6 ms·

Apple appears to be breaking iPhone web apps in the EU

79 points by agust 3y ago

spywaregorilla 3y ago
Is this "Just" in the EU?
- sfryxell 3y ago
  yes
  - spywaregorilla 3y ago
    is that something demonstrable in a similar version for the us?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
vdaea 3y ago
Now that alternative stores can be used I guess there's not much point to PWAs.
- avidiax 3y ago
  The conditions for those alternative stores are so onerous that it's not an effective alternative. There are significant financial costs and every app in that alternative app store has to be notarized by Apple after a security review.
- DANmode 3y ago
  Nobody's really thinking that, here, right?
- alberto180 3y ago
  Uhm yes? You don't have to develop them specifically for iOS, maintain a separate codebase, pay their extortion fees, or need to buy their Computers to develop
- flohofwoe 3y ago
  On the contrary, the weird rules around alternative app stores make PWAs a lot more interesting.
- szasamasa 3y ago
  the biggest alternative store is the web the website you use can be an app if well written "install" is not needed, the bad wording "install" is just a switch to standalone mode from tab view (and get a direct launch button etc.) by web apps (standalone websites) the browser stays as the running environment on top of OS, the web security model and trust stays intact competition law will demolish anything with time that hinders web apps it is sad we have to fight for this to happen I think under steve jobs apple would have the best web browser beating chrome and they would have converted app store monopoly revenue to other sources of revenue based on excellence, not monopoly
SllX 3y ago
There is a chance that this is still a “disabled for now” feature. My understanding of the third-party browser requirements in the DMA is they have to be able to do anything Apple’s Safari can do if they want to, and while Apple’s built out a bunch of entitlements for browsers and other DMA requirements, they haven’t done the same work for PWAs. Yet? So given that, it would actually violate the DMA if Safari supported them but Chrome and Firefox couldn’t, and they’re not going to allow that until they’ve taken the time to figure out how they want to proceed, if at all, with allowing it for third-party browsers.
- alberto180 3y ago
  Crippling PWAs would benefit their baseline through their App Store or Core Technology Fee though
  - SllX 3y ago
    PWAs aren’t exactly great on iOS to begin with, and if that was their aim, it would make more sense to disable it worldwide rather than just the EU. They may well not bring it back for all we know, but if they are going to, it’s not going to be without figuring out exactly what it is they want PWAs to be able to do and what resources they’ll be allowed access to which probably means additional APIs and entitlements for third-party browsers.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - alberto180 3y ago
      It works quite well for some use cases
      - SllX 3y ago
        Sure, but from the perspective of web developers advocating for PWAs it was already crippled. Now it’s just disabled in the EU.
cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
Sigh. This is really the perfect storm, because the “this has happened because Apple is evil” blog posts really write themselves after this change dropped. But really, let’s not forget that this is beta software. Apple routinely ships betas with features half-complete. The people that regularly use Apple betas know that. Drive-by drama bloggers don’t. If the final version ships with this change, I’ll be right there next to presumably everyone else railing against the ridiculousness of the change. For now though, I’m not, and I see absolutely zero point in anyone else doing so.
- zamadatix 3y ago
  I think it's reasonable to expect something like a communication be made on the intent to fix before shipping and that no commentary is an implicit denial of that. After all, if you only stand in the outrage line after it breaks in GA then you're essentially agreeing it's fine for it to be broken for a while and not everyone will see it that way. Bloggers could be less sensational about it for sure though.
  - zamadatix 3y ago
    And it seems that warning applied directly in this case: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 Had Apple not been pressured into a communication update on the matter the conversation would be starting at 0 a month from now.
- veeti 3y ago
  Maybe if Apple gave a damn about PWA developers or users they could just communicate with them? Maybe journalists wouldn't have to make such a big stink (i.e. doing their jobs) about breaking functionality if Apple simply acknowledged it was a "known issue" in the beta release notes [1]? You are simply giving far too much credit to a company known for its vague communications and underhanded tactics. Also note that the exceedingly detailed documentation for building "alternative browser engines" [2] has literally zero mention of progressive web apps. All the signs are in the air: it's busted and going to stay that way. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/ios-ipados-release-notes/ios-ipados-17_4-release-notes https://developer.apple.com/documentation/ios-ipados-release... [2] https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engines/ https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engi...
zamadatix 3y ago
Some previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39299007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39299007
sfryxell 3y ago
Here we are, being monopoly fucked right in the face. https://realness.online https://realness.online is my PWA only application, So, I've got a front row seat to apple's monopoly fulcrum killing all desenters. if you install https://whatpwacando.today/ https://whatpwacando.today/ on a phone or ipad today you can see how they already barely support standards. Only basic things work. filesystem access is only halfway. no Contact picker, no background sync. They will destroy the user experience for everyone in order to disable other browsers more robust implementations of the spec. They have been monopoly gaming us for years The EU is forcing them to go out in the open with it
- concinds 3y ago
  Why should websites, which are the least trusted form of code, be allowed to get filesystem access or contacts? We all know that nontechnical users click through those and won’t understand the risks. So how do browser devs deal with the ethics? “Our browser presented them a dialog, not our fault, they should have read it?” We know many won’t, I don’t care whose fault it is if I’m in that address book. If we want to imagine a world where websites have equivalent capabilities to native apps, first imagine a world where people install hundreds of new random native apps every day, both unreviewed and unsigned. Or, accept Microsoft requiring each website publisher to verify their identity with MS and sign their sites, like app developers? What’s the solution to avoid rolling back the security model 10-15 years?
  - thisislife2 3y ago
    This argument is not new - "they don't know any better than us" is what was used to deny the poor, the minorities and woman their right to vote for a long time. And these rights were won after a hard struggle. Apple also shouldn't be allowed to take away our consumer right with similar fear mongering. A balance where the user is in control of the device they rightfully own versus protecting the technologically illiterate from their own ignorance is possible. Just because some alcoholics ruin their own lives or even others with their addiction isn't a good excuse to ban alcohol for everyone. Just because terrorists are able to exploit a weakness in internal security, and cause harm to the State doesn't mean that the State can demand that everyone should blindly give up all their rights to a nanny state for "security". It's all about finding the right balance. Right now Apple devices don't offer that and violate our consumer rights by limiting and dictating what software we can run on it. It also uses this control to exploit us - by forcing us to install software only from the app store, we are unnecessarily forced to pay extra for every paid software because Apple expects a hefty app store commission on it.
moi2388 3y ago
Being able to have thirdparty stores and sidelining is horrible. I can no longer trust any app because it could now come from any source with no way of knowing its privacy or security settings. All I know is it isn’t being checked by Apple anymore.
- awesomeMilou 3y ago
  You can opt to just not use the third party stores. Nothing is changing about the Apples App Store submission guidelines.

79 points by agust 3y ago

spywaregorilla 3y ago

Is this "Just" in the EU?

sfryxell 3y ago
yes
- spywaregorilla 3y ago
  is that something demonstrable in a similar version for the us?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

vdaea 3y ago

Now that alternative stores can be used I guess there's not much point to PWAs.

avidiax 3y ago
The conditions for those alternative stores are so onerous that it's not an effective alternative. There are significant financial costs and every app in that alternative app store has to be notarized by Apple after a security review.
DANmode 3y ago
Nobody's really thinking that, here, right?
alberto180 3y ago
Uhm yes? You don't have to develop them specifically for iOS, maintain a separate codebase, pay their extortion fees, or need to buy their Computers to develop
flohofwoe 3y ago
On the contrary, the weird rules around alternative app stores make PWAs a lot more interesting.
szasamasa 3y ago
the biggest alternative store is the web the website you use can be an app if well written "install" is not needed, the bad wording "install" is just a switch to standalone mode from tab view (and get a direct launch button etc.) by web apps (standalone websites) the browser stays as the running environment on top of OS, the web security model and trust stays intact competition law will demolish anything with time that hinders web apps it is sad we have to fight for this to happen I think under steve jobs apple would have the best web browser beating chrome and they would have converted app store monopoly revenue to other sources of revenue based on excellence, not monopoly

SllX 3y ago

There is a chance that this is still a “disabled for now” feature. My understanding of the third-party browser requirements in the DMA is they have to be able to do anything Apple’s Safari can do if they want to, and while Apple’s built out a bunch of entitlements for browsers and other DMA requirements, they haven’t done the same work for PWAs. Yet? So given that, it would actually violate the DMA if Safari supported them but Chrome and Firefox couldn’t, and they’re not going to allow that until they’ve taken the time to figure out how they want to proceed, if at all, with allowing it for third-party browsers.

alberto180 3y ago
Crippling PWAs would benefit their baseline through their App Store or Core Technology Fee though
- SllX 3y ago
  PWAs aren’t exactly great on iOS to begin with, and if that was their aim, it would make more sense to disable it worldwide rather than just the EU. They may well not bring it back for all we know, but if they are going to, it’s not going to be without figuring out exactly what it is they want PWAs to be able to do and what resources they’ll be allowed access to which probably means additional APIs and entitlements for third-party browsers.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - alberto180 3y ago
    It works quite well for some use cases
    - SllX 3y ago
      Sure, but from the perspective of web developers advocating for PWAs it was already crippled. Now it’s just disabled in the EU.

cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago

Sigh. This is really the perfect storm, because the “this has happened because Apple is evil” blog posts really write themselves after this change dropped. But really, let’s not forget that this is beta software. Apple routinely ships betas with features half-complete. The people that regularly use Apple betas know that. Drive-by drama bloggers don’t. If the final version ships with this change, I’ll be right there next to presumably everyone else railing against the ridiculousness of the change. For now though, I’m not, and I see absolutely zero point in anyone else doing so.

zamadatix 3y ago
I think it's reasonable to expect something like a communication be made on the intent to fix before shipping and that no commentary is an implicit denial of that. After all, if you only stand in the outrage line after it breaks in GA then you're essentially agreeing it's fine for it to be broken for a while and not everyone will see it that way. Bloggers could be less sensational about it for sure though.
- zamadatix 3y ago
  And it seems that warning applied directly in this case: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39388218 Had Apple not been pressured into a communication update on the matter the conversation would be starting at 0 a month from now.
veeti 3y ago
Maybe if Apple gave a damn about PWA developers or users they could just communicate with them? Maybe journalists wouldn't have to make such a big stink (i.e. doing their jobs) about breaking functionality if Apple simply acknowledged it was a "known issue" in the beta release notes [1]? You are simply giving far too much credit to a company known for its vague communications and underhanded tactics. Also note that the exceedingly detailed documentation for building "alternative browser engines" [2] has literally zero mention of progressive web apps. All the signs are in the air: it's busted and going to stay that way. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/ios-ipados-release-notes/ios-ipados-17_4-release-notes https://developer.apple.com/documentation/ios-ipados-release... [2] https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engines/ https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engi...

zamadatix 3y ago

Some previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39299007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39299007

sfryxell 3y ago

Here we are, being monopoly fucked right in the face. https://realness.online https://realness.online is my PWA only application, So, I've got a front row seat to apple's monopoly fulcrum killing all desenters. if you install https://whatpwacando.today/ https://whatpwacando.today/ on a phone or ipad today you can see how they already barely support standards. Only basic things work. filesystem access is only halfway. no Contact picker, no background sync. They will destroy the user experience for everyone in order to disable other browsers more robust implementations of the spec. They have been monopoly gaming us for years The EU is forcing them to go out in the open with it

concinds 3y ago
Why should websites, which are the least trusted form of code, be allowed to get filesystem access or contacts? We all know that nontechnical users click through those and won’t understand the risks. So how do browser devs deal with the ethics? “Our browser presented them a dialog, not our fault, they should have read it?” We know many won’t, I don’t care whose fault it is if I’m in that address book. If we want to imagine a world where websites have equivalent capabilities to native apps, first imagine a world where people install hundreds of new random native apps every day, both unreviewed and unsigned. Or, accept Microsoft requiring each website publisher to verify their identity with MS and sign their sites, like app developers? What’s the solution to avoid rolling back the security model 10-15 years?
- thisislife2 3y ago
  This argument is not new - "they don't know any better than us" is what was used to deny the poor, the minorities and woman their right to vote for a long time. And these rights were won after a hard struggle. Apple also shouldn't be allowed to take away our consumer right with similar fear mongering. A balance where the user is in control of the device they rightfully own versus protecting the technologically illiterate from their own ignorance is possible. Just because some alcoholics ruin their own lives or even others with their addiction isn't a good excuse to ban alcohol for everyone. Just because terrorists are able to exploit a weakness in internal security, and cause harm to the State doesn't mean that the State can demand that everyone should blindly give up all their rights to a nanny state for "security". It's all about finding the right balance. Right now Apple devices don't offer that and violate our consumer rights by limiting and dictating what software we can run on it. It also uses this control to exploit us - by forcing us to install software only from the app store, we are unnecessarily forced to pay extra for every paid software because Apple expects a hefty app store commission on it.

moi2388 3y ago

Being able to have thirdparty stores and sidelining is horrible. I can no longer trust any app because it could now come from any source with no way of knowing its privacy or security settings. All I know is it isn’t being checked by Apple anymore.

awesomeMilou 3y ago
You can opt to just not use the third party stores. Nothing is changing about the Apples App Store submission guidelines.