5 ms·

People need to own the unintended side effects of their preferred regulation instead of constantly complaining about companies not embracing the “spirit” of sai

People need to own the unintended side effects of their preferred regulation instead of constantly complaining about companies not embracing the “spirit” of said regulation.

jcotton42 3y ago
This is 100% malicious compliance or spite from Apple. The DMA did not in any way require them to dump PWAs.
- mikestew 3y ago
  Apple argues otherwise, and I find their argument to be reasonable. What are the specifics of your disagreement?
  - MrStonedOne 3y ago
    [dead]
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    a user can stay in safari if it trusts apple with web security a user can download spying native apps from the apple app store but I cannot decide to trust Google, Microsoft, Mozilla with their browser security sandbox?
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    you are an apple bot I see otherwise why do you specifically care what browser engine choice I make? Apple could disable web capabilities in safari and let other engines do otherwise you CAN and SHOULD stay in Safari if you trust only apple browsers to be safe? what do you care if I use chrome and got fucked? (which I wont) do you want to tell me that I should not use macos, linux, windows android and firefox or edge or chrome because I may get fucked? you do not really understand that it is MY choice how I get fucked with a lastpass native app clone on apple or with a real chrome browser nobody stops you to stay by your webkit engine!
- alwa 3y ago
  It sounds like it would, though, require an engineering effort on par with building a new feature from scratch in order to support PWAs in the DMA environment. It makes sense that a firm might be willing to invest in minimal maintenance of a feature, but wouldn’t build it again if faced with the choice today. And the DMA forced the choice again today. Since ~nobody uses PWAs, or at least so few people that Apple can’t justify the effort to retain any advantages PWAs confer on its own browser/OS, doesn’t it become a business decision at that point?
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    it is competition law it is also an effort to build access for disabled people the difference is Apple has practically disabled the web as an app store and in the future if it is possible to launch web apps on every platform, there will be 99% web apps apple is a big company and it is such a vital thing they can and will be forced what android, windows, linux, mac os(!) can do... it is like claiming not many disabled people wanted to use my services until now (huge stairs without lift or so) so I just do not want this 2 days and 0,000000001% of my monopolisitc budget to build access for them
- szasamasa 3y ago
  agree very WEAK arguments from apple, practically lies mac os users have been safe from service workers and web app capabilities using chrome and firefox and edge in the last 5-10 years surely apple is able to keep ios and ipados users safe from these scary other browser engines it is much easier to safeguard 3-10 other browser engines than millions of native apps in addition, do they really have to pay attention to other than chrome, edge and firefox? if somebody uses a chinese spy browser or a russian, the same when somebody downloads any other spying ot malicious native app do they even need to care about me optin out from safari on MY 1000 dollar iphone? what the fuck, I am not a child! keep safari safe and at max give me some warning before downloading chrome or firefox or whatever!
jnovek 3y ago
This is not a “failure to embrace”, this is malicious compliance.
- zamfi 3y ago
  Hmm -- are you suggesting that Apple is lying in their rationales here? That they should have instead kept supporting PWAs but only on WebKit, in violation of the DMA? Or that they should have argued the DMA doesn't require PWA support for alternative browser engines? Or that it's in fact straightforward to offer an API for browser engines to integrate with caching, background operations, notifications, etc., and Apple should have held off compliance with DMA until these were implemented? If so I'd love to learn more. I'm sort of inclined to believe that these currently sit deep in WebKit and it's a nontrivial exercise to pull them out and offer them as an API to other browser engines.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    > that they should have argued the DMA doesn't require PWA support for alternative browser engines? That would have been the least controversial aspect of their first attempt at compliance, in my view. They could have also just allowed third-party browsers to offer a "PWA home screen" as an intermediate step until the APIs are ready. I can't think of a PWA API that's impossible to implement in a third-party browser other than appearing on the home screen and in the app switcher under its own icon. They could have also just forced the same upon WebKit PWAs until the API is ready. So many options. Yes, all of them would have taken some engineering work, but that hasn't stopped them from doing very complicated things in other aspects of their DMA compliance framework.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - gruez 3y ago
      >I can't think of a PWA API that's impossible to implement in a third-party browser other than appearing in the app switcher under its own icon. Yeah but how much work would it be to implement, and is it worth implementing for the 1% of sites that use it?
ajayyy 3y ago
On Android, I can create a PWA that runs in Firefox and it works great. Apple could easily implement the same thing
- drooopy 3y ago
  Can confirm. I have an android device that was given to me by my company and PWAs work just fine in Firefox. It's not a matter of technical limitations, it's just the poor multitrillion dollar company is gonna screw over their customers while scary government bureaucrats won't let them have their cake and eat it as well.
  - zamfi 3y ago
    They don't say it's a technical limitation, they say it was too much work to do for a relatively underused feature? > Addressing the complex security and privacy concerns associated with web apps using alternative browser engines would require building an entirely new integration architecture that does not currently exist in iOS and was not practical to undertake given the other demands of the DMA and the very low user adoption of Home Screen web apps.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  "Apple could easily implement the same thing" This is quite easier said than done. Simply copying a feature from competitor is not neccessarily easy especially if they challenge deep architectural decisions that have been made in the past.
- the_third_wave 3y ago
  Indeed, and the icon has a Firefox badge on it so I know it is Firefox running the show. If things go south I know who to blame: Firefox. The same goes for Cromite (which used to be Bromite, which is a de-fanged de-Googled version of Chromium) or any other browser which offers this functionality. See, Apple? This is how you can implement PWAs so that users do not accuse you of other browser's problems. Then again I assume this is already known in Cupertino but not implemented because it would break down that wall around the garden, brick by brick.
rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
So PWA also must be removed from Android for DMA compliance I guess? Let's see if Google remove them because "DMA" or if Google ends up being sanctioned for this.

People need to own the unintended side effects of their preferred regulation instead of constantly complaining about companies not embracing the “spirit” of said regulation.

jcotton42 3y ago

This is 100% malicious compliance or spite from Apple. The DMA did not in any way require them to dump PWAs.

mikestew 3y ago
Apple argues otherwise, and I find their argument to be reasonable. What are the specifics of your disagreement?
- MrStonedOne 3y ago
  [dead]
- szasamasa 3y ago
  a user can stay in safari if it trusts apple with web security a user can download spying native apps from the apple app store but I cannot decide to trust Google, Microsoft, Mozilla with their browser security sandbox?
- szasamasa 3y ago
  you are an apple bot I see otherwise why do you specifically care what browser engine choice I make? Apple could disable web capabilities in safari and let other engines do otherwise you CAN and SHOULD stay in Safari if you trust only apple browsers to be safe? what do you care if I use chrome and got fucked? (which I wont) do you want to tell me that I should not use macos, linux, windows android and firefox or edge or chrome because I may get fucked? you do not really understand that it is MY choice how I get fucked with a lastpass native app clone on apple or with a real chrome browser nobody stops you to stay by your webkit engine!
alwa 3y ago
It sounds like it would, though, require an engineering effort on par with building a new feature from scratch in order to support PWAs in the DMA environment. It makes sense that a firm might be willing to invest in minimal maintenance of a feature, but wouldn’t build it again if faced with the choice today. And the DMA forced the choice again today. Since ~nobody uses PWAs, or at least so few people that Apple can’t justify the effort to retain any advantages PWAs confer on its own browser/OS, doesn’t it become a business decision at that point?
- szasamasa 3y ago
  it is competition law it is also an effort to build access for disabled people the difference is Apple has practically disabled the web as an app store and in the future if it is possible to launch web apps on every platform, there will be 99% web apps apple is a big company and it is such a vital thing they can and will be forced what android, windows, linux, mac os(!) can do... it is like claiming not many disabled people wanted to use my services until now (huge stairs without lift or so) so I just do not want this 2 days and 0,000000001% of my monopolisitc budget to build access for them
szasamasa 3y ago
agree very WEAK arguments from apple, practically lies mac os users have been safe from service workers and web app capabilities using chrome and firefox and edge in the last 5-10 years surely apple is able to keep ios and ipados users safe from these scary other browser engines it is much easier to safeguard 3-10 other browser engines than millions of native apps in addition, do they really have to pay attention to other than chrome, edge and firefox? if somebody uses a chinese spy browser or a russian, the same when somebody downloads any other spying ot malicious native app do they even need to care about me optin out from safari on MY 1000 dollar iphone? what the fuck, I am not a child! keep safari safe and at max give me some warning before downloading chrome or firefox or whatever!

jnovek 3y ago

This is not a “failure to embrace”, this is malicious compliance.

zamfi 3y ago
Hmm -- are you suggesting that Apple is lying in their rationales here? That they should have instead kept supporting PWAs but only on WebKit, in violation of the DMA? Or that they should have argued the DMA doesn't require PWA support for alternative browser engines? Or that it's in fact straightforward to offer an API for browser engines to integrate with caching, background operations, notifications, etc., and Apple should have held off compliance with DMA until these were implemented? If so I'd love to learn more. I'm sort of inclined to believe that these currently sit deep in WebKit and it's a nontrivial exercise to pull them out and offer them as an API to other browser engines.
- lxgr 3y ago
  > that they should have argued the DMA doesn't require PWA support for alternative browser engines? That would have been the least controversial aspect of their first attempt at compliance, in my view. They could have also just allowed third-party browsers to offer a "PWA home screen" as an intermediate step until the APIs are ready. I can't think of a PWA API that's impossible to implement in a third-party browser other than appearing on the home screen and in the app switcher under its own icon. They could have also just forced the same upon WebKit PWAs until the API is ready. So many options. Yes, all of them would have taken some engineering work, but that hasn't stopped them from doing very complicated things in other aspects of their DMA compliance framework.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - gruez 3y ago
    >I can't think of a PWA API that's impossible to implement in a third-party browser other than appearing in the app switcher under its own icon. Yeah but how much work would it be to implement, and is it worth implementing for the 1% of sites that use it?

ajayyy 3y ago

On Android, I can create a PWA that runs in Firefox and it works great. Apple could easily implement the same thing

drooopy 3y ago
Can confirm. I have an android device that was given to me by my company and PWAs work just fine in Firefox. It's not a matter of technical limitations, it's just the poor multitrillion dollar company is gonna screw over their customers while scary government bureaucrats won't let them have their cake and eat it as well.
- zamfi 3y ago
  They don't say it's a technical limitation, they say it was too much work to do for a relatively underused feature? > Addressing the complex security and privacy concerns associated with web apps using alternative browser engines would require building an entirely new integration architecture that does not currently exist in iOS and was not practical to undertake given the other demands of the DMA and the very low user adoption of Home Screen web apps.
charcircuit 3y ago
"Apple could easily implement the same thing" This is quite easier said than done. Simply copying a feature from competitor is not neccessarily easy especially if they challenge deep architectural decisions that have been made in the past.
the_third_wave 3y ago
Indeed, and the icon has a Firefox badge on it so I know it is Firefox running the show. If things go south I know who to blame: Firefox. The same goes for Cromite (which used to be Bromite, which is a de-fanged de-Googled version of Chromium) or any other browser which offers this functionality. See, Apple? This is how you can implement PWAs so that users do not accuse you of other browser's problems. Then again I assume this is already known in Cupertino but not implemented because it would break down that wall around the garden, brick by brick.

rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago

So PWA also must be removed from Android for DMA compliance I guess? Let's see if Google remove them because "DMA" or if Google ends up being sanctioned for this.