27 ms·

Apple confirms it's breaking iPhone web apps in the EU on purpose

• RockRobotRock 3y ago
  What a petulant move
• whatsthatabout 3y ago
  Wanted to try an android phone for some time again anyways, thanks apple :)
• givemeethekeys 3y ago
  It's news like this that makes me want to trade my iPhone for the closest Android phone.
  • zshrc 3y ago
    Then do it and stop complaining. This isn’t a charity it’s a company. What company doesn’t have their best interest in mind? Don’t even say a FOSS company like Red Hat because that would be bull.
    • throwaway49849 3y ago
      The social contract has been that these big companies benefit from the free work of open source maintainers, and they continue to work together to support open standards. This latest maneuver from Apple, while well within their rights, is a big FU to everyone who builds and maintains the software that they depend on. They've broken the contract by continuing to hobble open web tech.
      • throwaway49850 3y ago
        That has never been the social contract. I hate this outcome as much as the next guy and I'm sure Apple could have continued to support PWAs if they wanted to. And they should have done it. That being said, I'm tired of the argument that OSS maintainers are being owed anything (beyond gratitude). They publish their software under licences they themselves choose. As long as someone follows the license, they are good. If you don't want your work to be used for commercial activities in exchange for nothing, then don't publish it under a license permitting that.
        • deleted 3y ago
          [deleted]
        • throwaway49849 3y ago
          I don't mean to imply that the OSS maintainers are owed anything, because I don't believe that. There is still a social contract without anyone being owed anything. You haven't really given an example of why you don't think it exists. Also, to what do I owe the honor of you creating a username based on mine, specifically to reply to me?
          • throwaway49850 3y ago
            The maintainers say in the LICENSE files that their creations can be used by anyone for commercial activities with no strings attached. Once they say that, no one who wants to use the creation has any responsibility to uphold any social contract. But I'm just repeating myself. > Also, to what do I owe the honor of you creating a username based on mine, specifically to reply to me? If you want to stay anon, then so can I.
            • throwaway49849 3y ago
              A social contract is not defined by a LICENSE file. Developers are under no obligation to create new software for a hostile company's products. Let's see how many vision pro apps get created if Apple keeps shitting on open standards.
    • v512 3y ago
      The country you lived for past 10 years started curbing the freedom then the solution is "just change country" is it? Ofcourse its a solution but not the only solution. You don't have right to say that just move away and stop complaining, that's not how things work.
• Fizzadar 3y ago
  Honestly Apple’s response to the DMA changes is pathetic, they’re acting like a petulant child. I really hope the EU throws the book at them. Will believe it when I see it, fingers crossed.
  • Fizzadar 3y ago
    I say all this as a MacBook, iPhone and AirPods user (:
• addicted 3y ago
  I don’t think Apple’s pettiness is gonna work in their favor. I am not in the EU but my next iPhone is almost certainly not gonna be an iPhone despite me having used a non iPhone for about 6 months in the last 15 years. Their throwing their customers under the bus just to throw a tantrum in the EU does not bode well for how they would treat their customers in other situations.
  • JadeNB 3y ago
    > I am not in the EU but my next iPhone is almost certainly not gonna be an iPhone …. Next phone, right?
    • shaan7 3y ago
      Thats just parent's way of playing around with all the AI models reading this page xD
      • CaptainFever 3y ago
        As a large language model, hey!
    • addicted 3y ago
      lol good call. To be honest an iPhone and a phone have been synonymous for me for 15 years. The 6 months was a period of madness (or genius, considering I actually loved it) when I was using a Windows Phone, until basically all the 3rd party apps I used dropped support.
  • toyg 3y ago
    They're desperately hoping that their fanbois will howl so much, that MEPs will relent.
    • montagg 3y ago
      I don't understand. How do you see disabling a feature that few people use leading to riling people up so the EU reverse itself?
• deminature 3y ago
  In combination with the 'Core Technology Fee' that financially cripples any developer that tries to release a popular app outside the official app store, this is pathetic behavior. Hopefully the EU smacks them down for this temper tantrum at being forced to adhere to the DMA. They are trying to flex their market power and should be reminded they operate within a system of laws that doesn't bend for anyone, regardless of their size.
  • robertoandred 3y ago
    This IS adhering to the DMA. Every browser engine is treated the same.
    • impossiblefork 3y ago
      I think that's very unlikely. I interpret 6 (a) as basically requiring you to be able to install whatever software you like and to provide no mechanism whereby any fee can be demanded for such installation to be possible. Apple tries to get around this by this core technology stuff, but APIs aren't even subject to copyright protection, and it's also basic interoperability stuff. I don't think the courts will see it the way I interpret your comment.
    • ajross 3y ago
      Deliberately removing useful features from your own product so that you don't have to let other people implement the same features may be technically conforming to the letter of the law, but is clearly violating it in spirit. The spirit of the law is platform interoperability: your control over the platform shouldn't restrict what other people can make it do (be it "run an app store" or "run a web app").
      • riscy 3y ago
        When did it become illegal to take features away from a products or create derivative products with different features? The “spirit of the law” most certainly is not what you’re imagining. If they wanted, they could remove the App Store from iOS in EU, or pull the iPhone from the EU market entirely. Apple isn’t required by the DMA to part of a digital market at all.
• LeoPanthera 3y ago
  Since the article doesn't actually repeat what Apple has said, here's what Apple says: == Begin quote == The iOS system has traditionally provided support for Home Screen web apps by building directly on WebKit and its security architecture. That integration means Home Screen web apps are managed to align with the security and privacy model for native apps on iOS, including isolation of storage and enforcement of system prompts to access privacy impacting capabilities on a per-site basis. Without this type of isolation and enforcement, malicious web apps could read data from other web apps and recapture their permissions to gain access to a user’s camera, microphone or location without a user’s consent. Browsers also could install web apps on the system without a user’s awareness and consent. 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. And so, to comply with the DMA’s requirements, we had to remove the Home Screen web apps feature in the EU. EU users will be able to continue accessing websites directly from their Home Screen through a bookmark with minimal impact to their functionality. We expect this change to affect a small number of users. Still, we regret any impact this change — that was made as part of the work to comply with the DMA — may have on developers of Home Screen web apps and our users. == End quote == Source: https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#dev-qa https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#...
  • sccxy 3y ago
    TLDR: We did not want to give other browsers too powerful apis to compete with Safari & App Store.
    • LeoPanthera 3y ago
      I think this is an extremely cynical interpretation.
      • akaij 3y ago
        I think any other interpretation is extremely naive.
• 5evOX5hTZ9mYa9E 3y ago
  The good news is that DMA contains private right of action. Might as well start drafting the responsive court filings already, March 8th is just around the corner.
  • simongray 3y ago
    Can you provide a bit more context, please. Private right of action? March 8th?
    • privacyking 3y ago
      Presumably it means individuals can use Apple for non compliance.
• gargs 3y ago
  This is the courageous Apple we've all been waiting for. One that doesn't think twice about antagonizing its users just to throw a tantrum.
• johanneskanybal 3y ago
  As a European dev I want apple to fail super hard and implode. They used to be so cool and make slick hardware for their nische but now I'm happy to use worse hardware as long as they disapear from the face of the earth.
  • gear54rus 3y ago
    They ain't never been cool. The shit practices they are trying to defend were there from day 1 and are baked into their DNA. Treating their users like stupid animals that don't know what's good for them is what they do. And they will fight tooth and nail to continue to do it. Even as EU tries to kick their predatory ways out of them. To think there's a hardware thing in 2024 that does not allow its owner to compile and install arbitrary software while still calling itself a smartphone is just laughable. It's a good thing people are starting to wake up to this even on legislative level.
    • amelius 3y ago
      > Treating their users like stupid animals that don't know what's good for them is what they do. The problem I have with that is that they are selling a ContentFilter as an integrated part of their OS, when it can be a separate, optional part, and even offered by a third party. Also, they equate AppStore == ContentFilter, which are clearly two separate concepts.
    • pb7 3y ago
      Most users are stupid though. Reminder that a US congressman once grilled Google's CEO about whether Google was tracking his iPhone's precise location. And this one was smart enough to con his way into Congress. "I have an iPhone, and if I move from here and go over there and sit with my Democrat friends, which would make them real nervous, does Google track my movement?" -- Ted Poe https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/google-ceo-pichai-grilled-over-companys-location-tracking-capabilities/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/google-ceo-pichai-grilled-o...
      • jeroenhd 3y ago
• akmarinov 3y ago
  Since iPadOS doesn’t get alternative stores and alternative browsers - I wonder whether PWAs will still work on iPads in the EU. That’d be funny.
  • hardcopy 3y ago
    They still work on iPadOS
• brikym 3y ago
  I'm actually thinking of switching back to Android because of this bullshit. There are a lot of niche web apps I use, particularly for local things, that just won't be developed into an iOS app because it's not viable.
  • tonoto 3y ago
    Android user since ~2010 (before that, Symbian).. I tried one of Apple's "Pro" phones with IOS 2021, last year I went back to Android and back to freedom even if it is Google's walled garden. Still, being able to control many aspects of the phone (choice of browser, do I need to mention different volume controls, can compile own stuff, automation) is unbeatable. To me using iPhone left me with the same crippled feeling that I would have if someone forced me to use Windows on a computer. On the plus side, my screen time was actually lower during those two years..
    • MrDresden 3y ago
      > ..even if it is Google's walled garden. But it isn't. As an owner of the device, you can install anything you want on it, from any source you'd like.
  • SJetKaran 3y ago
    I just moved to a second hand iPhone. My next mobile won't certainly be an Apple one.
• smeagull 3y ago
  Seems like a very unreliable platform to me.
• ttarr 3y ago
  These kind of news make me feel happy that I'm Apple, Microsoft and Google* free. Phone is ungoogled Android.
  • system2 3y ago
    Ironic that Android was mostly developed by Google.
    • MrDresden 3y ago
      But isn't it lovely though, the ability to not be beholden to the original developer with the device you own? It should bring hope to the hearts of all device owners that are currently firmly under the bootheel of device manufacturers.
    • v512 3y ago
      Exactly why its a bad look for Apple right? Android is open, you don't need to have Google apps to make it work on other hand you can't even install Firefox/Chrome on iOS.
• ivan_gammel 3y ago
  Very questionable argumentation. This can be seen from two different angles: 1. PWA is a native wrapper for a web application, not a browser. It is supposed to be limited to the app website. DMA does not tell Apple that every app with embedded WebView should offer users possibility to switch the engine. Why PWA should be treated differently here? I‘d rather clarify this with regulators first, before harming end users. 2. There’s no browser engines currently supporting PWA on Apple mobile devices. Apple has enough resources and time to figure out how to sandbox PWAs on other engines together with the first browser vendor that decides to offer such support and commit engineering resources to this project. In the meantime current solution could stay simply because it does not hinder any competition. I’m not a legal expert, so maybe I miss something here. But Apple statement does not look convincing to me.
  • Someone 3y ago
    > DMA does not tell Apple that every app with embedded WebView should offer users possibility to switch the engine. I don’t see how that’s related to the issue being discussed. > In the meantime current solution could stay simply because it does not hinder any competition. Why do you think “you can install a third party browser, but if you do, you can’t add PWAs to the Home Screen” doesn’t hinder competition?
    • ivan_gammel 3y ago
      >I don’t see how that’s related to the issue being discussed. PWA is not a browser, it is a native app using a browser engine to render a specific website. >Why do you think “you can install a third party browser, but if you do, you can’t add PWAs to the Home Screen” doesn’t hinder competition? I literally explained it in my comment you are replying to, but I can repeat. Competition does not exist yet. Browsers do not offer PWA support out of the box, it is a feature to be implemented separately from rendering engine. See Firefox on Windows for an example — it doesn’t support PWA out of the box. This feature has to be built: if Apple were to hinder the competition, they would resist it by not offering the APIs. But they can offer them through the cooperation with vendors, even if those APIs do not exist yet. Say, Mozilla comes and asks for APIs: Apple starts negotiating and proposes the compatibility requirements and a reasonable timeline. They both work on their part and eventually Firefox is released with PWA support. Who would fine or sue them if it worked this way? How the violation of DMA could be proven?
• pierrebai 3y ago
  Come on now, if it was /that other company/ you'd be saying it without a pause. FUD See? Not hard to say, even when it is Apple and not Microsoft. The concept that browser allow one web site to read the storage of other sites is ludicrous. SuuuuuUUUuuure Apple can't /guarantee/ that the browser has no bug... which assumes Apple can somehow prove their own browser is bug-free. Plus, what prevents Apple from launching separate instances with separate data permissions for WPA? That's is 99% certainly what they did with their own WebKit-based solution. FUD FUD FUD
• 23B1 3y ago
  AAPL's recent behavior has really degraded the brand for me personally. Like I won't be buying the Vision Pro because I'm not really sure I want to get further locked into their ecosystem if they're this hostile towards the will and rights of the people who buy their products.
• Alifatisk 3y ago
  Bummer, so all these recent news about Apple allowing push notifications and PWAs to iPhone was for nothing?
  • sccxy 3y ago
    I guess they realized that if they opened up too much of their walled garden, there was no going back.
  • mnau 3y ago
    If you are ouside of EU, it wasn't for nothing. EU is only sixths of world GDP and shrinking.
    • Alifatisk 3y ago
      That’s a big if
• malermeister 3y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I Apple has become the IBM in their famous 1984 ad. "A garden of pure ideology", indeed.
• dontdoxxme 3y ago
  Probably easier to leave the EU than get Apple to listen.
• hardcopy 3y ago
  Sigh. This is a huge headache for me. https://lemmy.world/post/12001569 https://lemmy.world/post/12001569 (I develop https://github.com/aeharding/voyager https://github.com/aeharding/voyager)
  • leifross 3y ago
    I feel you, I am the sole developer of https://ember.ly https://ember.ly Certainly feels great to have your livelyhood kicked to the curb by some rich american megacorporation throwing a tantrum. The worst part is that probably 40 percent of the development time has been trying to wrangle my way around weird rendering quirks in safari, never again. My next site will have a banner suggesting safari users open the site in firefox..
    • Symbiote 3y ago
      As a Norwegian / Norwegian company, is there even any politician you can write to?
      • almostnormal 3y ago
        Ask the users to return their broken phones, demand a full refund, and buy an android instead.
      • leifross 3y ago
        Norway as an independent actor is too small to carry any weight in this matter. Our best bet is to hedge our interest as an extended member of the European Union, and even there we have a limited say.
• nonrandomstring 3y ago
  Said it before and it seems clearer every day, that we're in an era reminiscent of the 1920s with big mobs fighting it out. One of the old games back in town is protection rackets [0], digital forms of ransacking, vandalism, threats and "tax" collecting are all the rage dontchyknow. Everyone's got their "security" to give you. But it ain't your security, and it ain't compatible with noone else's. Nice app store you got here. Shame if anything might 'appen to it! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_racket https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_racket
  • joshxyz 3y ago
    love this. history often rhymes and really rhymes on this one.
  • nonethewiser 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • oblio 3y ago
      How is it a mob if it's democratically elected? People have the most random and poorly thought out talking points.
      • Gamemaster1379 3y ago
        Tyranny of the majority
        • johnnyanmac 3y ago
          Is it tyranny to allow an option to load an extra app store? I can tell you from 14 years of android experience that nothing else is going to really compete with the App Store even if Apple had a setup screen advertising alternative app stores on every device. The alt store will be where 1) a few super rich apps to dodge the 30% (which as of now consists of... Fortnite on Android. And that's it. Apple already banned that. And from previous articles, they are already maliciously complying with this anyway) 2) apps that are on the Grey market (emulators, certain readers) 3) porn, or any other app that is simply not allowed on IOS for moral reasons as opposed to legal. There are less of these than you think, though I can see Japan taking advantage of this to balance it out. 4) some niche homebrew stuff or otherwise apps that have a strong ideology for Open Source as opposed to selling a service So, nothing Apple really cares about (and Fortnite, which has been out of the picture for 4 years now). My blue sky hopes is that Valve makes a mobile Steam for premium games one day if this opens up properly, but I don't see that happening this decade, even if IOS opened the floodgates worldwide tomorrow.
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• torartc 3y ago
  Is there anything we can actually do to push back on this? I get we can long term just not buy their products, but it feels like there needs to be more urgent action then that.
  • jeroenhd 3y ago
    I don't think so. Either the EU takes action (assuming what Apple does is illegal, though I doubt it) or you'll have to vote with your wallet. Perhaps your best bet would be to loudly proclaim Apple's user-hostile behaviour as the reason you're switching to another brand of phone, so non-tech people also learn about Apple's hissy fit, but I doubt it'll do much to their bottom line.
• pseudony 3y ago
  On the point of trusting (big) Apple to keep us safe. This was linked in a similar discussion today. Either they knowingly provide backdoors for state actors or they are being so incompetent that it is laughable. Zero interaction remote exploit of hardware features designed to circumvent their own security measures? Why ? Seriously, find someone worthy of your trust, because that isn't Apple https://www.kaspersky.com/about/press-releases/2023_kaspersky-discloses-iphone-hardware-feature-vital-in-operation-triangulation-case https://www.kaspersky.com/about/press-releases/2023_kaspersk...
  • stonegray 3y ago
    I trust Apple more for this decision, not less. PWAs used WebKit to allow untrusted code (any website in this case) to safely execute on the phone. In the EU now, you can modify or replace that layer of trust (browser engine) and restricting camera access and local storage seems reasonable; these limitations are expected for websites. I expect 3rd-party engines in the EU may choose to allow this, for example by launching in Chromium in full screen w/ additional permissions, but I'm glad this attack surface is reduced at least for right now.
• Ajedi32 3y ago
  Honestly this doesn't bother me as much as some of the other malicious compliance Apple has been doing. It sounds like Safari had a pretty tight level of integration with the operating system in order to allow PWAs, and creating secure APIs to allow other 3rd party browsers to achieve the same thing would have been expensive. So in order to avoid giving preferential treatment Safari over competing browsers without incurring that cost they had to remove PWA support. Obviously long-term what should happen is that Apple should build out those necessary APIs, then re-introduce PWA support to Safari and 3rd party browsers, but I personally feel like the EU trying to legislate an entirely new platform feature into existence like that would be a step too far. Some of the other concerns with Apple's recent moves (like them trying to charge developers for installs that don't go through Apple's App Store, and that Apple therefore has nothing to do with) are a far bigger issue.
• niutech 3y ago
  Bad move from Apple. It's time to boycott iOS and move to FOSS alternatives, such as: AOSP, Ubuntu Touch, GNOME Mobile, KDE Plasma, Sailfish OS. Personally I am using both UBports and Sailfish OS and I appreciate the privacy they provide. As a possible workaround to fullscreen PWAs in iOS in the EU, I propose a convention to append some hash to the Web App Manifest start_url, e.g. #__pwa__, then set the default iOS web browser to e.g. Firefox, then add the PWA to the home screen from it with this special hash. When a user clicks on a PWA icon in the home screen, it would open in the default browser (e.g. Firefox), the browser then checks if the newly opened tab is opened from external source and its URL ends with #__pwa__ and if so, then hides the UI providing a fullscreen viewport for the opened PWA.
  • dbtc 3y ago
    What's a good device to replace my iphone 13 mini?
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • accoil 3y ago
      What do you like about it? Size?
      • brikym 3y ago
        There aren't many small phones that aren't cheap and nasty. iPhone minis are small and premium which is rare. The android manufacturers really need to try harder. 6" is basically a tablet. It's really unnecessary for phones to be as big as they are today. UI designs have gotten more sparse and wasteful of screen real estate.
        • niutech 3y ago
          Being affordable is an advantage, unless you want to put on the ritz with a premium locked iPhone. For example Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact is a nice affordable smartphone.
• anon373839 3y ago
  It’s disappointing to see that Apple’s spin job is apparently working (based on some of the comments here). While it sounds superficially plausible, it’s actually quite deceitful. For example, the argument that one web app could steal the permissions of another web app is predicated on the assumption that a non-Apple browser engine will fail to sandbox the apps. But *the exact same* threat vector will exist for non-Home Screen web apps accessed through third party browsers. That’s because ordinary websites ALSO have the ability to request access to microphones and cameras, and it will be up to the developers of the browser engines to ensure that these permissions are properly sandboxed. Apple won’t be able to eliminate this risk without breaking vast numbers of sites that people use every day. In truth, a PWA is no different from a website. It’s built using the same technologies and APIs. The main difference is that it can run in full-screen mode like an app, and it has its local storage cleared less often. These are nice extras that benefit users who choose to “install” such apps, and they carry no special security risks.
• macinjosh 3y ago
  Apple ducking sucks.
• w4 3y ago
  I’m primed to be upset with Apple these days, but this doesn’t seem like an unreasonable position. The EU is forcing them to do a bunch of work to support alternate browser engines, this in turn creates a bunch of additional work if Apple wants to fully support PWAs, and PWAs aren’t really in Apple’s financial interest to begin with, so f-it. They're not going to spend resources to add support for PWAs in the EU. It's easier to just disable them and call it a day. It's a rational choice. Apple isn’t a charity, so why would they spend resources on extra work that they didn’t want to do in the first place, given that work is not required for legal compliance. The security spin is clearly nonsense, but other than that I can't really fault Apple for their position on this, even if I wish it were different.
  • jsnell 3y ago
    The EU is not forcing Apple to do any work. Apple is choosing to do the work mostly to make competing browsers as limited and non-compelling as possible, while still hoping to stay within the letter of the law. They could in reality comply pretty much by removing their arbitrary restrictions. > It's a rational choice. Apple isn’t a charity, so why would they spend resources on extra work that they didn’t want to do in the first place, given that work is not required for legal compliance. I mean, the obvious answer would be that it actually is required. And the outcome of that would be that Apple gets a bunch of bad press, pays a ton in fines, and ends up with a consent decree that restricts them more than just acting in good faith would have. It feels like a really stupid gamble. There's so little to gain from it, in comparison to the cost if the gamble fails. Apple owns their users, lock, stock and barrel. Basically none of them is going to switch to a competing app store or browser even once those exist. And when the users don't move, neither will the developers.
    • xvector 3y ago
      Telling a company they must implement an API is absolutely telling them to do work. And you're well within the right to refuse entirely.
      • mordae 3y ago
• aetherspawn 3y ago
  I am on Apples side here. I have been a macOS and iPhone user for over a decade now, but have had Android devices and I use Windows for games and work. I think what the EU has done to Apple is unfair. It is unfortunate in my opinion that they can’t just tell them to get stuffed. They have had to build probably 100-million LOCs just so EU have the right to pick their own browser, and yet Safari works just fine. In fact the great thing about Safari (and Apple knew this) is that compatibility was really good precisely because everyone on mobile was using the same browser. Now I’m just waiting to get those stupid “only supported in Chrome” pop ups on my mobile phone too.. Their core strategy has always been to keep cost low by supporting one hardware, one browser engine, one App Store. That’s how they kept things lean and integrated. The EU has forced them to take an approach that is fundamentally different to what made them successful. Some might say - who cares? It only affects the EU right? That’s to be seen.. we all might be affected globally from the security bugs caused by the unhardening of the OS required to conform to EU standards. And this huge code base is going to cost something to maintain and I doubt we won’t pay for that either.
  • brikym 3y ago
    > yet Safari works just fine I laughed. Clearly you've never tried building a halfway complex web app.
  • seszett 3y ago
    > In fact the great thing about Safari (and Apple knew this) is that compatibility was really good precisely because everyone on mobile was using the same browser. What a weird take. Safari is the minority browser that takes so much work because of its quirks. The largest mobile browser by far is Chrome (65% vs 25%) and while it might be different in your particular bubble (probably the US? it's the only market where Apple is dominant afaik) it's well known that Safari is the equivalent of Internet Explorer in the bad old days.
  • c-cube 3y ago
    > keep cost low Have you seen the price of Apple devices?? They're anything but low. If Apple has to reduce a bit their margin because they lose their monopoly I won't be shedding tears for them.
• pcdoodle 3y ago
  Does this mean all PWAs will no longer work in airplane mode?
• Vinnl 3y ago
  I'm guessing now that the app store had been designated as a gatekeeper and that alternatives app stores are technically allowed, it no longer has to pretend that PWAs are a Viva alternative?
• Razengan 3y ago
  Browsers should only display documents, not apps. That's what operating systems are for. Just give native apps what made the web popular in the first place: • Ability to instantly launch any app just by typing its "name" • No need to download or install anything • Ability to revisit any part of an app just by copy/pasting some text and sharing it with anyone. That's what ultimately matters to end users.
  • postalrat 3y ago
    The problem is systems developers haven't been able to settle one any platform for multi-platform apps. They a head start of decades before web browsers became popular and couldn't pull it off. Failure after failure.
• pseudospock 3y ago
  I have to admire Apple's pettiness about it. Malicious compliance at its best.
• piyush_soni 3y ago
  One day everyone will realize, Apple is one of the most toxic companies ever.
• chocoboaus2 3y ago
  Red rag to a bull The EU is going to absolutely see this as Apple spitting in its face.
  • alex_suzuki 3y ago
    You're counting on EU regulators understanding what a PWA is, and how it is a potential threat to Apple's walled garden. I think that's being optimistic.
    • chrisjj 3y ago
      Well, thanks to Apple, those regulators have only to read the national news.
• hamandcheese 3y ago
  Are there any notable PWAs out there? I can't think of any that I use. Sadly, it seems like if given the choice, most companies want you to install a Real App, probably for better snooping.
• dev1ycan 3y ago
  Why is Apple given so much leniency? just give Apple a 5 year ban in Europe, you'll see how quickly they decide to start begging and complying.
  • zirror 3y ago
    I think I agree, if that is legally possible. I don't think apple provides any important infrastructure like Amazon, Microsoft and Google do. It's basically a luxury company. Might be bad for the people who already own iOS devices and need it to survive in one way or another (e.g. as a wallet).
    • dev1ycan 3y ago
      Well apple could still operate the devices that they've sold, they just wouldn't be able to sell for a specified period of time, doubtful apple removes support anyways because then they customer trust.
• dilippkumar 3y ago
  There have been several comments along the lines of: "Why should I trust apple and their security, but not that of a third-party web browser?" I don't have an answer for you. But I want to recommend this talk from 7 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLGFriOKz6U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLGFriOKz6U That alone convinced me. Apple knows what it is doing when it comes to device security. Today, I trust them with my most sensitive data and sleep peacefully at night.
• nmstoker 3y ago
  Is this something that other browser suppliers could revert by having their browsers support PWAs or is there something at the OS level that makes that impractical/impossible?
• bloppe 3y ago
  So, here's Apple's concern, which is valid: every website (PWA) should have isolated storage (cookies etc), and independent access to system resources (webcam etc) confirmed by the user on a per-site basis. I think we can all agree that's how things should be. Previously, Safari handled these requirements because it's a modern browser (isolated storage has been a cornerstone of browser security for a long time), and had special privileges in iOS to configure per-site user permissions, whereas normal apps only had app-wide permissions. Luckily, Chrome already has isolated per-site storage because it's also a modern browser. If it didn't, the world would probably explode. That leaves per-site permissions as the only real problem. I'm sure the Chrome-on-iOS team would do whatever it takes to make this a good user experience, but let's assume for the sake of argument that this would actually be a burden for Apple to support. How does disabling PWA functionality change the security situation whatsoever? Users preferring Chrome would just load the sites in Chrome as a bookmark, which has no meaningful difference from a "security" perspective. Users strictly using Safari obviously have a strictly-worse experience. Who does this help? What is made more secure by disabling this?
  • cherioo 3y ago
    The difference is, whether or not, when iOS user clicks an icon to open an ”app”, they can be confident whether or not the app is “secured” or not. Hypothetically, without apple doing this, opening a PWA1 app can caused its data to be siphoned off by PWA2, up to isolation of the browser. Whether or not that is a legitimate enough concern is up to each individual.
    • bloppe 3y ago
      I just don't understand what PWA's have to do with any of this. There is nothing that a PWA can do that a regular Chrome window would not be able to do. Apple is being force to support the latter. What's wrong with continuing to support the former? If it all boils down to "Apple users expect Apple to have control over everything, and if that expectation is violated, it will be really bad", then I'm sure EU regulators will handle it. Is there anything I'm missing from a security perspective?
• ijhuygft776 3y ago
  I always knew Apple was an evil company... glad to see them finally admitting it...
• ranger_danger 3y ago
  repost https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39386569 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39386569
• KingOfCoders 3y ago
  When companies and the state collide, and the state is serious about the issue, the companies lose. Always. I know they want to win and the CEOs ego - I can imagine Cook in his office - is hurt, so "Ok, then you don't get PWAs!", and for some time companies get away with it (especially startups operating a grey area until they get enough customers), but in the end, the state wins. Because it can put people in jail and the company can't.
• system2 3y ago
  Sounds like the web developers who depended only on PWA will have to learn Swift very quickly.
• throwaway49849 3y ago
  The amusing thing is that on-homescreen PWAs were the only way iOS supported web push notifications. They could 100% do it in the browser, like every other browser does. But they won't, because they're openly hostile to open web technologies.
• _8j50 3y ago
  If for example the EU instituted rules in the steel industry that harmed US companies, US politicians would fight back and start a trade war. Why is it not the case with apple? They undermine the entire concept of free market capitalism by forcing companies to do unprofitable things instead of letting consumers vote with their wallets by using alternative products of which there are many. There is no anti-competitiveness or harm to consumers. No one is telling car makers to allow standardized engine parts. Ferrari can make every part of the car unique and incompatible with other car makers so long as it meets safety standards, so why is apple special? My theory is the EU has benefited a lot from fining rich US tech companies, they get votes from european techies who don't get capitalism and extra revenue. And the US is docile because they need EU support against China.
  • hamandcheese 3y ago
    Well, probably because the digital markets act isn't an Apple Tax. It merely provides more freedom to users. > They undermine the entire concept of free market capitalism by forcing companies to do unprofitable things instead of letting consumers vote with their wallets by using alternative products of which there are many If this truly forces unprofitable behavior, we should expect Apple to pull out out Europe. But I would bet my life that doesn't happen.
    • _8j50 3y ago
      > It merely provides more freedom to users. Users already have freedom and apple has a minority market share in europe already. > If this truly forces unprofitable behavior, we should expect Apple to pull out out Europe. But I would bet my life that doesn't happen. Less profit does not mean no profit. You essentially expect companies who can't compete because of rules made to prevent them from competing to pull out? Instead of users not buying their product forcing them out? I hope america never catches that nanny state disease. The one good european phone maker nokia lost because users stopped liking it. Now all Europe does is try to profit by unfair laws. Don't europeans who like apple products deserve to use them as apple designed? It is absolutley deranged to think that forcing design choices on a company gives users choices. As if their wallet isn't good enough to vote with or there aren't alternatives.
• stevefan1999 3y ago
  That's why I almost wouldn't buy a new Apple product anymore, with their draconian Chinese model (Apple as the big parent), and instead I crack Apple's product to assert my freedom (I do use Hackintosh, by the way). The only exception is an iPad Pro (M1) because there aren't good competitions in the market. Over the time I'm starting to think about replacing it with an Android tablet but I'm still yet to find one with a decent pen and memory. Alas, to quote Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety". You gave up your liberty to be colonialized by Apple, and now you get neither Liberty nor Safety in the future eventually.
  • jocaal 3y ago
    > Android tablet but I'm still yet to find one with a decent pen and memory I don't have one, so take with grain of salt, but I've seen reviews of the Galaxy Tab s9 Ultra are pretty good [0]. Super expensive though. Also as a bonus, android is possibly getting a VM [1], so in the future you might be able to install full fat linux on high quality tablets. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl0UUhmaiDU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl0UUhmaiDU [1] https://source.android.com/docs/core/virtualization/architecture https://source.android.com/docs/core/virtualization/architec...
  • paulddraper 3y ago
    > I'm still yet to find one with a decent pen and memory. Huh? Buy the Galaxy Tab S6 Lite with 4GB RAM for $250. Plus a pen for another $20.
• hurril 3y ago
  Can I as an EU citizen please opt out of this nonsens?
  • bomgar 3y ago
    Yes. Don't buy apple anymore.
    • hurril 3y ago
      How about: don't be in EU anymore?
• moi2388 3y ago
  Good. Fuck PWAs
• mantenpanther 3y ago
  Regardless of who is the bad guy here, the outcome of this is just devastating for the free web. For me the future trajectory of Apps were PWAs, which worked reasonably well lately. As small company, creating one App that works everywhere and is available without AppStores was just great. Much money spent on PWAs just wasted. This is a terrible outcome, again caused by "well meant" but unpractical EU regulation.
  • LaGrange 3y ago
    ROFL. This isn't "unpractical EU regulation" but once again a corporation doing malicious compliance. At some point they really should just get banned from the market with any IP rights getting invalidated.
    • mantenpanther 3y ago
      The EU gave Apple an argument to kill PWAs (because the investment to support them is not worth it for them), while Apple does not like PWAs anyways. Bad for the citizens of the EU.
      • LaGrange 3y ago
        > while Apple does not like PWAs anyways [citation needed]. PWAs give Apple an out from having certain apps (for example, FetLife) on the App Store without making the phone a non-starter for people who want to use them. As much as Apple likes its walled garden, it likes the walls just fuzzy enough to not piss people off into migrating. Apple just want to make the regulation itself annoying.
        • mantenpanther 3y ago
          And annoying it is. I'm not on the side of Apple here, but also question the way regulators work, because lately the outcome of IT-regulation in some cases seems to be a net negative for citizens.
  • andy_ppp 3y ago
• thatha7777 3y ago
  Frankly, Apple's position enrages me. It's okay that Apple doesn't like a European law. As a US-based company, it makes sense that it feels like a foreigner is meddling in their affairs... It's okay that they continue to have the hubris that Apple, and Apple alone, knows what's best for everyone. However... the democratically-elected institutions of the EU represent a total of 447 million people. Most technologists I know in the EU are pro-DMA. It doesn't feel like Apple has ever engaged in any kind of external discussion around this, or any kind of acknowledgment that there may be an issue with their current policies. It's like walking it the courtroom with bloody hands and screaming in an obviously fake British accent "MURDER?!? THAT IS RIDICULOUS, Your Honor. I AM WEARING A TUXEDO." Apple's arguments at every single junction have been nothing short of ridiculous. My favorite one: "Apple operates 5 distinct App Stores: the iOS App Store, the macOS App Store, the iPadOS App Store, etc..., and only the iOS one is big enough to be a "gatekeeper"." [0] COME FUCKING ON. HIRE BETTER LAWYERS. [0]: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/digital_markets_act/cases/202344/DMA_100013_215.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/competition/digital_markets_act/cases/2...
  • MrDresden 3y ago
    They didn't need better lawyers. There wasn't an argument for them to use, better than the one you mention. Apple (and by extension it's product line), is monopolistic. And they know it.
• andy_ppp 3y ago
  Why can’t Apple continue to provide the normal way progressive web apps function when Safari is selected (that work like they do outside of the EU) and provide this other system for alternative browsers makers? I don’t believe they are trying to abide by the spirit of the EU law and are trying their best to behave extremely poorly towards it in how they are complying, choosing the most user hostile interpretations possible. I hope the EU issue the maximum fine.
• pulse7 3y ago
  This is a political action to angry consumers so that they complain to local governments... a type of sabotage...
• cabello58 3y ago
  [dead]
• pantulis 3y ago
  Perhaps it has already been said but, didn't Steve Jobs state that "The SDK is the web", on the original iPhone launch?
  • yreg 3y ago
    He did, but strategies change over time.
    • pantulis 3y ago
      Even Steve changed when the App Store was launched, of course!
• mediumsmart 3y ago
  I don't want the internet in an iOS device, only in the browser. On purpose.
• pompino 3y ago
  Apple is fearmongering that if the user installs a browser of their choice, the phone would get rooted in seconds and the user would have their data stolen. Yeah, how about they fix that ?
• danhau 3y ago
  Does this mean Apple has killed PWAs in the EU?
• szasamasa 3y ago
  web apps are websites with standalone the name "install" is bad and the wording is NOT a web standard, NOTHING is installed the question is web capabilities one core capability is caching and offline via service workers no need for "install" for this "installing" a web app does not even need anything anymore, not even offline or service workers... it is ONLY switch to standalone and get a launch button or be integrated into app launchers on OS behind "install" is a bad and immature web app manifest api, it is a draft... the wording install must go it is one of MANY possible web capabilities for a web domain to be able run standalone and get a button apple cannot ban this since a shortcut to chrome cannot be deemed unsafe, where then CHROME decides to run standalone or not the real problem is NOT that safari kills standalone they try to kill a lot of web capability, like service workers, and NOT JUST FOR SAFARI I mean this will not stand, you CAN stay apple-level-safe (whether it is more or less than other platforms) by CHOOSING safari it is an obvious CHOICE to be granted to trust google, mozilla or microsoft and their web security model to stay safe with THEM on the web no argument why this should not be allowed if other native apps are allowed and come on, even mac os is safe with service workers in chromium
• InsomniacL 3y ago
  So you can build a website that runs on iPhone using some other browser engine that requests permission to use the camera... But if you want to move that website into a PWA that runs on iPhone that uses some other browser engine that requests permission to use the camera then, that browser engine can't be trusted?
  • rahkiin 3y ago
    I think PWA integration architecture needs to be rebuild for supporting different browsers and it was not a priority because of low usage (their words). I can imagine an architecture where every pwa does not run a whole Safari instance but just a tab. Then all those ‘app looking’ pwas run in the same actual app. Or they just dont trust google to make no native apps anymore for the app store…
    • InsomniacL 3y ago
      > I think PWA integration architecture needs to be rebuild for supporting different browsers and it was not a priority because of low usage Just more evidence of their Anti-Competitive practices, giving preferential access to Safari to the system. Where Apple are providing the 'platform' (i.e AppStore) and are competing against other users of that platform, those departments should be treated as any other user of the platform. Safari/iMessage/etc.. should only be able to use the same API's that every other developer can access and should have the same level of access to the AppStore as every other developer.
• Mindwipe 3y ago
  Apple are being actively dishonest in their justification here. If you work at Apple and are reading this, it's time to start asking serious questions about why your company is happy to lie to the public and lawmakers to try and juice their revenue.
• rjmunro 3y ago
  To allow other browser engines on iOS, why do Apple have to do anything except change the policy of the App store to not reject them?
• d1sxeyes 3y ago
  I’m a bit of a hobby coder, and I have enjoyed writing small, home cooked apps (https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/ https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/) and publishing them as PWAs that my friends and family can enjoy. I can’t justify an annual 99 USD for an Apple developer licence, and my family have a mix of iPhones and Androids. This step makes it much less possible for me to do this kind of “home cooked” development, and it makes me sad. I think Apple would do well to offer a solution for folks like me, maybe a significant discount (or free?) developer accounts for folks with apps with fewer than 50 users or no App Store access, etc. But I guess they don’t really care, which is sad.
  • axelthegerman 3y ago
    > But I guess they don’t really care, which is sad. Hit the nail on the head there. Currently they care about protecting their iOS monopoly. I'm not sure there is much they care about more. PWA, alternative browsers, alternative app stores are all just little pawns in the iOS/Android duopoly game I too was very excited that PWAs are finally here and work everywhere. I thought being open web technology they wouldn't go away easily - guess what Apple always finds a way. They really just are the new Microsoft from the old days
• browningstreet 3y ago
  So many laypeople that I know don’t even use bookmarks. I’m a Linux geek with macOS and Windows in the house and I’ve never used a PWA. I just can’t get excited over this one.. technical, political.. Apple is doing what I’d expect from a company being told how to build and change their product. And since I don’t want to live in a Dell world running Windows paired to an Android phone of any kind, I personally am inclined to give them a pass on their obstinance. There’s very little in the tech world that runs as cleanly as iOS on an iPhone. (And yes I’d love to run Linux on my mobile desktop but it’s all really terrible and not even close to a whisper of a starter. And I’ve tried them all.) Not an Apple apologizer, just ranking them against the performance and quality of the alternatives.
  • troad 3y ago
    > I’m a Linux geek with macOS and Windows in the house and I’ve never used a PWA. I'm pretty techy and I'm pretty baffled myself. I don't think I've ever even seen anyone else use a PWA, let alone used them myself. And honestly, I'm not sure how I feel about them. Replacing native apps with web-only cloud services sounds like a bad case of 'out of the frying pan and into the fire'. I've come to hate what Apple has done to computing, but I'm sceptical that PWAs are the solution here, so I'm struggling to get too fired up about this.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
• swellbastion 3y ago
  It's worth noting that Android solved this problem a long time ago. Home screen shortcuts just open in whatever browser you created the shortcut with. If apple hasn't fixed this a year from now, it'll be a clear indication that they are taking this as an opportunity to disadvantage the web platform.
• cdeutsch 3y ago
  More proof Apple is terrible at software and iOS is a broken, stagnant OS. I love Apple's hardware, but iOS is such a turd, I'm stuck on Android even though the rest of my eco-system is Apple (MacBook, AirPods, AppleTV)
• ksec 3y ago
  If we were to design a third OS Ecosystem. May be an OS that is based entirely on Web? And let all Apps be PWA?
• pcdoodle 3y ago
  Shame these threads keep getting removed from HN. This is one of the most important conversations we are having this year. Flamewars be damned, the conversation needs to take place. Apples pivot kill PWAs shows their true intention. Web apps are ready to disrupt their monopoly and industry wide 30% tax.
• szasamasa 3y ago
  dma here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022R1925&from=EN https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE... Apple cannot simply invoke DMA (50) as a free pass. For its arguments to align with the intent of the legislation, here's a roadmap of what they need to do to justify their security-based restrictions on iOS: Apple must be transparent about the exact security issues posed by alternative browser engines with concrete instances (not merely speculative risks). They need to prove that these are unique to iOS, given the successful use of unrestricted browser engines on macOS (and every other OS). Before opting for the extreme step of removing functionality, Apple needs to offer documentation of all the methods for managing and mitigating specific threats that were considered and subsequently ruled out as infeasible (sandboxing, enhanced APIs, etc.). This emphasizes that their actions are indeed the last resort and not merely a way to suppress competition. The company needs to demonstrate how they would proactively work with browser engine developers to establish strong security controls and threat monitoring on par with or exceeding their current practices for native-only experiences. This shifts the focus to building a safe environment rather than merely limiting the scope of capabilities. Apple must guarantee that if and when these security challenges are met, it will progressively expand support for unrestricted use of web standards for third-party browser engines. This creates the long-term perspective the DMA is designed to protect and gives confidence to developers investing in advanced web app solutions. Without taking action in these key areas, Apple's reliance on this DMA portion won't hold up to regulatory scrutiny. They cannot cite generic security dangers then fall back on "practicality" arguments without robust, evidence-backed reasoning.
• lwhi 3y ago
  This only adds to a potential narrative that Apple is posturing in the same way an upset child might to a parent or teacher. It's not a position of strength; and I wonder whether this is a sign they're now very firmly on the back foot.