10 ms·

> It’s telling that this is the feature that Apple refused to share. And it makes sense: the idea that users could install safe and secure apps that Apple can’t

> It’s telling that this is the feature that Apple refused to share. And it makes sense: the idea that users could install safe and secure apps that Apple can’t tax, block or control is terrifying to them. I think that’s what this decision is all about. When Safari was the only browser engine on iOS, PWAs didn’t threaten the App Store because Safari delivers a degraded experience with them. With alternative browser engines mandated by law, Apple faced the possibility that Chrome or Firefox might make PWAs easy to discover, easy to install, and feature-complete. They might have begun to see serious adoption and investment. I think Apple did not want to risk letting that happen.

neximo64 3y ago
This is quite often where people make the greatest mistake. It's all about distribution and customer usage. Most people hate and don't use PWAs. What stands in the way are Native iPhone apps are better. It also goes for android too. That's why PWAs fail. If they were successful Apple would find a way to monetise the hell out of them.
- lozenge 3y ago
  Most people don't use PWAs... as they exist today. What would happen if Google added all the APIs to Chrome that are needed for every one of their iOS apps, and then offered them as "PWAs that work best with Google Chrome"? Google would not have to abide by App Store rules, nor the rules for app marketplaces, nor pay the Core Technology Fee of half a euro per install. Apple's entire approach of using their status as a popular phone manufacturer to control the software market would fall.
  - neximo64 3y ago
    PWA's can do most things: https://whatpwacando.today https://whatpwacando.today. Steve Jobs also preferred PWAs and hated the app store. I'm curious as to ask what they can't do that a native app can do without any workaround whatsoever? I don't know of a single person, ordinary person, who uses PWAs. A Cordova app is a better experience.
    - lozenge 3y ago
      I don't mean just adding an improved notification API, I mean they could literally allow access to the entire SwiftUI and all other iOS APIs from the web. Heck, they could allow PWAs to run in Objective-C instead of JavaScript. At that point it would be indistinguishable from a native app, except that it would not be beholden to Apple's policies like Core Technology Fee, notarisation, payment scare screens, etc ( https://proton.me/blog/apple-dma-compliance-plan-trap https://proton.me/blog/apple-dma-compliance-plan-trap )
      - neximo64 3y ago
        You can use web notifications, and you can compile Objective C to webassembly. You're also able to use apple pay. Everything you've mentioned has a workaround. I'm really getting at how PWAs are basically something most people wouldn't use, not because they're missing APIs but because they're just a terrible experience and difficult to install and use. If its Apple that is holding back PWAs so much, its not that they're any successful on Android either. And then to extend the argument further, "App Clips" or "Instant Apps" aren't much success either from an adoption perspective, despite having full access to the APIs native apps have.
        anon373839 3y ago
        There is another thing holding PWAs back: they don’t offer as much data mining potential as native apps. A lot of companies sabotage their own web apps just to force you to use the spyware in the App Store, and I’ll admit that isn’t Apple’s fault.
        wiseowise 3y ago
        > And then to extend the argument further, "App Clips" or "Instant Apps" aren't much success either from an adoption perspective, despite having full access to the APIs native apps have. They never had full access to the APIs native apps have, what are you talking about? Last time I tried to develop instant app on Android (and that was like 4(?) years ago), it didn't have access to network interfaces or something like that. It was a great idea on paper, but terrible in execution.
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    It may have to do something that if you cannot trust Apple not to break web apps like they are planning to do now, companies will not invest in web apps. Also, most companies have native apps already... Web apps are the future competitor, not present.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      Yes because Apple never breaks native apps… Do you remember when they completely removed 32 bit app support from iOS. People on HN want to make every excuse in the world for why PWAs on Android aren’t more popular and how it’s Apple’s fault.
      - szasamasa 3y ago
        it is not breaking native apps, it is pushing you to update your tech... currently you cannot update some code for your website to work offline on iOS like there is a competition... few companies have great websites/web apps and if a native app worked, people will not abandon it for a web version of course... the competition you claim web apps lost (even on android) has not yet even started :) in a very huge article-like top level comment I wrote about how this "install" web apps is misleading and comparing native apps directly to web technology web technology is not all about apps... I just checked one good example: hover.com has no native app, never had... they made the website work on all screen sizes. actually I never cared if they have web manifest implemented so that I can switch them to standalone (web app, vow)... now I see I could do this but I will not because this particular domain I choose to use NOT standalone (not as an app) but from the browser... it is a well written website that could be used standalone but since I rarely use it and from linux desktop, I do not care actually, web manifest is a draft not a web standard yet: https://www.w3.org/TR/appmanifest/ https://www.w3.org/TR/appmanifest/ all it does (what some people love to call "install") is initiating standalone usage and you can get a home screen button each and every web capability practically has its own standard... caching and offline websites are possible via service workers, orthogonal to standalone and "web app" what I want to say it is not that simple that web app vs. native... hover does not pay Apple or Google because they were capable of responsive design... if you use a service like it every day or standalone is crucial or your choice of using it, use it that way, it is still run in your chosen browser sandbox whether you hide browser UI or not it is about choice and it is about the future... what I can tell you knowing web capabilities well, 99% of the time it is possible to deliver the same experiences with a browser as native apps deliver the web is an alternative, even for standalone experiences (apps)... it may be like linux and stay niche or become like chromium time will tell
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    It may have to do something with the fact that if you cannot trust Apple not to break web apps like they are planning to do now, companies will not invest in web apps. Also, most companies have native apps already so no need to reproduce them. Web apps are a future competitor, not a present one. They are really suited for smaller cross platform projects but if you follow how the web evolves, nowadays they are just a serious thing to consider for any kinds of software projects.
- holoduke 3y ago
  Our apps are available as webapps. 100% identical user experience. All functionality. Including notifications, offline, storage, performance and more. We have over 50m installs. Where do you get your info from? Really curious.
- phartenfeller 3y ago
  I agree that native apps can offer better experiences and often do because they get more development effort. I disagree that most people hate PWAs because they are just websites. I think many mix bad websites with "PWA is a bad technology". All the cookie banners, ads and prompts to install the native app are the reason the experience is worse. What could a native app for Wikipedia, Google or a basic news pages (without ads) do better? I use the Twitter PWA for years as it saves battery and offers the same experience. Maybe animations are not as smooth but most people won't even notice that. I also rather use YouTube in Firefox mobile so I can use uBlock even though the app offers more features and generally more ambition. For hardware heavy use cases native apps are obviously better. Also when companies push people to install the native apps for quick access, push notifications and better data collection you can't take customer usage as a metric for people's taste.
  - anon373839 3y ago
    > I think many mix bad websites with "PWA is a bad technology". Exactly. I put together a demo a few years ago that employed somewhat novel interaction design to showcase some machine learning tech. A number of people were gobsmacked by it and asked endless questions about what framework it was built with. I didn't use a framework. I dug into the deep recesses of CSS to make it do what I wanted. Really, you can accomplish almost anything with HTML/CSS/JS/SVG (though I'll admit it might be painful).
    - szasamasa 3y ago
      actually, you can do everything with js js web api-s have become so powerful (web animation instead of css) of course you have to know what dom is (and there is cssom as well, modifiable via js) but it took me some time to realize all you need is js (and understand what js-async really is)... actually I love the js async model for UI the only problem is that js is a scripting language... some may use typescript for stronger types but what I would love to have and will never come since all web API is for js is a new language... however, you can use webassembly for critical frontend tasks (like stockfish chess engine on lichess) or actually last time I checked V8 was so optimized that good js code was practically not inferior to webassebly or native...
- wiseowise 3y ago
  The only reason why I would install native application is if it's the only way of distribution and I absolutely NEED to use it (banking, government, etc.), for everything else if it's not in a browser - it doesn't exist to me. Native applications might offer marginal performance boost, but given how optimized modern web is and how powerful are devices that I use - that's not an argument to me unless I do something computing intensive. I don't know how incredibly self-centered and obtuse you might be to think that your specific crud #383835 is not like all those other™ crud apps and absolutely requires a native application. In a browser I can: * Freely select ANY text(unless for some reason some special snowflake website thinks that it needs to disable text selection) * Bookmark, add tags, sort, organize websites how I want * Sync all of my information and access it on all platforms, not platforms that vendor decided to lock me in * Add plugins that allow me to modify and work with content how I see fit * Prohibit JS, ads or any sorts of tracking And probably at least another 10 things if I think longer than 2 minutes about it. All of this is just from perspective of a user. If I were to write from perspective of a developer, that would take a whole blogpost to explain how native applications are relic of the past and should just roll over and die.
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    totally agree in the end, freedom of choice, diversity and innovation would make every service find its optimal incarnation (native or web) in addition, web security is actually so robust via sandboxing that I feel more secure in a top browser on any web domains than downloading stuff from app stores native apps have a built in "layer" of bot security, however... a website has to implement security itself because even a smart fridge can make GET requests :) but I just play the devil's lawyer... I think 999 out of 1000 "standalone UX" better off delivered from the web
  - rubymamis 3y ago
    I highly disagree. Web apps are notoriously slow. I'm developing a Notion alternative in Qt C++ that load large text files on my 2017 MacBook Air while on my friend's 2021 M1 Pro, the fastest web based block editor (MarkText) takes around 11x longer to load the same file. So, essentialy, my 2017 MacBook Air is FASTER just due to more efficient software. Why are we allowing this degradation of software? Each time I think about opening Spotify (Electron) on my desktop, I dread the loading time and the RAM it would use. For very simple apps, frameworks like Tauri should do the job. But for complex applications, let's please not lose our benchmarking standards. My app: https://www.get-plume.com/ https://www.get-plume.com/
- kibwen 3y ago
  If PWAs are so bad, why is Apple utterly terrified at the idea of letting them compete with native apps? I avoid native apps at every turn. If an app is only available natively, I look for a competitor who offers a web version. Finding native apps is a mess compared to finding a website; it's truly impressive how app stores still manage to have worse search results than Google despite Google's quality plummeting. Installing native apps is a hassle. Managing permissions is a hassle. Dealing with their internal ads is a hassle.
  - manuelabeledo 3y ago
    This is an odd take. Native apps are usually just better looking and more performant.
    - kibwen 3y ago
      To me, the odd take is thinking that the point of an app is to look good.
      - manuelabeledo 3y ago
        It is not, it's just an attribute, arguably important to the success of the app.
      - troupo 3y ago
        Yes. Yes, among other things the point of the app is to look good: be fluid, performant, responsive and conform to the platform look and feel and HIGs. All the things that web apps objectively fail to do.
        kibwen 3y ago
        And if I can't find the app because of the awful app store interface, and if it's stealing my information by demanding permissions that it doesn't need, and if it's showing me ads that I can't block, and if it's bothering me with constant updates, why should I care if it's "fluid"? The goal of software is not to look pretty, it's to be functional. Web apps are more functional than native apps by my metrics. I do not care if it's less fluid, because I use software to do things.
- deergomoo 3y ago
  I almost universally prefer native apps, and I'm also an iPhone user, but it's hard to claim PWAs are unpopular on their own merits when Apple has seemingly deliberately stifled them. On Android you can go to a mobile webpage and see a fairly unintrusive, one-time banner which will let you install it to the homescreen. Sure it's only two taps on iOS (Share -> Add to homescreen), but for a start your users need to know that functionality even exists, which alone is a massive roadblock to adoption. As a user, if I want to get notifications and an "app-ish" experience, and the developer is unable or unwilling to create decent platform-specific apps, I would happily take a PWA over a "native" app that is actually just an embedded web view or something trying to recreate the world like Flutter. If I'm not gonna get the benefits of my chosen platform, I'd at least like to not also have to deal with the downsides of App Store apps, like large install sizes and stuff getting held up or nerfed by app review. I recognise that giving PWAs unimpeded access to the core capabilities that native apps have might result in a worse offering of native apps—as more developers choose to just not bother—but then I'd say it's on Apple (and Google!) to step up and make native a more compelling option. Any veteran iOS developer will agree there's an enormous list of stuff dying for improvement in the development and submission process.
chii 3y ago
> I think Apple did not want to risk letting that happen. they've already shown a shadow of their true colors when they banned flash under the guise of security (which is also a problem, but for which apple conveniently uses as an excuse). This is their true intention. The app store and the easy revenue from those sales are just not something they'll willingly give up.
- lesuorac 3y ago
  Loosen up that tinfoil hat. Apple banned flash when web apps were the _only_ apps on the iphone (besides the preloaded apps). The App Store [1] is ~18 months after the iPhone [2] was released. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone
  - patrickaljord 3y ago
    This is true, but it's naive to believe that the App Store wasn't planned long before those 18 months and was written in just a couple of month before its release.
    - TheFuzzball 3y ago
      I think we can tell that the App Store wasn't planned that early because if it was the earlier Apple apps would have been using the APIs that needed to be implemented and documented for the first App Store, and they didn't. Apple today is very different from the Apple that launched the iPhone and the original App Store - they started off thinking all apps could be PWAs, but the Web Platform wasn't mature enough at the time and they pivoted to native, that's the actual truth. Now they're addicted to in-app-purchase money from casino games and don't want that money moving out of their 30% taxable grasp. It's a sad story, truly.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        Really? You think the casino style games are going to move to PWAs without direct access to users wallets via in app purchases? If that’s the case, why aren’t all of the same games moving to the web for Android?
scarface_74 3y ago
Everyone thinks that Apple really cares if you use PWAs? It came out in the Epic trial that 90% of the App Store revenue comes from pay to win games and in app purchases of loot boxes and coins. Those apps aren’t going to be PWAs. If it’s only mean old Apple keeping the great world of cross platform apps using web technologies, why aren’t PWAs more popular on Android?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  > Those apps aren’t going to be PWAs. Except when a manager learns that they can keep Apple’s 30% if they release a PWA instead. They don’t even need to know what a PWA is, they just ask the developer if it’s possible, who says “something something WebGL and web sockets?” The manager thinks it’s a great idea. Whether that translates to their users migrating to the new implementation could be up in the air. I suspect Apple will lose some revenue, at any rate, and they’re likely thinking similarly.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    So you really think that none of these game developers or their management never heard about PWAs and if they thought they could avoid the 30% fee on Android by creating one without any loss in usage they wouldn’t do it?
- szasamasa 3y ago
  if apple did not care, they would not have crippled web capabilities in the last 10+ years and they would just let chromium/gecko based browsers make use of web standards web apps are the future that may take as much as 90%+ of the 100B app store revenue web apps will succeed once good programmers and companies make strategic decisions to build good web apps crippling web apps on one important major platform like iOS stalls these strategic decisions since it is not easy to tell your programmers that now you learn js and web technologies if you still need those native apps in addition, most companies have already published native apps, web apps will start to gain success after apple is forced to let them work with feature parity on iOS etc. AND 3-5-10 years pass since rather new companies choose web apps get back to your observation of "popularity" after apple is forced from governments and competition authorities to support web apps on iOS (just like on macOS or every other OS does) plus 5 years!
mmcnl 3y ago
Exactly. It's a loophole in their alternative App Store model so they closed it. Nothing more, nothing less.
polynomial 3y ago
> because Safari delivers a degraded experience with them. Can you recommend any sources that go deeper into particulars of degraded experience?
- t00 3y ago
  WebKit development is Apple oriented leading to several incompatibilities with other major browsers. Reasoning is usually either WebKit works according to standards, or that bug is accepted but it is basically abandoned. Possibly strategically, to keep Apple controlling some niche use cases. Ingenious but nasty strategy indeed. https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?order=changeddate%2Cbug_status%2Cpriority%2Cassigned_to%2Cbug_id&product=WebKit&query_format=advanced&resolution=--- https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?order=changeddate%2Cbug_...

neximo64 3y ago

This is quite often where people make the greatest mistake. It's all about distribution and customer usage. Most people hate and don't use PWAs. What stands in the way are Native iPhone apps are better. It also goes for android too. That's why PWAs fail. If they were successful Apple would find a way to monetise the hell out of them.

lozenge 3y ago
Most people don't use PWAs... as they exist today. What would happen if Google added all the APIs to Chrome that are needed for every one of their iOS apps, and then offered them as "PWAs that work best with Google Chrome"? Google would not have to abide by App Store rules, nor the rules for app marketplaces, nor pay the Core Technology Fee of half a euro per install. Apple's entire approach of using their status as a popular phone manufacturer to control the software market would fall.
- neximo64 3y ago
  PWA's can do most things: https://whatpwacando.today https://whatpwacando.today. Steve Jobs also preferred PWAs and hated the app store. I'm curious as to ask what they can't do that a native app can do without any workaround whatsoever? I don't know of a single person, ordinary person, who uses PWAs. A Cordova app is a better experience.
  - lozenge 3y ago
    I don't mean just adding an improved notification API, I mean they could literally allow access to the entire SwiftUI and all other iOS APIs from the web. Heck, they could allow PWAs to run in Objective-C instead of JavaScript. At that point it would be indistinguishable from a native app, except that it would not be beholden to Apple's policies like Core Technology Fee, notarisation, payment scare screens, etc ( https://proton.me/blog/apple-dma-compliance-plan-trap https://proton.me/blog/apple-dma-compliance-plan-trap )
    - neximo64 3y ago
      You can use web notifications, and you can compile Objective C to webassembly. You're also able to use apple pay. Everything you've mentioned has a workaround. I'm really getting at how PWAs are basically something most people wouldn't use, not because they're missing APIs but because they're just a terrible experience and difficult to install and use. If its Apple that is holding back PWAs so much, its not that they're any successful on Android either. And then to extend the argument further, "App Clips" or "Instant Apps" aren't much success either from an adoption perspective, despite having full access to the APIs native apps have.
      - anon373839 3y ago
        There is another thing holding PWAs back: they don’t offer as much data mining potential as native apps. A lot of companies sabotage their own web apps just to force you to use the spyware in the App Store, and I’ll admit that isn’t Apple’s fault.
      - wiseowise 3y ago
        > And then to extend the argument further, "App Clips" or "Instant Apps" aren't much success either from an adoption perspective, despite having full access to the APIs native apps have. They never had full access to the APIs native apps have, what are you talking about? Last time I tried to develop instant app on Android (and that was like 4(?) years ago), it didn't have access to network interfaces or something like that. It was a great idea on paper, but terrible in execution.
- szasamasa 3y ago
  It may have to do something that if you cannot trust Apple not to break web apps like they are planning to do now, companies will not invest in web apps. Also, most companies have native apps already... Web apps are the future competitor, not present.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Yes because Apple never breaks native apps… Do you remember when they completely removed 32 bit app support from iOS. People on HN want to make every excuse in the world for why PWAs on Android aren’t more popular and how it’s Apple’s fault.
    - szasamasa 3y ago
      it is not breaking native apps, it is pushing you to update your tech... currently you cannot update some code for your website to work offline on iOS like there is a competition... few companies have great websites/web apps and if a native app worked, people will not abandon it for a web version of course... the competition you claim web apps lost (even on android) has not yet even started :) in a very huge article-like top level comment I wrote about how this "install" web apps is misleading and comparing native apps directly to web technology web technology is not all about apps... I just checked one good example: hover.com has no native app, never had... they made the website work on all screen sizes. actually I never cared if they have web manifest implemented so that I can switch them to standalone (web app, vow)... now I see I could do this but I will not because this particular domain I choose to use NOT standalone (not as an app) but from the browser... it is a well written website that could be used standalone but since I rarely use it and from linux desktop, I do not care actually, web manifest is a draft not a web standard yet: https://www.w3.org/TR/appmanifest/ https://www.w3.org/TR/appmanifest/ all it does (what some people love to call "install") is initiating standalone usage and you can get a home screen button each and every web capability practically has its own standard... caching and offline websites are possible via service workers, orthogonal to standalone and "web app" what I want to say it is not that simple that web app vs. native... hover does not pay Apple or Google because they were capable of responsive design... if you use a service like it every day or standalone is crucial or your choice of using it, use it that way, it is still run in your chosen browser sandbox whether you hide browser UI or not it is about choice and it is about the future... what I can tell you knowing web capabilities well, 99% of the time it is possible to deliver the same experiences with a browser as native apps deliver the web is an alternative, even for standalone experiences (apps)... it may be like linux and stay niche or become like chromium time will tell
- szasamasa 3y ago
  It may have to do something with the fact that if you cannot trust Apple not to break web apps like they are planning to do now, companies will not invest in web apps. Also, most companies have native apps already so no need to reproduce them. Web apps are a future competitor, not a present one. They are really suited for smaller cross platform projects but if you follow how the web evolves, nowadays they are just a serious thing to consider for any kinds of software projects.
holoduke 3y ago
Our apps are available as webapps. 100% identical user experience. All functionality. Including notifications, offline, storage, performance and more. We have over 50m installs. Where do you get your info from? Really curious.
phartenfeller 3y ago
I agree that native apps can offer better experiences and often do because they get more development effort. I disagree that most people hate PWAs because they are just websites. I think many mix bad websites with "PWA is a bad technology". All the cookie banners, ads and prompts to install the native app are the reason the experience is worse. What could a native app for Wikipedia, Google or a basic news pages (without ads) do better? I use the Twitter PWA for years as it saves battery and offers the same experience. Maybe animations are not as smooth but most people won't even notice that. I also rather use YouTube in Firefox mobile so I can use uBlock even though the app offers more features and generally more ambition. For hardware heavy use cases native apps are obviously better. Also when companies push people to install the native apps for quick access, push notifications and better data collection you can't take customer usage as a metric for people's taste.
- anon373839 3y ago
  > I think many mix bad websites with "PWA is a bad technology". Exactly. I put together a demo a few years ago that employed somewhat novel interaction design to showcase some machine learning tech. A number of people were gobsmacked by it and asked endless questions about what framework it was built with. I didn't use a framework. I dug into the deep recesses of CSS to make it do what I wanted. Really, you can accomplish almost anything with HTML/CSS/JS/SVG (though I'll admit it might be painful).
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    actually, you can do everything with js js web api-s have become so powerful (web animation instead of css) of course you have to know what dom is (and there is cssom as well, modifiable via js) but it took me some time to realize all you need is js (and understand what js-async really is)... actually I love the js async model for UI the only problem is that js is a scripting language... some may use typescript for stronger types but what I would love to have and will never come since all web API is for js is a new language... however, you can use webassembly for critical frontend tasks (like stockfish chess engine on lichess) or actually last time I checked V8 was so optimized that good js code was practically not inferior to webassebly or native...
wiseowise 3y ago
The only reason why I would install native application is if it's the only way of distribution and I absolutely NEED to use it (banking, government, etc.), for everything else if it's not in a browser - it doesn't exist to me. Native applications might offer marginal performance boost, but given how optimized modern web is and how powerful are devices that I use - that's not an argument to me unless I do something computing intensive. I don't know how incredibly self-centered and obtuse you might be to think that your specific crud #383835 is not like all those other™ crud apps and absolutely requires a native application. In a browser I can: * Freely select ANY text(unless for some reason some special snowflake website thinks that it needs to disable text selection) * Bookmark, add tags, sort, organize websites how I want * Sync all of my information and access it on all platforms, not platforms that vendor decided to lock me in * Add plugins that allow me to modify and work with content how I see fit * Prohibit JS, ads or any sorts of tracking And probably at least another 10 things if I think longer than 2 minutes about it. All of this is just from perspective of a user. If I were to write from perspective of a developer, that would take a whole blogpost to explain how native applications are relic of the past and should just roll over and die.
- szasamasa 3y ago
  totally agree in the end, freedom of choice, diversity and innovation would make every service find its optimal incarnation (native or web) in addition, web security is actually so robust via sandboxing that I feel more secure in a top browser on any web domains than downloading stuff from app stores native apps have a built in "layer" of bot security, however... a website has to implement security itself because even a smart fridge can make GET requests :) but I just play the devil's lawyer... I think 999 out of 1000 "standalone UX" better off delivered from the web
- rubymamis 3y ago
  I highly disagree. Web apps are notoriously slow. I'm developing a Notion alternative in Qt C++ that load large text files on my 2017 MacBook Air while on my friend's 2021 M1 Pro, the fastest web based block editor (MarkText) takes around 11x longer to load the same file. So, essentialy, my 2017 MacBook Air is FASTER just due to more efficient software. Why are we allowing this degradation of software? Each time I think about opening Spotify (Electron) on my desktop, I dread the loading time and the RAM it would use. For very simple apps, frameworks like Tauri should do the job. But for complex applications, let's please not lose our benchmarking standards. My app: https://www.get-plume.com/ https://www.get-plume.com/
kibwen 3y ago
If PWAs are so bad, why is Apple utterly terrified at the idea of letting them compete with native apps? I avoid native apps at every turn. If an app is only available natively, I look for a competitor who offers a web version. Finding native apps is a mess compared to finding a website; it's truly impressive how app stores still manage to have worse search results than Google despite Google's quality plummeting. Installing native apps is a hassle. Managing permissions is a hassle. Dealing with their internal ads is a hassle.
- manuelabeledo 3y ago
  This is an odd take. Native apps are usually just better looking and more performant.
  - kibwen 3y ago
    To me, the odd take is thinking that the point of an app is to look good.
    - manuelabeledo 3y ago
      It is not, it's just an attribute, arguably important to the success of the app.
    - troupo 3y ago
      Yes. Yes, among other things the point of the app is to look good: be fluid, performant, responsive and conform to the platform look and feel and HIGs. All the things that web apps objectively fail to do.
      - kibwen 3y ago
        And if I can't find the app because of the awful app store interface, and if it's stealing my information by demanding permissions that it doesn't need, and if it's showing me ads that I can't block, and if it's bothering me with constant updates, why should I care if it's "fluid"? The goal of software is not to look pretty, it's to be functional. Web apps are more functional than native apps by my metrics. I do not care if it's less fluid, because I use software to do things.
deergomoo 3y ago
I almost universally prefer native apps, and I'm also an iPhone user, but it's hard to claim PWAs are unpopular on their own merits when Apple has seemingly deliberately stifled them. On Android you can go to a mobile webpage and see a fairly unintrusive, one-time banner which will let you install it to the homescreen. Sure it's only two taps on iOS (Share -> Add to homescreen), but for a start your users need to know that functionality even exists, which alone is a massive roadblock to adoption. As a user, if I want to get notifications and an "app-ish" experience, and the developer is unable or unwilling to create decent platform-specific apps, I would happily take a PWA over a "native" app that is actually just an embedded web view or something trying to recreate the world like Flutter. If I'm not gonna get the benefits of my chosen platform, I'd at least like to not also have to deal with the downsides of App Store apps, like large install sizes and stuff getting held up or nerfed by app review. I recognise that giving PWAs unimpeded access to the core capabilities that native apps have might result in a worse offering of native apps—as more developers choose to just not bother—but then I'd say it's on Apple (and Google!) to step up and make native a more compelling option. Any veteran iOS developer will agree there's an enormous list of stuff dying for improvement in the development and submission process.

chii 3y ago

> I think Apple did not want to risk letting that happen. they've already shown a shadow of their true colors when they banned flash under the guise of security (which is also a problem, but for which apple conveniently uses as an excuse). This is their true intention. The app store and the easy revenue from those sales are just not something they'll willingly give up.

lesuorac 3y ago
Loosen up that tinfoil hat. Apple banned flash when web apps were the _only_ apps on the iphone (besides the preloaded apps). The App Store [1] is ~18 months after the iPhone [2] was released. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App_Store_(Apple) [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone
- patrickaljord 3y ago
  This is true, but it's naive to believe that the App Store wasn't planned long before those 18 months and was written in just a couple of month before its release.
  - TheFuzzball 3y ago
    I think we can tell that the App Store wasn't planned that early because if it was the earlier Apple apps would have been using the APIs that needed to be implemented and documented for the first App Store, and they didn't. Apple today is very different from the Apple that launched the iPhone and the original App Store - they started off thinking all apps could be PWAs, but the Web Platform wasn't mature enough at the time and they pivoted to native, that's the actual truth. Now they're addicted to in-app-purchase money from casino games and don't want that money moving out of their 30% taxable grasp. It's a sad story, truly.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      Really? You think the casino style games are going to move to PWAs without direct access to users wallets via in app purchases? If that’s the case, why aren’t all of the same games moving to the web for Android?

scarface_74 3y ago

Everyone thinks that Apple really cares if you use PWAs? It came out in the Epic trial that 90% of the App Store revenue comes from pay to win games and in app purchases of loot boxes and coins. Those apps aren’t going to be PWAs. If it’s only mean old Apple keeping the great world of cross platform apps using web technologies, why aren’t PWAs more popular on Android?

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
> Those apps aren’t going to be PWAs. Except when a manager learns that they can keep Apple’s 30% if they release a PWA instead. They don’t even need to know what a PWA is, they just ask the developer if it’s possible, who says “something something WebGL and web sockets?” The manager thinks it’s a great idea. Whether that translates to their users migrating to the new implementation could be up in the air. I suspect Apple will lose some revenue, at any rate, and they’re likely thinking similarly.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  So you really think that none of these game developers or their management never heard about PWAs and if they thought they could avoid the 30% fee on Android by creating one without any loss in usage they wouldn’t do it?
szasamasa 3y ago
if apple did not care, they would not have crippled web capabilities in the last 10+ years and they would just let chromium/gecko based browsers make use of web standards web apps are the future that may take as much as 90%+ of the 100B app store revenue web apps will succeed once good programmers and companies make strategic decisions to build good web apps crippling web apps on one important major platform like iOS stalls these strategic decisions since it is not easy to tell your programmers that now you learn js and web technologies if you still need those native apps in addition, most companies have already published native apps, web apps will start to gain success after apple is forced to let them work with feature parity on iOS etc. AND 3-5-10 years pass since rather new companies choose web apps get back to your observation of "popularity" after apple is forced from governments and competition authorities to support web apps on iOS (just like on macOS or every other OS does) plus 5 years!

mmcnl 3y ago

Exactly. It's a loophole in their alternative App Store model so they closed it. Nothing more, nothing less.

polynomial 3y ago

> because Safari delivers a degraded experience with them. Can you recommend any sources that go deeper into particulars of degraded experience?

t00 3y ago
WebKit development is Apple oriented leading to several incompatibilities with other major browsers. Reasoning is usually either WebKit works according to standards, or that bug is accepted but it is basically abandoned. Possibly strategically, to keep Apple controlling some niche use cases. Ingenious but nasty strategy indeed. https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?order=changeddate%2Cbug_status%2Cpriority%2Cassigned_to%2Cbug_id&product=WebKit&query_format=advanced&resolution=--- https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?order=changeddate%2Cbug_...