5 ms·

Mostly Apple wants to ensure that PWAs can't emerge as a viable option. As long as they're on WebKit, they can ensure that the apps are limited in their functi

Mostly Apple wants to ensure that PWAs can't emerge as a viable option. As long as they're on WebKit, they can ensure that the apps are limited in their functionality.

kemayo 3y ago
If that's Apple's motivation, why have they been implementing PWAs at all? Killing them would be even simpler if they just weren't on iOS in the first place.
- jamesgeck0 3y ago
  They’ve been on iOS since the beginning, predating the App Store. They were originally supposed to be the only public API for building 3rd party apps on iOS. For a long time they appeared to be in maintenance mode on iOS. They’re still years behind what Chrome allows PWAs to do.
  - dunham 3y ago
    Apple has also added PWA to Desktop Safari in the latest OS release (which seems to work well for Tana). So their Safari team is putting some continuing effort behind PWA in general. I used this when I was taking a break from chrome, because Firefox cancelled their PWA support for Desktop.
- albert180 3y ago
  Because they are their go to excuse why the limitation to the App Store isn't a monopoly with the regulators.
  - burnerthrow008 3y ago
    So... you're saying that having PWAs is purely performative because nobody actually uses PWAs... meaning that the loss of PWAs has no impact on customers?
    - albert180 3y ago
      No, but they are obviously not equivalent in capabilities on iOS
- realusername 3y ago
  As far as I'm concerned, it's just an argument for them to use in antitrust lawsuits. "See, they could have developed a web app if they aren't happy with our store". It's better to keep an option opened, especially if it's not good enough to be used.
graftak 3y ago
PWA’s can run a ServiceWorker in the background too, I can imagine Apple does not want anyone to be able to run code they don’t control as a background task as this may negatively affect overall performance and battery life.
- agust 3y ago
  Apple not wanting PWA to work properly on iPhones has nothing to do with performance, security, privacy, battery life or whatever excuse they may officially come up with. The only reason Apple does not want PWA is because it threatens their App Store profit. More information: https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apple-backs-off-killing-web-apps/ https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apple-backs-off-killing-w...
  - robin_reala 3y ago
    These black and white takes are boring. It can be all of the above.
    - Sammi 3y ago
      Only one of the options affects the bottom line of Apple. Incentives incentives incentives. When you want to understand what and why people do what they do, always find out the incentives.
      - robin_reala 3y ago
        Then why would they have bothered adding any support in the first place? There are market incentives in at least appearing to be modern.
        Sammi 3y ago
        Misalignment of the company bottom line (incentives) and employees bottom line (incentives). Company gets money from variable App Store revenue which is directly threatened by PWAs. Employees get money from fixed monthly salary, which is only indirectly threatened by PWAs. Employees take money and do what is required of them, and otherwise do what they think is awesome. Employees think PWAs are awesome so PWAs happen... until they threaten almighty App Store then it stops.
scarface_74 3y ago
Like they have emerged as a viable option on Android?
- sangnoir 3y ago
  Yes. Would you rather install a full-on app for a once-off event (concert, festival or conference) or would you rather just install a light-weight PWA or just use the website?
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    Just one user's opinion. I'd just use the web site for a one-off event. But if I had to install something for some reason, I probably wouldn't care what technology it was made with and would only care if there was a functionality or performance difference. Honestly, nobody but web developers cares about PWAs. If you put a gun to my head and made me choose between Native and PWA, I guess I'd choose a native app that looks and feels like a native app, performs like a native app, uses native controls and UX idioms, and has the security guarantees of a native app. I honestly don't think users's really care about this PWA vs. Native App war that web developers insist on making a big deal over.
  - Tteriffic 3y ago
    AppClip would be best
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Well, and that all works on Safari… And that’s not what most people consider a PWA.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      I have attended conferences that can be described as "scrappy": flakey oversubscribed wifi, lots of interesting talks and multiple "streams" in different rooms over 2-3 days in a foreign country where my visit was too short to bother to buy a SIM card. Being apple to see the schedule offline would have been a boon, a problem that can be effectively solved by PWAs. Any app that's geared towards visitors or tourists is better served as a PWA - think of the apps used to pay for transit, or parking in a city you're visiting. A website is Ok, but offline access and a shortcut on the homescreen would be better.

Mostly Apple wants to ensure that PWAs can't emerge as a viable option. As long as they're on WebKit, they can ensure that the apps are limited in their functionality.

kemayo 3y ago

If that's Apple's motivation, why have they been implementing PWAs at all? Killing them would be even simpler if they just weren't on iOS in the first place.

jamesgeck0 3y ago
They’ve been on iOS since the beginning, predating the App Store. They were originally supposed to be the only public API for building 3rd party apps on iOS. For a long time they appeared to be in maintenance mode on iOS. They’re still years behind what Chrome allows PWAs to do.
- dunham 3y ago
  Apple has also added PWA to Desktop Safari in the latest OS release (which seems to work well for Tana). So their Safari team is putting some continuing effort behind PWA in general. I used this when I was taking a break from chrome, because Firefox cancelled their PWA support for Desktop.
albert180 3y ago
Because they are their go to excuse why the limitation to the App Store isn't a monopoly with the regulators.
- burnerthrow008 3y ago
  So... you're saying that having PWAs is purely performative because nobody actually uses PWAs... meaning that the loss of PWAs has no impact on customers?
  - albert180 3y ago
    No, but they are obviously not equivalent in capabilities on iOS
realusername 3y ago
As far as I'm concerned, it's just an argument for them to use in antitrust lawsuits. "See, they could have developed a web app if they aren't happy with our store". It's better to keep an option opened, especially if it's not good enough to be used.

graftak 3y ago

PWA’s can run a ServiceWorker in the background too, I can imagine Apple does not want anyone to be able to run code they don’t control as a background task as this may negatively affect overall performance and battery life.

agust 3y ago
Apple not wanting PWA to work properly on iPhones has nothing to do with performance, security, privacy, battery life or whatever excuse they may officially come up with. The only reason Apple does not want PWA is because it threatens their App Store profit. More information: https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apple-backs-off-killing-web-apps/ https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apple-backs-off-killing-w...
- robin_reala 3y ago
  These black and white takes are boring. It can be all of the above.
  - Sammi 3y ago
    Only one of the options affects the bottom line of Apple. Incentives incentives incentives. When you want to understand what and why people do what they do, always find out the incentives.
    - robin_reala 3y ago
      Then why would they have bothered adding any support in the first place? There are market incentives in at least appearing to be modern.
      - Sammi 3y ago
        Misalignment of the company bottom line (incentives) and employees bottom line (incentives). Company gets money from variable App Store revenue which is directly threatened by PWAs. Employees get money from fixed monthly salary, which is only indirectly threatened by PWAs. Employees take money and do what is required of them, and otherwise do what they think is awesome. Employees think PWAs are awesome so PWAs happen... until they threaten almighty App Store then it stops.

scarface_74 3y ago

Like they have emerged as a viable option on Android?

sangnoir 3y ago
Yes. Would you rather install a full-on app for a once-off event (concert, festival or conference) or would you rather just install a light-weight PWA or just use the website?
- ryandrake 3y ago
  Just one user's opinion. I'd just use the web site for a one-off event. But if I had to install something for some reason, I probably wouldn't care what technology it was made with and would only care if there was a functionality or performance difference. Honestly, nobody but web developers cares about PWAs. If you put a gun to my head and made me choose between Native and PWA, I guess I'd choose a native app that looks and feels like a native app, performs like a native app, uses native controls and UX idioms, and has the security guarantees of a native app. I honestly don't think users's really care about this PWA vs. Native App war that web developers insist on making a big deal over.
- Tteriffic 3y ago
  AppClip would be best
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Well, and that all works on Safari… And that’s not what most people consider a PWA.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    I have attended conferences that can be described as "scrappy": flakey oversubscribed wifi, lots of interesting talks and multiple "streams" in different rooms over 2-3 days in a foreign country where my visit was too short to bother to buy a SIM card. Being apple to see the schedule offline would have been a boon, a problem that can be effectively solved by PWAs. Any app that's geared towards visitors or tourists is better served as a PWA - think of the apps used to pay for transit, or parking in a city you're visiting. A website is Ok, but offline access and a shortcut on the homescreen would be better.