8 ms·
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.
by 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 agoThey’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 agoApple 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 agoBecause they are their go to excuse why the limitation to the App Store isn't a monopoly with the regulators.
- burnerthrow008 3y agoSo... 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 agoNo, but they are obviously not equivalent in capabilities on iOS
- realusername 3y agoAs 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.