5 ms·

Looks awesome! While the visualization is cool, I hope some of these will remain "not found" indefinitely. Just because we can stick everything into a web-spec

by isodev 3y ago

Looks awesome! While the visualization is cool, I hope some of these will remain "not found" indefinitely. Just because we can stick everything into a web-spec, doesn't mean we should.

tgv 3y ago
Me too. Device orientation, USB, Bluetooth, vibration, they don't belong in a web app.
- Izmaki 3y ago
  Even something as simple as auto-focus on a form field on page load... imagine that your keyboard jumps up and takes up half of your screen space, just because a web-dev wanted you to be able to "immediately input your name". I'm actually quite happy that my iPhone doesn't shove a keyboard in my face "for my convenience of being able to input text immediately".
- hestefisk 3y ago
  I agree with you. Notifications is another “feature” I just want to stay out of my browser. To that extent, I actually don’t mind Safari on iOS being deliberately slow to adopt some of the more intrusive standards.
- yccs27 3y ago
  Also clipboard reading and volume change, no thanks.
- agust 3y ago
  Why would they belong in a platform-specific app but not in a standard-based web app? Because Apple can't get 30% out of it?
  - L3viathan 3y ago
    Because there's typically at least a minimum of safety checks before an app can go into the app store, whereas a website can do whatever it wants (and can).
    - boweruk 3y ago
      Almost all of these APIs still require a user to approve their use in the browser for a given origin.
      - tgv 3y ago
        Next next next finish
  - wil421 3y ago
    Because some of us lived through pop up hell and Microsoft’s lack of security as it relates to web browsers in the late 90s/2000s. Web apps should be as restricted as possible. Rich companies such as Epic, complaining about a 30% cut can cry me a river. Lock iOS down as much as possible and restrict/sandbox the web. iOS is the only internet connected computer I’ve had that didn’t get malware and/or a virus at some point. Unless you consider an Xbox/PlayStation a computer. https://medium.com/online-io-blockchain-technologies/the-evolution-of-internet-ads-the-rise-of-pop-ups-179fd7e5a3bb https://medium.com/online-io-blockchain-technologies/the-evo...
  - madeofpalk 3y ago
    The web lacks intentionality that installed 'native' apps have. You search for a recipie and land on a random blog, executing untrustable code from a countless number of third parties, clicking "I agree" on that modal that says "LiveLaughLove blog and out 1382 partners value your privacy". Native apps have a much higher level of friction at multiple points that helps balance the higher level of access they get.
    - agust 3y ago
      The APIs coming with a security or privacy risk are always gated by a permission prompt on the web (contrary to platform-specific apps). Safari has gone even further by only allowing some of them (e.g. Push notifications) for installed web apps. These APIs are also much more restricted than their proprietary-ecosystem equivalent. Overall, web apps having access to these features in Chrome are an order of magnitude safer than platform-specific apps.
  - isodev 3y ago
    And would you build for all browsers or just your favourite "standard"? It doesn't matter how many layers we add, it will always amount to the same challenge when people use different systems. That's why it's generally better to target a solution with the least amount of abstractions to depend on. Build a native app, you depend on the OS. Build a PWA, you depend on the browser and the OS. As for the 30%, How long do you think it would be before Chrome decides to monetize their web apps? The Manifest v3 story was a hint, maybe not everyone got the memo.
- buildfocus 3y ago
  All the dangerous ones come with comprehensive permissions prompts, and browsers can offer options for don't ask again/never ask etc, so if you're not interested there's still little downside to those being available for those who are. Personally, I've found a bunch of these super useful, as user and a developer. Being able to use tools like https://www.espruino.com/ide/ https://www.espruino.com/ide/ to play with hardware straight from the web is amazing.
  - plufz 3y ago
    I would guess that most regular users are very quick to click “Allow” on a dialog box. I like how macOS handles unidentified apps where you have to navigate manually to the security settings to allow an unidentified app.
    - jwells89 3y ago
      Also known as “yes click syndrome” or “make the stupid thing work already”, a phenomenon which can be and has been weaponized.
    - latexr 3y ago
      > where you have to navigate manually to the security settings to allow an unidentified app. You don’t need to do that, you can just right-click the app and choose “Open”.
    - buildfocus 3y ago
      For dangerous ones like WebUSB you can't just click 'Allow' - after granting permission, it shows you a list of connected devices, and you have to actively select the device you want the website to access, and then approve it.
  - isodev 3y ago
    We already have a diverse ecosystem of platforms which are capable of using hardware components for various experiences - we call them "the OS". It comes with a security model, permission prompts and all kinds of bells and whistles (it's a mature platform, developed for decades). The browser (agent) is a native app designed to allow users to access and navigate web resources (we call them pages or documents). Pages can be styled (CSS) and made interactive (JavaScript). When one wants to create an experience which goes beyond the scope of the browser, one builds another native app that is able to leverage the needed resources. A dedicated native app can embed a browser (e.g. webframe) or consume web resources through other protocols. A native app can also request access to hardware resources via the OS.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 3y ago
  Many of these belong into a web app, the problem is that browsers can't distinguish between a web app and a web site.
- perks_12 3y ago
  They belong in the browser engine so that they could be used by a web-app that is presented and served as a standalone app. They do not belong in the scope of just any website out there.
- mavhc 3y ago
  Correct, we need to be hiring 3x the amount of programmers to make our apps on 3 platforms instead of one, webusb is killing jobs!
- RicoElectrico 3y ago
  TBH Bluetooth is useful for Xiaomi e-paper clock-thermometers which can't be set without a Mi Home app... smh
- dariosalvi78 3y ago
  They absolutely do, if well implemented they are no more risk than any other API. The web can be what java wanted to be, if we don't screw it up.
- shepherdjerred 3y ago
  I didn't understand why these APIs existed until I used ESPHome. It can use the Web Serial API to flash an ESP32 board using Chrome + a USB cable.
jsheard 3y ago
Weren't some of these like WebUSB and WebBluetooth unilaterally pushed by Chrome without going through the usual spec processes? Firefox doesn't have them either.
hmottestad 3y ago
And some things aren't great on mobile but make more sense on desktop. Autofocus doesn't cover half my screen with a keyboard when I'm on my laptop...

by isodev 3y ago

Looks awesome! While the visualization is cool, I hope some of these will remain "not found" indefinitely. Just because we can stick everything into a web-spec, doesn't mean we should.

tgv 3y ago

Me too. Device orientation, USB, Bluetooth, vibration, they don't belong in a web app.

Izmaki 3y ago
Even something as simple as auto-focus on a form field on page load... imagine that your keyboard jumps up and takes up half of your screen space, just because a web-dev wanted you to be able to "immediately input your name". I'm actually quite happy that my iPhone doesn't shove a keyboard in my face "for my convenience of being able to input text immediately".
hestefisk 3y ago
I agree with you. Notifications is another “feature” I just want to stay out of my browser. To that extent, I actually don’t mind Safari on iOS being deliberately slow to adopt some of the more intrusive standards.
yccs27 3y ago
Also clipboard reading and volume change, no thanks.
agust 3y ago
Why would they belong in a platform-specific app but not in a standard-based web app? Because Apple can't get 30% out of it?
- L3viathan 3y ago
  Because there's typically at least a minimum of safety checks before an app can go into the app store, whereas a website can do whatever it wants (and can).
  - boweruk 3y ago
    Almost all of these APIs still require a user to approve their use in the browser for a given origin.
    - tgv 3y ago
      Next next next finish
- wil421 3y ago
  Because some of us lived through pop up hell and Microsoft’s lack of security as it relates to web browsers in the late 90s/2000s. Web apps should be as restricted as possible. Rich companies such as Epic, complaining about a 30% cut can cry me a river. Lock iOS down as much as possible and restrict/sandbox the web. iOS is the only internet connected computer I’ve had that didn’t get malware and/or a virus at some point. Unless you consider an Xbox/PlayStation a computer. https://medium.com/online-io-blockchain-technologies/the-evolution-of-internet-ads-the-rise-of-pop-ups-179fd7e5a3bb https://medium.com/online-io-blockchain-technologies/the-evo...
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  The web lacks intentionality that installed 'native' apps have. You search for a recipie and land on a random blog, executing untrustable code from a countless number of third parties, clicking "I agree" on that modal that says "LiveLaughLove blog and out 1382 partners value your privacy". Native apps have a much higher level of friction at multiple points that helps balance the higher level of access they get.
  - agust 3y ago
    The APIs coming with a security or privacy risk are always gated by a permission prompt on the web (contrary to platform-specific apps). Safari has gone even further by only allowing some of them (e.g. Push notifications) for installed web apps. These APIs are also much more restricted than their proprietary-ecosystem equivalent. Overall, web apps having access to these features in Chrome are an order of magnitude safer than platform-specific apps.
- isodev 3y ago
  And would you build for all browsers or just your favourite "standard"? It doesn't matter how many layers we add, it will always amount to the same challenge when people use different systems. That's why it's generally better to target a solution with the least amount of abstractions to depend on. Build a native app, you depend on the OS. Build a PWA, you depend on the browser and the OS. As for the 30%, How long do you think it would be before Chrome decides to monetize their web apps? The Manifest v3 story was a hint, maybe not everyone got the memo.
buildfocus 3y ago
All the dangerous ones come with comprehensive permissions prompts, and browsers can offer options for don't ask again/never ask etc, so if you're not interested there's still little downside to those being available for those who are. Personally, I've found a bunch of these super useful, as user and a developer. Being able to use tools like https://www.espruino.com/ide/ https://www.espruino.com/ide/ to play with hardware straight from the web is amazing.
- plufz 3y ago
  I would guess that most regular users are very quick to click “Allow” on a dialog box. I like how macOS handles unidentified apps where you have to navigate manually to the security settings to allow an unidentified app.
  - jwells89 3y ago
    Also known as “yes click syndrome” or “make the stupid thing work already”, a phenomenon which can be and has been weaponized.
  - latexr 3y ago
    > where you have to navigate manually to the security settings to allow an unidentified app. You don’t need to do that, you can just right-click the app and choose “Open”.
  - buildfocus 3y ago
    For dangerous ones like WebUSB you can't just click 'Allow' - after granting permission, it shows you a list of connected devices, and you have to actively select the device you want the website to access, and then approve it.
- isodev 3y ago
  We already have a diverse ecosystem of platforms which are capable of using hardware components for various experiences - we call them "the OS". It comes with a security model, permission prompts and all kinds of bells and whistles (it's a mature platform, developed for decades). The browser (agent) is a native app designed to allow users to access and navigate web resources (we call them pages or documents). Pages can be styled (CSS) and made interactive (JavaScript). When one wants to create an experience which goes beyond the scope of the browser, one builds another native app that is able to leverage the needed resources. A dedicated native app can embed a browser (e.g. webframe) or consume web resources through other protocols. A native app can also request access to hardware resources via the OS.
tgsovlerkhgsel 3y ago
Many of these belong into a web app, the problem is that browsers can't distinguish between a web app and a web site.
perks_12 3y ago
They belong in the browser engine so that they could be used by a web-app that is presented and served as a standalone app. They do not belong in the scope of just any website out there.
mavhc 3y ago
Correct, we need to be hiring 3x the amount of programmers to make our apps on 3 platforms instead of one, webusb is killing jobs!
RicoElectrico 3y ago
TBH Bluetooth is useful for Xiaomi e-paper clock-thermometers which can't be set without a Mi Home app... smh
dariosalvi78 3y ago
They absolutely do, if well implemented they are no more risk than any other API. The web can be what java wanted to be, if we don't screw it up.
shepherdjerred 3y ago
I didn't understand why these APIs existed until I used ESPHome. It can use the Web Serial API to flash an ESP32 board using Chrome + a USB cable.

jsheard 3y ago

Weren't some of these like WebUSB and WebBluetooth unilaterally pushed by Chrome without going through the usual spec processes? Firefox doesn't have them either.

hmottestad 3y ago

And some things aren't great on mobile but make more sense on desktop. Autofocus doesn't cover half my screen with a keyboard when I'm on my laptop...