4 ms·

"security reasons" (= http://bit.ly/1d7p5Tq http://bit.ly/1d7p5Tq) it would be interesting if they elaborate on those...

wildpeaks 13y ago
More like "job security" reasons as they have less control over webapps than apps.
- streptomycin 13y ago
  Same reason I think they're dragging their feet on various parts of HTML5 that everyone else has already implemented, such as IndexedDB.
  - rimantas 13y ago
    You forgot to mention the part where Apple was first to implement features that later become known as HTML5. Also, the story of Web SQL and IndexedDB is not so simple.
    - streptomycin 13y ago
      Can you tell the story that explains why Apple has done nothing with IndexedDB for years while every browser vendor implemented it a while ago? Because the story as I see it is very clear: Apple embraced the web when they had very small market share, and they're doing the opposite now that they have a good chunk of the market. Walled gardens generally aren't very profitable if you have only a tiny fraction of the market. Of course, it'll be hard for you to tell a convincing story because (AFAIK) Apple hasn't even commented on IndexedDB. Strange, for such a well-established open standard. Even MS has supported it for years!
robmcm 13y ago
My understanding was that Safari used JIT which is prone to security issues with how it executes that code. As to why it's safer to do so in Safar that in a webview must be because the only API to safar is from the JS/HTML/CSS but with a webview you have a C/ObjectiveC API from the other side, which may be harder to protect against. [EDIT] - More information on the topic from Gruber http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43 http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43 although there is no reason given as to why a UIWebView is more at risk from exploits than Safari.
Alphasite_ 13y ago
My understanding is that you would have to mark some of the apps pages as executable, iirc, which could allow for arbitrary code execution.
- jamiesonbecker 13y ago
  That makes little to no sense. This reeks of the same logic that caused them to disable HTML file upload buttons (there's "no" filesystem -- which is apparently why you can't even browse for photos and uploads until recent IOS). This is what drove "there's an app for that" for so many years: Apple's systematic limiting of web apps into a severely curtailed walled garden so that the app store would -- in fact, could -- be the only source for real applications. "Web Apps aren't as performant as native" is a direct result of such strategies. In other words, those strategies WORKED. As with all anti-competitive practices, they will keep doing their job for a while, until something new and better (or at least workable) comes along.
  - rimantas 13y ago
    Ok, show me Android apps which are as performant as native. This nonsense about Apple fearing web apps should stop already.
  - stevekinney 13y ago
    What's extra fun is that when Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, he explained that developers could write web apps if they wanted to create software for the iPhone.
    - jamiesonbecker 13y ago
      I remember that, excellent point.

wildpeaks 13y ago

More like "job security" reasons as they have less control over webapps than apps.

streptomycin 13y ago
Same reason I think they're dragging their feet on various parts of HTML5 that everyone else has already implemented, such as IndexedDB.
- rimantas 13y ago
  You forgot to mention the part where Apple was first to implement features that later become known as HTML5. Also, the story of Web SQL and IndexedDB is not so simple.
  - streptomycin 13y ago
    Can you tell the story that explains why Apple has done nothing with IndexedDB for years while every browser vendor implemented it a while ago? Because the story as I see it is very clear: Apple embraced the web when they had very small market share, and they're doing the opposite now that they have a good chunk of the market. Walled gardens generally aren't very profitable if you have only a tiny fraction of the market. Of course, it'll be hard for you to tell a convincing story because (AFAIK) Apple hasn't even commented on IndexedDB. Strange, for such a well-established open standard. Even MS has supported it for years!

robmcm 13y ago

My understanding was that Safari used JIT which is prone to security issues with how it executes that code. As to why it's safer to do so in Safar that in a webview must be because the only API to safar is from the JS/HTML/CSS but with a webview you have a C/ObjectiveC API from the other side, which may be harder to protect against. [EDIT] - More information on the topic from Gruber http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43 http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43 although there is no reason given as to why a UIWebView is more at risk from exploits than Safari.

Alphasite_ 13y ago

My understanding is that you would have to mark some of the apps pages as executable, iirc, which could allow for arbitrary code execution.

jamiesonbecker 13y ago
That makes little to no sense. This reeks of the same logic that caused them to disable HTML file upload buttons (there's "no" filesystem -- which is apparently why you can't even browse for photos and uploads until recent IOS). This is what drove "there's an app for that" for so many years: Apple's systematic limiting of web apps into a severely curtailed walled garden so that the app store would -- in fact, could -- be the only source for real applications. "Web Apps aren't as performant as native" is a direct result of such strategies. In other words, those strategies WORKED. As with all anti-competitive practices, they will keep doing their job for a while, until something new and better (or at least workable) comes along.
- rimantas 13y ago
  Ok, show me Android apps which are as performant as native. This nonsense about Apple fearing web apps should stop already.
- stevekinney 13y ago
  What's extra fun is that when Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, he explained that developers could write web apps if they wanted to create software for the iPhone.
  - jamiesonbecker 13y ago
    I remember that, excellent point.