rejhgadellaa

8 ms·

1.
by rejhgadellaa 6mo ago
> Strange then that they routinely don't wait for and ignore any and all input from other browser vendors It's not strange when you consider that other browser vendors sometimes flat out refuse or delay. The only option, then,
2.
by rejhgadellaa 6mo ago
But if the web engine you have to use is a) shitty and b) the same as everyone else (except slightly shittier [1]), how are you going to make it popular? The browser engine is an important piece of the puzzle when it comes to getting people
3.
by rejhgadellaa 6mo ago
Right. So I don't know the costs of the hoops we need to jump through for our app to be granted a place on the app store. I'm not the guy who does the spreadsheets :). I do know that we've spent considerable time to make chan
4.
by rejhgadellaa 6mo ago
>> If your app doesn't work for the wealthiest 50% of users, why go that route? > Why doesn't business hire two teams? One for the amazing native-like PWA, and one for iOS? You quote me, but missed the exact part where I
5.
by rejhgadellaa 6mo ago
The WPT graph shows failures for tests that fail in only one browser. So the accelerometer tests, for example, would need to pass in both Blink and Gecko for it to count as a failure on Safari's part.
6.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> A feature that is shipped in a single browser is just that: that browser's non-interoperable feature. AFAIK, the popover and/or anchor positioning APIs was standards before it shipped in more than one browser. (I will say tha
7.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
Building the same app for iOS, Android and desktop: up to 2-5 times the costs (for businesses, how they cover those costs depends) App tax: 15-30%, which can drive the price for consumers up by up to 44% https://open-web-advocacy
8.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> business hires three teams? Yes. The web's winning feature is "it works everywhere". If your app doesn't work for the wealthiest 50% of users, why go that route? Making a desktop web app work on mobile, just for And
9.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> if you break the app store monopoly, you can install chrome or firefox and do all the web-app-platform nonsense you want Apple would also need to be forced to provide the APIs that browsers need so they can properly integrate with the
10.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> In other words, Apple has successfully prevented you from writing a web application ... by abusing their monopoly position on iOS (instead of competing). Good outcome?
11.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> Google often doesn't bother even with a spec. I'm sorry, but that doesn't seem to be right. They have a process: https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/ > I wouldn't really q
12.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
I thought this was obvious, but higher costs for building and maintaining an app (vs a web app) means higher prices for users. I think people would love to pay less, and would hate to pay more.
13.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
First of all: don't they? (honest question, I truly don't know if Africa has more PWAs compared to US/EU/etc) Second: There are many reasons why businesses would opt for a native app. Notifications, for one (not availabl
14.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> I care whether Apple would compete with Google, and they wouldn't. They receive $20B a year from Google (search engine deal). Some estimates put WebKit/Safari's budget at $500M. That's a rounding error away from $20
15.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
Funny you would say that. Because businesses and users have only one choice on iOS: native apps, because the web app isn't viable (and/or available) on iOS.
16.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
How is that irrelevant? Isn't it important to ask the question "why did this thing work on desktop, but not on mobile?"
17.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> I think Chromium out-competing every other browser engine is a bad thing. Hmm. I believe that Apple can compete with Google if they want to. They have the money, they have the marketing chops, they have the incentive ($20B search engin
18.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
I compiled a "short" list of why amd how Safari is crippled. Not entirely on topic for the post, but seems appropriate as a reply on this particular comment ;) https://webventures.rejh.nl/blog/2024/histor
19.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> Mobile safari is arguably the only thing standing between Google and total browser dominance "Apple Is Not Defending Browser Engine Choice" https://infrequently.org/2022/06/apple-is-not-defending-bro
20.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
Fair :)
21.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
No, because any browser can decide to ship a feature that it thinks is worthwhile. Users can decide which browser they trust to be their User Agent. The distribution model is open. You type a URL, you click a link. No single company in cont
22.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> many of these are in fact not a standard according to W3C and should not be implemented in any browser until it is. That's not exactly how standards work. A browser (or anyone) comes up with a spec, a browser can ship it (to test
23.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> The people don't like apps built with web tech Then why do most people spend > 90% of their time in a browser (or web-powered app) on desktop?
24.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
The web can be a competitor for the app stores, breaking that monopoly. It already did on desktop (where most users spend > 90% of their time in a browser) And yes, you can write native apps in a lot of languages, but you can't choo
25.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
If a web app doesn't work on iOS, a business builds a native app instead. iOS is too important. So that fantastic native-like PWA never gets built in the first place. Apple is not just holding back PWA on iOS, they're holding back
26.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
Businesses tend to relay costs onto their customers (someone has to pay the bills). - The app store tax - The extra work of maintaining at least 2 separate apps (iOS, Android, optionally(?) desktop web app) - Dealing with app store rules So
27.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
> I don't think Apple is terribly interested in market share for Safari Google pays Apple $20B a year because of the market share Safari has on iOS. I'd call that "interest" That's 10% of their turnover (and like
28.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
First of all, features can be a standard without (full) FF and/or Safari support. Second, Safari has a monopoly on iOS and controls what other browsers can support on the platform (that also usually means "less than Safari",
29.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
Do you have a source link for this? I don't want to sound snarky, but this list doesn't make sense to me. Offline support has been available (and buggy, YMMV) for a long time. Web Push has been available since 16.4 (with a lot o
30.
by rejhgadellaa 7mo ago
The difference is that, on iOS, you can't switch to a different browser that does support these features. Om very other OS you can. A web app could ask you to use a different browser (not ideal, but if the web app requires a specific A

More ›