Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

debuggerdotbreak.judahgabriel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 415 posts

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#331

Post by laythea »

judah wrote: post #55
rolha-capoeira wrote: post #47

> From minor things like “iOS Safari won’t let you play audio without first interacting with the page” to major, show-stopping things like, “iOS Safari won’t let you play the next song if your app is in the background or if your screen is off.” I disagree that these things are purely because Apple wants your $99/year. Maybe that's part of the story, but not all. I am glad that websites cannot play audio without the u…

Agreed that apps (web or native) shouldn't have free access to e.g. your contacts without permission. But Apple goes beyond security and actually makes it impossible to build first-class experiences for iOS without paying $99/year + 33% in-app purchases. I think that's unfortunate. The free and opened web presents a challenge to Apple's app business. They have a perverse incentive to keep web apps second-class citize…

Yes but given the current state of the App store, with the minor obstacle that is the $99/year, I hasten to imagine what the state of it would be without it!

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#332

Post by akvadrako »

mft_ wrote: post #248
mankash666 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gosh darn the cognitive dissonance!! The free market and users are completely capable of choosing quality apps, iOS/Apple needn't babysit, nay play brainwashing big-brother-evil-megacorp strangling competition/dissent, them in the process. "If your project is more than a hobby, you ...." Yes yes - if you're serious about your project, you'll willfully submit yourself to anal-probes by monopolistic mega-corporation th…

> When was the last time you let your refrigerator manufacturer tell you what items are allowed in your OWN FUCKING refrigerator? Why is different for iOS/Apple? Well, if the things I put in my refrigerator started acting like malware, I think manufacturers might start taking a different approach...

> if the things I put in my refrigerator started acting like malware

Sure, like if the supermarket sold something that spread mold spores to other food.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#333

Post by Zanni »

emj wrote: post #328
Zanni wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a note on style--your post reads as a complaint, whether you intended it that way or not. The strong editorial slant actually undermines the meat of the article for me, which is, as you mentioned, documenting the hurdles in publishing a PWA. You could make this a better resource by stripping out the overt anti-Apple editorializing. Let the facts speak for themselves--for those who agree with you. Which I don't.…

There are two different arguments here, one very common and long lived that Apple is good at protecting users, and the other that Apple is not prioritizing the process for web developers. Maybe you are conflating them?

I don't think I am. I'm suggesting that much of what the OP takes as not prioritizing web apps is part of a deliberate strategy to protect users. I certainly could be wrong about Apple's motives, though.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#334

Post by realusername »

millstone wrote: post #36

> Mobile platform vendors, like Apple, are totally cool with apps that use your phone to its fullest. Access your location, play background audio, get your GPS coordinates, read all your contacts, play videos or audio without app interaction, read your email, intercept your typing, play more than one thing at a time, use your microphone and camera, access your pictures, and more. Apple’s totally cool with that. Apple…

> 99% of websites do user-hostile things, like track users.

99% of apps as well, most apps embed tracking code.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#335

Post by realusername »

peoplewindow wrote: post #91
Grae wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the difference between $99 and $25 is make-or-break, you're probably trying to publish a hobby/low quality app anyways. Or maybe you live in a situation where $74 USD is a meaningful barrier to accessing a market. >The only people who like webapps and their encroachment on good, native apps are webapp developers because it allows them to use their skillset to build something they don't know how to build. You're e…

Or maybe you live in a situation where $74 USD is a meaningful barrier to accessing a market. Like what situation? To build an app at all he requires at least one computer, which is guaranteed to cost more than $99. He didn't blink at paying $25 to access MacInCloud. The $99 fee is hardly a big deal. It's quite clearly there to encourage people to report charges on stolen credit cards, i.e. to make credit cards usabl…

> To build an app at all he requires at least one computer

It does not just require a computer, they require an Apple computer, big difference.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#336

Post by realusername »

scarface74 wrote: post #117
judah wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac button, not Macbook, but you already knew that. Open standards are good. And we should want them to win, because it provides a safe haven from the abuses of big corporations. And I think right now, Apple is stepping into those waters: they are holding back web standards in order to keep promoting their business, which is reliant on native apps.

Open standards aren't "good" if they provide an inferior user experience.

They only provide inferior user experience because Safari mobile is crap.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#337

Post by swebs »

addicted wrote: post #302
rolha-capoeira wrote: post #47

> From minor things like “iOS Safari won’t let you play audio without first interacting with the page” to major, show-stopping things like, “iOS Safari won’t let you play the next song if your app is in the background or if your screen is off.” I disagree that these things are purely because Apple wants your $99/year. Maybe that's part of the story, but not all. I am glad that websites cannot play audio without the u…

> as a user, I would find it too "buried" behind Safari How is this any different than music playing on say Google Play Music on my iPhone? I listen to music from YouTube, iTunes, iHeartRadio, Google Play Music, Pandora, and other apps occasionally. Why don't I feel it's buried in those situations? Because of the simple reason that Apple allows only one source of audio on iOS at any point of time (including Safari),…

>How is this any different than music playing on say Google Play Music on my iPhone?

Because when I'm browsing the internet, random websites don't use Google Play Music as an attack vector for some autoplaying video that I never asked to see.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#338

Post by dannyw »

judah wrote: post #194
al2o3cr wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lemme get this straight: you're mad that a company you don't want to pay $99/yr to won't build APIs so you can make money on their platform. So sad, lemme find my tiny violin.

Author here. I'm not making any money on their platform. I'm a non-profit, building a free app; this isn't about money. I mentioned money in the post as a list of all barriers to moving a PWA to app store. $99/year + 33% in-app purchases (plus a $1000+ Mac to build, and probably one or more Mac minis for CI) is a barrier. The bigger concern is Apple is lagging behind on web standards. I suspect the reason for that is…

Nit : it’s 30% :)

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#339

Post by iaml »

Silhouette wrote: post #97
judah wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partially agree. I understand security concerns; we shouldn't allow random web apps to freely access privileged operations, for example. (Should we allow web apps to ask for permission? That is another question.) But stopping web apps from working? For example, breaking open standards like "you can't play more than one stream of audio", or "you're not allowed to play audio if your app isn't in the fore"? Nah, that's…

Mobile Safari's support for modern web standards has made IE look good for some time now. It seems very clear that Apple doesn't want a good experience for web users on its devices. It's very frustrating, because we keep getting requests from users for features we're happy to look into or even already working on... but then discover the user has an iPhone, where the necessary web technologies are supported poorly if…

It's quite contrary, actually - apple provides good experience for its users - tightly controlled, secure sandboxed environments. The fact that you find it hard to develop apps for it is irrelevant for them.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#340

Post by imiric »

Zanni wrote: post #292
judah wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. I'm not making any money on their platform. I'm a non-profit, building a free app; this isn't about money. I mentioned money in the post as a list of all barriers to moving a PWA to app store. $99/year + 33% in-app purchases (plus a $1000+ Mac to build, and probably one or more Mac minis for CI) is a barrier. The bigger concern is Apple is lagging behind on web standards. I suspect the reason for that is…

Just a note on style--your post reads as a complaint, whether you intended it that way or not. The strong editorial slant actually undermines the meat of the article for me, which is, as you mentioned, documenting the hurdles in publishing a PWA. You could make this a better resource by stripping out the overt anti-Apple editorializing. Let the facts speak for themselves--for those who agree with you. Which I don't.…

> Apple is choosing a deliberate strategy here that privileges users over developers.

What is stopping them from doing both?

There's no reason developers should jump through arbitrary hoops to make their applications available to users. Yes, quality control, security, etc. is very important, but the publishing process should and can be as user friendly as their platform claims to be for end users, and that is what the article is showcasing.

FWIW I didn't notice any bias against Apple in the article. Just a lot of understandable frustration with their processes and platform.

Post reply on HN