581–590 of 927 posts
The more we use these, the more likely the APIs are to be fully implemented (and hopefully have features added to them).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I basically assume my phone is nearly useless without connectivity. And if I want something to work in that sort of environment, it better be a native app.
To an end user there’s an icon on their screen, they tap it, the app opens. It didn’t matter if they downloaded from the AppStore or from a website. This is no longer the case which is why the OP is upset.
I have already stopped building native apps because the App Store process is so painful.
Did PWA's take off? What are some famous/big PWA's now? I can't remember ever "installing" anything in a browser as an app, or even being asked if I wanted to do it. Am I misunderstanding what they are?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's actually what it clarifies. Or at the very least it's very confusing. > have their own counter of days of use. Their days of use will match actual use of the web application which resets the timer. This makes it sound very much like homescreen apps will have their data wiped after 7 days of non-use. > We do not expect the first-party in such a web application to have its website data deleted. And…
Yes, it's confusing. It's not 7 days of non-use , it's seven days of application use without visiting the site. Safari is one application, the homescreen app is a separate application. Presumably, all the alt browsers or WebView apps are separate applications as well. Since you can't use a homescreen app without visiting the site, the 7 days of not visiting the site can't happen.
Did PWA's take off? What are some famous/big PWA's now? I can't remember ever "installing" anything in a browser as an app, or even being asked if I wanted to do it. Am I misunderstanding what they are?
PWAs haven't taken off because Apple won't implement full Push API support in Safari thus forcing you to go through the App Store if your web site or application needs push notifications. The App Store then complains if you try to publish an app that just wraps your web site so that you can have push notifications. It's... infuriating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really understand this. If you want to make something local, make an app and distribute through the app store, that's what it is for. A web app on the other hand is connected by definition, no? Apple forcing local apps to distribute through the app store is a feature .
> A web app on the other hand is connected by definition, no? No, not in the era of "progressive web apps", which is really just a little bit of branding around interconnected APIs. The Cache API in particular means that a webapp can be downloaded and made available offline on a permanent basis. Unless it isn't actually permanent at all, which is what Apple are doing here. The web and the App Store are just delivery…
The advantage of PWAs then seems to be the ability to dodge the app store certification which, while onerous, is not a bad thing for your clients.
Would be good to include in the title.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A PWA app isn't going to generate any 30% revenue share for Apple since no one is paying for it in the PWA case and thus likely won't be paying for it in the pure app case either.
Why would no-one be paying for a PWA? There are countless paid-for services available via web apps. Providing even a free native app via the App Store to access a service with a subscription model becomes a very risky proposition given Apple's rules, though.
Users clear their caches. They swap browsers. They swap machines. They use their phone instead of their desktop. They use private mode, or sand boxing. They re-install their OS. They buy a new machine.
Don’t be lazy. Using local storage without a backup is not acceptable.
And what kind of ‘progressive’ web app expects all the features in every client? Have we forgotten what progressive means?
Don’t be entitled. You are not more important than your users.