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

Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

andregarzia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 927 posts

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#651

Post by vernon99 »

munk-a wrote: post #587
untog wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Having worked on a cross platform application that defined the UI via HTML I'm still kinda confused about this use case - it's super trivial to wrap a set of HTML + JS in an app that's essentially just a full screen webkit/whatever window and distribute this. 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.

This is equal to saying “I’m ok with Apple having a censorship monopoly of what an iPhone can run”. I don’t think the majority of people here would agree with that. I also don’t think users buying a device that is supposed to support web apps would be happy to find out that in fact it doesn’t. I’m one of those very unhappy users.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#652

Post by ravenstine »

dubcanada wrote: post #436

I don't understand what the problem is. I can easily go to the settings area and delete my entire browser cache (Remove All Website Data), in fact if you are running low of space it even tells you to do it. Why are people assuming things stored on a browser are a good place to store things. Nothing stored on a browser should be assumed to be forever.

That's like asking why people store files on disks when they could store everything in the cloud.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#653

Post by LocalPCGuy »

icedchai wrote: post #582
rezz wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Pretty sure it is still the case if they have connectivity...

Let's say you use an app that allows you to add Todos. You've added 30 Todos. No internet needed, it's always just worked. You go on vacation for 10 days. You get back, you open your app. No Todos...all gone. Very simple use case that is now broken.

Yes, you as the user could wipe those out. But now Apple is doing it just because you didn't use it in 7 days. And the user will not blame Apple, they won't even know Apple did that. They will blame the app developer, who in the interest of privacy didn't want to push your personal Todos to a database online.

Again, just a contrived example, please don't go down the road of why a server should have been used. Let's stick to the use case described.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#654

Post by pier25 »

gridlockd wrote: post #564
untog wrote: post #545

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.

will it be "7 days of non-use" for regular websites that use localStorage?

You can't really have "seven days of application use without visiting the site".

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#655

Post by vially »

munk-a wrote: post #587
untog wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Having worked on a cross platform application that defined the UI via HTML I'm still kinda confused about this use case - it's super trivial to wrap a set of HTML + JS in an app that's essentially just a full screen webkit/whatever window and distribute this. 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.

> [...] is not a bad thing for your clients

Except when you have to pass some of the 30% Apple fee on to your clients.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#656

Post by LocalPCGuy »

notduncansmith wrote: post #644
Silhouette wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a website hasn't been used for 7 days, I'm happy for its data to disappear and save space on my device. You might be, but maybe not everyone is. I've worked on apps based around multimedia content where downloading in advance to watch or listen later was a big deal, because a typical user also travels a lot and might well be going away for longer than a week. Even if they can get the same data again next time they…

Then wouldn't it be appropriate to offer a native app to offer that functionality? A web browser in 2020 is a place to run vast swathes of untrusted code safely; it is not a digital workstation platform, that is the job of the OS. If what I am downloading from you is important enough that I want to have it even offline, then I trust you enough to install your native app.

I believe this entire statement is wrong in 2020. There are literally OSes now that are just browsers.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#657

Post by billyhoffman »

Silhouette wrote: post #557
rstupek wrote: post #544

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.

(Looks at home screen) Slack, Jira, LastPass, and Netflix. All Native apps that are free via the App Store, and all with the subscription model that I pay for. And for most of those I can’t even buy the subscription from inside of the native app, so Apple gets no money from these

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#658

Post by notduncansmith »

cloverich wrote: post #595
notduncansmith wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't understand the alarm. There is no hard limit on how long things will be stored. Data in localStorage might still be stored for weeks/months/years, as before. The only limit is on how long things will be stored if the user does not interact with the site/PWA . If you are a website, not a natively-installed app, that I haven't "used" in a first-party sense for 7 days or more, I don't think your data belong…

It is certainly a plan to further relegate PWAs because they directly challenge the monetization strategy of apple. Its an area where their interests do not align with user interests. A "properly written" PWA may offer things like not re-fetching data from the internet when you already have it locally, and / or not forcing you to create an account just to save some basic data (ex: A recipe app, a jobs search app, etc…

> Consider for example, saving a job search website as an app, and being able to search and save jobs without having to make an account. An account could be offered if you want cross device syncing, but is not required just to save jobs. Which is great because some users prefer to remain anonymous, and PWA's open the door to that type of thing (as a singular example).

Consider the use-cased of this example. If I am actively job-searching, I will probably be using the site at least once per week, and the data will be saved throughout the process. When I stop using the site, I want that data to disappear for my own privacy/security; and if users want to save the data indefinitely without signing up for an account, then offering an export (e.g. CSV) seems like a reasonable way to address that.

Furthermore, non-Apple user agents may retain data as long as they like, and PWA's (as well as web trackers) are free to utilize that. It's not like this move implements any additional vendor lock-in; people who don't like it will switch to non-Apple platforms.

> Moreover, the outcome of this will be more "native" apps that are actually just wrappers around web apps, that exist purely because some basic functionality is being actively blocked by Apple.

This doesn't seem problematic. It's great if you can reuse some code between your web and native apps. Obviously truly-native UIs will be more efficient in many cases, but perfect needn't be the enemy of good.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#659

Post by Silhouette »

joosters wrote: post #647
Silhouette wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Can you give a few examples of paid-for PWAs? Sure there are websites that are paid-for, but I've never seen a paid-for PWA.

I'm posting pseudonymously here, so please forgive me for not citing personal examples, but the normal web apps for accessing quite a few popular services are now PWAs. Spotify famously started looking into using a PWA after some issues with Apple regarding the cut taken with a native app. Uber is another well-known example.

Re: Private client-side-only PWAs are hard, but now Apple made them impossible

#660

Post by Silhouette »

billyhoffman wrote: post #657
Silhouette wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

(Looks at home screen) Slack, Jira, LastPass, and Netflix. All Native apps that are free via the App Store, and all with the subscription model that I pay for. And for most of those I can’t even buy the subscription from inside of the native app, so Apple gets no money from these

And for most of those I can’t even buy the subscription from inside of the native app, so Apple gets no money from these

This is where things get pretty shady with Apple's terms for native apps and the App Store. Take a look at Spotify's experience for a different version of the story.

Post reply on HN