Since the article doesn't actually repeat what Apple has said, here's what Apple says: == Begin quote == The iOS system has traditionally provided support for Home Screen web apps by building directly on WebKit and its security architecture. That integration means Home Screen web apps are managed to align with the security and privacy model for native apps on iOS, including isolation of storage and enforcement of sys…
Seems like an OS problem. They should fix that.
Spend money to lose money, not a great investment in their eyes.
Why should we trust Apple for security in that context? Apple also provides all those functionalities via their proprietary API, which is not even audit-able. If Apple really believes in that argument, they should disable their own API as well.
Well, while the argument is entirely bogus as "PWAs are unsafe" implies that loading web pages in that browser itself is unsafe and thus stopping PWAs but not loading pages is pointless, you do have to have full trust in Apple for security of your device as they are the sole provider for the core platform providing most of the security primitives used. That just doesn't exclude trusting others as well.
> Well, while the argument is entirely bogus as "PWAs are unsafe" implies that loading web pages in that browser itself is unsafe
Except that's exactly what Apple is saying. Their engine -- and their brand depends on it -- offers users assurances arbitrary engines do not offer. Apple says PWAs are safe because Safari is safe, while not-Safari PWAs are not-safe.
I'm guessing now that the app store had been designated as a gatekeeper and that alternatives app stores are technically allowed, it no longer has to pretend that PWAs are a Viva alternative?
As a European dev I want apple to fail super hard and implode. They used to be so cool and make slick hardware for their nische but now I'm happy to use worse hardware as long as they disapear from the face of the earth.
Yes, that's the way I feel too. I learned to program on an Apple ][ that I loved, before Jobs started his nefarious business practices. Woz's Apple was cool. Jobs' Apple makes me feel like they want to enslave developers, or at least milk them to the last drop.
It's only turned really cynical under Cook, chargers no longer included, cables sold separately from chargers to nickel and dime customers, refusal to adopt standards like USB-C unless threatened in court, refusing to pay patent license fee for blood O2 monitoring on the Apple Watch and trying to scalp all the talent from the company instead, anti-competitive behavior in the EU. Jobs version of Apple was pretty benign compared to the win-at-any-cost Cook version of Apple.
Since the article doesn't actually repeat what Apple has said, here's what Apple says: == Begin quote == The iOS system has traditionally provided support for Home Screen web apps by building directly on WebKit and its security architecture. That integration means Home Screen web apps are managed to align with the security and privacy model for native apps on iOS, including isolation of storage and enforcement of sys…
Without this type of isolation and enforcement, malicious... camera, microphone or location ... Browsers ... 30 some million lines of code in chromium browsers. Thats bigger than the linux kernel. The HN crowed might not LIKE apples response but they have a very defensible position. Edit: Its not like we haven't seen this play out on the desktop recently: https://www.theverge.com/24054329/microsoft-edge-automatic-c..…
Android handles this just fine. These are the world's largest corporations we're talking about, not some mom and pop shop that will be crushed under the heel of overzealous regulation.
> For Apple, ownership of the "trust problem" is an intrinsic part of "making good products". Yes, this might be true. And the majority of elected officials in EU fundamentally disagrees with that statement.
Yeah, as I’ve said before: the root problem here is that the EU wants to outlaw apples business model. People don’t think of it that way, they tell themselves all the reasons why that’s a good thing, but that’s ultimately what it is - a legislative solution to end the “android vs iOS” debate for all time. The argument is walled gardens shouldn’t exist, so the solution is to either legislate requirements that apple de…
I feel like this is a win for consumers - I'd much rather there remain more OS competition on mobile devices[1] but if Apple wants to pursue a business model that excludes large portions of the world from their customer base that's their decision. I don't believe there exists any maliciousness from the EU towards Apple - they do, after all, benefit greatly from corporation tax revenues from Apple and iPhones are still quite popular in the EU. I think at the end of the day there's just a difference in the social expectation of privacy and freedom between the EU and NA. Apple, being primarily steeped in NA's expectations for freedom, hasn't built an ecosystem that is compatible with the EU's higher expectations.
Bad move from Apple. It's time to boycott iOS and move to FOSS alternatives, such as: AOSP, Ubuntu Touch, GNOME Mobile, KDE Plasma, Sailfish OS. Personally I am using both UBports and Sailfish OS and I appreciate the privacy they provide. As a possible workaround to fullscreen PWAs in iOS in the EU, I propose a convention to append some hash to the Web App Manifest start_url, e.g. #__pwa__, then set the default iOS w…
What's a good device to replace my iphone 13 mini?
Since the article doesn't actually repeat what Apple has said, here's what Apple says: == Begin quote == The iOS system has traditionally provided support for Home Screen web apps by building directly on WebKit and its security architecture. That integration means Home Screen web apps are managed to align with the security and privacy model for native apps on iOS, including isolation of storage and enforcement of sys…
The “low usage” comment is going to be more ammo against Apple unfortunately. The whole reason they are low usage on PWAs is because of a lack of investment from Apple and a lack of parity, yet for the longest time Apple has played both sides by saying PWAs are a viable alternative to the App Store, all while channeling people to App Store for actual app downloads and not providing similar marketing or anything for P…
I don’t think Apple’s pettiness is gonna work in their favor. I am not in the EU but my next iPhone is almost certainly not gonna be an iPhone despite me having used a non iPhone for about 6 months in the last 15 years. Their throwing their customers under the bus just to throw a tantrum in the EU does not bode well for how they would treat their customers in other situations.
This is exactly why this legislation is stupid: if you don’t like the way Apple does things just buy an android.
Of course they could. They looked at the cost of rewriting the entire integration and framework for running PWAs and said, "eh, nah."
They'll have to allow some kind of app installation API to allow for alternative app stores. If Google implements some kind of WebAPK technology on iOS, they may just be able to launch a Google Play for iOS to work around these PWAs as a workaround, and Safari will be down a feature. I have the feeling Apple is betting on Google not caring enough about the PWA platform to try to compete. Maybe they're right, but if t…
> I have the feeling Apple is betting on Google not caring enough about the PWA platform to try to compete.
I don't think it's about Google, I think they assume consumers won't care, and they're probably right.