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

Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 451 posts

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#441

Post by erikpukinskis »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #381
erikpukinskis wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A native app will never have instant install, or update without download. A native app will never be available on all platforms. Sometimes a native app is better, sometimes it is worse. It's certainly better if all you care about is fancy animations.

> A native app will never have instant install, or update without download. So ? Updates happen automatically anyway. > A native app will never be available on all platforms. I don’t need it on all platforms, I only use iOS.

Instant install is just a better experience. Going in and out of the App Store is a pointless step.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#442

Post by erikpukinskis »

threeseed wrote: post #372
erikpukinskis wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A native app will never have instant install, or update without download. A native app will never be available on all platforms. Sometimes a native app is better, sometimes it is worse. It's certainly better if all you care about is fancy animations.

Is anyone demanding instant install or updates ? I can download 95% of apps in under 30 seconds and all of my apps update whilst I am sleeping. And nothing is stopping you downloading new content in a native app which is where the majority of use cases stem from.

No one will demand it. You're just giving your users a worse experience. App store developers are people who have given up on speed. Y'all think a 30 second delay between screens with several pointless clicks is an acceptable user experience. It's sad.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#443

Post by Jyaif »

DerekL wrote: post #400
Jyaif wrote: post #16

Fundamentally, it's Apple's refusal to allow real 3rd party browsers that is the problem.

Actually, 3rd party browsers are now allowed on the App Store, with a few restrictions. Previous, section 3.3.2 of the developer agreement prevented the downloading and running of any code, except for JavaScript running inside iOS's JavaScriptCore. But the June 5th agreement allows any language and interpreter. There are two limitations. The system makes it impossible to run unsigned code, so JIT compilation is out.…

I'm talking about section 2.5.6, which still states "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript."

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#444

Post by Aaargh20318 »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #441
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A native app will never have instant install, or update without download. So ? Updates happen automatically anyway. > A native app will never be available on all platforms. I don’t need it on all platforms, I only use iOS.

Instant install is just a better experience. Going in and out of the App Store is a pointless step.

So because you want to provide a better UX for the one time you install the app, you want to sacrifice the UX of every single time you actually use the app. That makes no sense at all.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#445

Post by interpol_p »

crispinb wrote: post #392
interpol_p wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But as an iOS user I expect you to use the technology stack provided by my preferred operating system. I don't want to use your app if you're targeting a lowest-common-denominator feature set. When I change my preferred text size through accessibility settings, good native apps respond correctly. If I need voice over support, the operating system knows how to read the view hierarchy to me in a logical way. When drag-…

> But as an iOS user I expect you to use the technology stack provided by my preferred operating system. As an iOS user I don't expect Apple to mandate your preferences for me > There are thousands of tiny details that your web app just won't have. Those details are more important than your familiarity with a tech stack or how long it takes you to deploy something. They are more important to you. They may not be to m…

I disagree that it's marketing drivel. Wanting everything to be consistent is the entire reason I was driven to the Mac as a platform in the first place many years ago.

Being on a platform where users and developers care about exactly what shade of grey their menu bar icon was, or matching the platform characteristics, adopting system-wide services, making apps accessible, is very important to me.

You may not care, but that's how I choose a platform. It's not marketing, it's personal preference.

I'm going to push for iOS and macOS to develop in this direction by supporting developers who try their very best to make thoughtful and consistent software.

Your argument works against yourself: "cheap cross-platform apps are relevant to some, but we don't need the personal tastes of some precious souls to be mandated for all of us." (I'm not making this argument against you, but try to see how cross-platform is your own personal preference that you are trying to push onto others. In my opinion it degrades a platform even if you don't use any cross-platform apps.)

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#446

Post by GordonS »

GordonS wrote: post #74
christiangenco wrote: post #65

I think a lot of commenters here are missing the point and getting distracted by push notifications (who wants a website spamming them with notifications?) and loading screens (hardly a feature). Apple supporting PWA (Progressive Web Apps) is hugely important because it enables a future where web apps can natively support browser, Mac/Windows/Linux desktop, and mobile iPhone/Android/Windows native mobile with a singl…

> Right now, the only way for me to accomplish that on iOS is to make a native app. This means I had to learn an entirely new technology stack It's not the only way - you can create a hybrid app with something like Ionic (obviously this is compiled to a native app at build time, but you never touch a line of XCode yourself). One of the big selling points of hybrid apps is that you can use your existing Javascript/Typ…

Downvoter care to comment? Seems a bit random.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#447

Post by erikpukinskis »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #444
erikpukinskis wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instant install is just a better experience. Going in and out of the App Store is a pointless step.

So because you want to provide a better UX for the one time you install the app, you want to sacrifice the UX of every single time you actually use the app. That makes no sense at all.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Which UX issues are insurmountable in a web app?

Generally speaking, they can all be worked around by a good designer. The inferior install, update, and cross platform experience for native apps can't be worked around.

Are you talking about like realtime video authoring apps or games? I'll admit in those categories the web is often not the best choice.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#448

Post by DerekL »

Jyaif wrote: post #443
DerekL wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, 3rd party browsers are now allowed on the App Store, with a few restrictions. Previous, section 3.3.2 of the developer agreement prevented the downloading and running of any code, except for JavaScript running inside iOS's JavaScriptCore. But the June 5th agreement allows any language and interpreter. There are two limitations. The system makes it impossible to run unsigned code, so JIT compilation is out.…

I'm talking about section 2.5.6, which still states "Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript."

That's in the App Store Review Guidelines, not the Apple Developer Program License Agreement. But that is a good point.

However, Opera Mini has a “Mini mode”, where the parsing and JavaScript execution is done on Opera's server, which then compresses the data and sends it to the phone for display. In this mode, it does not use the WebKit framework. Opera Mini has been on the App Store since 2010.

https://techcrunch.com/2010/04/12/surprise-surprise-opera-mi...

I wonder if section 2.5.6 applies to apps that display web pages as one function among many, and not to web browsers. Maybe Apple figures that if the user hits a “Web Page” button in some app, they expect it to work just like Safari, but if they download Chrome, Firefox, or Opera Mini, they actually want the web browser to be different from Safari. But I haven't researched this yet.

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#449

Post by bo1024 »

krapp wrote: post #187
bo1024 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is such an important distinction that we should build it into web standards. A site should label itself as either a "plain site" or a "web app". "Sites" may only use a limited subset and amount of javascript (perhaps none?!). Browsers, search engines, and plugins can treat plain sites and web apps differently.

>A site should label itself as either "just a site" or a "web app". "Sites" may only use a limited subset and amount of javascript (perhaps none?!). Browsers, search engines, and plugins can treat sites and web apps differently. I too dislike the fact that web developers have the freedom to make design decisions with which I disagree.

If the goal is to let developers make more design decisions, shouldn't we give websites root access to the machine by default?

Re: Apple’s refusal to support Progressive Web Apps is a detriment to the web

#450

Post by Aaargh20318 »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #447
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because you want to provide a better UX for the one time you install the app, you want to sacrifice the UX of every single time you actually use the app. That makes no sense at all.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Which UX issues are insurmountable in a web app? Generally speaking, they can all be worked around by a good designer. The inferior install, update, and cross platform experience for native apps can't be worked around. Are you talking about like realtime video authoring apps or games? I'll admit in those categories the web is often not the best choice.

> I'm not sure what you're referring to. Which UX issues are insurmountable in a web app?

You can get close to the look & feel of native app, but you can never get there.

Post reply on HN