Hacker News Reader

Comment by CharlesW | Hacker News Reader

FWIW…

> You're stuck in Apple's app store which is equally as draconian as Chrome's and Firefox's but now you have to pay $99/year.

Safari extensions do have to be notarized (so $99/year), but notarized extensions don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store.

> No IndexedDB.

Safari appears to support IndexedDB, with native support for IndexedDB 2.0 in Safari 10.1+. https://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb

> The extensions aren't usable on mobile.

Safari for iOS does support extensions, so I'd assume they'll use the same framework. https://www.idropnews.com/apps/11-best-safari-extensions-iph...

View on HN

>don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store.

I didn't know this. Thanks.

>Safari appears to support IndexedDB

This is also news to me and makes me pretty happy.

>Safari for iOS does support extensions

This really makes me wonder how they handle the UI. I'll check it out.

It'll likely require user interaction every time you want to run the extension.

> Safari for iOS does support extensions, so I'd assume they'll use the same framework.

Safari for iOS and iPadOS has native Safari App Extensions but not the new web tech based Safari Web Extensions (yet).

Thank you!

Web Extensions api is only for macOS.

Thanks! I've since watched the session, you're right — they announced specifically for macOS. The door's still open, though…

"All the demos revolved around Safari web extensions available on the Mac, though the talk makes a point of not targeting user agent strings (information a browser reports about its own version and what system it’s running on), but rather asking about features that might be present. Given that other types of Safari extensions are available on iOS/iPadOS (namely content blockers), might web extensions eventually make their way to Apple’s mobile platforms as well? One can hope."[1]

[1] https://sixcolors.com/post/2020/06/wwdc-2020-tuesday-session...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com