Firefox doesn't support them either, and like Safari considers them harmful. And for good reasons that Google (who are the sole authors of these Chrome only non-standards) completely ignores.
Yes, they are being dealt with because Safari and Firefox are persistent. Chrome just releases them.
> where does it differ that much from normal apps
"Hey, we know that native apps are a nightmare for privacy and security, why would you oppose making the web more like native " isn't a good argument
Yes. And Bluetooth/USB etc. pierce that sandbox and communicate to devices outside the browser.
And no, you can't "fix it" with a simple "oh hey this page wants to access a device".
Hint: we can't successfully ignore prevent people from phishing sites and scammers, but sure, let's give an untrusted execution environment full access to everything.
> What can a native app possibly do that's such an egregious invasion of privacy that a webpage can't do
Webpage doesn't have full access to file systems (and Chrome wants to give full access to file systems), or to USB/Bluetooth/etc. (and Chrome wants to give full access to that), and...
Once again. "Hey, we know that native apps are a nightmare for privacy and security, why would you oppose making the web more like native " isn't a good argument".
Also, hint: native apps exist beyond mobile.
Also, hint on filesystems: even though they are encapsulated, that encapsulation differs greatly between systems, and having, say, full access to cloud files is just as bad.
You can disable commonly abused/exploited things like service workers and still use most websites just fine, while a webapp might depend on having that functionality enabled reducing your security when using websites and webapps.
> What can a native app possibly do that's such an egregious invasion of privacy that a webpage can't do?
Harvest your contacts? (unless that's changed)