Apple drops PWA support on iOS for EU users
twitter.com
twitter.com
When I heard about this new EU regulation, I started to consider retiring my iPhone. I developed my own iOS app, but I'm unable to run it permanently because I need to get it approved by Apple to install it on my own device. PWAs are an alternative I was considering, and I'm also using some from others.
If this is true. I'll switch to Android. The only device I'd keep using actively is the M1 MacBook because it's running Asahi Linux and I haven't booted into MacOS for months now.
This isn’t the case anymore. If using Expo you can also do it through EAS Build.
https://developer.apple.com/help/account/manage-profiles/cre...
https://docs.expo.dev/build/internal-distribution/#22-config...
- custom ringtone;
- emulators;
- lock screen rotation in landscape;
- listen to music from local storage without an Apple subscription;
I could go on and on. Most of them have solutions, but again, a burden to configure compared to an Android device. My next smartphone will be Android, once again. I just wish small smartphones were more common and had battery life comparable to Apple's.
I bought a second hand MacBook Pro 2015 to use Linux on. I'll let Asahi cook a bit more before moving to an M series.
That this is a burden to do is straight up false. Playing from local storage works the same as it did since the days of the iPod.
I personally tried it with Apple Music and it did not work if you had no connectivity — and, in fact, because about half of the app itself appears to be loaded on demand, parts of the UI were non-functional as well.
Also, it was not possible for me to download the equivalent of my Discover Weekly playlist for use offline; it HAD to be streamed for each. and. every. play.
I gave up and went back to Spotify. A few months later, I wiped the iPhone and sold it, leaving me with GrapheneOS exclusively.
Just last night I wiped the storage of my last Mac and it will be given away.
Given the direction Apple is going, I made the right call, which is a damn shame.
Some of the main draws of Apple were the freedom of the platform as a whole and the total cost of ownership that was much lower than the price tag would suggest at first.
Nowadays not only do you pay for the privilège of locked down hardware but the software is very often "meh" at best, when it's not completely trash compared to the alternatives. And their push to everything subscription with the inability to both upgrade/repair the hardware easily makes the price tag unpalatable. They aren't better built than many expensive options nowadays... Most of the current Apple software works well only if you want to pay for content, for your own stuff the softwares are rather lacking which makes the base offering uninteresting and since 3rd party software has become extremely expensive in the ecosystem it truly is a luxury platform.
In the end, there is nothing that is better done on Apple's ecosystem nowadays, most of their historical advantage have evaporated and arguing about the battery life of Apple Silicon seems like splitting hair considering the overall cost...
> I wasn't able to find 'nonexistent' in your Apple Music library. Search on Apple Music or ask for it on a different app.
The wording is confusing, but Apple Music library in this context means local. It doesn't enroll me to anything.
Hard to tell what I'm missing currently. But I'm using rather basic tools in the command line and all these work fine. Of course Firefox works. Inkscape, Darktable, TexLive, too.
How's battery life compared to macOS?
I wanted to flesh this out some more.
> Sites that had some PWA information provided - such as an iOS icon - would be added as PWAs even though they weren’t. They have tightened up things so that only sites that are explicitly configured as PWAs will be added as such.
Apple has the staff and the budget to make a decent browser and to ensure web apps work, they don't because they don't want anyone competing with their AppStore or their 20b/year google search revenue.
You claim they only do it protect the App Store monopoly… so if users will just download something else, what would be the point? The things you want them to add (what you claim makes them uncompetitive to Chrome) completely defeats the alleged purpose of supporting their own engine. So why would they pay engineers to work on that? It’s nonsensical, magical thinking.
I seriously hope you will reflect on the real negative consequences of what you are doing to the web. This isn’t one of those times when you can just stick your head in the sand and repeat the mantra “I’m just typing code”.
Once Safari is killed, Google can really start ramping up the war on Firefox because the collective market share of non-Chrome browsers will be too small to matter. You are killing the open web that you claim you want.
Apple is the one that has cost Firefox. Otherwise they’d likely have a thriving mobile browser which would have taken off because of extensions years before the competition.
Apple is not the defender of the open web, they invested the bare minimum into Safari to the point it was full of bugs, completely unreliable to build anything but basic websites, and was lacking all the core features required to compete with native apps. They were not competing with chrome on any platform except for on MacOS.
The only reason they have increased investment recently is because of the threat of competition.
Firefox maintains an unimpressive ~3% market share according to this [0]. Why do you believe they'd have a thriving mobile browser if not for Apple? Is it not more likely that Chrome would just dominate iOS like it does everywhere else?
I do agree that Chromium overtaking the web is bad for the open web in general. I don’t agree that forcing Apple to allow third party browser engines is going to make that problem worse.
I’ll leave in the middle any value judgment on whether that warrants blocking other engines. Still, it must be pointed out that you sidestepped it and then held up a shiny new topic before pulling a whataboutism.
> The issue is that because there is no browser competition on iOS, Apple doesn't need to fear losing market share. That in turn ensures they have no reason to invest in Safari or web apps.
And yet, they did invest in Safari and specifically in supporting web apps. So, what was the incentive? Or are you going to follow up your cynicism with something along the lines of “they want to evade regulation”?
> Apple has the staff and the budget to make a decent browser and to ensure web apps work, they don't because they don't want anyone competing with their AppStore or their 20b/year google search revenue.
Talk about a poor take.
This is not true. Since Jen Simmons joined Apple in 2020, Apple has made considerable strides in improving Safari and WebKit and added significant support for web apps.
They’ve consistently scored high on the annual Interop score, if not outright lead the pack at the top, and every update continues to add heaps of improvements.
People in the industry who can see past the trite “Apple bad, Safari sucks” mantra also acknowledge this: https://www.threads.net/@syntax_fm/post/C22hyslOABy/
Your choice to name-drop OWA to produce a fallacious argument from authority followed by poor takes ensures I won’t bother taking OWA seriously when it’s mentioned in the future.
This is thoughts and prayers, not a counterexample.
They’re obviously trying to prevent companies from bypassing their extortion proposal in response to DMA by simply offering a PWA to users that can work around the „core tech fee“..
Let us count the years until they understand the mess they are creating right now...
Does the ECJ grant the EC injunctions?
The court systems do exist as an appeals mechanism, but my impression is that they pretty much never overrule the EC on competition issues.
Probably APIs for adding sites to the Home Screen slipped in the development time and is coming later
Maybe you have a fine native calendar app available to you on your platform that you trust. Great, good for you. Maybe you have a messenger app on your native platform that you trust. Good for you, we are happy for you!
To use that to say the web shouldn't have a capability is incredibly cruel. Other users have corporate controlled systems and school laptops and terminals at public library. These users have next to no power, but the web is a common baseline for humanity that does serve & help everyone. It should have this capability, be possible to do this thing.
If this feature annoys you, don't use it. Turn it off. This is the web: get an extension that blocks Web Push requests preemptively. You as a web user have a user agent at your back that is flexible & configurable in how you browse the web. Just telling people they can't have a feature because In Your High Opinion It's Bad takes so much. Other people should have the liberty too. The web should have features, not cater to those who insist on its withdrawal from spaces they carve out.
I'm not against web tech being able to send notifications, but allowing every site to ask for permission (when people just don't read and click anything) is a nightmare. Apple's solution there is pretty good: You can have web push if you want to treat this site as an app
The astroturfing on this site has gotten incredible since the Reddit meltdown.
Like when people play dumb pretending that the sole use case for notifications is ads?
This is a much needed feature. Currently, we are riddled with terrible app notifications because the options are so limited.
Bring back the web as the front of the internet, and put native programs(a word I miss, by the way) back where they belong, in my control.
Your same argument was used by javascript advocates back in the day "if you don't like it, disable it."
Have you tried browsing the web without it these days? Most sites, which just display text don't work.
That is why I am so aggressively against this crap. Web developers have proven they can't be trusted, to not abuse these features.
I would be flabbergasted & shamed if you could come up with a single example of this ridiculous forxed-adoption slippery slope happening anywhere on the web. This paranoia against the web is everywhere, and it's rotting people's fucking brains.
Burger menu -> Share -> Add to Home Screen
Works fine.
Apple then allowed other browsers also to add sites to home screen. If it is not PWA, then it opens in default browser.
This is just Max’s viewpoint and others in the thread who are actually in Europe have confirmed it works for them
So your statement isn’t accurate
I’m in the EU on the latest version of iOS.
People have been saying it's working for them in the EU: the Apple's detection is complex and seem to take into account different parameters, like the ios region, but also the origin country of the sim card used.
But note this behavior only occurs if you are in the EU and you are using 17.4 beta 1 or beta 2
If my theory is correct, we will soon see a large EU software company - which deployed PWAs in the past - mysteriously start supporting Apple in their refusal to open up to alternative App Stores in the EU.
They will talk about security and user choice, while completely ignoring that the EU is merely asking Apple to treat them as well as China. In China, Apple has already been allowing 3rd party app stores for some years.
For what it's worth, I used to be a proud Apple user. But recently, I can't help but imagine the financial incentives behind their every move.
Doesn't make sense to be "forcing" them.
Native app is not possible, app stores rules do now allow to publish our app.
We had "the most powerful and advanced smartphones" (TM) iPhones first, but Safari is always running out of memory.
But now with 150 eur Android phones, there are no more memory issues...