8 ms·

Home Screen Advantage

330 points by genericlemon24 3y ago

sara44444444 3y ago
[flagged]
th4tg41 3y ago
Off topic: This site is next to unreadable on my phone. Zigzagscrolling is an insult to the audience.
- k1t 3y ago
  It looks fine to me. (Firefox / Android)
- sosodev 3y ago
  It's perfectly readable on my phone and with various device dimensions set in my desktop browser.
- quyleanh 3y ago
  Me too. Using Safari on iPhone now. Is it intended?
- exodust 3y ago
  Problems on ultrawide desktop too (severe horizontal scrolling). To partially fix, open dev tools and change the body tag's display:grid to display:block. I'm not sure how you can stuff up a single column HTML article, but they've managed to.
- xorcist 3y ago
  The line length is hilarious. Press the little book icon (or F9 in Firefox desktop), it fixes this just as it fixes so many other unreadable web sites. Luckily our clients aren't completely strangled yet so this still works. How meta considering the subject.
- underwater 3y ago
  If Safari supported extensions then you'd have the ability to resolve this by installing something like Readability. If iOS supported other browsers then you could read it in a Chromium based browser, where it appears completely readable.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - zimpenfish 3y ago
    > If Safari supported extensions iOS Safari does support extensions. I've got a handful installed on my phone right now, including Userscripts to apply custom formatting and styling to this website.
  - nottorp 3y ago
    But why should you need extensions to go around some site disrespecting you?
  - latexr 3y ago
    Safari does support extensions. And it has built-in Reader mode. And it needs none of that for this case since the website loads perfectly fine with no zigzagging required. What Apple is doing sucks, for sure, but let’s not lose sight of reality and make stuff up or misinform people.
    - 93po 3y ago
      Show me how to get ublock origin on safari in iOS. You can’t, and this is basically the top extension anyone wants, and so your blanket statement is also misinforming
      - latexr 3y ago
        I didn’t say it supports all extensions from all browsers. Thanks to manifest v3 uBlock Origin will also not be viable on what is by far the most popular browser. Will you also say Google Chrome doesn’t support extensions then? It’s not like Safari can’t do ad blocking. It can, and solutions like 1Blocker are quite capable. It can even block at the system level, which is more than uBlock Origin in the browser does. Either way, none of this is relevant to your first comment. Extensions aren’t even necessary for the original complaint. Please don’t move the goalposts.
- rezonant 3y ago
  It looks completely fine on my phone, what browser are you using? Did you perhaps leave Desktop Mode on? Since Alex is here in the comments, I'm sure he'd reply if he had fixed something between each of us reading it.
verisimi 3y ago
PWA - progressive web app, delivered via the web, html, CSS, JavaScript, etc.
- gambiting 3y ago
  Thank you! I hate when articles use acronyms and never actually expand what they mean - I read the entire article without any clue what PWAs actually are.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    I know - I'm not in that area and got quite a way through before realising I had to look it up!
  - npteljes 3y ago
    I agree, it's a bad writing practice. And it's very simple to be completely unambiguous - just use the complete phrase the first time. So in this case, the tagline could just be "Decoding Apple's Desperate Ploy To Scuttle Progressive Web Applications", and then, if people see PWA, they can decipher it themselves. But of course this seems to be a personal blog, so much of it is up to personal taste, as it should be.
    - verisimi 3y ago
      I totally agree. For this person, it's surely obvious. They probably didn't expect this to become a popular read on HN. Do you remember when ai used to stand for 'artificial insemination'? Lol.
eksu 3y ago
I don’t use any PWA’s and I am not so sympathetic from claims of harm from removing/deprecating PWA’s without some data on the size and impact of this change. Xbox Gamepass presumably would be the largest one/best example, is that how they ask people on iOS to stream games?
- kevingadd 3y ago
  I can't speak to whether this is still true, but there was a time period where Apple would reject certain categories of iOS app store submissions and tell people to just make a website - 'simple webview' type stuff, like apps for a small business etc. The natural response to that is to make a PWA if Apple says you're not good enough for the store. Now that option is going away, so I can understand if people who previously relied on it are ticked off.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    Yes, it is the "Minimum Functionality" requirement , still in the books: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#minimum-functionality https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#min... > 4.2 Minimum Functionality > Your app should include features, content, and UI that elevate it beyond a repackaged website. If your app is not particularly useful, unique, or “app-like,” it doesn’t belong on the App Store. If your App doesn’t provide some sort of lasting entertainment value or adequate utility, it may not be accepted.
  - rezonant 3y ago
    That is for actual websites. A PWA is typically something app-like. Think about it a little harder. If Apple says "only bikes are allowed in their bike store, and if you want to build something else, go put your product in a different store", then you said OK fine and proceeded to build a bike and put it in another store, does that make sense? Apple would've accepted your bike. Websites and web apps are treated differently in Apple's rules. Understand that Apple has used this rule to keep web based apps out of the app store, but they got burned on that and there's no such restriction today.
n33 3y ago
"True character is revealed in the choices a human being makes under pressure - the greater the pressure, the deeper the revelation, the truer the choice to the character's essential nature." — Robert McKee
- rob74 3y ago
  Well, the "true character" of any company is essentially being a greedy asshole - and that's no surprise, if they weren't that way from the beginning, the shareholders would dictate this behavior. I know some people think Apple is an exception - maybe these latest shenanigans will change their minds, but I wouldn't bet on it...
  - kqr 3y ago
    It may often be a useful model to pretend "a company" has a character, but when the context is McKee on character, it is a mistaken perspective. I'm sure McKee would argue for the exact opposite! Organisations are run by individuals, and it is their character that is revealed. The greedy assholery is the front they have to assume to uphold their fiduciary duty to shareholders, but their true character is what happens underneath – the thing revealed under pressure. And in this, we see large variation.
  - diffeomorphism 3y ago
    Nah, this is too much equivocation. Some companies are much more spiteful than others and shareholders also don't want you burning bridges. So it is not about Apple being exceptionally good but rather them going out of their way to be exceptionally asshole-ish.
kevingadd 3y ago
"Apple looks set to argue, contra everyone else subject to the DMA, that the moment from which features must be made interoperable is the end of the fair-warning period, not the date of designation." is an interesting point I hadn't seen before. I was under the impression that as long as they removed PWAs before the final deadline, they'd be able to claim they were complying in good faith. But I suppose that might not be true, and it could actually be as-of the warning period?
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Like with the GDPR, the DMA had a long lead-in time in which the law has gone into effect but the EU wasn't prosecuting anyone for incompliance yet. The designation took place half a year ago but you can't expect companies to act on a rough draft and unmade commission decisions, so while the right EU people got started, nobody needed to comply yet. Of course Apple could've acted earlier out of the goodness of their hearts and to serve customer interests (lol), but like with the GDPR, companies tend to prepare longer and only launch their changes right when they're about to see any real risk. The end of the fair warning period is the final deadline. Microsoft and Google are doing the same thing, I think it's to be expected with regulation like this, and the regulation was designed for this.
reactordev 3y ago
[flagged]
- rezonant 3y ago
  What exactly isn't happening yet?
  - reactordev 3y ago
    1) While I agree there should be alternative stores on devices, entire portions of the DMA are unenforceable and plain english. A few of these were pointed out in the article but weren't followed up. 2) Apple can not deeply integrate into other browsers like it has with Webkit/Safari on iOS - The argument that they can just do the same integrations with all the other browsers to provide PWAs is fallacy and indicative of someone who doesn't know what that engineering effort is. They built the integration because they built both sides of the bridge to make it happen. 3) Are Apple being bullies? Yeah, for sure. But it's their device, their platform, and if the EU really wants to have a DMA, they need to create their own Apple, plain and simple. Apple should be barred from the EU if they can't comply with EU laws. But the EU laws need to be written in a way that holds weight and is enforceable. "Must provide alternative after 6 months of first service" isn't enforceable. If the decision is "Launch this but do it twice" or "Never launch this at all", never launch is going to win. And so, you all will never launch. 4) I get that having an app icon is all the rage but is it really that bad to just bookmark things? If you all want to avoid the Apple tax, provide a store that apple can present to the EU that allows for Apache Cordova PWA. I think the onus for this is on the EU. Not Apple. If there is such a store-front already (that's not used by pirates) I'm sure Apple would work with them to integrate for the EU market. A company shouldn't have to provide their own components to adhere to compliance requirements when their original offering was/is already accepted. If you want an alternative, go build one. 5) The article uses a lot of strong emotional language and straw-man arguments. Is it a bad move by Apple to remove PWA Home Dock capabilities? Yes. But what alternative could there be when they are forced to also provide that for 3rd-party browsers that they don't have the same integration with (because they didn't write the browser, the code, and integrating the same security controls could take years). The entire DMA is unrealistic, unenforceable, and would be unconstitutional in the US. It's not a companies job to provide alternative markets, fair or otherwise. It's the EU's. Built it. Force Apple to use it. That's how you win.
randomdev3 3y ago
It's just nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it. Well, Androids don't come with root permissions either ( you should be able to get it easily if you want imo ) but at least you can install any app, even just create your own.
- shrx 3y ago
  It's not that easy on Android either. Rooting usually requires a factory reset and several apps (e.g. banking) will not work if they detect the system is rooted. edit: Also, in some cases you lose warranty.
  - rezonant 3y ago
    There is no need to root to install software on Android. Rooting is only required for permissions that no app (save pre installed apps), whether installed via Play store or not, can be given.
  - pooper 3y ago
    The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode and run locally (used to be at all now I guess seven day limit) is silly. On Android, with Android 12, we can now have apps on neostore (fdroid frontend) auto update. There is no good reason to defend apple here. You as a user are always free to not install third party app stores.
    - boxed 3y ago
      > The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode ...I do right now. So that isn't a fact. It's a myth.
      - pooper 3y ago
        But they die after seven days?
        3y ago
phartenfeller 3y ago
I think removing persistent storage and the ability to add websites to the home screen makes it obvious what their strategy is. The EU shows that they want interoperability for big players like they do with messenger interoperability in the DMA. The web is such a fundamental standard and its interoperability is so important I guess the EU will fine Apple for such behavior. The question is how soon this will happen.
- pantulis 3y ago
  > I guess the EU will fine Apple for such behavior. The question is how soon this will happen Too late, I'm afraid. Apple has pulled a really smart trick against the tons of paper written by EU commissioners.
  - t0mas88 3y ago
    Really smart tricks can buy you a few years, but in the end either you'll get sued for not complying with the intention of the law or the law gets changed to kill your trick. The legal system doesn't like tricks, a "yes but I did X in a really clever way so it's not X" defence doesn't usually work.
  - Xelbair 3y ago
    I think you aren't aware that EU courts judge on intent, not letter of the law.
    - pantulis 3y ago
      I did not mean to say that Apple will get away with this, it's just that I don't expect the EU to be exactly fast in its response. As the FA says, it will take its sweet time and by then Apple will have reinforced their dominant position. Of course Apple and their legal teams already know that.
      - pantulis 3y ago
        Well that happened really fast https://www.ft.com/content/d2f7328c-5851-4f16-8f8d-93f0098b6adc https://www.ft.com/content/d2f7328c-5851-4f16-8f8d-93f0098b6...
aragilar 3y ago
Not an IPhone user: but honesty I'd rather have things open an actual browser tab, as then I can interact with it via all my standard extensions (e.g. adblockers), rather than be opened in a webview. Also, given how often you need to change phones (given build quality), if I have important data and you're a web app, I rather the server be the source of truth, and the phone a cache (so I don't loose data when the phone breaks).
- beardyw 3y ago
  Web apps are mostly optional and otherwise work as a normal web site. Differences are that some functions are exclusive to web apps, so you wouldn't get them on a web site anyway. A feature I do find annoying is the ability to save a page onto my (Android) phone screen is taken away and replaced by "install app". I work around that by going into airplane mode, fetching the page unsuccessfully, and saving that!
  - aragilar 3y ago
    That doesn't mean they don't have ads, or other things I want to work around.
    - kilburn 3y ago
      The point is that with EU mandating alt-browsers on iOS, it should have been a possibility to have "Installed" (home-)PWAs where the engine is the alt-browser, not safari/webview. Those browsers could have implemented the Home-PWA functionality while maintaining your ability to install plugins such as adblockers within that PWA's context. Apple has made this impossible by removing the OS APIs that allowed "Installed" (home-)PWAs entirely. This is just so they aren't forced to allow these under a different browser engine. Of course, this is all done because "think of the children" (i.e.: think of the poor people ticked into using a non-privacy-respecting browser to run their PWAs).
- sspiff 3y ago
  This should be an option for the user then, like "Install" (as a PWA) or "Add bookmark to home screen" (as a browser tap). There's reasons to want either, but as a heavy user of PWAs for a few online services / communities, I much prefer the former in most cases.
silvestrov 3y ago
> Apple has gamely sent $1600/yr lawyers shouldn't this be "$1600/hr" ?
- euroderf 3y ago
  The author was thinking of public defenders ?
- slightlyoff 3y ago
  Fixed.
euroderf 3y ago
> PWApocalypse How about: aPWAcalypse
- rezonant 3y ago
  Nice. Kinda sounds too adorable for what it is though
throwawa14223 3y ago
Maybe I don’t get it? I look at the list of features Apple is removing and they all seem like things I wouldn’t want a web browser to have to begin with.
- the_gipsy 3y ago
  Just look at the timing. And there is a simple solution too: just offer multiple browsers in the appstore.
  - Sander_Marechal 3y ago
    It's not about browsers. It's about OS APIs that browsers need to support PWAs. Apple is killing those APIs so that other browsers cannot offer PWAs.
    - the_gipsy 3y ago
      That's what I meant: they could continue offering safari as a "basic web browser" but allow actual web browsers in the appstore, that can fully implement any web APIs.
      - throwawa14223 3y ago
        This is probably not accurate given I was mistaken above but I thought that's what Apple was doing. You can load any browser but some OS APIs are going away.
- m1el 3y ago
  Not a browser, but a PWA. It's a web page, which you can "install" as an "app". Features like storage, background tasks and notifications are important for many applications, for example a messenger. These were available, and there is a market for those, but Apple has decided to kill that market.
  - throwawa14223 3y ago
coldtea 3y ago
Thank god for Apple's lacklustre support for PWAs. Else iOS would be like macOS, with every second app from a major vendor people need to run (for work, school, banking, etc) would be the equivalent of an Electron monstrocity. Apparently that's the dream of the author.
- joemelonyeah 3y ago
  Funny that the reverse has already happened due to Apple's lackluster support of PWAs. PWAs run with the system's browser engine, unlike Electron apps that ship with their own customized Chromium engine. Each app is only a few megabytes tops, unlike the hundreds of megabytes of bloat native apps tend to take up nowadays.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    The static megabytes on disk are not a problem [1], the runtime, battery, and memory overhead from them being written in JS+DOM is. [1] never got anywhere near close to run out of space on iOS because of apps (at 50+ apps installed). Besides the big offenders space-wise are not general apps and their code dependencies, but games with huge asset libraries.
- themoonisachees 3y ago
  ... Are you somehow under the impression that means companies won't go back to how it was before and simply package their website as an electron app for iOS? This is the reason PWAs were invented in the first place, to avoid every app shipping an entire browser when the user-selected one was right there, if only it presented the app like an app and not a website. Companies aren't going to magically switch to a ios-compatible framework or language, it's cheaper to keep just web devs and hire one guy that knows how to package an electron app.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    >... Are you somehow under the impression that means companies won't go back to how it was before and simply package their website as an electron app for iOS? I'm not sure there that many doing "add to home screen PWAs" in the first place, for them to be "going back". "Add to home screen PWAs" were used by users (not many either) for convenient access to this or that website they've used, but weren't ever a major app delivery use case in iOS. So, I see the whole post more like much ado about nothing. And while companies do just package webkit (or use system webkit) + some web app framework as iOS native apps, iOS still encourages developing proper native apps. Which I'm all for. If Slack, VS Code and co could be forced to create fully native apps on the desktop too, I'd jump at the chance of replacing their Electron stuff with those.
timwaagh 3y ago
There's fortunately no need to use any apple products. The ones most hurt by this will probably be Apple. Especially if functionality breaks as stated here. It will mean the 'luxury phone brand' is now a broken phone brand at least in the EU. Apple users might switch and I think Samsung is most likely to get them.
- joelanman 3y ago
  that would be nice but when Apple dropped Flash it was Flash that died
- fuzzy2 3y ago
  It’s not that easy. I switched to iPhone mainly because of Android phone makers’ abysmal update policies. Heck, I had a Nexus 5 and it was “killed” merely 1.5 years after I bought it. Because newer Android required newer graphics drivers and Qualcomm said “no”. Supposedly things are better now, but are they really? My iPhone 7 was my daily driver for 5 years and was only retired because I got an offer that was too good to pass up. And then there’s also the degrading storage on many Android phones. They just become sooooo slow. My iPhone 7 is slow now, too. After 7 years, not after 3.
  - rezonant 3y ago
    Both Samsung and Google now offer 7 years of software support (security and features) on their latest phones, and Samsung is increasing that from 5 years. > And then there’s also the degrading storage on many Android phones Citation needed.
    - fuzzy2 3y ago
      The performance degradation is just my experience from a Galaxy Nexus, a Galaxy Tab 2, a Nexus 5 and most of the older Android phones friends & family have/had. I don't remember from the earlier Android days. It's entirely possible this is "fixed" nowadays, because flash/UFS technology has progressed and/or device makers are finally using slightly less crappy components.
- 3y ago
zmmmmm 3y ago
I hope the EU calls them on this and mandates that they offer equivalent OS API support for 3rd party browsers to implement PWAs to what Safari had at the time their initial ruling was made. Let's then watch how fast Apple restores PWA capabilities to Safari when web sites are actively encouraging users to install third party browsers so that PWA's keep working.
Devasta 3y ago
Its honestly a fantastic feat of marketing that JavaScript apps outside the browser are still referred to as web apps.
- fuzzy2 3y ago
  They’re not Javascript apps though. They’re HTML with Javascript over HTTPS, rendered by a browser engine and… oh wait, that’s a website.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    Yes, it's only an app if it's approved in the Cupertino region of California. Anything else is a sparkling website.
    - fuzzy2 3y ago
      Not what I was referring to. PWAs are a specific combination of web technologies. They're not "JavaScript apps". They really are web apps, even when "installed".
boomskats 3y ago
The number of apologists and distractors in this comments section honestly makes me feel like it's been brigaded. I'm amazed, given how well informed this crowd typically is. As for the topic being discussed - Apple have gone out of their way for the last _decade_ to avoid implementing things like ServiceWorkers properly. I remember having this same conversation back in 2015. It is a real shame, as things like the proposed w3c sensors api would totally eliminate the pain of deploying private/internal/enterprise apps to a fleet of employees, for example. There is so much that this enables for private apps. I won't be surprised if their decade+ old viewport meta tag reference documentation for home screen icons and status bar styling in full screen mode stops working at some point too - it's been neglected for years. It'll be a weird, heartbreaking example of corporate revisionism, especially considering Steve Jobs' original vision for apps on the iphone. I'm not a huge fan of the big G either, but I honestly hope they take advantage of this with some clever (non-developer) product-centric marketing. PWAs are a very well thought out approach to 90% of what modern apps are. We absolutely should be sandboxing private browser instances per PWA, not shipping entire separate webkit wrappers for every app every time an app is updated. It's almost literally the same difference as shipping layered container images as updates instead of giant VM blobs. Such a huge loss.
- meibo 3y ago
  Most of the people on this site have either worked for Apple before or hold Apple stock. Regulation is directly reaching into their pockets. Also obvious by how this post is already on 14th place after 2 hours, with more than 200 votes. (Edit: now 31, 3 hours in)
  - ffsm8 3y ago
    Apple has fostered an incredibly fanatic userbase. Most of them unironically call themselves "apple users". They don't use a device, they've made the device part of their identity, and even implying that it's not the best thing ever created consequently becomes a personal insult. Google and Microsoft tried to replicate that kind of brand love but were thankfully unsuccessful for the most part, so you'll always get an incredible amount of comments on anything related to Apple.
rambambram 3y ago
Although I agree with the article and the obvious sh!t move Apple is making, one needs to keep making a distinction between PWAs and web apps in general. Not every 'web app' needs local storage or push notifications. Besides, I heard the 'simple' web apps still can have a place on the homescreen. Can anybody with an iPhone tell me if that works like the video from the article? Is it just with an address bar?
- fuzzy2 3y ago
  The video in the article (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AST12aDGf0Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AST12aDGf0Q) shows that PWAs are completely gone. They are degraded to pinned bookmarks that open in your default browser. Yes, you can still pin bookmarks, as you always(?) could, but those are not PWAs. Only PWAs can offer a true app-like experience.
  - rambambram 3y ago
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but these "pinned bookmarks" can be on the homescreen like a link that opens in your default browser, right? > Only PWAs can offer a true app-like experience. If one's definition of an app requires push notifications and local storage. I get the d!ck move from Apple, but web apps can be way simpler without push notifications and storage on a server under your control. To me personally, push notifications and local storage are overrated.
    - fuzzy2 3y ago
      ? My definition of an app-like experience is that it’s not a browser. No address bar, no tabs, no GUI elements whatsoever but the web view. That’s a PWA. Local storage is merely a supporting technology. Push notifications are not required at all.
1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago
FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory love to ramble on about "security" but considering how "untouchable" these companies are, coupled with their evasive, callous behaviour toward "users" as well as any reasonable notion of transparency, it would be insane to assume they care about you or your data even one iota, except to the extent they can exploit you. And they can do so with ease. The risk of losing you as a "user" is almost nonexistant. There is nowhere else to go. Thus, the greatest threats to a computer owner's "security" are, in fact, FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory. There is no defense and no escape. Common cybercriminals are a joke by comparison. FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory will never allow computer users to protect themselves from FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory. "Trust" is assumed. It's not like they ever ask you, "Do you want to trust us?" Of course, you can always give up and ignore the threat. You can claim you trust one of these companies. You can wax on about how one is better than the other. But the threat remains. They can do whatever they want, no matter how irrational or "evil", and we are watching them do so in real-time. It did not take much to get them to show their true colors. What if business were to really get worse. Imagine what they could do. They could set new levels for douchebag behaviour. Unstoppable.
neoberg 3y ago
I've always been an Apple ecosystem user. Both main devices and accesories. Apart from my first one, all my smartphones had been Apple. I've only used Apple computers since 15 years. But that's it. Once my current iPhone breaks (and I took my protector off), I'm not buying another one. This is malicious compliance at the expense of user.
joshstrange 3y ago
I feel like something that gets brushed off on HN all the time is: Do people actually want PWAs? In my experience the answer is a resounding “NO”. Android supports PWAs but they aren’t taking the world by storm. My Android friends don’t use any that I’m aware of and if you ask them about it they just get a blank look on the faces. Heck, businesses don’t care about PWAs or websites even. I work in this space, I’ve written well over 10 cross platform apps (web/iOS/Android) and not only do they not care about PWAs but they don’t care much about the web. It’s the same codebase and normally we get the web version up and running first so we tell them they can start playing with it on their phone in the browser. They literally do not even open it until we provide the app version to them. I know because only once there is an app do we hear _any_ feedback. No matter how many times we tell them it’s the same, that they can start doing user acceptance testing or QA early, or to just check the UI/colors to make sure it’s what they want. They don’t care until it’s an app.
- 93po 3y ago
  I want PWAs in instances where the alternative is no app or no feature at all. For instance I use Firefox in iOS but it’s massively crippled (no extension support) thanks to Apple being shitheads. If the only option to have extension support is with PWA then I 100% want PWA
- chillfox 3y ago
  Nope, every PWA I have used ended up loosing data. They are universally shit across all devices/os I have tried.
- remram 3y ago
  Do I want apps that install instantly from the page, can't reach into my photos or contacts, and that even I can develop for all platforms without learning OS-specific APIs? Yes. I use some already, though a lot of apps today are mobile-friendly versions of websites, so I just use the website (e.g. Twitter, YouTube, FreshRSS, ...)
  - Affric 3y ago
    > that even I can develop This gives away that you are not a regular consumer.
frodowtf 3y ago
> ... very low user adoption of Home Screen web apps. Well, if nobody wants to play with our total clusterfuck of inconsistent APIs, we might as well drop support for them >:(
niutech 3y ago
I've proposed a workaround for bringing back PWA support to iOS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39454792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39454792

sara44444444 3y ago

[flagged]

th4tg41 3y ago

Off topic: This site is next to unreadable on my phone. Zigzagscrolling is an insult to the audience.

k1t 3y ago
It looks fine to me. (Firefox / Android)
sosodev 3y ago
It's perfectly readable on my phone and with various device dimensions set in my desktop browser.
quyleanh 3y ago
Me too. Using Safari on iPhone now. Is it intended?
exodust 3y ago
Problems on ultrawide desktop too (severe horizontal scrolling). To partially fix, open dev tools and change the body tag's display:grid to display:block. I'm not sure how you can stuff up a single column HTML article, but they've managed to.
xorcist 3y ago
The line length is hilarious. Press the little book icon (or F9 in Firefox desktop), it fixes this just as it fixes so many other unreadable web sites. Luckily our clients aren't completely strangled yet so this still works. How meta considering the subject.
underwater 3y ago
If Safari supported extensions then you'd have the ability to resolve this by installing something like Readability. If iOS supported other browsers then you could read it in a Chromium based browser, where it appears completely readable.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- zimpenfish 3y ago
  > If Safari supported extensions iOS Safari does support extensions. I've got a handful installed on my phone right now, including Userscripts to apply custom formatting and styling to this website.
- nottorp 3y ago
  But why should you need extensions to go around some site disrespecting you?
- latexr 3y ago
  Safari does support extensions. And it has built-in Reader mode. And it needs none of that for this case since the website loads perfectly fine with no zigzagging required. What Apple is doing sucks, for sure, but let’s not lose sight of reality and make stuff up or misinform people.
  - 93po 3y ago
    Show me how to get ublock origin on safari in iOS. You can’t, and this is basically the top extension anyone wants, and so your blanket statement is also misinforming
    - latexr 3y ago
      I didn’t say it supports all extensions from all browsers. Thanks to manifest v3 uBlock Origin will also not be viable on what is by far the most popular browser. Will you also say Google Chrome doesn’t support extensions then? It’s not like Safari can’t do ad blocking. It can, and solutions like 1Blocker are quite capable. It can even block at the system level, which is more than uBlock Origin in the browser does. Either way, none of this is relevant to your first comment. Extensions aren’t even necessary for the original complaint. Please don’t move the goalposts.
rezonant 3y ago
It looks completely fine on my phone, what browser are you using? Did you perhaps leave Desktop Mode on? Since Alex is here in the comments, I'm sure he'd reply if he had fixed something between each of us reading it.

verisimi 3y ago

PWA - progressive web app, delivered via the web, html, CSS, JavaScript, etc.

gambiting 3y ago
Thank you! I hate when articles use acronyms and never actually expand what they mean - I read the entire article without any clue what PWAs actually are.
- verisimi 3y ago
  I know - I'm not in that area and got quite a way through before realising I had to look it up!
- npteljes 3y ago
  I agree, it's a bad writing practice. And it's very simple to be completely unambiguous - just use the complete phrase the first time. So in this case, the tagline could just be "Decoding Apple's Desperate Ploy To Scuttle Progressive Web Applications", and then, if people see PWA, they can decipher it themselves. But of course this seems to be a personal blog, so much of it is up to personal taste, as it should be.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    I totally agree. For this person, it's surely obvious. They probably didn't expect this to become a popular read on HN. Do you remember when ai used to stand for 'artificial insemination'? Lol.

eksu 3y ago

I don’t use any PWA’s and I am not so sympathetic from claims of harm from removing/deprecating PWA’s without some data on the size and impact of this change. Xbox Gamepass presumably would be the largest one/best example, is that how they ask people on iOS to stream games?

kevingadd 3y ago
I can't speak to whether this is still true, but there was a time period where Apple would reject certain categories of iOS app store submissions and tell people to just make a website - 'simple webview' type stuff, like apps for a small business etc. The natural response to that is to make a PWA if Apple says you're not good enough for the store. Now that option is going away, so I can understand if people who previously relied on it are ticked off.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  Yes, it is the "Minimum Functionality" requirement , still in the books: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#minimum-functionality https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#min... > 4.2 Minimum Functionality > Your app should include features, content, and UI that elevate it beyond a repackaged website. If your app is not particularly useful, unique, or “app-like,” it doesn’t belong on the App Store. If your App doesn’t provide some sort of lasting entertainment value or adequate utility, it may not be accepted.
- rezonant 3y ago
  That is for actual websites. A PWA is typically something app-like. Think about it a little harder. If Apple says "only bikes are allowed in their bike store, and if you want to build something else, go put your product in a different store", then you said OK fine and proceeded to build a bike and put it in another store, does that make sense? Apple would've accepted your bike. Websites and web apps are treated differently in Apple's rules. Understand that Apple has used this rule to keep web based apps out of the app store, but they got burned on that and there's no such restriction today.

n33 3y ago

"True character is revealed in the choices a human being makes under pressure - the greater the pressure, the deeper the revelation, the truer the choice to the character's essential nature." — Robert McKee

rob74 3y ago
Well, the "true character" of any company is essentially being a greedy asshole - and that's no surprise, if they weren't that way from the beginning, the shareholders would dictate this behavior. I know some people think Apple is an exception - maybe these latest shenanigans will change their minds, but I wouldn't bet on it...
- kqr 3y ago
  It may often be a useful model to pretend "a company" has a character, but when the context is McKee on character, it is a mistaken perspective. I'm sure McKee would argue for the exact opposite! Organisations are run by individuals, and it is their character that is revealed. The greedy assholery is the front they have to assume to uphold their fiduciary duty to shareholders, but their true character is what happens underneath – the thing revealed under pressure. And in this, we see large variation.
- diffeomorphism 3y ago
  Nah, this is too much equivocation. Some companies are much more spiteful than others and shareholders also don't want you burning bridges. So it is not about Apple being exceptionally good but rather them going out of their way to be exceptionally asshole-ish.

kevingadd 3y ago

"Apple looks set to argue, contra everyone else subject to the DMA, that the moment from which features must be made interoperable is the end of the fair-warning period, not the date of designation." is an interesting point I hadn't seen before. I was under the impression that as long as they removed PWAs before the final deadline, they'd be able to claim they were complying in good faith. But I suppose that might not be true, and it could actually be as-of the warning period?

jeroenhd 3y ago
Like with the GDPR, the DMA had a long lead-in time in which the law has gone into effect but the EU wasn't prosecuting anyone for incompliance yet. The designation took place half a year ago but you can't expect companies to act on a rough draft and unmade commission decisions, so while the right EU people got started, nobody needed to comply yet. Of course Apple could've acted earlier out of the goodness of their hearts and to serve customer interests (lol), but like with the GDPR, companies tend to prepare longer and only launch their changes right when they're about to see any real risk. The end of the fair warning period is the final deadline. Microsoft and Google are doing the same thing, I think it's to be expected with regulation like this, and the regulation was designed for this.

reactordev 3y ago

[flagged]

rezonant 3y ago
What exactly isn't happening yet?
- reactordev 3y ago
  1) While I agree there should be alternative stores on devices, entire portions of the DMA are unenforceable and plain english. A few of these were pointed out in the article but weren't followed up. 2) Apple can not deeply integrate into other browsers like it has with Webkit/Safari on iOS - The argument that they can just do the same integrations with all the other browsers to provide PWAs is fallacy and indicative of someone who doesn't know what that engineering effort is. They built the integration because they built both sides of the bridge to make it happen. 3) Are Apple being bullies? Yeah, for sure. But it's their device, their platform, and if the EU really wants to have a DMA, they need to create their own Apple, plain and simple. Apple should be barred from the EU if they can't comply with EU laws. But the EU laws need to be written in a way that holds weight and is enforceable. "Must provide alternative after 6 months of first service" isn't enforceable. If the decision is "Launch this but do it twice" or "Never launch this at all", never launch is going to win. And so, you all will never launch. 4) I get that having an app icon is all the rage but is it really that bad to just bookmark things? If you all want to avoid the Apple tax, provide a store that apple can present to the EU that allows for Apache Cordova PWA. I think the onus for this is on the EU. Not Apple. If there is such a store-front already (that's not used by pirates) I'm sure Apple would work with them to integrate for the EU market. A company shouldn't have to provide their own components to adhere to compliance requirements when their original offering was/is already accepted. If you want an alternative, go build one. 5) The article uses a lot of strong emotional language and straw-man arguments. Is it a bad move by Apple to remove PWA Home Dock capabilities? Yes. But what alternative could there be when they are forced to also provide that for 3rd-party browsers that they don't have the same integration with (because they didn't write the browser, the code, and integrating the same security controls could take years). The entire DMA is unrealistic, unenforceable, and would be unconstitutional in the US. It's not a companies job to provide alternative markets, fair or otherwise. It's the EU's. Built it. Force Apple to use it. That's how you win.

randomdev3 3y ago

It's just nonsensical to use a device that dictates what you can install on it. Well, Androids don't come with root permissions either ( you should be able to get it easily if you want imo ) but at least you can install any app, even just create your own.

shrx 3y ago
It's not that easy on Android either. Rooting usually requires a factory reset and several apps (e.g. banking) will not work if they detect the system is rooted. edit: Also, in some cases you lose warranty.
- rezonant 3y ago
  There is no need to root to install software on Android. Rooting is only required for permissions that no app (save pre installed apps), whether installed via Play store or not, can be given.
- pooper 3y ago
  The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode and run locally (used to be at all now I guess seven day limit) is silly. On Android, with Android 12, we can now have apps on neostore (fdroid frontend) auto update. There is no good reason to defend apple here. You as a user are always free to not install third party app stores.
  - boxed 3y ago
    > The fact that you can't install apps from your own xcode ...I do right now. So that isn't a fact. It's a myth.
    - pooper 3y ago
      But they die after seven days?
      - 3y ago

phartenfeller 3y ago

I think removing persistent storage and the ability to add websites to the home screen makes it obvious what their strategy is. The EU shows that they want interoperability for big players like they do with messenger interoperability in the DMA. The web is such a fundamental standard and its interoperability is so important I guess the EU will fine Apple for such behavior. The question is how soon this will happen.

pantulis 3y ago
> I guess the EU will fine Apple for such behavior. The question is how soon this will happen Too late, I'm afraid. Apple has pulled a really smart trick against the tons of paper written by EU commissioners.
- t0mas88 3y ago
  Really smart tricks can buy you a few years, but in the end either you'll get sued for not complying with the intention of the law or the law gets changed to kill your trick. The legal system doesn't like tricks, a "yes but I did X in a really clever way so it's not X" defence doesn't usually work.
- Xelbair 3y ago
  I think you aren't aware that EU courts judge on intent, not letter of the law.
  - pantulis 3y ago
    I did not mean to say that Apple will get away with this, it's just that I don't expect the EU to be exactly fast in its response. As the FA says, it will take its sweet time and by then Apple will have reinforced their dominant position. Of course Apple and their legal teams already know that.
    - pantulis 3y ago
      Well that happened really fast https://www.ft.com/content/d2f7328c-5851-4f16-8f8d-93f0098b6adc https://www.ft.com/content/d2f7328c-5851-4f16-8f8d-93f0098b6...

aragilar 3y ago

Not an IPhone user: but honesty I'd rather have things open an actual browser tab, as then I can interact with it via all my standard extensions (e.g. adblockers), rather than be opened in a webview. Also, given how often you need to change phones (given build quality), if I have important data and you're a web app, I rather the server be the source of truth, and the phone a cache (so I don't loose data when the phone breaks).

beardyw 3y ago
Web apps are mostly optional and otherwise work as a normal web site. Differences are that some functions are exclusive to web apps, so you wouldn't get them on a web site anyway. A feature I do find annoying is the ability to save a page onto my (Android) phone screen is taken away and replaced by "install app". I work around that by going into airplane mode, fetching the page unsuccessfully, and saving that!
- aragilar 3y ago
  That doesn't mean they don't have ads, or other things I want to work around.
  - kilburn 3y ago
    The point is that with EU mandating alt-browsers on iOS, it should have been a possibility to have "Installed" (home-)PWAs where the engine is the alt-browser, not safari/webview. Those browsers could have implemented the Home-PWA functionality while maintaining your ability to install plugins such as adblockers within that PWA's context. Apple has made this impossible by removing the OS APIs that allowed "Installed" (home-)PWAs entirely. This is just so they aren't forced to allow these under a different browser engine. Of course, this is all done because "think of the children" (i.e.: think of the poor people ticked into using a non-privacy-respecting browser to run their PWAs).
sspiff 3y ago
This should be an option for the user then, like "Install" (as a PWA) or "Add bookmark to home screen" (as a browser tap). There's reasons to want either, but as a heavy user of PWAs for a few online services / communities, I much prefer the former in most cases.

silvestrov 3y ago

> Apple has gamely sent $1600/yr lawyers shouldn't this be "$1600/hr" ?

euroderf 3y ago
The author was thinking of public defenders ?
slightlyoff 3y ago
Fixed.

euroderf 3y ago

> PWApocalypse How about: aPWAcalypse

rezonant 3y ago
Nice. Kinda sounds too adorable for what it is though

throwawa14223 3y ago

Maybe I don’t get it? I look at the list of features Apple is removing and they all seem like things I wouldn’t want a web browser to have to begin with.

the_gipsy 3y ago
Just look at the timing. And there is a simple solution too: just offer multiple browsers in the appstore.
- Sander_Marechal 3y ago
  It's not about browsers. It's about OS APIs that browsers need to support PWAs. Apple is killing those APIs so that other browsers cannot offer PWAs.
  - the_gipsy 3y ago
    That's what I meant: they could continue offering safari as a "basic web browser" but allow actual web browsers in the appstore, that can fully implement any web APIs.
    - throwawa14223 3y ago
      This is probably not accurate given I was mistaken above but I thought that's what Apple was doing. You can load any browser but some OS APIs are going away.
m1el 3y ago
Not a browser, but a PWA. It's a web page, which you can "install" as an "app". Features like storage, background tasks and notifications are important for many applications, for example a messenger. These were available, and there is a market for those, but Apple has decided to kill that market.
- throwawa14223 3y ago

coldtea 3y ago

Thank god for Apple's lacklustre support for PWAs. Else iOS would be like macOS, with every second app from a major vendor people need to run (for work, school, banking, etc) would be the equivalent of an Electron monstrocity. Apparently that's the dream of the author.

joemelonyeah 3y ago
Funny that the reverse has already happened due to Apple's lackluster support of PWAs. PWAs run with the system's browser engine, unlike Electron apps that ship with their own customized Chromium engine. Each app is only a few megabytes tops, unlike the hundreds of megabytes of bloat native apps tend to take up nowadays.
- coldtea 3y ago
  The static megabytes on disk are not a problem [1], the runtime, battery, and memory overhead from them being written in JS+DOM is. [1] never got anywhere near close to run out of space on iOS because of apps (at 50+ apps installed). Besides the big offenders space-wise are not general apps and their code dependencies, but games with huge asset libraries.
themoonisachees 3y ago
... Are you somehow under the impression that means companies won't go back to how it was before and simply package their website as an electron app for iOS? This is the reason PWAs were invented in the first place, to avoid every app shipping an entire browser when the user-selected one was right there, if only it presented the app like an app and not a website. Companies aren't going to magically switch to a ios-compatible framework or language, it's cheaper to keep just web devs and hire one guy that knows how to package an electron app.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >... Are you somehow under the impression that means companies won't go back to how it was before and simply package their website as an electron app for iOS? I'm not sure there that many doing "add to home screen PWAs" in the first place, for them to be "going back". "Add to home screen PWAs" were used by users (not many either) for convenient access to this or that website they've used, but weren't ever a major app delivery use case in iOS. So, I see the whole post more like much ado about nothing. And while companies do just package webkit (or use system webkit) + some web app framework as iOS native apps, iOS still encourages developing proper native apps. Which I'm all for. If Slack, VS Code and co could be forced to create fully native apps on the desktop too, I'd jump at the chance of replacing their Electron stuff with those.

timwaagh 3y ago

There's fortunately no need to use any apple products. The ones most hurt by this will probably be Apple. Especially if functionality breaks as stated here. It will mean the 'luxury phone brand' is now a broken phone brand at least in the EU. Apple users might switch and I think Samsung is most likely to get them.

joelanman 3y ago
that would be nice but when Apple dropped Flash it was Flash that died
fuzzy2 3y ago
It’s not that easy. I switched to iPhone mainly because of Android phone makers’ abysmal update policies. Heck, I had a Nexus 5 and it was “killed” merely 1.5 years after I bought it. Because newer Android required newer graphics drivers and Qualcomm said “no”. Supposedly things are better now, but are they really? My iPhone 7 was my daily driver for 5 years and was only retired because I got an offer that was too good to pass up. And then there’s also the degrading storage on many Android phones. They just become sooooo slow. My iPhone 7 is slow now, too. After 7 years, not after 3.
- rezonant 3y ago
  Both Samsung and Google now offer 7 years of software support (security and features) on their latest phones, and Samsung is increasing that from 5 years. > And then there’s also the degrading storage on many Android phones Citation needed.
  - fuzzy2 3y ago
    The performance degradation is just my experience from a Galaxy Nexus, a Galaxy Tab 2, a Nexus 5 and most of the older Android phones friends & family have/had. I don't remember from the earlier Android days. It's entirely possible this is "fixed" nowadays, because flash/UFS technology has progressed and/or device makers are finally using slightly less crappy components.
3y ago

zmmmmm 3y ago

I hope the EU calls them on this and mandates that they offer equivalent OS API support for 3rd party browsers to implement PWAs to what Safari had at the time their initial ruling was made. Let's then watch how fast Apple restores PWA capabilities to Safari when web sites are actively encouraging users to install third party browsers so that PWA's keep working.

Devasta 3y ago

Its honestly a fantastic feat of marketing that JavaScript apps outside the browser are still referred to as web apps.

fuzzy2 3y ago
They’re not Javascript apps though. They’re HTML with Javascript over HTTPS, rendered by a browser engine and… oh wait, that’s a website.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  Yes, it's only an app if it's approved in the Cupertino region of California. Anything else is a sparkling website.
  - fuzzy2 3y ago
    Not what I was referring to. PWAs are a specific combination of web technologies. They're not "JavaScript apps". They really are web apps, even when "installed".

boomskats 3y ago

The number of apologists and distractors in this comments section honestly makes me feel like it's been brigaded. I'm amazed, given how well informed this crowd typically is. As for the topic being discussed - Apple have gone out of their way for the last _decade_ to avoid implementing things like ServiceWorkers properly. I remember having this same conversation back in 2015. It is a real shame, as things like the proposed w3c sensors api would totally eliminate the pain of deploying private/internal/enterprise apps to a fleet of employees, for example. There is so much that this enables for private apps. I won't be surprised if their decade+ old viewport meta tag reference documentation for home screen icons and status bar styling in full screen mode stops working at some point too - it's been neglected for years. It'll be a weird, heartbreaking example of corporate revisionism, especially considering Steve Jobs' original vision for apps on the iphone. I'm not a huge fan of the big G either, but I honestly hope they take advantage of this with some clever (non-developer) product-centric marketing. PWAs are a very well thought out approach to 90% of what modern apps are. We absolutely should be sandboxing private browser instances per PWA, not shipping entire separate webkit wrappers for every app every time an app is updated. It's almost literally the same difference as shipping layered container images as updates instead of giant VM blobs. Such a huge loss.

meibo 3y ago
Most of the people on this site have either worked for Apple before or hold Apple stock. Regulation is directly reaching into their pockets. Also obvious by how this post is already on 14th place after 2 hours, with more than 200 votes. (Edit: now 31, 3 hours in)
- ffsm8 3y ago
  Apple has fostered an incredibly fanatic userbase. Most of them unironically call themselves "apple users". They don't use a device, they've made the device part of their identity, and even implying that it's not the best thing ever created consequently becomes a personal insult. Google and Microsoft tried to replicate that kind of brand love but were thankfully unsuccessful for the most part, so you'll always get an incredible amount of comments on anything related to Apple.

rambambram 3y ago

Although I agree with the article and the obvious sh!t move Apple is making, one needs to keep making a distinction between PWAs and web apps in general. Not every 'web app' needs local storage or push notifications. Besides, I heard the 'simple' web apps still can have a place on the homescreen. Can anybody with an iPhone tell me if that works like the video from the article? Is it just with an address bar?

fuzzy2 3y ago
The video in the article (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AST12aDGf0Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AST12aDGf0Q) shows that PWAs are completely gone. They are degraded to pinned bookmarks that open in your default browser. Yes, you can still pin bookmarks, as you always(?) could, but those are not PWAs. Only PWAs can offer a true app-like experience.
- rambambram 3y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but these "pinned bookmarks" can be on the homescreen like a link that opens in your default browser, right? > Only PWAs can offer a true app-like experience. If one's definition of an app requires push notifications and local storage. I get the d!ck move from Apple, but web apps can be way simpler without push notifications and storage on a server under your control. To me personally, push notifications and local storage are overrated.
  - fuzzy2 3y ago
    ? My definition of an app-like experience is that it’s not a browser. No address bar, no tabs, no GUI elements whatsoever but the web view. That’s a PWA. Local storage is merely a supporting technology. Push notifications are not required at all.

1vuio0pswjnm7 3y ago

FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory love to ramble on about "security" but considering how "untouchable" these companies are, coupled with their evasive, callous behaviour toward "users" as well as any reasonable notion of transparency, it would be insane to assume they care about you or your data even one iota, except to the extent they can exploit you. And they can do so with ease. The risk of losing you as a "user" is almost nonexistant. There is nowhere else to go. Thus, the greatest threats to a computer owner's "security" are, in fact, FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory. There is no defense and no escape. Common cybercriminals are a joke by comparison. FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory will never allow computer users to protect themselves from FruitCo and the Chocolate Factory. "Trust" is assumed. It's not like they ever ask you, "Do you want to trust us?" Of course, you can always give up and ignore the threat. You can claim you trust one of these companies. You can wax on about how one is better than the other. But the threat remains. They can do whatever they want, no matter how irrational or "evil", and we are watching them do so in real-time. It did not take much to get them to show their true colors. What if business were to really get worse. Imagine what they could do. They could set new levels for douchebag behaviour. Unstoppable.

neoberg 3y ago

I've always been an Apple ecosystem user. Both main devices and accesories. Apart from my first one, all my smartphones had been Apple. I've only used Apple computers since 15 years. But that's it. Once my current iPhone breaks (and I took my protector off), I'm not buying another one. This is malicious compliance at the expense of user.

joshstrange 3y ago

I feel like something that gets brushed off on HN all the time is: Do people actually want PWAs? In my experience the answer is a resounding “NO”. Android supports PWAs but they aren’t taking the world by storm. My Android friends don’t use any that I’m aware of and if you ask them about it they just get a blank look on the faces. Heck, businesses don’t care about PWAs or websites even. I work in this space, I’ve written well over 10 cross platform apps (web/iOS/Android) and not only do they not care about PWAs but they don’t care much about the web. It’s the same codebase and normally we get the web version up and running first so we tell them they can start playing with it on their phone in the browser. They literally do not even open it until we provide the app version to them. I know because only once there is an app do we hear _any_ feedback. No matter how many times we tell them it’s the same, that they can start doing user acceptance testing or QA early, or to just check the UI/colors to make sure it’s what they want. They don’t care until it’s an app.

93po 3y ago
I want PWAs in instances where the alternative is no app or no feature at all. For instance I use Firefox in iOS but it’s massively crippled (no extension support) thanks to Apple being shitheads. If the only option to have extension support is with PWA then I 100% want PWA
chillfox 3y ago
Nope, every PWA I have used ended up loosing data. They are universally shit across all devices/os I have tried.
remram 3y ago
Do I want apps that install instantly from the page, can't reach into my photos or contacts, and that even I can develop for all platforms without learning OS-specific APIs? Yes. I use some already, though a lot of apps today are mobile-friendly versions of websites, so I just use the website (e.g. Twitter, YouTube, FreshRSS, ...)
- Affric 3y ago
  > that even I can develop This gives away that you are not a regular consumer.

frodowtf 3y ago

> ... very low user adoption of Home Screen web apps. Well, if nobody wants to play with our total clusterfuck of inconsistent APIs, we might as well drop support for them >:(

niutech 3y ago

I've proposed a workaround for bringing back PWA support to iOS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39454792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39454792