| This is the conspiratorial version. The more likely explanation is that when every app can bundle their own browser engine, we will not see a competition explosion. Instead, Electron apps will come to mobile, with every app shipping its own browser stack. You can’t tell me Gecko, which has already failed on desktop, will suddenly be popular on mobile. You can easily tell me every app shipping their own Chromium would be very popular with developers. |
| |
| ▲ | xp84 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is true, however I think an App Store rule that to ship a browser engine, you have to be a browser, defined as having a browser that is maintained on MacOS, Linux, and/or Windows and which can be made the default browser on those platforms. Or even simpler, it has to present web browsing to the user as the primary function and not secondary to accessing content/shopping/gaming. Seems either approach would rule out your Slack, Amazon app, etc. from shipping their own outdated 900MB Chromiums but allow Chrome, Firefox, K-Meleon, whatever. | |
| ▲ | wolvoleo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Firefox is really good now on android. It's my go to browser now for everything. It just needed full addon support but when that was finally there it was great. | | | |
| ▲ | bloppe 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | a browser is essentially an app store with no 30% cut for Apple. If you can ship a browser, you don't need to pay the Apple tax | | |
| ▲ | gjsman-1000 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Has PWA become popular on unencumbered platforms like Android or Windows? No. Even if unencumbered on iOS, it will still fail, because PWA is an intrinsically confusing technology. The pitch to non-technical users is terrible. Just like passkeys, which has also been terrible. | | |
| ▲ | xp84 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s not that confusing. To a user it could be the same as an app, just one you can be prompted to “install” instantly without a download and without wasting space on your device. If Apple weren’t incentivized to block PWA use, they’d allow them to be “installed” with the same type of little top banner that prompts you to get/open an App Store app. Instead they relegate it to some obscure buried option inside the Safari Share menu. | |
| ▲ | kelthuzad 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >Has PWA become popular on unencumbered platforms like Android or Windows?
No. Obviously. When a major Gatekeeper systematically holds it back to prevent it from challenging its taxation funnel, then it has no chance of competing and will thus not be chosen on competing platforms either, which will prevent its adoption and any investment in it. >Even if unencumbered on iOS, it will still fail, because PWA is an intrinsically confusing technology. PWA is not an "intrinsically confusing technology" and making such an absurd statement without proper elaboration reeks of pure bias. | |
| ▲ | judah 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "Has PWA become popular on unencumbered platforms like Android or Windows? No." Yes, PWAs have become popular on these platforms. I work for Microsoft on the Microsoft Store (app store on Windows) and I work with the Edge team, and I work on PWABuilder.com, which publishes PWAs to app stores. Some of the most popular apps in the Microsoft Store are PWAs: Netflix, TikTok, Adobe Creative Cloud, Disney+, and many others. To view the list of PWAs in the Store, on a Windows box you can run ms-windows-store://assoc/?Tags=AppExtension-microsoft.store.edgePWA I run PWABuilder.com as well, and I can tell you that many, many PWAs get published to the Google Play Store, including some very popular ones. I agree there is some confusion around PWA installation. There are some proposed web standards with Google and Microsoft's backing to help with that, e.g. Web Install: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/MSEdgeExplainers/blob/main/... | |
| ▲ | inquirerGeneral 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
| |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every app shipping its own Chromium isn't currently forbidden, as I understand it. They're just not allowed to use their own engines for webviews. | | | |
| ▲ | kelthuzad 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >This is the conspiratorial version. Everything that's inconvenient for your preferred narrative can just be dismissed as conspiratorial thinking, makes the world so much easier - doesnt it? I've compiled some of the evidences that makes clear how one of the Gatekeepers (Apple) has a tremendous conflict of interest, which manifested itself in systematic sabotaging of PWAs over the years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45534316 |
|
