Hacker News Reader

Comment by gjsman-1000 | Hacker News Reader

Another reason is actually security.

Remember that Apple doesn't allow other web browser engines in any application. Imagine if an Electron application on iOS just decided to ship with it's entire, own browser engine. We would have super-bloated apps like our desktops, and if a security flaw was found, good luck getting all those apps to update.

In a way, Apple knows that allowing other browser engines means:

1. Chromium-based browsers just increase their monopoly, Firefox continues stagnation by almost all odds

2. The Electron mess on our desktops will claim new territory on our phones and bring security problems with it

Not very appealing. Limiting competition? When your only realistic competition is Chrome with it's 80%+ dominance, I don't think a regulator would have a problem with that.

View on HN

The ironic part of this is that if Apple allowed alternative browser engines, I guarantee you it is only a matter of time before you see Electron apps bringing their own browser engines with them to iOS. And not long after before Hacker News is screaming and moaning about it (like they do for Electron on desktop) and begging for Apple to stop it.

HN already screams and moans about mobile apps built with PhoneGap/Cordova/Capacitor/Ionic ect. for not being "native" at the same time as promoting PWAs and complaining that apple doesn't support them, ignoring that PhoneGap, Cordova and especially Capacitor give you that functionality (mostly). I think that says more about HN than Apple...

What it says is that people mostly just post when they want to complain about stuff. Some minority of people are outraged over lack of PWA on iPhone, so they post to complain loudly about it. Some other minority of people are outraged over electron apps on Mac, so they post to complain loudly about it. It's not the same people, it's just the same pattern of the loud minority and silent majority.

I'll admit, though, I'm in the "I really want native Mac apps" minority :)

I’m reminded of a chestnut I was once told; satisfied people generally do not post comments, because people don’t go out of their way to say that things are okay, and your everyday person doesn’t even really post good reviews unprompted, because good service is usually the expectation.

People only really get active about bad divergence from expectations.

You never see "Toy Story 2 was ok" spray painted on an overpass.

People do voice very positive opinions, but nobody really voices indifference.

Further, even extremely opinionated people are usually only opinionated about a few things. Most people are indifferent to most things.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that in the case of positive opinions, it's not super common to leave them unprompted (see: all the popups in apps for "Like our app? Rate us on the app store!") whereas people angry at bad service have no compunctions about finding somewhere to vent, in public if they have to, and are super driven by their agitation.

I don't think there's a lot of overlap between folks who are very upset with Apple for not making PWAs work better on iOS, and people who hate non-native apps and wish they'd be banned.

the difference is the distribution channel. For cordova you still need to use Apple store and pay yearly and share your income with Apple. With PWA, the distribution channel is web, so no commissions for Apple.

Its almost like different people have different opinions or something.

Also security, but different: Apple want sight of all of the native code that's running in your app, because their ABI is also a privilege boundary. JIT that's not controlled by them could be used to call symbols that your app is not supposed to call.

Security isn’t a great argument when Apple only updates safari with full system updates. Sure, iOS has a high update rate compared to Android but it’s still far lower than an App Store update would be.

Plus, security is somewhat less of a concern when the application only accesses a limited site and isn’t for general purpose browsing for untrusted sites.

> Security isn’t a great argument when Apple only updates safari with full system updates.

But they can put those updates out whenever they want, so that doesn't go against the security argument at all.

Users can only get an update by rebooting their devices, so it absolutely goes against the security argument.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com