Apple makes it official: No Home Screen web apps in Europe
- Reference: 1708069030
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/02/16/apple_web_apps/
- Source link:
As The Register [1]noted last week, the second beta release of iOS 17.4 – which includes code intended to comply with the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA) – broke PWAs in Europe. EU users should still be able to open Home Screen web apps, but within their browser window rather than as a stand-alone app, and without specific functions like Push notifications.
Apple made this change without notice to developers, despite Cupertino's repeated insistence that web apps represent an alternative to native iOS apps for those unable or unwilling to abide by its platform restrictions.
[2]
Finally, Apple has offered an apology of sorts, and has tried to soften the blow by suggesting few people actually bother installing web apps on their iOS Home Screen.
[3]
[4]
"We expect this change to affect a small number of users," the fruit cart wrote in [5]an explanatory note covering its obligations under the DMA. "Still, we regret any impact this change – that was made as part of the work to comply with the DMA – may have on developers of Home Screen web apps and our users."
This is significantly impacting our user experience
That's cold comfort for those who have been adding their voices to [6]a WebKit bug thread about the Squoosh.app – a PWA that no longer works under the iOS 17.4 beta in Europe.
"This issue is significantly impacting our user experience and hindering our ability to deliver seamless services to our customers," [7]wrote one developer. "This is impacting 50K+ of our app users." Others expressed similar sentiment.
Apple did not respond to a request to quantify Home Screen web app installation on iOS – a situation of its own making as a consequence of [8]half-hearted support for web APIs.
[9]
Despite Apple's suggestion that hardly anyone uses PWAs, some major players have invested in them. Adobe last year [10]highlighted a dozen exemplary PWAs from orgs like Starbucks, Uber, Pinterest, Tinder, and Spotify. "PWAs provide an excellent user experience no matter what device the user is browsing on," Adobe claimed at the time.
Apple's rationale for dropping PWA support is that it would take a lot of work to comply with European regualtions. That said, Apple could have started the process back in November 2022 when the DMA took effect – or when Apple was designated as a gatekeeper last September.
[11]Apple Vision Pro units returned as folks just can't see themselves using it
[12]In its tantrum with Europe, Apple broke web apps in iOS 17 beta, still hasn't fixed them
[13]Web devs fear Apple's iOS shakeup for Europe will be a nightmare for support
[14]In quest to defeat Euro red-tape, Apple said it had three Safari browsers – not one
Home Screen apps under iOS depend upon WebKit and its security architecture. The DMA requirement for support of alternative browser engines would require decoupling that integration and creating code that lets Home Screen apps interact securely with multiple browser engines.
"Addressing the complex security and privacy concerns associated with web apps using alternative browser engines would require building an entirely new integration architecture that does not currently exist in iOS and was not practical to undertake given the other demands of the DMA and the very low user adoption of Home Screen web apps," explained Apple, the [15]second most valuable company in the world by market capitalization.
"And so, to comply with the DMA's requirements, we had to remove the Home Screen web apps feature in the EU."
[16]
PWAs are considered to be more than just web apps because they provide [17]functions normally associated with native platform apps – like file system access, NFC and offline support, and home screen installation on mobile and desktop devices.
Depriving them of Home Screen installation – which allows them to run in their own window rather than within a browser pane – and other lost functions degrades the user experience and makes them less capable of competing with native apps. Incidentally, native apps generated [18]$1.1 trillion in App Store revenue in 2022.
'Lies'
Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games, which challenged Apple's platform-based self-preferencing in court with only limited success, condemned the iGiant's decision.
"More bad faith compliance and lies from Apple, this time falsely claiming that Safari is the only trustworthy web browser – in order to kill web apps, which they touted in Epic v Apple as a viable substitute to native apps," he [19]posted . "Shame on this once great and now greatly diminished company."
Maximiliano Firtman, a web developer who works on PWAs, [20]added , "The technical reasons behind the decision published in the document are childish and it contains many lies."
The changes Apple is planning, he said, mean that in the EU, Apple will delete user data associated with PWAs without notice, and that Web Push notifications will stop working, among other consequences.
"Safari on iOS 17.4 is reverting web app functionality to what was available with iPhone OS 2.0, 16 years ago," he [21]warned .
Safe and secure apps that Apple can't tax, block, or control [are] terrifying to them
The Open Web Advocacy, an organization of web developers, agrees.
"It's telling that this is the feature that Apple refused to share. And it makes sense, the idea that users could install safe and secure apps that Apple can't tax, block, or control is terrifying to them," it notes.
"Even Apple admits their sandbox is, to quote them, orders of magnitude more secure than that of native apps. They tried claiming to the UK regulator that Safari was more secure than other major browsers but decisively lost that argument. So this is their new tactic. Kill off a competitor while saying the EU made them do it.
"Apple has had 15 years to allow third party browsers the ability to compete in web app functionality and nearly two since they knew they would be legally compelled to do so. Clearly the backlash has caught them off guard and that's why they had to rush out this panicked response, the only significant update they have made to their compliance proposal." ®
Get our [22]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/08/apple_web_apps_eu/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Zc9AWYwHBaL4a122C7O1GQAAAMA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Zc9AWYwHBaL4a122C7O1GQAAAMA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Zc9AWYwHBaL4a122C7O1GQAAAMA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://developer.apple.com/support/dma-and-apps-in-the-eu/#dev-qa
[6] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=268643
[7] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=268643#c22
[8] https://github.com/PWA-POLICE/pwa-bugs?tab=readme-ov-file#ios-safari
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Zc9AWYwHBaL4a122C7O1GQAAAMA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/progressive-web-app-examples
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/15/apple_vision_pro_returns/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/08/apple_web_apps_eu/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/31/web_developers_worry_apple_ios/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/02/apple_safari_browser/
[15] https://www.reuters.com/technology/microsoft-edges-out-apple-worlds-most-valuable-company-2024-01-12/
[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Zc9AWYwHBaL4a122C7O1GQAAAMA&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[17] https://whatpwacando.today/
[18] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/05/developers-generated-one-point-one-trillion-in-the-app-store-ecosystem-in-2022/
[19] https://x.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1758204858593612047
[20] https://x.com/firt/status/1758214098284691506
[21] https://x.com/firt/status/1758236747958222904
[22] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Yes, you really are the product
Indeed. The fruit cart is not there to work, it's there to rake in the dough.
And rake in the dough it does, by the cargo ship load.
What it will take for Apple to actually commit to this architecture is for Android to start making a killing with it and for Apple to lose market share because of that. That would make things move.
But it will never happen, because people who buy Apple don't change, they stay Apple.
Re: Yes, you really are the product
"people who buy Apple don't change, they stay Apple."
You say this, but... I speak as a strong Apple fan for more than a decade. And I've seen how the iPhone experience is losing ground to the competition year by year. And how my current MacOS experience is degrading almost by the day; I'm seeing crashes, freezes and the beachball of death more now under Sonoma than I ever remember, with at least one full forced restart a week now. I'm getting sick of it.
Right now, the Apple experience is mediocre, while some of the new crop of Android phones combined with Windows are actually really, really good. And genuinely interesting.
And I'm more than trivially considering whether my next phone/laptop will be Apple or not.
Did anyone ....
.... really expect the Fruity Ones to just roll over and give in to EU law by complying in good faith with the required changes?
I would love to see a significant fine applied to them for malicious compliance. But I doubt it will happen.
Re: Did anyone ....
How can they be fined if they are complying with the letter of the law? If the EU wants them to act differently, they will have to change the letter of the law which is within their power to do.
Re: Did anyone ....
The law isn't that specific: it's about ensuring reasonable access to the platform by third parties. It isn't yet clear whether Apple's efforts will be acceptable: they'll have to be evaluated when the full picture is available.
If the overall effect is that the modifications result in a terrible platform that's equally bad for everyone, the EU would have no grounds to object. If. however, the result is a sufficiently degraded platform for potential new entrants that Apple's gatekeeper status is not materially changed, then they would. Currently, it looks like Apple might be doing both simultaneously.
Re: Did anyone ....
The effect of this is that it is now going to be *more difficult* to deploy an app outside of the App Store than it was before.
PWAs are good enough for some use-cases, like the ones I work on. Now, instead of just sending the appropriate webmanifest with your website, you have to jump through all the hoops to provide an alternative app store, and you have to actually build the App for iOS.
Re: Did anyone ....
Unlike in the US where the 'letter of the law' tends to be the only thing that matters, European courts give much more weight to the actual intent of the law.
Turning round the question that somebody posed above, does Apple really think the EU is just going to go "Oh, OK, you sure outsmarted us there Apple. Well done and carry on"?
Re: Did anyone ....
"malicious compliance"
Can you even hear yourself?
Re: Did anyone ....
""malicious compliance"
Can you even hear yourself?"
Oh, I believe it. No question.
""We expect this change to affect a small number of users," the fruit cart wrote in an explanatory note"
Fruit cart
"Look at what you made me do"
Seems like the classic abuser line of blaming the receiving party for their behaviour. *Smashes your things* "I wouldn't have to do this if you just did what I wanted and not got these laws passed EU. Really this is your fault. I don't want to, but you leave me no choice"
Piss off Apple. May your revenue decline and profits falter.
The core truth...
...of why Apple did this is very neatly encapsulated here: "...the idea that users could install safe and secure apps that Apple can't tax, block, or control is terrifying to them"
The EU ruling forces Apple to not completely lock in users, and if it was just that, very little would happen because users don't really care that much one way or the other. But as soon as that gate in the walled garden is open, developers are given an option to provide with a web app that exact same functionality as with a native app, without having to pay Apple 30%. Again, the users wouldn't really care much if it's the same functionality and they're paying the same price. But as a developer, why would you provide a native app and give 30% to Apple* if you can provide a web app and keep all the revenue. So it's unsurprising that they're digging a moat around the open gate and filling it with piranhas.
*actually there is a reason, which is discovery in the App Store to users who might otherwise not find you. It's instructive that the companies looking to use Web Apps the most are probably those like Epic, Adobe etc that are big enough to have their own customer base who are looking for their apps, and don't need to be 'discovered' in the App Store
No problem
You can use android if you’re not satisfied with the platform.
In my opinion, I don’t want more security loopholes in the platform.
I can understand developers that wishes to have a WebApp that can be installed on every devices.
I always prefer native applications because WebApps take too much resources so it’s no way on my Mac or on my phone.
there are many companies that made a native application afterwards to make it better.
And the web is a hell of a security problem.
Yes, you really are the product
"Addressing the complex security and privacy concerns associated with web apps using alternative browser engines would require building an entirely new integration architecture that does not currently exist in iOS and was not practical to undertake given the other demands of the DMA"
All weasel words to avoid actually doing something. The only reason that integration architecture doesn't exist in iOS is because they don't want to support it so are deflecting and saying it's too hard. I suppose once you're already making a trillion dollars a year by selling apps in your walled garden, it's also just not worth the effort so fuck the consumer.