On iOS there are no web browsers other than Safari, per the app store rules. "Chrome" / "Firefox" / etc on iOS are just basically skins on top of Webkit.
This is why you don't get any of the features / extensions / etc of Chrome or Firefox on iOS.
Apple does this so that the mobile web can never replace apps that they have a monopoly on and get a % from. If you could just visit netflix.com and have it install a Netflix SPA that worked as well as the native app, why would you ever install the native app?
Edit after reading replies - lol, that programming of Apple users to believe "we need an app for every possible site".
>Apple does this so that the mobile web can never replace apps that they have a monopoly on and get a % from
Or you know, because they disallow dynamic code execution of arbitrary downloaded code in apps, and JIT JS compilers do just that.
>If you could just visit netflix.com and have it install a Netflix SPA that worked as well as the native app, why would you ever install the native app?
It's like asking "why would you ever use a native app". Because it's faster, native, and much more convenient?
Take the best desktop browser engine, e.g. Chrome, and put it inside a mobile browser app. Still, I (and most I guess) wouldn't use it to watch Netflix over individual apps.
I can't speak to the mobile/desktop distinction, but comparing "watching Netflix in Firefox on my desktop" with "watching Netflix on my LG WebOS TV", there's barely any difference. If anything, the browser version wins because of the superior input devices (kbd, mouse) attached to it compared with the TV. This suggests to me that there would be little difference when comparing mobile/desktop or app/browser, other than the netflix logo being the point of entry (and if you could run the SPA literally like an app, no difference at all).
>Still, I (and most I guess) wouldn't use it to watch Netflix over individual apps.
If the experience is so much better why are Apple scared to let other browsers into the app store?
Phones are general purpose computers for the majority of the world's population, exercising such authoritarian grip over what a user can do with the device is very depressing to see being defended.
>If the experience is so much better why are Apple scared to let other browsers into the app store?
Well, the weasel word "scared" kind of begs the question.
Who said it's "scared"?
Apple spearheaded the modern browser with Safari. Chrome wasn't even a thing then (it forked off of Apple's work on Safari/Webkit later, just like v8 came after Apple's own JSC JIT work).
As for Mobile Safari, it took several years for Android browsers to come close: Android Browser in particular was a piece of crap, slower, and lacking more features, than Mobile Safari. Was Google also "scared" of web apps?
Also note that, when Apple suggested to developers they make their own web apps in lack of a native SDK, most dissed those and wanted, nay, demanded a native SDK.
And Mobile Safari is not exactly some bad browser holding those apps back. You can watch Netflix on mobile safari, on the web, if you so want. Why would you though?
And here's the 1000 pound argument: do you see many people watching Netflix on Android Chrome, as opposed to using the Android Netflix app?
Didn't think so.
Why would they do it on the iPhone then, if Chrome was available in the App Store?
>Phones are general purpose computers for the majority of the world's population
>Apple spearheaded the modern browser with Safari...
>As for Mobile Safari, it took several years for Android browsers to come close...
>suggested to developers they make their own web apps in lack of a native SDK, most dissed those...
>Safari is not exactly some bad browser holding those apps back...
>do you see many people watching Netflix on Android Chrome...
Absolutely none of these points are arguments against having the option to have an alternative browser rendering engine. Not sure why you think they are.
>Absolutely none of these points are arguments against having the option to have an alternative browser rendering engine. Not sure why you think they are.
Not sure why you think they were intended to be.
Those weren't "arguments against having the option to have an alternative browser rendering engine".
Those were arguments about "Apple not having an alternative rendering engine" is not about sabotaging some imaginary web app revolution, just about Safari having its own timeline and priorities.
Regarding that, not how there's no such web-over-native-app trend in Android either, where Chrome IS available. Most still prefer native apps.
If you think, you could also think them as "arguments not against, but as to why it's no big deal to not have an alternative browser rendering engine".
I don't think this conversation is going anywhere to be honest. Maybe I misinterpreted your point.
My central point was I see no reason for Apple to disallow altnernative browsers (not just shells around webkit) other than to gatekeep. Your points about safari being better or users not using a PWA for netflix don't seem to relate to this I don't think. I think Apple is only concerned about staying in control with regards to what users can install on their devices. I don't think they want other browsers to be genuine alternatives to iOS safari so they've essentially neutered the competition.
I also think you flippantly dismissed that a very large portion of the world is mobile first (not just the third world anymore) and this to me makes having the choice even more important.
Mobile Safari does hold the Web back. Examples are easy to find:
Safari doesn't support the standard unprefixed fullscreen API, while Firefox and Chrome have for years, so Web developers have to write a bunch of compatibility crap or accept fullscreen not working on iOS.
Firefox and Chrome have supported WebGL2 for years, iOS Safari still doesn't.
> Safari doesn't support the standard unprefixed fullscreen API, while Firefox and Chrome have for years, so Web developers have to write a bunch of compatibility crap or accept fullscreen not working on iOS.
Having used an iPad for general web browsing for a while, the worst change they made was allowing web apps write their own fullscreen interfaces. I can't think of any video website where they've done a better job at basic video player controls than what the OS does natively.
Fullscreen isn't just for video though. It's very commonly used for games. I also wrote fullscreen support for "DOM videos" (e.g. https://pernos.co/about/overview/) using the fullscreen API. The latter doesn't even support Webkit because the compatibility work was just too hard.
> Or you know, because they disallow dynamic code execution of arbitrary downloaded code in apps, and JIT JS compilers do just that.
No, they explicitly disallow other implementations, whether they JIT or not. Since Apple's WebKit is missing so many features, this has the effect that GP noted.
"2.5.6 Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript."
>No, they explicitly disallow other implementations, whether they JIT or not. Since Apple's WebKit is missing so many features, this has the effect that GP noted.
So, do you know people who prefer web apps over native apps for their Android, where "other browsers" are not disallowed, and Chrome is available?
I'm sure you'll find some. I doubt you'll find any significant percentage though.
I, personally, never do, and haven't seen any doing it in the wild, except for things there's not an app for...
> Or you know, because they disallow dynamic code execution of arbitrary downloaded code in apps, and JIT JS compilers do just that.
What would you call a webview? Is it that much different if it is webkit or gecko or blink doing it? If I used a webview to run js-linux, xfce and firefox should that be disallowed too?
Off the top of my head, mobile Safari can't handle push notifications for new content or downloading videos to watch later. I'm sure there are other problems with it as well.
Being able to download/cache content reliably would be welcome, on all browsers. However, I haven't seen a good example of using PWAs' storage APIs to cache video content, Safari or otherwise.
Lack of push notifications in iOS Safari is a giant shortcoming. It's especially baffling since it exists for Safari on macOS. That being said, I can't say that Netflix's push notifications (in the app) are particularly useful (to me). They always spam me with newly released yet irrelevant in-house produced titles.
Exactly. As we can see, everybody that uses Android watches Netflix on the web, and the Netflix Android app is left to languish with a measly 1B+ installs. There's clearly no reason why a long-running, DRM-heavy video streaming service like Netflix would want an actual native app on mobile devices.
See 2.5.6 here - https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
This is why you don't get any of the features / extensions / etc of Chrome or Firefox on iOS.
Apple does this so that the mobile web can never replace apps that they have a monopoly on and get a % from. If you could just visit netflix.com and have it install a Netflix SPA that worked as well as the native app, why would you ever install the native app?
Edit after reading replies - lol, that programming of Apple users to believe "we need an app for every possible site".