Simple. Money.
Let's wind the clock back to 2007. Apple unveils the iPhone and tells the world "if you want to make apps, build them on the web."
But developers complained. "We want native apps!" came the cry. And for several good reasons. Web apps were limited and the first iPhone had a lagging data protocol making often painfully slow. We all saw that and so the chorus continued- "native apps for iOS!"
So Apple caved and by 2008 we got the App Store. But Apple decided that for their trouble in building and running that platform they wanted 30%. A fair deal in my book and while a few might have squeaked at the time most were happy to give up 30% to join the digital gold rush that ensued. And for the next few years everyone seemed happy.
But now, 8 years on, the App Store has become more competitive and that 30% cut has become- in many devs eyes- an unfair tax on their shrinking revenues.
Add to that the fact that Android development is a shit show and many developers have started looking back to the web as a way to develop once and reach everyone. So they began doing what Apple had suggested they do 8 years ago- they started making web apps work better. More features, more capable, faster etc. Their goal is to eliminate the multi-platform support issues as well as bypass the App Store cut by making web apps that can satisfy users just as well as native apps; while at the same time allowing for more and easier monetization strategies. Makes sense.
But a funny thing happened on the way to a "more capable web." Apple decided to spend their resources not on better mobile web but on better native app support. More APIs. More platforms for native apps (watchOS anyone?). Why? Because it's working. They're making money and maintaining more control. It's better for Apple and it's better (or at least no worse) for their customers. From Apple's perspective it's working great.
So all these developers complaining about mobile Safari's limitations or the lack of other browsers ability to add these features sound to me a lot like sour grapes.
The "Safari is the new IE" argument is total bunk. Apple has one version of Safari always being pushed to update. IE was and still is a fragmented mess. Safari is built on WebKit, an open source framework. IE was notorious for forcing developers to update for all sorts of custom junk. The fact that my (and many other companies) keep old versions of it running side by side with new ones just to interact with some sites show what a mess it was. And worse- IE was the juggernaut that everyone HAD to deal with. Not supporting Safari (optimally) isn't keeping anyone from succeeding on the web. Hell, Safari isn't even available on a majority of web capable devices (by market share). So what's driving this gripe?
Money. The people spending money use Apple products and developers want Apple to make that lucrative market available to them in the easiest way possible (for the developers that is).
That ship has sailed. Apple worked hard to build a lucrative platform and they did it by giving users the best, most secure experience they can. I have no doubt Apple will continue to support advances in web tech. But they're not going to do it with a priority over or at the expense of their users.
Expecting anything less is just sour grapes.
No comments:
Post a Comment