Yes it is. Because you have cherry-picked a single word out of my whole argument to make your point. I dedicated an entire paragraph describing the undesired consequences of going the PWA route and you refused to acknowledge it, claiming it's only the "UX" people are taking issues with.
Not including your reason in my question does not make it a false dichotomy. I never stated that UI conventions were the _only_ reason to dislike PWAs, it was simply the only reason the commenter implied.
If _you_ think promoting walled gardens and Apple's monopolistic power is less of a problem than expanding browsers' scope of functionality, I disagree, but that's not what I came here to argue about, that doesn't have anything to do with my original comment that you have an issue with.
Neither the commenter I responded to nor Apple are simply "disliking" PWAs. Apple is not allowing PWAs to bolster their monopolistic moat, and the commenter is supporting Apple's decision to not allow _other people_ to build & use PWAs on iOS, seemingly just because they personally prefer native UX. Both of those are far beyond just "disliking".
This might seem like mere semantics about what "disliking" is, but while simply having personal preferences is fine, taking _actions_ that affect _other people_ or publicly expressing support for such actions necessarily comes with some moral responsibility for those actions I think. Perhaps some puny PWAs and their market effects aren't important enough for people to consider that, but the principle is all the same I would think.