Plenty of native apps are terrible, oversized, over reaching in permissions or just plain battery drainers. Nothing stops PWAs being these.

If you're on about features? Ask Apple why they shy away from them on the web? Hard to justify imposing the 30% cut on a website/app.

Hell, Apple could have lead the charge on "web app privacy", implement the specs they've "missed" for web (notifications, background sync etc), and GATE THEM TO PWA/installed web apps, no more news sites asking to notify you when you just go to an article.

Heck, add keys to the web app manifest so as a developer I need an Apple Dev account and the holy $99 entry fee as well as my personal info in Apple's hands to make sites that do these things, so they have recourse to nuke the bad actors.

Nothing excites me more as a mobile user than having every website I use littered with push notifications and background processes that I need to dig through some Debug/Settings screen to discover.

Because web developers can absolutely be trusted to do the right thing.

almost every browser rrquires approvals. youre saying safari is write to have a shityy pwa implementation because the web isnt a walled garden

Pretty much 100% of users would prefer which ever technology solution that solves their problem for the least cost (in terms of money, or storage space on the device, or battery, or time, etc). For most apps that aren't graphically intensive, or require massive amounts of data in memory, or that require a ton of side effects when the user interacts with the UI, a PWA should do the job perfectly adequately even if it's worse than something native.

Being able to deploy a PWA that avoided the 30% cut Apple takes for all digital content would suit many users very, very well.

PWA are indeed limited, but they are particularly so because Safari drags them down.

No, it is because the idea that everything must be build using web tech is dragging them down.

It can only improve as fast as the slowest actor.