I've been asking these people for the merits of Apple's decisions for years, and all I ever get in response is "Apple knows best, I don't need these features."

That seems like a perfectly reasonable argument on the merits. What user actually needs web apps? What's the market for apps whose developers can't stomach a $99 developer fee and/or with functionality not allowable by app review?

Well shit, what user needs an app store to begin with? It was never about need, it was about what they could convince users to put up with.

Why do you think an app store isn't something people want, rather than something they put up with? What about the pre-app store world made it the one preferred by consumers in your mind?

> Why do you think an app store isn't something people want, rather than something they put up with?

Because it seems to be that way on MacOS. On Mac, the App Store is absolutely useless and exclusively something people do not want. It does not distribute the software users want, it charges them extra fees, and limits the type of app you distribute.

Judging by every single professional Mac user I've met, circumventing the App Store is a functional necessity for some. Most of them absolutely "put up with" the limitations and issues of MacOS.

> What about the pre-app store world made it the one preferred by consumers in your mind?

The freedom? The cheaper software? The stronger OS security models and lack of social-manipulation-as-a-security-feature?

If the post-App Store world is so great, people will keep living in it even when alternative stores exist. I suspect that most users will not give a rats ass about convenience if there's a 30% cheaper subscription elsewhere.

> If the post-App Store world is so great, people will keep living in it even when alternative stores exist

Bear in mind I'm replying to someone who's saying app stores aren't necessary in general:

> Well shit, what user needs an app store to begin with

In a reductive sense, they're right. Computers existed for upwards of three decades without App Stores, and we distributed software just fine without 'em.

Apple could sign software the same way they do on Mac and effectively turn the App Store into an IPA-downloading PWA.

One user saying they don't need apps outside the App Store is an anecdote. Every person you ask about this matter over years saying they don't need apps outside the App Store is data.

I hope you realize the irony that this just your personal view on what is reasonable and what is or isn't a merit. I don't see the point in bullying someone who is simply expressing an opinion - which happens to be anti-Apple - and one which makes a lot of sense to me.

Can you point out what I said that could be described as "bullying"?

I made a web app that I use which makes use of the Web Push feature for timely notifications. Why should I pay Apple 99/year to get my own notifications on my own phone?

> it's better to look positions on their merits

How do you do this when any value a "merit" could have is based in this dichotomy of vendor/user?

It's not based on that, as far as I can see. Saying "browsers are extremely complex from a security perspective and we will only allow the one we made on to our platform" is in service of making a better product.

You might say that that's not true, and browsers are easy to secure, but that would be arguing the point on its merits. Not on the tribalist lens you're seeing this situation through.

> Instead of just being tribal, it's better to look positions on their merits.

I agree. English is not my main language and maybe I should have used a different word than "side".

Above someone said that this seems to be an OS problem, which should be fixed by Apple. The person I replied to said "Or they could just not."

And that's why I asked why they were siding with Apple here. What's the benefit for users if iOS doesn't work as expected when a different rendering engine is used for a web app? How is this good for EU users? I don't get it.