Can you give provide a source for your iOS 17.4 "parity" claim? Apple's actual statement: "complex security and privacy concerns associated with web apps using alternative browser engines would require building an entirely new integration architecture that does not currently exist in iOS and was not practical to undertake." That's what they said. Security architecture requiring new engineering work, not parity between browsers.

Second, "the EU backed off." can you provide a source for that? Apple reversed their decision after massive backlash from developers and users. If you're claiming the EU changed their position instead, provide a source from which you derived that.

Third, here's crucial context you're ignoring, Apple just threatened to stop shipping products to the EU entirely rather than comply with the Digital Markets Act. (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/sep/25/apple-cal...) They've called for the DMA to be repealed. They've deliberately delayed features and explicitly stated "EU users' experience on Apple products will fall further behind." Those are Apple's own words.

Notice the pattern? iOS 17.4: remove PWAs, cite security concerns, reverse under pressure. Now Apple threatens to withdraw products entirely, cite security concerns, fight DMA in courts, hold an entire market hostage. This is the same company you're arguing has no conflict of interest and is just making neutral technical decisions about web standards?

Let me ask you directly, does Apple have a conflict of interest here? They run a $20+ billion App Store business that takes 15-30% of digital transactions. PWAs would let developers bypass that entirely. Do you acknowledge this financial incentive structure exists, or are you seriously claiming Apple has no motivation to limit PWA capabilities?

Because your entire argument requires believing that Apple's decade of PWA underinvestment, the iOS 17.4 removal and reversal, the current threats to leave the EU market, the active legal fights against the DMA, and the systematic feature gaps compared to Android are all just coincidental technical decisions completely unrelated to App Store revenue. That's not remotely plausible.

On push notifications, your logic contradicts itself. You're saying users don't want them and Apple chose not to implement them for a decade, but then Apple implemented them anyway in 2023. Why? If there's no demand, why spend engineering resources on it? And why did macOS Safari get them in 2013 if user demand is so low? The 10-year gap between platforms using the same technology stack still has zero explanation from you.

Your Android argument actually proves our point, not yours. PWAs need iOS support to be economically viable for developers. Without iPhone users being reachable, the entire cross-platform proposition fails. Developers can't justify PWA investment if they can't access the iOS market. Saying "PWAs fail on Android" when iOS support is systematically hobbled just demonstrates exactly what we're arguing: Apple's gatekeeping shapes the entire ecosystem.

And your claim: "PWAs failing causes Apple not to care about them." That's pure gaslighting through reversed causality. Apple's systematic underinvestment, active obstruction (iOS 17.4), and decade of feature gaps cause PWAs to struggle on their platform. Then you point to that struggle as justification for Apple's behavior. That's circular reasoning designed to absolve Apple of responsibility for the situation they created.

You've shifted explanations three times in this thread. First it was Google doing embrace-and-extend. When that didn't explain Apple-specific behavior, you pivoted to "parity requirements". Then "user preferences" (with no supporting data). Now Android market dynamics (which proves our point about gatekeepers). Every time evidence contradicts your previous explanation, you invent a new one. That's not reasoned argument, that's motivated reasoning to protect a predetermined conclusion.

So I'm asking again, directly, do you acknowledge that Apple's App Store business creates a financial conflict of interest regarding PWA development? Yes or no? Because everything you've written requires us to ignore the obvious incentive structure and believe Apple is just making innocuous technical choices while coincidentally fighting regulations, threatening to leave markets, and maintaining decade-long feature gaps that happen to protect their most profitable business.