That doesn't answer my question. Apple allows any website with a corresponding active Apple Developer Program membership to send push notifications through Safari on macOS, no problem, no questions asked. This is not allowed on iOS. Why not?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bitcoin Scam App Approved by Apple Robs iPhone User of $600,000+
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The answer is because Apple chooses not to. I can't really guess why these rules are in effect.
My guess is because of battery life on a mobile device. Probably due to security as well.
It’s not hard to guess. Apple views full-featured PWAs as an existential threat to the iOS App Store business model which currently rests almost entirely on their being the sole authorized distributor of third-party iOS software.
An uninformed guess. Assuming Apple were to implement this the same way on iOS as on macOS — pretty sure it’s not a standards-compliant implementation, but I’d personally view it as a reasonable compromise — notifications would be sent over APNS, just like for native iOS and macOS apps. APNS works by maintaining one persistent connection between a push-enabled device and one of Apple’s push servers, so battery life is a non-argument; it’d work over a connection that’s likely already active.
As for security, again refer to APNS. In the developer agreement are limits on APNS usage which may be cured by limiting/revoking APNS access or other remedies. You would still have to explicitly consent to receiving notifications from a website, you'd still be able to revoke that capability from a website at any time, and Apple would still be able to revoke APNS access from any web developer found to be abusing it.
Well, there's a difference between iOS and macOS apps. Safari always runs in macOS if it is active. Not so for iOS, due to memory and power constraints. I'll give Apple the benefit of the doubt that the restrictions is more technical than financial.
It's speculation on the profit motive. There is no way of knowing if there were other considerations that Apple hasn't shared, such as security considerations.
No. Again, APNS works by maintaining one persistent connection between a push-enabled device and one of Apple’s push servers. The apps themselves don’t have to be running, and as long as you’ve enabled push notifications for any one app, your device has an active APNS connection. Whether you have push notifications enabled for one app/website or 30 apps/websites, they all go through that one persistent connection.
In case I have to illustrate this: Think of APNS as the other party in a never-ending phone call where APNS just irregularly blurts out Facebook live streams, tweets, Instagram story posts, Tinder matches, and pizza delivery discounts (and whatever else you’ve chosen to receive updates on, you get the point) while you say nothing.
Last edited:
I already addressed that. If Apple reuses on iOS the work they’ve done with APNS for web push notifications on macOS, push notifications for web apps are then no more or less “secure” than those for macOS and iOS apps because they’re all running through the same Apple-controlled push service.
You’d still have to explicitly grant permission to a website for it to be able to send push notifications, and you’d still be able to change your mind later. If an account was found to be abusing APNS, their access could be limited or revoked by Apple, just like for iOS and macOS apps, as well as websites through Safari on macOS.
They already have this working through APNS, it wouldn’t impact battery life due to how APNS works, and because it’d all run through APNS it’s no less secure. The motive is to protect the App Store business model.
I want Apple to address this question. Other than Apple addressing this question is speculation (which you are rightly allowed to do here), especially since as another posted noted, SMS is always an alternative as well as email I suppose. Maybe not the greatest of options, but they are options.
And I believe we are far afield of the thread premise.
