Write code for the web

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Apple’s tightly controlled ecosystem, from Xcode and Swift to the App Store review and billing rules, is portrayed as increasingly hostile or indifferent to third‑party developers, especially those who want cross‑platform or non‑Apple stacks. Commenters contrast this with the openness and longevity of the web, arguing that many apps should be browser‑based or PWAs instead, even as they acknowledge the web’s own problems with tooling complexity, browser politics, and performance gaps. The exchange highlights a broader tension between platform lock‑in and open standards, and how these trade‑offs shape where developers invest their time and careers.

Apple’s Relationship with Developers

  • Many see Apple as fundamentally user- and hardware-focused, with developers treated as replaceable suppliers rather than partners.
  • APIs, Swift, and Xcode are viewed by some as investments in lock‑in, not generosity. The dependency chain is perceived as “dev → Apple → user,” with little leverage in the opposite direction.
  • Others argue Apple does care in aggregate by keeping the ecosystem “high quality,” but not about individual developers or edge cases.

Xcode and Native iOS/macOS Development

  • Widespread complaints: Xcode is large, slow, crash‑prone, unintuitive, hard to configure, and painful with version control and CI/CD.
  • Specific irritations: layout/storyboards, project file format, weird formatting behavior, fragile previews, unclear errors, SwiftUI compiler timeouts.
  • A minority praise Swift and Apple APIs as very pleasant, and see Xcode as “fine” or even good compared to some competitors. Opinions on Android Studio are also split.

Web vs Native Apps

  • Many argue most apps should be web apps or PWAs, especially content/CRUD apps (news, parking, library, many business apps) that age badly as native.
  • Benefits cited: cross‑platform reach, long‑term compatibility, open hosting, avoidance of app‑store review and 30% cuts.
  • Counterpoints: native better for performance, offline robustness, rich hardware access, notifications, OS‑integrated UX; web still awkward for GPU compute and complex “app‑like” UX.

PWAs, Browsers, and Platform Politics

  • Apple is widely accused of deliberately weakening PWAs on iOS (limited APIs, data deletion quirks, awkward install flows) to protect App Store revenue.
  • Google/Chrome is seen as pushing the web platform aggressively, though some warn this shifts power from Apple to Google, not to users.
  • Safari is frequently called the “new IE” or “princess,” though others note it mostly lags on non‑standard or privacy‑sensitive APIs.

App Store Fees and Gatekeeping

  • The $99/year developer fee and opaque, sometimes arbitrary review process are recurring pain points, especially for small orgs and governments.
  • Some defend the fee as a spam/junk barrier; others see it as needless taxation that blocks experimentation and raises lock‑in risk.

Web Development Experience

  • Web praised for universality and a “historic” common standard, but many dislike JS/TS complexity, build systems, framework churn, and CSS ergonomics.
  • Others report that modern web standards and tools (React, TypeScript, HTMX, LiveView, etc.) have made the experience much better than in the past.

Lock‑in, Culture, and Alternatives

  • Strong sentiment that investing deeply in Apple‑only stacks is risky: skills are less portable, and Apple can change rules unilaterally.
  • Some describe Apple as “cultish” or an “abusive relationship”; others love the integrated user experience and accept the trade‑offs.
  • Alternatives mentioned: Flutter, Qt, .NET MAUI/Avalonia/Blazor, Linux phones (Librem 5, PinePhone), Electron, and pure web stacks.