Website able to be installed as desktop apps

Discourse was updated recently and after that update the browser showed an Install button in the location bar that made it possible to install the website as an app. This was very similar to a feature that has existed on mobile devices for some time.

image

It was pretty cool. After install I could find that site / app in my applications, switch to it by app switching keyboard shortcut and so on. I don’t remember the name of this feature or if this is a progress web app but it’s nice.

This might be one of a few alternative solutions for some companies or individuals who want to continue to use Flash Player sites on or after 2020. You can leave FP disabled in your main browser but have a separate installed app that has it enabled.

Update: It is a progressive web app

And yet again they try to sell you HTML as an app, it’s not
at best HTML can be a cheap way to produce the UI of an app
all the rest is bullshit

all the React/Angular/etc. SPA, Progressive Web Apps, etc.
those are pure bullshit

if you don’t do server side rendering, your SPA is just dead weight

I’m wondering when people will wake up and realise that

it always the same logic when you go through that rabbit hole:
once you decide all the apps can be done with HTML, then anything else is heresy

I was very upset when people would say, “…just use HTML5” as if it was any sort of alternative to FP. It’s not. We all know that. But I like it for running a site with some desktop app like operating system benefits. Simply being able to alt tab (not browser tabs) is a nice addition.

1 Like

The best thing that could happen, would even be launching a new web browser that would accept Flash Player without restrictions. A web browser that had its desktop and mobile version. Something like that should have surfaced before the arrival of 2020… Would be a good response to other browsers that block Flash Player. :blush:

On the desktop it is possible, on mobile not possible.

1 Like

I’ve been reading a topic about it here [ AIR, HTML and SWF ], but it was kind of advanced for my level of knowledge… Anyway, I had the impression that if the Mobile Browser were compiled into the AIR plugin, it would be able to run .html pages containing .swf .
But that’s fine… If ever a desktop browser comes up that accepts swf files, I’m glad. :blush:

So for mobile, it is not a technical limitation

Firefox for iOS

Firefox for iOS is a browser from Mozilla, for the Apple iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch mobile devices. It is the first Firefox branded browser not to use the Gecko layout engine as is used in Firefox for desktop and mobile. Due to iOS security restrictions chosen by Apple (specifically the inability to set writable pages executable, which is essential for just-in-time compilation, Firefox has to use the built-in iOS WebKit-based rendering framework instead of Gecko.

and

Google Chrom iOS

Chrome is available on Apple’s mobile iOS operating system as Google Chrome for iOS. Released in the Apple App Store on June 26, 2012, it supports the iPad, and iPod touch, and requires that the device has iOS 11.0 or greater installed. In accordance with Apple’s requirements for browsers released through their App Store, this version of Chrome uses the iOS WebKit – which is Apple’s own mobile rendering engine and components, developed for their Safari browser – therefore it is restricted from using Google’s own V8 JavaScript engine.


in short any browsers for iOS can only use the iOS WebKit and so is limited to what iOS WebKit can do

Off course, iOS WebKit does not support plugins among other many other things

1 Like

Ok, I understand… :+1:
I had also read about some iOS restrictions here in this old text:
http://blogs.adobe.com/airodynamics/2012/11/09/packaging-and-loading-multiple-swfs-in-air-apps-on-ios/

Do you plan to resume your browser project at some point? …or is it finished?
[Build an Open Source Browser Based on AIR]
:slightly_smiling_face:

yeah I still plan to do it if I have time but couple of things came up

long story short, I have been contacted to develop an app with redtamarin
and so paid contract to work with redtamarin vs open source app
well… I favoured the paid contract

1 Like