W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-mobile@w3.org > February 2014

Re: The state of standalone apps on iOS

From: Natasha Rooney <nrooney@gsma.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 09:22:01 +0000
To: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, "public-web-mobile@w3.org" <public-web-mobile@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CF2E2A82.8EA8%nrooney@gsma.com>
Thank-you for this Marcos!

A reminder to all! Please see the great work Marcos and the team have sone
on the Installable Web Apps topics and make some comments. Marcos is
looking to get this finished really soon, so donšt miss your chance to get
your comments across!



Natasha Rooney | Web Technologist | GSMA | nrooney@gsma.com | +44 (0) 7730
219 765 | @thisNatasha | Skype: nrooney@gsm.org

7th Floor, 5 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BF

On 21/02/2014 18:50, "Marcos Caceres" <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote:

>Hi All,
>The whole installable web app thing has been blowing up on twitter [1]
>[2] [3], so I made a few fixes and put it out for people on the web to
>The updated version is here:
>I added a "Recommendations to implementers/W3C" section. Would be great
>if, based on the data, people could add some additional recommendations I
>might have not though of.
>Kind regards,
>Marcos Caceres
>[1] https://twitter.com/marcosc/status/436522185641824256
>[2] https://twitter.com/ppk/status/436841242128031744
>[3] http://paul.kinlan.me/Add-to-homescreen-not-the-answer/
>On Thursday, February 20, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I've prepared a detailed study of installable web apps on iOS. You can
>>find the complete document here:
>> Would appreciate any feedback/review prior to wider circulation.
>> Below are the key findings from the study:
>> ##Key findings
>> The number of sites claiming to run as standalone is small but
>>significant; of the 78,155 sites we used as data, they represent 1.4% of
>>the dataset (i.e., 1097 claim to be "apple-mobile-web-app-capable").
>> Despite their claims to the contrary, what we found was that the
>>majority of web apps do not run as standalone (90%, or 324 out of 360).
>>Only a tiny fraction (10%, or 36 out of 360) are able to run as
>>standalone - and 28% of those had significant limitations (described
>>below). There is, in fact, a greater percentage (12%) of desktop sites
>>masquerading as installable web apps than there are actual standalone
>> Of those 36 apps that were true standalone web apps (i.e., has an icon,
>>is usable on mobile, can be navigated), 10 (28%) of those had issues
>>where they either left the user stranded without being able to "go back"
>>- or worst, suddenly navigated to the desktop version of the site. In
>>other cases, the application mostly worked - but then it was not
>>possible to perform some critical task in the application (e.g., a
>>purchase). In such cases, the application returned the user back into
>>Safari. Others, like nest.com (http://nest.com), make a best effort at
>>working at standalone, but throw the user back to the default web
>>browser at random points.
>> On the up-side, the majority of web apps (76%) where designed to work
>>on a mobile phone, even if only 13% of those could actually be navigated.
>> Icon usage, overall, was also fairly healthy - 56% of the web apps we
>>tested included an icon. However, we discovered that at least some web
>>apps included dummy icons from pre-purchased templates - meaning more
>>than one web app included an icon that had nothing to do with the
>>application itself and had the same icon as another site.
>> Oddly, many web apps (5%, or 19) incorrectly claim that they can run as
>>standalone - but contain a markup error in their HTML that prevents the
>>application from actually doing so! Ironically, of those, 12 out of 19
>>(63%) even go as far as to include an icon.
>> For more details, see the "other observations" section, as well as the
>>"all the questions" section.
>> --
>> Marcos Caceres

This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email or call +44 207 356 0600 and highlight the error.
Received on Saturday, 22 February 2014 09:22:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:59:03 UTC