Apple has been promoting some of the apps meant for its spatial computing headset extensively in the days leading up to the Vision Pro’s release. Download Disney Plus to enjoy Tatooine movies! On your face, Slack, Fantastical, and Microsoft Office! You can FaceTime as a floating hologram with your friends! However, it’s becoming more and more obvious that one app—Safari—will be largely responsible for the Vision Pro’s early success and the answer to the issue of what this headset is truly used for.
You’re correct, friends. Web browsers have returned. And if Apple hopes its $3,500-face computer to be a success, it needs them more than ever. At least initially, the open web is Apple’s best opportunity to turn its headset into a success. However, embracing the web will mean jeopardizing the very things that have made Apple so wealthy and powerful in the mobile era. Since it appears that developers are taking their time creating new apps for Apple’s new platform, at least thus far.
In the past, Apple has excelled in incentivizing developers to create apps that stay up with its latest releases. Within a few weeks after it introduces enhancements for iPhones and iPads, a sizable portion of the App Store will support those features. However, it seems that developers are moving slowly with Vision Pro development thus far. There are many compelling reasons to select from, albeit the specific explanations differ depending on the App Store. The first is that it’s a brand-new platform with innovative user interface concepts and usability issues on a very pricey gadget that very few people will be able to use for some time. It’s true that you can essentially migrate your iPad software to the Vision Pro by checking a box, but it might not satisfy everyone.
The larger issue is the growing discord between Apple and its developers. Netflix, Spotify, YouTube, and other well-known businesses have said that they will not be developing apps for the Vision Pro and its VisionOS platform. These same businesses have also publicly criticized Apple for the way the App Store is managed. For years, Spotify has been critical of Apple’s thirty percent take from in-app purchases. Years ago, Netflix and Apple struck a sweetheart agreement whereby Netflix would split only 15 percent of revenue. However, Netflix has long since stopped allowing users to subscribe to Netflix via an iOS device and has refused to take part in the discovery aspect of the Apple TV app. A few years back, YouTube banned in-app purchases and even terminated subscriptions that users had bought through the App Store to avoid paying Apple’s commission.
Since Apple was forced to permit developers to link out to other locations where customers can pay for apps, you would assume that the recent resolution of the Apple vs. Epic lawsuit would have improved matters. However, Apple amended its conditions to state that developers still owe Apple a commission even in the event that a user clicks the link and subscribes online. Granted, it’s just 27% as opposed to 30%, but nobody’s going to be persuaded by that. The message was very clear: Apple will receive a portion of any product sold through the App Store.
What happens, then, if you can no longer access Apple users through the App Store? With the Vision Pro leading the pack, all this corporate infighting has the power to fundamentally alter how we use our gadgets. It’s not like you can’t use Spotify on the headset; you’ll just have to visit Spotify.com in instead of tapping an app icon. The same goes for any other web app that chooses not to develop a native Vision Pro version, such as Netflix and YouTube. Additionally, a browser is required for gamers, regardless of whether they want to play Fortnite or use Xbox Game Pass. We’ve all switched from opening webpages to tapping app icons over the previous ten or so years, but it looks like the days of the URL are returning.
This is a huge victory for the internet’s future if you think that the open web is beneficial and that developers should focus more on their online apps rather than their native ones. (Disclosure: I think all of these things are true.) The issue is that it is occurring after mobile platforms have consistently ignored and degraded users’ browsing experiences for almost 20 years. Although online apps may be accessed through home screen bookmarks, which are essentially shortcuts to them, they lack certain built-in functionality of your phone, such as cross-app collaboration and offline modes. Even now, after all this time, using browser extensions on mobile Chrome or Safari is still difficult. Additionally, Apple makes it incredibly difficult even to maintain your online login credentials across multiple apps. It’s evident that mobile platforms treat browsers more like webpage viewers than app platforms.
However, there are some causes for optimism: It appears Apple is aware of Safari’s existence and is prepared to grant it access to some native functionality, as evidenced by the recent addition of multiple profiles, support for external webcams on the iPad, and a few other features. For years, it seemed as though Apple would gladly give up on Safari completely if given the chance; after all, it maintains strict control over every aspect of its platforms, whereas the internet is a completely unpredictable space. However, it seems like the business is still committed to making Safari function. (It’s also likely that the antitrust pressure centered on Safari is contributing to the progress.)
Some platform-specific features of Safari for VisionOS include the ability to open many windows simultaneously and move them around in a virtual space. Recently, a video that was leaked revealed someone interacting with a 3D object on a website. During last year’s WWDC, Apple engineers revealed that they had totally revamped the tab overview for visionOS and made some adjustments to ensure that the browser functions with both touch and the visionOS’s essential double-pinching and eye-tracking features. As people do bizarre things with their headsets, Apple has been alerting developers to make sure their apps are ready for a wide range of different screen sizes and layouts. Additionally, the company said that it will support WebXR, a browser-based virtual reality protocol with some incredibly immersive applications.
For a few years, there have also been rumors that Apple will no longer restrict developers to use WebKit, allowing other browsers to be developed using alternative rendering engines. You may be able to use full-featured versions of Chrome or Firefox on your Apple devices—possibly even the Vision Pro—if and when that occurs. This modification, in addition to the growing focus on progressive web apps (PWAs), which are cross-platform web apps that Windows, Mac, and Android are beginning to support more actively, might virtually instantly make the browser on your headgear far more potent. Many people may not even notice the difference between opening the Spotify app and visiting Spotify.com if they have a strong browser and robust PWAs. The web as a whole wins with that.
From the outset, the Vision Pro will be helpful and powerful due to its robust and tightly integrated desktop-class browser. Apple ought to support alternative desktop-class browsers, embrace Safari, and handle Vision Pro like the powerful user platform that it is. However, not enough of Safari has been shown to the public yet for anyone to determine whether VisionOS is all of those things, and I’m not sure Apple wants it to be. For Apple, the underlying question is this: is it more crucial to launch the Vision Pro successfully or maintain complete control over the App Store at all costs? I’m not convinced Apple can have it both ways as it attempts to build a platform shift in response to computers.
