Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 667 posts

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#151

Post by beerlord »

_bxg1 wrote: post #3

I feel less vengeful satisfaction from this one, but I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. I just hope it doesn't backfire. On a totally personal level, I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies.

Can someone explain how Facebook or Google hiring testers willing to expose 100% of their personal usage via an opt-in, paid program impacts consumers? Why should we 'applaud' Apple for this? Isn't it perfectly reasonable for companies like Google and Facebook to run deep user testing?

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#152

Post by zepto »

izacus wrote: post #58
_bxg1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.

Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.

Google and Facebook signed contracts and then broke the terms. That’s what makes it different.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#153

Post by [deleted] »

rootusrootus wrote: post #112
benologist wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will hopefully push Google, Facebook and others to favor web technologies over iOS, a win for open platforms.

Neither Google nor Facebook have the least amount of interest in open platforms, so I would not hold your breath.

[deleted]

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#154

Post by gojomo »

javagram wrote: post #118
gojomo wrote: post #79

Still, no story or commenter is quoting the exact terms that Facebook/Google are alleged to have violated. (There's an attempt here – https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19044643 – but without necessary definitions of key terms which would make all the difference.) Of course, Apple has immense discretion here. Even if FB/Google lawyers can make a good case that their usage was technically compliant, Apple can still…

They weren’t. See the terms at https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/193060 “solely for internal use by Your Employees or Permitted Users, or as otherwise expressly permitted in Section 2.1(f).” https://github.com/nicwise/apple-agreements/blob/master/appl... 2.1(f) Allow Your Customers to use Your Internal Use Applications on Deployment Devices, but only (i) on Your physical premises and/or on Your Permitted Entity’s phy…

Thank you for a link to a readable version of the agreement!

It looks to me like "Permitted Users" includes "contractors" like those in a compensated research panel, and thus the Facebook/Google uses are plausibly enabled under the program.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#155

Post by paavoova »

_bxg1 wrote: post #21
dombili wrote: post #4

I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?

I used to feel that way, and I used Android for years for that reason. But since switching to an iPhone, I've found that what I really want from my phone is not a totally open platform, but a tool that's simple, secure, and effective. Something I don't have to mess with, something I can trust to do its job and respect my privacy and be pleasant to interact with. They tried going that direction a bit with macOS when t…

> Workstations need to be totally user-controlled, but phones don't

And why this extreme generalization, exactly? Don't you suppose you could have privacy, security, and perhaps even simplicity and ease-of-use with a totally free and open phone that grants control to the user? You really don't explain how "a totally open platform" is mutually exclusive, nor how your own personal needs require the inverse of freedom. Further, the distinction between computer and mobile device are irrelevant given so many people depend on the later as their main computing device. They should be offered the same degree of control as someone with a computer has.

Ultimately, you cannot have privacy and security in a closed-source restricted platform, even if it's backed by good intentions. You're at the mercy of a few companies and as soon as they abandon the device, or make a mistake, you're exposed. And as a consumer, you're forced to buy into their ecosystem instead of having the choice to provide your own solutions. This is already true for the hardware, such as the black-box baseband required to connect to cellular networks.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#156

Post by wlesieutre »

gwbas1c wrote: post #115
askafriend wrote: post #43

Let’s say you’re using a Google API like Maps, and you violate terms by snapshotting sections of their maps and storing them on your severs so you can serve static maps without making API calls. They’d shut down your API access immediately Google and Facebook both knew the terms. They both knew that the Enterprise Distribution Program was for internal use only. They still put ads out in the wild to recruit regular co…

Is it really clear? Are the people they were paying technically Google and Facebook employees / contractors?

Can you pay 13 year olds in $20 gift cards and call them a contractor?

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#157

Post by rootusrootus »

grumpopotamus wrote: post #114
stevenjohns wrote: post #47

Extremely happy with my decision to get an iPhone. Events like these are what is going to keep me as a customer moving forward, too. I unplugged[0] from Google Last year - went DDG for search, went to iOS, dropped gmail for fastmail, etc. As time goes on I’m continually reaffirmed that I made the right decisions. [0] I still use some Google services, like YouTube, frequently, some of my mail still goes through Gmail,…

Is getting an iPhone the only reasonable path? I tried this briefly on Android, but various other apps started complaining that Play was not installed.

There are ways to do it without going to iPhone but they require a decent time commitment and some technical chops. For people who just expect their phone to work, switching to iOS is the simplest answer.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#158

Post by saagarjha »

the_duke wrote: post #102
outlog wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones." no - you are free to run any code on YOUR phones with the enterprise program - you are clearly not free to run any code on OTHERS phones using this program..

That doesn't change the point. As a user, I can not choose what code to run on my iPhone. The only way to run a non-official app would be if the app was open source: put it in testflight for your personal use. This is the main reason I have sworn off all Apple devices.

You can sign and install apps yourself.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#160

Post by matwood »

FakeComments wrote: post #13
dombili wrote: post #4

I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?

My model of it: It will cost $500 to ditch Apple and replace them; there’s a 10% chance I will have to switch before I’d make my next purchase anyway; and Apple has to date saved me over $50 in frustration via their control of the ecosystem. So I’m willing to ride it out and see what happens.

There is really nothing to ride out. I think it's rather refreshing that Apple followed the rules they set forth even when it was large companies breaking them. I would have more issue if Apple shutdown the lone developer, and then did nothing when FB/Google did the exact same thing.

With the above said, we can certainly discuss if Apple should use/have this ability at all. But, IMO it is a different discussion.

Post reply on HN