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

161–170 of 667 posts

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#161

Post by stephenconnolly »

javagram wrote: post #96
gojomo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think they're "very clearly laid out", can you quote the relevant sections, and definitions, from the terms that make it so? I've been searching, and asking, and not seen them yet.

https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/193060 The terms are very clear. Apple wants to control distribution of apps, the enterprise program is only supposed to be for employees or for end users using under the direct personal supervision of an employee as part of an in office test. The conditions are clearly defined.

Ah yes, but at what point does paying someone for work make them an employee?

Given that the users of the app in question were being paid by Google, one could argue they are employed... or at least are contractors.

On the other hand, given the users did not have the rights generally associated with being an employee or a contractor... and they were not even getting minimum wage...

But at that point IANAL and courts would need to decide

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#162

Post by eganist »

gojomo wrote: post #81
_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.

If you think they're "very clearly laid out", can you quote the relevant sections, and definitions, from the terms that make it so? I've been searching, and asking, and not seen them yet.

I'll contribute to the pile.

You're looking for the "Apple Developer Enterprise Program License Agreement" — I found it in ten seconds. The only production applications allowed on the cert are internal applications ("Internal Use Applications developed for macOS can be distributed under this Agreement using an Apple Certificate or may be separately distributed.") Or applications under development (2.1 Permitted Uses and Restrictions, Program Services). Also outlined are explicit unpermitted uses and a general declaration that anything outside of 2.1 won't fly (2.6 No Other Permitted Uses, specifically "You may not use the Apple Software, Apple Certificates, or any Services provided hereunder for any purpose not expressly permitted by this Agreement,").

You'll need to sign in with your Apple ID to open this: https://developer.apple.com/services-account/download?path=/...

Hope this helps.

---

Edit: for anyone who wants to spare themselves the chain, OP is missing the distinction between vendors, contractors, and other service providers and is interpreting the presence of any contract as rendering a person as a contractor. In this case, it's likely (IANAL) that each individual user of the service would be described as a vendor selling access to their data. The data itself is not created for Google's (or Facebook's in that previous case) consumption.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-vendo...

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/248665/contracto...

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#163

Post by module0000 »

sandov wrote: post #23
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it doesn't sit well with me that Apple yields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them At the end of the day, you can compile and run anything on your machine. This is just regulating distribution. Given the specific breaches at hand by Facebook and Google, a balance seems to have been found (acceptable to most users) between freedom and security.

Can you install rogue apps (i.e. not from apple's store) without jailbreaking the device?

Not using any installation mechanism provided by Apple. If you want to crack open the phone and begin trying to pin out the storage controller: then maybe.

The installer is a piece of software made by Apple, to install things that meet certain criteria(ie signed packages). It's not that you can't technically "install" other things, but there doesn't exist a mechanism to do so.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#164

Post by zepto »

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.

It does change the point. As a user, you can run any code on your phone.

If someone won’t give you the code, but instead will only supply it via Apple’s store, that’s between you and the supplier.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#166

Post by pzh »

javagram wrote: post #96
gojomo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think they're "very clearly laid out", can you quote the relevant sections, and definitions, from the terms that make it so? I've been searching, and asking, and not seen them yet.

https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/193060 The terms are very clear. Apple wants to control distribution of apps, the enterprise program is only supposed to be for employees or for end users using under the direct personal supervision of an employee as part of an in office test. The conditions are clearly defined.

If those users were getting paid to use the internal app, can’t Google or Facebook claim that they were contractors and part of the organization?

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#167

Post by zapzupnz »

Yeah, this is pretty clear cut. Apple has rule. Facebook and Google agree to rule. Facebook and Google violate rule. Apple enforces rule.

This isn't some grey area where the details are difficult to ascertain. Everything is pretty clear; the enterprise app distribution service is most assuredly not for distributing apps that break the App Store rules to customers. This isn't difficult to understand, so I'm struggling to see where people are trying to find some sort of detail to exonerate two well-known, repeated rule breakers, violators of personal privacy, and altogether companies who think their size puts them above reproach.

I mean, when Apple makes a big screw up, everybody leaps on it, even when it's just based on unconfirmed (and sometimes fabricated, like the journalist reporting on conditions in the Foxconn factories) reports; but if it's Facebook or Google, somehow they're underdogs with clean records, deserving of the benefit of the doubt? I don't swallow it.

How about we all just pass judgement equally upon the big companies, Apple included, for their foibles? But let's also take into account when these companies have been caught red-handed before, and if the best punishment we could muster was a slap with a wet bus ticket, let's not umm and ahh about why they think they can get away with their behaviour, and not be at all surprised when finally someone takes a stand on their own territory.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#168

Post by saagarjha »

klodolph wrote: post #57
_bxg1 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm not sure I quite understand your complaint about the Mac's App Store. I want to have free reign on my workstation, but part of that is I want to be able to limit the amount of access that programs have. The big difference with the App Store, from my perspective, is that I know that the applications are sandboxed, signed, and someone out there can revoke the code signing certificate. This is basically what I want,…

Fun fact: not all apps on the App Store are sandboxed. Some older apps, that were released before sandboxing was a requirement, were "grandfathered" in.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#170

Post by reneberlin »

Popcorn-time extended. 3 of the big 5 in a dispute about "lawful behaviour" and "ethical (ab)use of tech possibilities"

Kindergarden, at it's best. What everyone is still unclear about is: how will this play out for them - and for Apple especially, of course.

We can only speculate. And order another ton of popcorn.

Post reply on HN