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

Apple Sign In

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 544 posts

Re: Apple Sign In

#321

Post by dfabulich »

untog wrote: post #32
dyarosla wrote: post #19

Can’t services just disallow/block this address? Fun thing is, Apple themselves block name+addon@gmail.com addresses when using their dev console. You can bet that some companies will disallow Apple’s signature private passwords similarly if they can, in the name of ‘security’ or what have you. Or am I being too cynical? Feel free to CMV. EDIT: best response addressing this seems to be ‘The addresses are only generat…

Presumably such services won't implement Sign In With Apple in the first place. People will accept it because they want the sheer quantity of users Apple provides. The useful thing about Apple is that they can force people to do things they don't particularly want to do, like accept anonymous e-mail addresses or stop using Flash. (unfortunately this is also the bad thing about Apple)

"[Sign In with Apple] will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

Re: Apple Sign In

#322

Post by owenwil »

karmelapple wrote: post #298
Angostura wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually - does it lock you in, in a more literal way. If I sign up for a service using Apple Sign In, is then possible to sign into my account from a Windows etc machine subsequently?

There appears to be a web API for this, which would be cross compatible. If you have used Apple's service - which is completely opt-in - you could always go into an account and change the email you associated with it if they let you do that. And if you don't, this would be in the ballpark of switching email providers - yup, you'll need to change some accounts, because you've decided to no longer pay for the service f…

I don't think that really means what you think it means. It's very similar to the way "Apple Pay has a Web API"—websites may implement it for authentication BUT it won't allow users on a Linux/Windows machine to Pay, either. This is the same thing. You'll need to use Safari on a Mac, or it won't appear.

Re: Apple Sign In

#323

Post by owenwil »

threeseed wrote: post #287
peeters wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is some of the information available now is that historically, companies that respect your privacy today might not tomorrow. And might only be respecting your privacy to get a monopoly on your data so they can exploit it later.

Difference is you can visibly see how Apple makes money. It's exclusively from premium hardware and services. And not from advertising or monetising your data.

And you can visibly see that quickly disappearing. How are people not able to see past the now like this?

Re: Apple Sign In

#324

Post by rconti »

pluffycat wrote: post #297
noelsusman wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're close to parity with a giant exception that it's not available to the overwhelming majority of Facebook users.

Fb and G screwed themselves by: forcing users to submit real cell phone numbers (no forwarding numbers allowed) and real names. I’m laughing all the way to the apple oauth signup. So tired of G and Fb abusing users

From a privacy standpoint, yes, but from a Signal:Noise ratio, this is what made Fb usable for so long.

Re: Apple Sign In

#325

Post by Permagate »

taytus wrote: post #301
jacquesm wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As if everybody uses Apple.

what is the need to have such a knee jerk reply? Seriously, why would you say something like that? My comment meant: "Bye bye " for me. As in: I'm not using it anymore. I don't get you man.

I'm not the commenter. But taken at face value, your comment could be either bye bye mailinator.com (I'm not using you anymore) or bye bye mailinator.com (no one is going to use you anymore). Fwiw, I thought you meant the latter until I read your reply.

Re: Apple Sign In

#326

Post by nihonde »

jiveturkey wrote: post #314
polutropos wrote: post #308

According to the App Store review guidelines update posted today, Sign In with Apple will be required for any iOS app that implements a single-sign in button. "Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

that smells like an anti-competitive behavior. obviously apple has considered this and is forging on anyway. good for them.

Competition is not anti-competitive.

Excluding other third party sign on options would be problematic if Apple were abusing a dominant position among smartphone makers, which is not the case by any objective measure.

Re: Apple Sign In

#327

Post by summerlight »

jiveturkey wrote: post #314
polutropos wrote: post #308

According to the App Store review guidelines update posted today, Sign In with Apple will be required for any iOS app that implements a single-sign in button. "Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

that smells like an anti-competitive behavior. obviously apple has considered this and is forging on anyway. good for them.

Probably Apple is hoping the entire Apple ecosystem not to be defined as "a market" in terms of antitrust laws. I am not sure if the Justice Department will agree with it though; we'll see.

If it's defined as a market, then Apple will be surely in trouble but enforcing Apple ID alone doesn't make much differences from the current situation as it always has been doing similar things for web browsers, music apps, app store itself etc. So it's pretty natural to enforce this policy for Apple; no additional risks but only benefits.

Re: Apple Sign In

#328

Post by dfabulich »

polutropos wrote: post #308

According to the App Store review guidelines update posted today, Sign In with Apple will be required for any iOS app that implements a single-sign in button. "Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

Therefore, anyone offering Facebook/Google login will also have to accept Apple's anonymized forwarded email addresses, like fc452bd5ea@privaterelay.appleid.com.

Re: Apple Sign In

#329

Post by jdminhbg »

jdminhbg wrote: post #47
lghh wrote: post #35

What is forcing the sites that I'd want to use a fake email address with to use this? It wouldn't be in their interest to. They will just stick with their current SSO setup of Google/Facebook/whatever and never touch this, if they have SSO at all. I LOVE LOVE LOVE the idea, I just don't know if it will be useful and successful.

Nothing is forcing them to, and lots probably won't. The carrot is the much lower friction for sign up for users. It's similar to Apple Pay, where you don't get credit card info, but you do get a much easier user flow that will get you more signups.

Update to the above, since it's too late to edit: It looks like Apple is in fact forcing you to support this sign in method, if you also support Google/FB/etc.: https://9to5mac.com/2019/06/03/sign-in-with-apple-requiremen...

Re: Apple Sign In

#330

Post by haswell »

polutropos wrote: post #308

According to the App Store review guidelines update posted today, Sign In with Apple will be required for any iOS app that implements a single-sign in button. "Sign In with Apple will be available for beta testing this summer. It will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

I'm really curious to see if this impacts enterprise apps that are configured by an administrator to use an internal SSO provider, or if this only applies to apps that allow users to sign up.

For example, Slack can be (and is often) configured to use Okta or some other SSO provider. Does the Slack app have to implement some kind of support for Apple Sign In when such use cases are involved?

Post reply on HN