Live data from Hacker News

ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

techspot.com

361–370 of 392 posts

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A web app added to your home screen affects privacy much less than a native app, since it is even more sandboxed and restricted, and it even affects battery life less in some areas due to these restrictions. Native apps can schedule background tasks, among other things that would impact your battery life and privacy. So... disagree entirely. Please provide concrete examples of how a native app is less capable of inva…

> A web app added to your home screen affects privacy much less than a native app Yeah, that’s the perfect web app, and we already have these in iPhone. I added HN home page as a “web app” on my Home Screen, works perfectly. Another “web app” I use this way is a Grafana dashboard, and it even hides web browser GUI, so I’d say it looks and feel “native” enough, and very useful for quickly reviewing charts. What I woul…

> Yeah, that’s the perfect web app, and we already have these in iPhone.

> [...]

> What I wouldn’t like for battery and privacy is if a web app could have _background_ activity — sending data to its servers, having access to mic/camera/sensors, running JavaScript spaghetti non-stop when I am not having the thing in the foreground.

This doesn’t make any sense. It’s just fear mongering at this point. It’s not “the perfect web app” that doesn’t do these things. Apple rigidly enforces privacy on web apps.

First, Apple allows you to control which sensors a web app has access to exactly the same as any app. They don’t just get to steal camera access for fun. This is the same privacy-first approach that applies to native apps.

Second, Apple doesn’t allow these web apps to run in the background period. They run when you have them open, and that’s it.

If Apple allowed PWAs to run in the background, you would certainly be given options to control that behavior. The way Apple does things, any background behaviors would likely be severely restricted in how much CPU time they get to avoid impacting battery life. But for now, the impact is zero, unlike native apps.

> native apps are reviewed by an authority I trust, upon every app update

It has been shown repeatedly over the years that native apps will often get App Store guideline violations past review by simply feature flagging such unapproved behaviors until after review. Apple seemingly can’t catch every example of this, especially among smaller apps, as they simply don’t have the resources.

Safari is built around a model of extreme distrust, since you’re browsing websites that haven’t ever been reviewed, and PWAs are isolated to another level. Native apps are built on a trust model that is slowly being reclaimed for minimal trust, which just means they’re slowly catching up to PWAs. Safari isn’t leaning on some human app review process to determine how trustworthy code is.

PWAs are more private than native apps. That’s just the reality of it, but Apple has nothing to gain financially from emphasizing that to their customers.

> native apps are also mostly native code, so they are easier on the battery without sacrificing responsiveness.

Swift and Objective C are surprisingly slow languages in most benchmarks, and mainstream JavaScript interpreters are mind-blowingly good. I disagree with your point here, this is really just a coin toss. Developers can write bad code for either platform, period, and a JIT language like JavaScript can often figure out which code is performing poorly as it is running and optimize it into better code. If people were commonly writing their iOS apps in Rust, I would probably find this to be a more compelling point.

In summary, I don’t think you provided any concrete examples of things that currently make PWAs worse than native apps. You’re just afraid of how bad things could be if Apple decided to stop caring and remove privacy and behavioral restrictions from web apps entirely, which is something they have shown no interest in doing.

No one is asking for web apps to just run amok. Apple should give the user the option to let web apps added to the Home Screen send notifications, exactly the same as any native app. I think it would be great if Apple could devise a limited background permission that PWAs could request, instead of zero background ability. Native apps have lots of legitimate excuses to run in the background far more than you might expect, and it annoys me how even turning off Background App Refresh doesn’t stop native apps from running in the background. Native apps that choose to violate App Store guidelines can run without limit in the background, and you’re expecting Apple to find and discover every violation by hand.

Also, HN isn’t a PWA. It’s just a Safari bookmark on the home screen, if you add it there. I don’t know if Grafana offers a proper PWA experience or not. Twitter offers a real PWA, as an example.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#363

Guessing this is a hugely unpopular opinion here: A mafia engages in racketeering/extortion. They take a game that’s fair, and make it unfair. Instead of creating value, they steal it. Without the mafia, people would retain more value for themselves. Apple, on the other hand, created and maintains an enormous platform. Without Apple, the App Store would not exist. The rules are posted to a webpage and are applied mor…

> Concretely about this post: it seems really naive! Proton Mail is not just an app. It's going to be up to the courts to re-affirm that a private party cannot force another party to give them profits of an unrelated product. These kinds of "deals" are partially what got the Teamsters in trouble and are characteristic of the criminal mobs (which included the mafia). "I heard you have a second job selling stocks, be a…

Apple is forcing something? What?

Apple is giving Proton Mail the opportunity to come on to their platform and make more revenue. They are not forcing them on to their platform. If Apple didn’t exist, PM would simply not even have this opportunity. Mobs come into your business and demand revenue. Here proton mail is coming into Apple’s business and demanding revenue. Who’s the mob here?

And yeah, word choice matters if you want to be credible and taken seriously. I called the tone of this post naive because “stumbled into some plans” all innocent-like is comically naive from a large company that openly sells plans, wants access to a third party market place, and acts like they’re entitled to that marketplace for free. Instead of projecting competence and offering a compelling legal argument, the post plays dumb, which is sad when coming from a company that sells global security. You’re a company selling me encrypted messaging and you’re confused by Apple’s highly readable store rules?

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#364
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Side-loaded stores can't auto-update apps. You have to confirm each app every time. It's unacceptable UX for a typical user.

both owning a phone and having worked on large scale apps, users couldn't get an eff about updating apps and are in fact annoyed by it.

They’re more annoyed by persisting bugs and apps that stop working altogether though.

Autoupdating is the way to go for most users IMO.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walmart has 100% market share of distribution inside Walmart stores, alert the DoJ.

Apple is a country where only Wal-Mart can exist. Nice try.

That is a compelling analogy but I don’t think it holds because a country you can’t leave. You have to live in a country. Apple is an opt-in thing you choose for yourself and your next purchase can always be an Android.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without Apple, instead of creating an app you would have to create an app and the platform and distribution mechanism etc. And? As Brent Simmons of NetNewsWire et al observed: > We started selling over the web in the mid ’90s. * https://www.forbes.com/sites/robpegoraro/2020/07/29/what-tim... He says they'd give up 5% to a payment processor, not 30%. John Gruber: > To omit the fact that there was — dating back to th…

How old are you? Do you remember first hand how it was? The market for apps on phones was a disaster before the app store. Both for users and producers. 30% was absurdly low compared to other options (again - on mobile, not web).

> The market for apps on phones was a disaster before the app store. Both for users and producers.

Because of the fragmentation of the phone market, specifically with-in even a single manufacturer's sphere.

There was so much variation in screen size, CPU power, memory, keyboard layout even for (say) Nokia's own line of products that Nokia's own app store had to ask "which phone do you have?". It was a non-uniform mess because the phones available pre-iPhone were a a non-uniform mess.

Apple's iOS App Store was able to have a simple design because the iPhone(s) available had a simple design, and developers could write to a known quantity. When Apple changed screen size/resolution/density they ensured that scaling from older non-updated apps occurred in a reasonable manner.

To a certain extent this is still true with Android, as third-party manufacturers have spotty updates once hardware is released. Google used to have a public dashboard with the market share of each version, but now you have to go into the Android Studio to look at the minimum SDK cumulative market share:

* https://www.xda-developers.com/android-version-distribution-...

Their current dashboard has some data on screen capabilities, OpenGL, and Vulkan:

* https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards

Meanwhile with iOS if you target iOS 12 you'll get 94% of that market:

* https://developer.apple.com/support/app-store/

If you need to worry about hardware capabilities, iOS 14 supports the iPhone 6S (released 2015) so that can be used a minimum (at least for 'low-intensity' stuff, i.e., not-games).

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people still don't realize government and IRS are the mafia, believe it or not.

While it's true that historically law enforcement and tax collection was essentially the mafia, the difference here is that the IRS is controlled by a democratic organization.

You might like to watch this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ngpsJKQR_ZE

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#368
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the EU consumer protection law mandate this. You have to be able to cancel in all the same ways that you can sign up. The most common way to pay subscriptions is with SEPA direct debit, and banks have to let you revoke those authorizations even retro-actively for 90 days.

SEPA direct debit? First time I hear that anyone is using this for subscriptions, aren't you from Germany? :-) SEPA direct debit is also used here (Slovakia) but usually to pay for internet/phone/electricity/ and other bills, you basically give them a mandate to draw up to a certain amount and you can revoke it anytime. Debit (or less common credit) cards are I think pretty common for subscriptions but I haven't hear…

Netherlands. Internet/phone etc are also subscriptions, as least in Dutch the word for a Netflix and a phone subscription is the same.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#369
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the EU consumer protection law mandate this. You have to be able to cancel in all the same ways that you can sign up. The most common way to pay subscriptions is with SEPA direct debit, and banks have to let you revoke those authorizations even retro-actively for 90 days.

I don’t think stopping automatic payments automatically cancels the subscription. It just stops the money flow, but keeps you liable for the payments. It means the company has to make an effort to get money flowing again, though. Many will know that’s not worth it and stop the service instead. (Corrections welcome)

That's correct. However, it's useful for situations where you tried to unsubscribe, and have proof, and the company is still charging.

Re: ProtonMail CEO calls Apple's forced in-app purchases 'Mafia extortion'

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany is very specific in many of these things and the rest of EU is different :-).

Right, but that contradicts the parent assertion that it's outright illegal. FWIW I'm not sure I buy that - there are way too many services and companies, large and small, that don't have this symmetry of subscription.

It's a recent EU directive (2017 I think) and might not be implemented in every national law yet, I don't know. A lot of companies haven't caught up yet and enforcement might vary.
Post reply on HN