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

iPad Camera Multitasking

blog.thinktapwork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 160 posts

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#51

Post by mrtksn »

This doesn't bother me at all. Wouldn't it mean that if you talk to Apple about something you need they might actually give it to you?

I suspect that people imagine Zoom getting a privilege due to their inartistic value but I don't think that this is the case. I think that it's just a business and there's no reason why you can't have it with Apple too.

I imagine, engineers in Zoom needed this to accomplish something and they told the management. The management contacted Apple management and explained them how this could work well both for Apple and Zoom and promised not doing nasty stuff. Apple trusted Zoom enough to open or implement that feature for them. Maybe Apple have seen the the need of this API, developed it and contacted Zoom to give it a try.

Why wouldn't they open it for everybody? Probably edge cases that can be worked out on 1:1 partnership but need good design when open to everyone.

It's just business. What would have annoyed me though is if a competitor like Skype request access in similer terms but got denied.

For some reason, the narrative on HN and similar tech heavy forums require us to pretend that business relationships don't exist or that business relationships are dirty elitist entities that you can't have. A lot of people can be surprised how much you can have by just asking to have it or proposing something that can work for everyone. Maybe that's the dirty secret of the non-technicals :)

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#52

Post by supermatt »

joshjdr wrote: post #46
misterchrister wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hilariously, “most popular apps” being Zoom getting busted for lacking basic communication security out of the gate when the pandemic hit and a/v comms became important. Please, tell us more about these most popular apps.

So the pandemic hit, use of teleconferencing apps shot up, and then security issues were identified in one of the most popular apps. How does that refute the comment you’re responding to?

For zoom in particular, they were calling the app e2e encrypted, when it wasn’t. That’s not a security issue, that is a lie.

They were also (among other well known apps) caught snooping clipboard contents. That’s not something you do accidentally.

What else... reinstalling themselves after you remove them?

That’s 3 anti-user practices I can think of off the top of my head - no doubt there are more.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#53

Post by withinboredom »

joelhaasnoot wrote: post #43

Ah yes, the private entitlements. There's also a private entitlement to disable Apple Pay/PassKit so that it doesn't clash with things like barcodes (for example transit). That one is pretty Google-able though.

Ah, reminds me of the time almost everyone in our group got stuck in a train station. The people with androids had to let us out because our iPhones would open Apple Pay and obscure the barcode.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#54

Post by agsnu »

kgc wrote: post #47
vbsteven wrote: post #10

This is what bothers me most about Apple devices and software. They probably have the "best" devices out there in terms of user experience. I use an iPhone and iPad every day because of it. But they keep very tight control over what software can be installed and run on it in order to safeguard their views on UX and security/privacy. This means for me as a developer that it's hard to write software and tools for my ow…

If it's your own hardware and app, what's wrong with just sideloading it using a dev cert?

Dev certs won't give you access to private entitlements

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#55

Post by andrepd »

vbsteven wrote: post #10

This is what bothers me most about Apple devices and software. They probably have the "best" devices out there in terms of user experience. I use an iPhone and iPad every day because of it. But they keep very tight control over what software can be installed and run on it in order to safeguard their views on UX and security/privacy. This means for me as a developer that it's hard to write software and tools for my ow…

"A good user experience" and "not being able to do with your device as you please" are incompatible concepts to me. It's amazing how somebody is okay with Big Daddy Apple controlling what they do or do not do with the device they bought.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#56

Post by andrepd »

tpush wrote: post #45
saagarjha wrote: post #44

This is not a new occurrence: Uber got com.apple.private.allow-explicit-graphics-priority (yes, I really mean com.apple.private!) that let them record the device screen several years back.

That that didn't generate more of a hubbub back then and seemingly didn't stay in people's memories for long is a real mystery to me (and a great boon to Apple!).

Well you can see people in HN are very keen to defend Apple as being the world's most privacy friendly tech company, despite no evidence in that direction :)

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#57

Post by 0x0 »

Another weird example is how Apple's own "Clips" app has a special private entitlement that bypasses the permission prompt for camera access.

Would it hurt them so much to prompt for camera access the first time the app is started after installing it from the app store?

I found that extremely worrying as it means I can no longer trust the app store to provide a safe sandboxed environment. Suddenly there's an app with this special no-cam-permission entitlement and your mugshot is uploaded when you believed the ios camera permission system would have protected you.

Oh, but Apple would only ever grant that permission to its own apps? Better hope we'll never get a repeat of the PsychicPaper exploit!

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#58

Post by jefftk »

mrtksn wrote: post #51

This doesn't bother me at all. Wouldn't it mean that if you talk to Apple about something you need they might actually give it to you? I suspect that people imagine Zoom getting a privilege due to their inartistic value but I don't think that this is the case. I think that it's just a business and there's no reason why you can't have it with Apple too. I imagine, engineers in Zoom needed this to accomplish something…

Would you feel the same way if a web browser added a feature that could only be used by a specific partner?

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#59

Post by bellyfullofbac »

mrtksn wrote: post #51

This doesn't bother me at all. Wouldn't it mean that if you talk to Apple about something you need they might actually give it to you? I suspect that people imagine Zoom getting a privilege due to their inartistic value but I don't think that this is the case. I think that it's just a business and there's no reason why you can't have it with Apple too. I imagine, engineers in Zoom needed this to accomplish something…

I won't speak for anyone else, but my problem is more that I need to ask permission to tinker with hardware that I own. We can't even deploy apps on the device without having an Apple ID...

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#60

Post by slver »

_ph_ wrote: post #37
slver wrote: post #11

When Apple tests new ground, only their apps have access to a feature. Then only partners. Then only approved developers. Etc. This gradual rollout allows refinement and reduces the odds of screwups. It looks unfair, but Apples goal isn’t to be idealistically fair, but to keep iOS a good experience to users. For every good use of a feature there’s an abuse case.

It is fair, if Apple uses one or very few select developers in bringing a feature to the market. But after a certain point when the feature is rolled out in production of a very popular app in a way that it is visible to exist to everyone, they should be very transparent about it and clearly document it. And make it available for development, even if getting approval to deploy an application based on it might be a se…

So it’s not fair. Why should it be though.
Post reply on HN