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

61–70 of 160 posts

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#61

Post by josephg »

andrepd wrote: post #56
tpush wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 :)

Their record isn't perfect, but there's plenty of evidence Apple cares about privacy. For example, Apple added E2E encryption of iMessages long before signal and whatsapp made E2E popular. They also E2E encrypt the location of AirTags - which they absolutely did not need to do. Or the recent opt-in iOS data sharing rules - much to Facebook's frustration.

But companies, like governments, countries and people are not wholly good or bad. Companies don't think with a single mind, or act with a single voice by default. They're a flag waved by thousands of different people who each have a different background, different capabilities and who each make slightly different ethical and financial tradeoffs.

Google is a massive contributor to opensource. And they harvest vast amounts of user data. And they use far less of it for advertising targetting than they could, out of respect for their users. Google makes some of their most valuable IP - Android and Chrome - (mostly) opensource and open platforms. They suspend users' accounts for silly reasons, and have a bad habit of shuttering services people care about, to the point where I generally avoid new google products to prevent heartache.

Apple makes beautiful devices. And they do a good job caring about user privacy. And the iOS app store is a rent-seeking monopoly designed to maximise profit, where they pull crap like this. They have given the world llvm. And their design leadership invented the modern smartphone. Without them android might still be trying to emulate the blackberry.

Apple deserves praise for their privacy friendly technology. And they deserve criticism for how they run the app store. I see no contradiction there.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#62

Post by bellyfullofbac »

slver wrote: post #26
eps wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Add a second dot.

Two dots would look like the camera is used by two apps. That’s not the scenario. Also I doubt Apple wants to turn the UI into a Morse code sequence to be deciphered by users.

They just want to do that with the hardware...

How many finger and swipe combinations are there with the home button, or trackpad?

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#63

Post by mrtksn »

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #59
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...

You don't need to ask for permission to do anything on your own device. What you need permission is, to use Apple's tools that makes it orders of magnitude easier to do it.

Just remember, the first iPhone did not have an AppStore or SDK. People made apps for it anyway.

People also often confuse the right for access to Apple's app distribution services with the right to run apps on their own device. In reality, you can have a torrent client or anything you want on your phone without asking Apple for permission. That doesn't mean that it's going to be as easy as installing it from AppStore though. You will need to thinker harder.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#64

Post by ClumsyPilot »

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.

"Apples goal isn’t to be idealistically fair"

Either the market is manipulated, or it's not - there is no third option.

Anyway, if this is all normal amd legal, why do they lie about it?

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#65

Post by gzer0 »

judge2020 wrote: post #9
hrktb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you’re telling indie developers that no matter how hard they try, they won’t be able to match the functionality of Apple’s special friends. To note, the entitlement switching from private-only-zoom-is-in-the-loop to public-and-documented doesn’t mean that indie devs get access to it. Apple still will grant it to special friends only, and random indie devs can request but will just be rejected.

Chances are it'd be the same as the carplay drop-down - you only get access if your app is part of a market that apple allows the API to work on. You have no idea if it'll stay "only for Apple's friends" once they do this; even the current CarPlay app selection has no-name apps like Next[0] (74 total ratings), and I doubt they pulled any favors to get on there. 0: https://apps.apple.com/app/id1476724373

Hi, please let me know how I can apply for the entitlement: com.apple.developer.avfoundation.multitasking-camera-access

I see no documentation anywhere regarding this besides the Zoom forums. Thanks!

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#66

Post by matwood »

josephg wrote: post #61
andrepd wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 :)

Their record isn't perfect, but there's plenty of evidence Apple cares about privacy. For example, Apple added E2E encryption of iMessages long before signal and whatsapp made E2E popular. They also E2E encrypt the location of AirTags - which they absolutely did not need to do. Or the recent opt-in iOS data sharing rules - much to Facebook's frustration. But companies, like governments, countries and people are not w…

I was going to say tech people, but I think more generally people like to view the world in black or white or 0 or 1 when in reality there are few issues that clear. As you stated very well, most of the world exists in the gray. Apple can care about privacy while not being perfect. Privacy can also be good for their bottom line at the same time. Even the App Store policies are not wholly bad or good for users, just a different set of tradeoffs, some of which as you say deserve criticism.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#67

Post by bellyfullofbac »

mrtksn wrote: post #63
bellyfullofbac wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

You don't need to ask for permission to do anything on your own device. What you need permission is, to use Apple's tools that makes it orders of magnitude easier to do it. Just remember, the first iPhone did not have an AppStore or SDK. People made apps for it anyway. People also often confuse the right for access to Apple's app distribution services with the right to run apps on their own device. In reality, you ca…

OK, fine, they're gatekeeping not their hardware, but their dev tools. Kinda sad that you're fine with that...

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#68

Post by mrtksn »

jefftk wrote: post #58
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?

Good question. I had to think about it and I can't get more definitive beyond "it depends".

In many ways, it's already the case. Browsers are already possible through partnerships with companies that manage certificates, DNS and so on. They also have special APIs that are open only to the vendor. You can't spin off your authoritative DNS or certificate authority or malicious site detection and have it made accepted by Firefox/Chrome or others.

On the other hand, we have an understanding about what web is and expectations about the web standards which makes me to expect neutrality. It's the tool that promises me to parse whatever HTML I throw at it and execute any JS.

Then we have things like Brave browser that has API that's not of any standards.

So, I don't know. It depend. I will know it when I see it.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#69

Post by mrtksn »

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #67
mrtksn wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to ask for permission to do anything on your own device. What you need permission is, to use Apple's tools that makes it orders of magnitude easier to do it. Just remember, the first iPhone did not have an AppStore or SDK. People made apps for it anyway. People also often confuse the right for access to Apple's app distribution services with the right to run apps on their own device. In reality, you ca…

OK, fine, they're gatekeeping not their hardware, but their dev tools. Kinda sad that you're fine with that...

Why wouldn't anybody be fine with that? Of course it would have been amazing if they let us do more with their tools but I simply don't see how they are obligated to do it.

I also like how Apple is the opinionated elitists design house. As long as they are not the dominant force in this space, I'm fine with them doing things their way.

I see some people argue that Apple is dominant and everything changes when Apple does something but that's simply because Apple is really great at designing it. There are also many thing that Apple does and then doesn't stick. It's the stuff that they simply fail to design well.

It's good to have someone around that doesn't race to the bottom and have opinions on how things should be made.

Re: iPad Camera Multitasking

#70

Post by risyachka »

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #59
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...

Why do you have a problem with asking permission? You always have to ask for it unless something yours and you own 100% intellectual rights for it.

And this is the case not only with Apple, but with 99% of all devices out there. Developers get access only to what manufacturer gives them right to, and this is how it should be.

If you make some device no one should force you to open it up or give everyone access to it. This is your own product, you should be able to control who access what, otherwise it is not yours by definition.

Post reply on HN