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

My small revenge on Apple

javierantonsblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 471 posts

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#131

Post by collaborative »

coldtea wrote: post #129

> 3 Weeks ago Google temporarily removed Groups from their Google Play store with no warning. This has led me to start working on a "web" version that will withstand the whims of big tech. So here is my small revenge: I am refusing to port Apple ID to the web version. Apple users who logged into Groups via the app with Apple ID will need to create a second account. I think he took his revenge from the wrong company..…

You put those 2 sentences together but they actually belong in separate paragraphs. The latter is a closing statement to the entire post. And the former says that a web version is in the works

But nevermind, it sounds more funny the way you put it

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#132

Post by dmitriid »

collaborative wrote: post #97
schipplock wrote: post #78

So the creator/developer of "The King of Organigrams and Family Trees" (that's the title of the app's website ( https://www.groupsapp.online )) is complaining that Apple is giving its users the ability to hide their email information, am I right? So isn't this a good thing? For me, it is. I don't want to give away my actual email address. I get too much spam already. So I thank Apple for this feature. And of course,…

Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether you trust the app or not The fact is, I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too The only purpose an email address serves is password recovery. Period TBH I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money. I make no money and…

> I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too

- "privacy and security are top priorities".

and then

- Wants to force users to only use the least private log ins: via Facebook and Google

- Is pissed when privacy-conscious users hide their emails via Sign-in with Apple

> I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money.

Yes, yes they are. So why do you trust FB and Google and force your users to use those log in methods?

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#133

Post by collaborative »

sbuk wrote: post #130
webmobdev wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It is important that more developers stand up to this kind of bullying. Apple needs to respect developers more and, if it wants them to integrate Apple services they should instead offer incentives rather than threats to them. As both a developer and an Apple user, I don't care about Apple ID and so why would I wish to waste my precious time adding features I am not interested in? (I use Apple products but I nev…

Equally, developers need to respect their users. I don't want to have to have a Facebook or Google account to use your product. Why should I be interested in your app if you force me you use either of those options? They were also involved in PRISM and both have far worse track records with privacy than Apple. More importantly, why should I trust you with PII?

Having your email address boils down to password recovery. For instance, I only ever send 3 types of emails:

1 - Activation email with activation code to ensure the person actually owns the email address (non-OAUTH sign-up)

2 - Password recovery for when they have forgotten their password. Yes, a user doesn't need this with OAUTH but sometimes they will have forgotten that they used OAUTH to start with and need to sign in with email & pss

3 - When push is turned off and someone has messaged you

I don't think this is beyond reasonable but I'm willing to take criticism

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#134

Post by raxxorrax »

thom wrote: post #37

There appear to be multiple threads to the backstory explaining some of the bitterness that the developer is clearly feeling, and I can understand the frustration at the ever-changing table stakes required to get a seat at the mobile app table, but this is an appalling attitude to what is an entirely valid and useful privacy feature.

But it isn't a privacy feature. A privacy feature would be to create an account with a password without mail validation.

I you use Apple ID, Apple gets the info which services you are using. The service might request additional infos about your person. Most people will always confirm that in reality. This way many services will end up with more user information. Many people will just share everything but might think about it if they needed to provide this info manually.

It is maybe a privacy feature because Apple might be better than Google or Facebook. Well...

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#135

Post by collaborative »

user-the-name wrote: post #80
kraf wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protest is an important form of participation in a democracy, it's not petty at all. Forcing developers to add Apple ID as a sign-in method is the petty thing. The developers have no power unless they unionize in some form which seems absolutely impossible. So it seems to me that it's all a developer can really do to make a statement and I think it's brave.

It is not "petty", it is a way to ensure all users get access to a privacy-conscious method of logging in without giving up your privacy to Google or Facebook. Being this angry at having to give users the option of better privacy really isn't a great look.

No one is forcing users to use Google or FB. They can do traditional email signup

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#136

Post by Closi »

dspillett wrote: post #113
Closi wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that doesn't mean I want marketing emails, and spam, and all sorts of other crap from the makers of app Foo. And, more importantly, all sorts of other crap from the companies that Foo decided to disclose your email to.

> that Foo decided to disclose your email to. Or, just as often, anyone that has picked up my address from lists originally obtained via a hack of some sort because one of those entities has had lax security.

Yep. And as an added benefit of the email relay, we can now see exactly which app shared all your emails or got hacked.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#137

Post by sbuk »

collaborative wrote: post #133
sbuk wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equally, developers need to respect their users. I don't want to have to have a Facebook or Google account to use your product. Why should I be interested in your app if you force me you use either of those options? They were also involved in PRISM and both have far worse track records with privacy than Apple. More importantly, why should I trust you with PII?

Having your email address boils down to password recovery. For instance, I only ever send 3 types of emails: 1 - Activation email with activation code to ensure the person actually owns the email address (non-OAUTH sign-up) 2 - Password recovery for when they have forgotten their password. Yes, a user doesn't need this with OAUTH but sometimes they will have forgotten that they used OAUTH to start with and need to si…

There are other ways to do password recovery. Email is categorically not the only solution to this problem.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#138

Post by jhanschoo »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #72
rovek wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your second quote conveniently chops out the main point of the article, which is that Apple abuse their dominance to force developers into having no choice.

Because Apple prioritizes their customers over developers. If they didn’t force developers to adopt this, they would never do it as it’s in their interest to harvest the e-mail addresses of their customers.

Actually, from the article and the rule referenced (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#sig...),

the rule seems somewhat orthogonal to developers getting emails. Developers can still request login by the old school email-and-password with (or without) sign-up verification by email. On the other hand, some third-party logins don't give developers their users' contact information (just a token to verify that they're on their platform with no authentication permissions, or a dev can request that this be so else the third-party will inform the user that the dev is requesting their contact info).

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#139

Post by coldtea »

collaborative wrote: post #131
coldtea wrote: post #129

> 3 Weeks ago Google temporarily removed Groups from their Google Play store with no warning. This has led me to start working on a "web" version that will withstand the whims of big tech. So here is my small revenge: I am refusing to port Apple ID to the web version. Apple users who logged into Groups via the app with Apple ID will need to create a second account. I think he took his revenge from the wrong company..…

You put those 2 sentences together but they actually belong in separate paragraphs. The latter is a closing statement to the entire post. And the former says that a web version is in the works But nevermind, it sounds more funny the way you put it

>You put those 2 sentences together but they actually belong in separate paragraphs.

They belong in two successive paragraphs.

And the Google thing is a non-sequitur otherwise, given that most of the post he laments against Apple ID's requirements.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#140

Post by [deleted] »

collaborative wrote: post #133
sbuk wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equally, developers need to respect their users. I don't want to have to have a Facebook or Google account to use your product. Why should I be interested in your app if you force me you use either of those options? They were also involved in PRISM and both have far worse track records with privacy than Apple. More importantly, why should I trust you with PII?

Having your email address boils down to password recovery. For instance, I only ever send 3 types of emails: 1 - Activation email with activation code to ensure the person actually owns the email address (non-OAUTH sign-up) 2 - Password recovery for when they have forgotten their password. Yes, a user doesn't need this with OAUTH but sometimes they will have forgotten that they used OAUTH to start with and need to si…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN