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

Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

inputmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 309 posts

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#271

Post by nextaccountic »

windexh8er wrote: post #176
Razengan wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why has there never been a horde of torches and pitchforks outside Castle Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo yet? And don’t squeeze out that “cOnSoLeS aReNt cOmPuTeRs” bullshit. They’re closer to computers than a goddamn wristwatch.

It's a good point, but consoles were single purpose computers. They exist to play games. Now, I'll agree that the line is blurred these days, but they're still generally gaming machines. Nobody is buying an XBox to stream Netflix solely. I think the difference is that Apple wants people to buy these devices as your primary computing device. Are you OK when Apple locks down the Mac line? What if you couldn't use Brew…

> Nobody is buying an XBox to stream Netflix solely.

What if I want to? I don't particularly care what the manufacturer thinks, I bought the machine. Why does Microsoft gets a pass to dictate what I can do with the hardware I bought?

See for example people that bought PS3s for operating distributed clusters (because at the time the console WAS open) and then Sony locked down other OSes with an update. Why is this fair?

https://www.itwriting.com/blog/2394-sony-locks-down-the-ps3-...

> I think the difference is that Apple wants people to buy these devices as your primary computing device.

How can a wristwatch be a primary computing device?

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#272

Post by croes »

mikehearn wrote: post #269
jjcon wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didnt claim it was removed - i believe he was blocked from updating the app

The article seems to make that claim: "A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain [in the App Store], but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch."

Could it be that there is a free version and a payed one?

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#273

Post by hughrr »

Bud wrote: post #251
hughrr wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m removing myself from the concept of an ecosystem and choosing software based on individual merit at the moment.

Yeah, except that's not a real choice. That's pretending the issue does not exist and pretending that you can avoid privacy issues with a piecemeal choice. But you can't, of course. Cobbling together your own solution doesn't obscure the fact that you will almost inevitably end up with something that respects your privacy much less, which was my original point.

The real choice turned out you don’t need to solve a lot of the problems and don’t need an ecosystem and don’t need to create a problem that doesn’t need to be solved.

Example.

Numbers on my iPhone. Fuck it, use libreoffice on my laptop and have no online spreadsheet solution. Didn’t really need it. Sometimes things can wait. Shrug.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#274

Post by croes »

amiantos wrote: post #258

Has no one noticed that this app in question is still on the App Store? First result on google when you search for "Apple Watch keyboards". This makes me even more suspicious of the guy creating all this outrage. It's also not very well reviewed.

The low ratings mostly complain about lack of language support especially german seems to be missed. And the posted screenshot says it's removed from sale, maybe there were two versions, a free one and a payed one.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#275

Post by d35007 »

VortexDream wrote: post #248
d35007 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was this? Based on https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2005/06/28Apple-Takes-Podcast... , it looks like Apple added podcast support to iTunes in 2005. The iPhone wasn’t released until 2007 and the App Store didn’t exist until 2008.

I assume he means this, where Apple banned a podcast app because it "duplicated existing functionality". https://www.networkworld.com/article/2346233/apple-shows-tru...

Thanks. Apple has arbitrarily banned so many apps that I guess I just forgot about this one.

It's hard to imagine a time when iPhones couldn't download podcasts over the air. I can understand why banning Podcaster would have made OP sour on Apple.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#276

Post by JohnTHaller »

sircastor wrote: post #206
JohnTHaller wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd wager a lot of it has to do with history. Gaming consoles were always proprietary hardware that could only do things approved by the manufacturer, and were purchased with that understanding, unless you did some hacking. Computers were always open platforms that you purchased and then could do what you wanted with, no hacking required. iOS was the first major market computing platform that broke this general under…

> iOS was the first major market computing platform that broke this general understanding. I think the reason this worked, and the reason it’s still sort of confusing to people, is that the iPhone is a phone, and showed up at phone stores. People viewed as a super-powered iPod, not a computer.

The phone computers that came before it didn't have walled gardens either. Palm, for instance.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#277

Post by dding »

Razengan wrote: post #166
jacquesm wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you gatekeep applications on your device then it's a walled garden. Simple, no?

So why has there never been a horde of torches and pitchforks outside Castle Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo yet? And don’t squeeze out that “cOnSoLeS aReNt cOmPuTeRs” bullshit. They’re closer to computers than a goddamn wristwatch.

It's not about if devices are general computing devices or if the device maker can moderate third-party apps on its platform. Apple invited other developers to sell apps on a market it created and regulates. It also competes with those developers in this market. And in this case, it used its power as the market's regulator to remove a competitor and promote its own app.

Nintendo, Sony, etc also allow other developers to sell apps on markets they created, and they also compete with those developers. If Nintendo ever removes a platforming game for competing with the Mario series, we should also raise our pitchforks and protest against unfair abuse of power.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#278

Post by kazinator »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #133
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it’s just hard to say whether Apple broke any laws here Doesn't stealing someone's idea for an app/innovation and respinning it into your own implementation count as IP theft? IIRC the Winklevoss twins got paid handsomely as a settlement for Zuckerberg stealing their idea for Facebook. Granted, they were very rich and well connected so that helped.

Ideas are not worth much, and there is no law against executing someone else’s idea. Winklevoss twins (or Connect U rather) got paid to shut up and go away at a time when it was obvious $65M was going to be pocket change for Facebook and their lawsuit was going to cost more in time for people at Facebook than $65M.

> there is no law against executing someone else’s idea

Are you sure about that? Obviously, you mean outside of the patent framework and the concept of infringement, so never mind that.

There is law against executing someone else's idea which is public, and over which they have no patent.

What if the idea isn't public? Not that it applies in this case, but I think there is such a thing as breaking into an organization and stealing trade secrets: ideas that are not known outside of that organization, and are (consequently) not patented.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#279

Post by JadeNB »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #68
JadeNB wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not ask for the extra permissions when you need them for the extra features?

Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did?

> Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did?

None at all, no, and I did not mean to assert that they didn't. I was not saying anything about the program itself, only responding to the claim that permissions had to be requested for optional features (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538104):

> Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years.

which was a response to a question about why the permissions were requested if they were not necessary (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538036):

> Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years.

Since the permissions become necessary when the user chooses to use the optional features, I took kevingadd to be claiming that the permissions had to be requested whether or not the optional features were used.

Re: Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

#280

Post by [deleted] »

mlindner wrote: post #179
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the author stand a chance against the army of ivy league lawyers of a trillion dollar megacorp? I guess it would help if he's also American (don't know where he's from) so he could fight Apple on home turf and use the jury system on his side like "Evil megacorp steals from the little guy" (does it even work like this in the US or did I watch too many movies?), but I'm more curious how a lawsuit would go if he'd…

> Does the author stand a chance against the army of ivy league lawyers of a trillion dollar megacorp? I'm tired of this meme. Getting better lawyers doesn't let you cheat the law.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN