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

Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

forums.getpebble.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 414 posts

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#291

Post by jdmichal »

ebbv wrote: post #221
jdmichal wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you want to go after Apple, go after the way they don't allow consumers to modify the software or install custom software on iOS. I agree, because this is practically the same issue. The app store isn't just a way to get iOS software, it's the only way to get iOS software. Which means that being rejected from the app store means you cannot provide your product to those consumers. Which means Apple rejecting prod…

We only differ on whether Apple should be compelled to host content it doesn't want to. I would say no, but it should be compelled to allow iPhone owners to modify their devices and install third party software.

I actually haven't stated a position on solutions, only that IMO the current state opens them up to liability. I think allowing for applications to be side-loaded would be a fine solution.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#292

Post by bzbarsky »

blumkvist wrote: post #286
bzbarsky wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When has Apple hindered a break-through technology? Contemporary example: it's impossible (as in, disallowed by Apple's policies) to install a web browser with a rendering engine written in a memory-safe language on your iDevice.

How does this benefit them? I'm genuinely interested. I'm not a developer and don't know what that means. It sounds bad, but how does it stifle competition? Is Safari gaining an advantage? I used Chrome on my iphone4 and was pretty happy with it.

Chrome on iPhone is forced to use Apple's rendering engine, not Google's. In particular, it can't implement any HTML/CSS/JS features that Safari on iPhone doesn't implement.

Apple benefits partially in terms of disallowing possibly-unsafe code (JS interpreters, for example) that they themselves did not author. But also from locking out competing browsers so their hardware is harder to commoditize...

In terms of stifling competition, it means there isn't meaningful competition on iOS in terms of features browsers expose to web pages. Browsers on iOS can have different user interfaces, but they all look more or less identical as far as web pages are concerned. (I say more or less because browsers can implement a custom network stack; just not a custom CSS parser or JS engine.)

So for example, if you want a browser on iOS that supports the "transform" CSS property without the "-webkit" prefix, you're out of luck. Apple's policies don't allow such a browser. This is not "break-through technology", of course. But a browser engine in a memory-safe language, with the resulting smaller attack surface, is. And it's disallowed by Apple.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#293

Post by brianpgordon »

moskie wrote: post #276
Oletros wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Doing an anti competitive practice is legal if you don't have a monopoly?

That is my understanding. For example, Microsoft got in trouble for pre-installing IE on Windows because they had monopoly in the OS market. If they didn't have that monopoly, they would not have been penalized.

Having a monopoly might put you under the microscope, but you certainly can't get away with anticompetitive practices like price fixing or wage fixing even if you don't have a monopoly.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#294

Post by tkemp »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #182

From the forum comments, this is new behavior. It seems connected to Apple entering Pebble's space with their new Apple Watch. The existing Terms of Service about competing platforms is now being interpreted to consider Pebble a competing platform. The developer appealed and Apple told them that they specifically can't mention Pebble anywhere in their app description or metadata. Other developers have confirmed that…

Can you provide links to other cases where Apple has been restrictive about this?

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#295

Post by Someone1234 »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #120
Someone1234 wrote: post #15

This forum appears to have an invalid certificate: Domain: forums.getpebble.com CN = *.vanillaforums.com If you use HTTPS Everywhere, you'll want to uncheck this specific site, remove the HTTPS part of the URL and reload. PS - I love HTTPS Everywhere but it always surprises me just how many sites have broken HTTPS implementations.

This is the whole reason the site itself doesn't direct you to https or advertise it is available. In order to support https, you don't just install a cert, you know. You have to make sure your whole chain supports it. Including things like third party CDN providers, which can be more expensive to enable https than you pay for the CDN. So, if you use an extension that randomly directs you to connect using a method th…

> This is the whole reason the site itself doesn't direct you to https or advertise it is available.

They are advertising it. They have a web-server running on 443 open to the public, they aren't required to, but they choose to. They're also erroneously returning status code 200 (instead of 404 or 301).

> So, if you use an extension that randomly directs you to connect using a method the site operator never told you to use, expect problems.

Nothing "random" about it.

The site advertises that it has HTTP running on 80 and HTTPS on 443. So I have an extension which opts for 443 when status code 200 is returned as a first priority and then 80 as a backup. Google and Bing's search results do exactly the same thing.

If they don't want people to use HTTPS/443 then simply shut it down, problem solved. If you have to have 443 running for another site then return status code 404 (or 301).

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#296

Post by s73v3r »

soylentcola wrote: post #183
cybrox wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I technically agree with this, it is absolute nonsense from a user point of view. As the provider of an important host system, you might want to consider allowing people to list supported platforms in order to make it possible for the user to see which apps he can use with the equipment he has. It might be right from an objective point of view but it's a plain out dick-ish behaviour towards user friendly app ma…

Yep. If I was an iPhone user and just bought a Pebble, I'd go to the App Store and search for "Pebble" to see what apps I could buy that work with my Pebble. It's the same thing I did when I got a Moto 360. I went to the Play Store and searched for "Android Wear" to find apps that make use of it. If I'd gotten a Pebble, I would've done the same thing. It sucks for the developers of iOS apps that are meant to integrat…

No, you would use Pebble's app to do that.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#297

Post by kbenson »

blumkvist wrote: post #286
bzbarsky wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When has Apple hindered a break-through technology? Contemporary example: it's impossible (as in, disallowed by Apple's policies) to install a web browser with a rendering engine written in a memory-safe language on your iDevice.

How does this benefit them? I'm genuinely interested. I'm not a developer and don't know what that means. It sounds bad, but how does it stifle competition? Is Safari gaining an advantage? I used Chrome on my iphone4 and was pretty happy with it.

Chroms of iOS is a re-skinned Safari WebView[1]. They just put a front-end on it with their added on features. Apple entirely controls the browser and what's allowed, disallowed, supported, etc. For example, Google's SPDY protocol wasn't supported until Safari 8[2], and probably then because much of what SPDY entailed was adopted as HTTP/2.

1: https://developer.chrome.com/multidevice/ios/overview

2: http://caniuse.com/#feat=spdy

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#298

Post by s73v3r »

venomsnake wrote: post #80
AlexandrB wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that Google has a near monopoly on search whereas Apple has no such monopoly on mobile platforms.

Apple has 100% monopoly on iOS platform.

Which doesn't matter, as there are far more smartphone platforms than just iOS.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#299

Post by Oletros »

s73v3r wrote: post #262
mavdi wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erm... Wouldn't that be similar to Google rejecting the trademark "Apple" from their search results? You're making it sound like Apple owns Pebble trademark and aren't happy for it to be used.

Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy.

> Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy

Can you point where it is stated or the related point in the policy? Thanks

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#300

Post by digi_owl »

cududa wrote: post #214
LordKano wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the kind of behavior that gets a company in trouble with the FTC. Indeed but Apple is aware that the FTC isn't likely to punish them enough that the behavior will be a net negative. If only the Federal Government would be as serious about "Sending a message" on antitrust as they are about low-mid level drug dealers, this kind of thing would be a lot more rare.

But Apple doesn't have anywhere near a monopoly on smart phones, so being anti-competitive is completely legal

Monopoly is a smokescreen word. Antitrust is not about monopoly, it is about abuse of market position.

If your company has 10% of the market, and the rest has 1% each, you can still be slapped for antitrust if you start using that position as leverage in a different market.

ianal, btw...

Post reply on HN