Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely not. Compare the native ios documentation[1] with their "other platforms" documentation[2]. Their native documentation has code snippets, helpful links, and explains in depth what is happening. The "other platforms" documentation is "make this request, store some data, follow redirects". No code, no helpful links on how you might accomplish these things, nothing. You get the bare minimum. I'm not saying it…
The nature of "other" platforms means that example code could be in any language at all. The fact that their iOS documentation is so much better than average doesn't mean their "other platforms" documentation is inadequate. It just means there's plenty of room for third parties like indie bloggers to documentation their own approaches in JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Rust, or whatever.
Part of the problem is that android is an "other platform" in the first place. Sign in with apple is supposed to be a cross platform feature, but Apple can't be bothered to even write out some decent documentation for a platform with over 2 billion devices. Compare, for example, the Google sign in for iOS[1]. They provide a working example project and full documentation.
If you are a developer supporting a cross platform app, you're not getting much help from Apple. That's what the article is saying: integrating this feature is going to be more work and more risk than it's worth. That's the point.
> It just means there's plenty of room for third parties like indie bloggers to documentation their own approaches in JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Rust, or whatever.
We are talking about signing in. This is one of the most fundamental features you need to have. This is not something that you just copy paste from some half baked blog post. It is amazing to me you think that's acceptable.
[1] https://developers.google.com/identity/sign-in/ios/start