251–260 of 667 posts
Now I'm really curious if they're going to casually shut down doordash (afaik the doordash app for the dashers uses enterprise certs).
Yeah, this is pretty clear cut. Apple has rule. Facebook and Google agree to rule. Facebook and Google violate rule. Apple enforces rule. This isn't some grey area where the details are difficult to ascertain. Everything is pretty clear; the enterprise app distribution service is most assuredly not for distributing apps that break the App Store rules to customers . This isn't difficult to understand, so I'm strugglin…
If you're Facebook or Google you're used to being able to dictate terms to others. But there's always a bigger fish and in this case it's Apple. They're outraged because they have no recourse. What they usually do to users or partners, dictate take-it-or-leave-it terms, is being done to them. They can't even complain to antitrust regulators because Apple is only lord of its own kingdom (which doesn't have market domi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.
Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.
Heh. They already have, to Amazon though. See all the petty fights Google and Amazon have engaged in over youtube, chromecast etc. This is a good PR move by Apple though, especially when game studios are clawing out of the 30% cut and people are beginning to ask for the right to repair or the ability to side load apps. Apple saves the day yet again by providing value through the app store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks! But note that section 2.1 expressly allows deployment to "Permitted Users", and "Permitted Users" is defined to include "contractors... who have written and binding agreements with You or Your Permitted Entity to protect Your Internal Use Application from unauthorized use". Compensated members of these apps' research panels are quite literally "contractors" of FB/Google, and possibly even under written contra…
13 year olds aren't really contractors, they're random users that they've selected to market research on.
> Apple’s move to block Google’s developer certificate comes just a day after Google disabled its Screenwise Meter app following press coverage So Apple got to know it's terms are being violated after the press attention? Did they already know/is there a way they can detect this is happening? If not, then there could certainly be smaller players who have been routinely abusing this contract? I am trying to understand…
Good question. I use an Apple agreement like this to push apps via MDM, and I don't remember seeing anything about Apple monitoring for this. At the same time what would apple monitor for? How would they know if iPhone serial #75346345346 doesn't belong to an employee and how would they know what BusinessApp401 is, that doesn't get sent to their headquarters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the Apple Developer Enterprise Program webpage [1], the first big feature (of four) is "Deploy In-house Apps" -- "within your organization", "to your employees' devices". I'm not sure how it could be much clearer that this is not intended to be used to distribute apps to customers. [1]: https://developer.apple.com/programs/enterprise/
But the people using these research apps are not, in their role as app-users, "customers". They're contractors, being paid for a service rendered. And other provisos of the agreement specifically define "Permitted Users" to include "contractors".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you for a link to a readable version of the agreement! It looks to me like "Permitted Users" includes "contractors" like those in a compensated research panel, and thus the Facebook/Google uses are plausibly enabled under the program.
Can you call a 9 year old getting $20 gift cards a contractor?
Rumor has it that Google's subsequent requests for clarification to Apple have gone entirely unanswered, save for automated messages stating that Apple's decision on this matter should be regarded as "final" and "binding", and that no further statement from Apple should be expected.
Let’s say you’re using a Google API like Maps, and you violate terms by snapshotting sections of their maps and storing them on your severs so you can serve static maps without making API calls. They’d shut down your API access immediately Google and Facebook both knew the terms. They both knew that the Enterprise Distribution Program was for internal use only. They still put ads out in the wild to recruit regular co…
This is the key sentiment I feel is missing from much of the discussions (and in some cases, reporting) taking place surrounding these events this week. Thank you for posting it. It's useful to discuss the philosophical implications of any tech company having too much power. To add the most to that discussion, it's helpful to understand that these actions are not directly affecting customers (aside from those who wer…
Clearly that's not a terribly big deal, and you'd imagine that Google has a lower proportion of iPhone users than many companies, but it's not nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good question. I use an Apple agreement like this to push apps via MDM, and I don't remember seeing anything about Apple monitoring for this. At the same time what would apple monitor for? How would they know if iPhone serial #75346345346 doesn't belong to an employee and how would they know what BusinessApp401 is, that doesn't get sent to their headquarters.
If these internal apps use a corporate certificate, I would imagine their Apple ID needs to be on a company domain email in order to download/use the app?