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

Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 667 posts

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#261

Post by ancorevard »

jwildeboer wrote: post #194
nahzgah wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don’t understand people who are acting offended that Apple is enforcing the clear terms of service it laid out. I don't understand why they were so happy when this happened to Facebook but now they are offended because it happened to Google. Oh wait, yes I do understand why. o:-)

I for one welcome the consistency that Apple shows. And I hope that people recognise how these walled gardens have their own laws, judges and prisons.

And this is one of the reasons why I pay a “premium” for my phone, I expect Apple to work harder for me to protect me from actors like these.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#262

Post by johnsea »

briffle wrote: post #141
johnsea wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple should not have the right to enforce those conditions to begin with. Same as they should not be allowed to kick out apps from their whole platform on a whim. Inacceptable. Such a company should not be allowed to do business in EU. Much worse than what happened with Microsoft in the 90ties.

This is a pretty poor argument. I can think of multiple reasons they should be able to immediately revoke a certificate (or an app) 1. It finds the certificate has been compromised 2. it finds a publisher introduced malware in an update to their app If some app decides to include a crypto-miner, that burns up your battery, your sure going to want apple to yank that from all the phones, as quick as possible, not sit t…

I didn't argue this specific case. I said in general, Apple should not be allowed to have such power. (Laws need to be adapted/modernized to cover the current mobile ecosystems)

It's my device, if I am fully informed and decide to run a crypto-miner application I should be able to do so. If I want to run 'In A Permanent Save State' [1], Apple shouldn't be allowed to censor this (not that I would agree with the subsumptions in that app, but that is not relevant here).

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/11/13/the-very...

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#263

Post by megy »

gorkish wrote: post #74

What I want to know is why these companies are using the same cert to sign apps with widely differing uses and security profiles. It seems to me that they should have a number of enterprise signing certs for each use case such as internal beta, external beta, internal utility, external utility, whatever. If the companies are signing all of their apps under the same cert then it's kind of on them for being stupid to s…

> It seems to me that they should have a number of enterprise signing certs for each use case such as internal beta, external beta, internal utility, external utility, whatever.

Then you need each user to install each cert.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#265

Post by pixl97 »

jasonvorhe wrote: post #72
iamleppert wrote: post #45

A real show of power would be Apple disabling all of Facebook and Google's public apps, and then bricking all of Facebook and Google's employees' phones.

And lose a couple of million in annual sales, for a cute little PR stunt, that would send ripples through trust in their ecosystem?

Million? Google pays apple 9 billion a year to be the default browser.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#266

Post by mjw1007 »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #238
blhack wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because lots of people still think that if you own a piece of hardware, you should be able to run whatever code you want on it.

That's right. That's why you shouldn't buy iOS devices. If you do, you agree to Apple's terms. (also, what Apple allows you to run on your own device is actually a different story, not related to this news)

According to the story, Apple have stopped Google employees running Google's "Gbus app for transportation". So yes, it's about what Apple allows people to run on their own devices.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#267

Post by lern_too_spel »

beerlord wrote: post #151
_bxg1 wrote: post #3

I feel less vengeful satisfaction from this one, but I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. I just hope it doesn't backfire. On a totally personal level, I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies.

Can someone explain how Facebook or Google hiring testers willing to expose 100% of their personal usage via an opt-in, paid program impacts consumers? Why should we 'applaud' Apple for this? Isn't it perfectly reasonable for companies like Google and Facebook to run deep user testing?

Because Apple has frivolous restrictions on what users can do on their phones, and the violators knew this ahead of time. Rules are rules.

Apple is likely shooting themselves in the foot here. These companies' IT departments will no longer be able to support iOS devices for accessing intranet resources, which means no engineers will be using iOS devices as daily drivers, which means their iOS apps will fall further behind their Android apps in quality.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#268

Post by donarb »

gojomo wrote: post #154
javagram wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They weren’t. See the terms at https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/193060 “solely for internal use by Your Employees or Permitted Users, or as otherwise expressly permitted in Section 2.1(f).” https://github.com/nicwise/apple-agreements/blob/master/appl... 2.1(f) Allow Your Customers to use Your Internal Use Applications on Deployment Devices, but only (i) on Your physical premises and/or on Your Permitted Entity’s phy…

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.

I am responsible for maintaining an app for a client who has an Apple Enterprise certificate. I am a contractor so I realize that I am allowed to use the client's certificate to install the app on one or more of my devices while developing and testing. Should I need more testers, I am authorized to get other users to test the app, subject to them signing NDAs and having them under my direct supervision.

That is the extent of my allowed use of that certificate. Anyone with any sort of ethics at Facebook/Google should have realized the same. Passing out gift cards and calling users "contractors" is against the spirit and letter of the contract.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#269

Post by simonh »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #238
blhack wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because lots of people still think that if you own a piece of hardware, you should be able to run whatever code you want on it.

That's right. That's why you shouldn't buy iOS devices. If you do, you agree to Apple's terms. (also, what Apple allows you to run on your own device is actually a different story, not related to this news)

>If you do, you agree to Apple’s terms.

And know that Apple has your back when it comes to holding developers of the apps you use to their commitments.

There’s a clear benefit to the reputation of a vendor being on the line for the security and quality of their product and the services offered on it.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#270

Post by bunderbunder »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #238
blhack wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because lots of people still think that if you own a piece of hardware, you should be able to run whatever code you want on it.

That's right. That's why you shouldn't buy iOS devices. If you do, you agree to Apple's terms. (also, what Apple allows you to run on your own device is actually a different story, not related to this news)

More than a couple of us know Apple's terms and agree to them quite enthusiastically.

The perennial mansplaining around this issue mildly baffles me. Apple acting as a gatekeeper for iOS has been a well-known thing for a decade now. Coming to a place like this and preaching as if people don't understand Apple's terms is frankly insulting.

Post reply on HN