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

441–450 of 667 posts

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#441

Post by dilap »

_bxg1 wrote: post #21
dombili wrote: post #4

I don't want to pass judgment on whether Google (or in the previous case, Facebook) was in the wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me that Apple wields so much power on what software their phones can run after it sells them. You may very well think that they're using their power sparingly and benevolently, but who is to say that will be the case next time around?

I used to feel that way, and I used Android for years for that reason. But since switching to an iPhone, I've found that what I really want from my phone is not a totally open platform, but a tool that's simple, secure, and effective. Something I don't have to mess with, something I can trust to do its job and respect my privacy and be pleasant to interact with. They tried going that direction a bit with macOS when t…

That's just iPhones having good security and sandboxing. None of that goes away if Apple allows people to use enterprise certs to distribute software.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#442

Post by Someone »

askafriend wrote: post #43

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…

I don’t object to them doing it, but I do object to the fact that they have the ability to do it.

IMO, it is very, very wrong that Apple is judge, jury, and executioner in this case.

Also, in today’s world, this potentially could be disastrous, not only for the company affected, but also for the world at large, for example if Google depends on internal apps for informing employees about emergencies such as “hacking like activity on our servers or even “data center on fire”.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#443

Post by jyrkesh »

joshuamorton wrote: post #424
jakebellacera wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google already broke Apple's TOS, so it seems like Apple still has grounds to revoke their license.

Right, I'm not saying this isn't warranted necessarily, just that it's punitive not preventative.

No, they still needed to revoke the cert because the app was still hanging out on users' devices. The only way to ensure that those apps are dead, from Apple's perspective, is to revoke the cert

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#444

Post by dkrich »

rootusrootus wrote: post #436
dkrich wrote: post #431

So now it comes out that Apple is working to “quickly reinstate Google’s enterprise certificates” but won’t work with Facebook? By now it should be fairly obvious that Apple hates Facebook for a very good reason- Facebook is Apple’s single biggest threat. I’m completely convinced this has nothing to do with privacy or protecting users, it just makes for a convenient excuse. If people slowly start replacing iMessage w…

I doubt Apple sees Facebook as any kind of threat. There is already a far more plausible messaging bridge from iOS to Android called Hangouts and it hasn't really been effective for that. People aren't staying with iPhone because they're trapped by imessage.

Agree to disagree. Messenger and WhatsApp are more advanced and combine the social dynamic to chats. They’ve also made a lot of headway in competing with FaceTime. Which apps would Apple have a distinct advantage of it loses iMessage and FaceTime?

Edit: to elaborate I don’t mean a direct bridge to android, rather a substitute for iMessage that’s available on iOS and Android which makes switching relatively painless.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#445

Post by xd1936 »

benologist wrote: post #356
Despegar wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If anything Google should be grateful Apple's support isn't as deliberately-shit as their own fake support system, they may yet resolve this instead of being banned for life.

Company-on-company support is an entirely different thing from customer support. These are developers with direct lines to one another. Google isn't filing a support ticket at an Apple Store.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#446

Post by SubuSS »

RandomBK wrote: post #419
SubuSS wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand: Do you expect to be able to run any programs you want on the micro-controller on your washing machine? That's what Apple is doing here. Pushing iPhone as a commodity, not a replacement for your macbook. This way they get the benefits of controlling the experience as much as they want. (I am not saying it is right or wrong, just that many people are fine with commodity phones and don't care for the…

If the washing machine was internet connected, then yes. If not, I'd still like the JTAG interface intact. Now, _will_ I do that? Probably not, but my opinion is that as the owner of the device, I should have the ability to do so if I so choose.

how does connectivity matter in relation to ability to custom program?

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#447

Post by jyrkesh »

driverdan wrote: post #291
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.

Of course you should. It's my device, I should be able to do what I want with it. The default should be protected but root should be available.

I 100% agree with you. I should be able to run any code on my device (after I flip a bit and it gets wiped). The first thing I've done with every Nexus or Pixel purpose is to wipe and root it.

But that's not what this is about. Apple has been enforcing these rules for years. F.lux tried to get around the App Store by reaching users how to sideload via Xcode. Apple killed it.

The big players should be subject to the same rules. If they want to run their own code, they can't just flagrantly ignore Apple's TOS.

I'm also onboard with the Nielsen metaphor but not for kids. And both were scummy in targeting kids (though FB was definitely worse judging from marketing materials).

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#448

Post by perfect_wave »

manigandham wrote: post #397
eanzenberg wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> In one sense, Apple already gives up a data feed by sending search queries to Google. Apple does this under protest. Their top search queries are served through siri lately, and the hope is siri will replace all search so they won't need to utilize google anymore.

So they’re going to build their own search engine? Siri doesn’t do anything outside of your own data.

What if Apple bought Duckduckgo?

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#449

Post by mikewhy »

Someone wrote: post #442
askafriend wrote: post #43

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…

I don’t object to them doing it, but I do object to the fact that they have the ability to do it. IMO, it is very, very wrong that Apple is judge, jury, and executioner in this case. Also, in today’s world, this potentially could be disastrous, not only for the company affected, but also for the world at large, for example if Google depends on internal apps for informing employees about emergencies such as “hacking l…

> if Google depends on internal apps

If Google depends on internal apps then they shouldn't have violated the terms of internal apps.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#450

Post by why_only_15 »

eanzenberg wrote: post #415
ChuckMcM wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Siri isn't a search engine, it is a front end to a search engine[1]. That used to be Bing but now it is Google (see: http://fortune.com/2017/09/25/google-bing-default-iphone/ ) There was a time when the Siri folks approached Blekko (which was an actual search engine with its own index, crawler, and ranking Etc. to discuss partnering with Apple (personally I think they should have bought us :-)) But, according to peop…

In safari, when you enter terms into the search bar, the "google suggestions" is separate from "siri knowledge" or "siri suggested website" which they surface at the top. It looks like Apple generates that independent of google

Siri suggested website is based on what your device knows about you (that is never uploaded from your device).
Post reply on HN