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

451–460 of 667 posts

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#451

Post by Natanael_L »

CPLX wrote: post #329
mcmoose75 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Google & FB violated the terms of the agreement they had with Apple. I think an interesting question is: What is Apple's best move from here? I would suggest that Apple should leave Google/ FB blocked for ~1-2 weeks, to remind them who's boss on the iOS platform. However, I would argue it'd be smart for them to switch them back on after that- there's a chance that this looks anticompetitive to regulators…

There's absolutely nothing anti-competitive about this from a legal standpoint whatsoever.

Apple completely forbidding the availability of certain types of software on their devices from third party developers? Not anticompetitive? Although sure, in this particular case it wasn't because of the type of app, but it still has the same effect because certain apps ARE forbidden from the store, and this does indeed mean that nobody can effectively offer such apps because of Apple's rules

There's no actual legal requirement that your company offers the same service that you use your market control to prevent your competitors from offering.

This is especially relevant in the markets where Apple has a significant market share (USA).

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#452

Post by gojomo »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #371
gojomo wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A person who enters an agreement to provide something of value (here, data) for something else of value (here, a small monthly payment, perhaps as gift cards) has entered a contract, and is a contractor. (Yes, when Netflix agrees to provide you with something in return for your payment, you've entered a contract with them, and they are your contractor. If somehow you were an US entity with 50+ netflix subscriptions f…

> (Yes, when Netflix agrees to provide you with something in return for your payment, you've entered a contract with them, and they are your contractor. If somehow you were an US entity with 50+ netflix subscriptions for different offices, and thus paid them more than $600/year, you technically might be on the hook to file a 1099.) Source. Now. Because I highly doubt this is accurate. I have never heard of someone ha…

I forgot that all payments to C-Corps or S-Corps are exempt from 1099 filings, so yes, as long as Netflix remains a C-Corp, there's no need to file. (That's a matter of 1099 tax law, though - it's still a contracted relationship. And so while it is uncommon to think of them as a 'contractor', that's what Netflix is, when delivering a service for payments under the terms of a contract.)

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#453

Post by Legogris »

wutbrodo wrote: post #378
51lver wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong, you're just in the wrong place. Apple is the sysadmin and the phone holders are the users. They WANT apple looking out for them. Anyone who says otherwise stupidly wasted $1000 when they could have bought any number of unlockable devices for that money. I say this with an unlocked and de-googled android phone next to me, and several hacked arm devices at home. I OWN THEM, with no doubt, so I agree w…

Is this true of people who voluntarily signed up to be paid for data collection? It's like saying that Nielsen panelists need to be protected from Nielsen by Vizio. (Insert standard caveat about the degree to which kids' autonomy is in the hands of their parents).

An important difference that Nielsen doesn't have an agreement with Vizio that they broke and the "protection" being Vizio terminating their end of that agreement as a response.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#454

Post by cptskippy »

hnnh44 wrote: post #104
cptskippy wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With Apple's devices, and to a lesser extent Google's, there isn't a software distribution channel apart from the one sanctioned from up high. That being said, the official channels are sanctioned and sponsored by Apple (or Google) and so it is their reputation on the line when it comes to malicious or questionable Apps. So I can completely understand Apple (or Google) removing certs or banning companies for violatin…

I disagree with your argument as a whole. My device is little more to me than something to run a web browser. I despise native apps. Facebook and Googles apps can - and should IMO - be run from a browser without crossing over into my personal contacts and photos. Apple has zero authority over who I contact or what content I access over the web. With any luck, this drives development back towards the web. I haven't ha…

What are you disagreeing with? I didn't make an argument, I stated some facts and gave an opinion of the consequences of those actions.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#455

Post by smashit »

nostrademons wrote: post #178
gigatexal wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 90%+ of the profit from smartphones goes to Apple — if that’s not the upper hand then I don’t know what is. Apple makes profit. Google has a legion of devices with incentives to keep insecure so they can monitor and harvest the data to both serve and sell ads.

That's not the upper hand. The upper hand is having the installed base needed to be able to push through product changes that undermine your competitors' strategic position. Things like being able to continuously track the location of each of your ~2B customers so that you know who is hanging out with whom and can build the social graph that another one of your primary competitors spent a decade curating - or, for th…

It's the upper hand in certain regions. Last I checked Apple has majority market share in Japan, think it was 60% or more. Google definitely stand to lose something and clearly its worthwhile if they are paying billions per year.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#456

Post by samat »

nraynaud wrote: post #365
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 am a bit offended that google has a phone number and means of communications to resolve the issue with a real human at Apple. Nobody has that at google.

That's clearly not true. You'd have a phone number if you are a customer. Even with Gmail — GSuite offers decent phone support.

The fact that you cant reach a human if you are a "user" tells a lot about values at Google.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#457

Post by 3xblah »

SteveNuts wrote: post #410
3xblah wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say you're using a Google API like Maps, and you snapshot sections of their maps and store them on your computer so you can access them anytime without making API calls. This would sure save a lot of unnecessary network usage and bandwidth charges, not to mention it would be useful when you do not have network connectivity. What is the reason if any why users should be prohibited from doing this?

Because they don't own the pictures, plain and simple.

I don't follow your reasoning.

The question is why every time the user wants to look at a map she needs to let Google know, using computer network access for which the user must pay.

Paper maps or maps stored on physical media do not have this requirement. The map company may "own the map" but the purchaser can look at the map anytime she wants, without any ongoing expense to keep the map company abreast of her travel plans.

I do not not use an "account" or "log in" to view free maps, so I just take screenshots as a quick workaround.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#458

Post by emiliosic »

Vendan wrote: post #428
askafriend wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 2 massive companies, not a single one and Google has far more marketshare globally with Android. Details matter. Don’t leave them out.

Google blocking this kind of thing in android would be quite hard to near impossible...

On Android, one can sideload an app. Amazon has it's own app store. Chinese Android phones have their own. Android was initially designed with this kind of openness. In fact, Google didn't have an app store initially. Now, there are pros and cons to these approach. FB could be side loading Android apps all day long, doing who knows what, and there is not much Google can do about it. Now, if they were a bit smarter, they could've used a shell company's throwaway certificates. I cannot fathom why they would do something this shady using their own corporate certificates.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#459

Post by buildbot »

blhack wrote: post #214
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…

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.

Well in this case, wouldn't most people be using Google owned phones? Or if they bring their own device, have explicitly allowed Google/FB to manage their device through an enterprise system. That enterprise system for some reason shared a cert with an application _not_ used for enterprise, so the cert is banned.

Re: Apple blocks Google from running its internal iOS apps

#460

Post by jtd514 »

perfect_wave wrote: post #448
manigandham wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Then they still need to build a search engine, DuckDuckGo is just a proxy for google.
Post reply on HN