Twitter and Facebook also have similar solutions. Have they been shut down too?
I think at least Facebook's usage would fall under the category of facilitating inter-app communication. They just communicate with almost every app out there.
Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
51–60 of 63 posts
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems like an incredibly petty way to view it. Apple's not out to get you. In fact, I'm glad they did this. That iHasApp looks creepy as hell, and it pisses me off that other devs were using it to basically spy on me. It reduces my trust in all apps.
To be clear - I have no problem with this service getting shut down, as it's clearly intended to violate the user's privacy. But to say you must use APIs as "prescribed" by Apple is way too broad and subjective. I'm sure the iOS developer Terms of Service forbids this at some level. If not, then update it. Then say you're shutting this down because it violates the TOS.
That's a good way to get a million page TOS.
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
> We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it". And we think that you will also know it when you cross it.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#53I want to be outraged on your behalf over this but I can't really summon it forth. While I understand the ever-present engineer desire to "see if it can be done", no good can really come from this sort of service in my opinion. I guess chalk it up to an interesting technical exercise and that's it.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#54You are an unethical person. I'm pleasantly surprised Apple shut this down.
I share your concern that this functionality could be abused, but disagree with your attempt to treat this as black-and-white or as a matter of personal character.
There are both ethical reasons and unethical reasons why an app-developer would want to know the other apps chosen by their users. On the up side, one could use the knowledge to prioritize improvements/integrations/compatibility with other apps. On the down side, one could punitively react to the presence of competing apps.
Assessing the ethics of how the functionality is used requires greater openness and transparency by everyone. Unfortunately, in a culture as closed as Apple's (eg http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2375476,00.asp or https://developer.pidgin.im/wiki/WhyNoiOSVersion ), you are unlikely to see that kind of openness.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#55> your app uses public APIs in a manner not prescribed by Apple What an enraging way to phrase this. I understand Apple's desire to shut this down, but they make their contempt for app developers obvious at every possible turn.
I'm totally for this being blocked.
My concern is that this, like everything, will be applied unevenly. For instance, Twitter's app does this, and probably won't be yanked from the app store.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#56Huh, how does this service's behavior differ from what the Twitter App Graph does?
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#57You are an unethical person. I'm pleasantly surprised Apple shut this down.
I don't even think you should be surprised. I don't see how anyone could condone the privacy violation this app commits. Of course this app should be banned, should have never made it to the appstore to begin with. And the developer should be ashamed of himself. With all the discussions around the NSA & privacy these days, it's tone-deafness & insensitive for a developer not to see the obvious problems iHasApp create…
Do you really suppose ad providers in millions of apps do anything differently? Do you think Apple's own iAd relevancy engine that allows them to charge premiums to advertisers does anything differently?
It seems odd to be outraged at a practice employed by the very knight in shining armor that just shut them down.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
When, whether talking about money or not, have you ever seen someone write 100M to mean "a hundred thousand"? That would be completely ridiculous. Roman numerals are not used for that.
It's used exactly like that in finance all the time. http://www.accountingcoach.com/blog/what-does-m-and-mm-stand... http://english.stackexchange.com/a/182072
That guy's response makes no sense to me. I worked in finance and banking for five years and didn't even once see M used to represent thousand. Perhaps times have changed and that used to be common. k (thousand) and M, m or MM (millions) were used though.
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't even think you should be surprised. I don't see how anyone could condone the privacy violation this app commits. Of course this app should be banned, should have never made it to the appstore to begin with. And the developer should be ashamed of himself. With all the discussions around the NSA & privacy these days, it's tone-deafness & insensitive for a developer not to see the obvious problems iHasApp create…
Do you really suppose ad providers in millions of apps do anything differently? Do you think Apple's own iAd relevancy engine that allows them to charge premiums to advertisers does anything differently? It seems odd to be outraged at a practice employed by the very knight in shining armor that just shut them down.
[deleted]
Re: Shutting Down a Service with 500M Requests per Month
#60It's a shame you had to bring this down but it looks like you saw it coming and enjoyed the ride. I think the posts that characterize you as unethical are just not willing to cope with the disillusion that technology is a two sided coin. The information was there and you used it. I commend you on seizing on the opportunity and wish you best of luck in the future.
Sorry, no. Technology is a two sided coin, mostly unable to be ethical or unethical. The people using technology, however, are surely able to fall somewhere in the spectrum. The OP is using this technology for (imo obviously) unethical reasons and is capable of being judged by that decision.