I wonder how many applications do the same thing and haven't been called out on it.
Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
61–70 of 112 posts
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree it is helpful to involve Google so it can be changed for existing Pokemon Go users. But I don't see how Google has verified the claim, since Google themselves have yet to release a statement. By the way, Google indorsed this comment. Believe me?
It's probably much easier to involve Google when you are a Google spinoff company.
the people working at "niantic" are paid by google. niantic and alphabet are just tax dodges and lawsuit shields. it's all google, and you're all idiots.
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure the login flow used the official flow API and not collected the login credentials themselves to "helpfully" register the user? I haven't used to app so I have no idea, just a thought.
it's the google login flow
you don't HAVE to use it though. there are many different APIs you can use, OAuth tokens are just one of them. if you have username and password, you can use that.
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#64From the 1.01 iOS release notes: "-Fixed Google account scope"
Not documented, Pokemon Go now asks for Notification permissions. (Which is typical of mobile games and should have been done at launch, but ironic given current circumstances.)
> should have been done at launch
Generally speaking, this is the worst way to do it, as the app hasn't made a case for why it needs to send notifications.
It should do it in a contextual way so the user understands that notifications will enhance their experience of the app.
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#65Inital thought: Wow that company is so great... that they did the right thing... ...Wait a second do i think a company is great just cause they do things the way they should do them.
Yes. Because it's an uncommon thing for a company to do right by their customers, and everyone that does IMO deserves praise (and more business).
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not surprising given the incredible overwhelming number of people trying to play the game. I knew it would be huge, I never imagined it would be the phenomenon it is. (Go to a park at lunch or after work if you don't know what I'm talking about. Any park in the country.)
Being a semi-Google company, maybe the server code is written in Python, that's why the servers are always overloaded 8-)
Being the guys who wrote Ingress, I'm betting they still host their stuff on Google App Engine... ;).
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't seem like they were anticipating the load their servers would get. I've had trouble logging in, and other lags from time to time that really seem to be server overload issues.
Not surprising given the incredible overwhelming number of people trying to play the game. I knew it would be huge, I never imagined it would be the phenomenon it is. (Go to a park at lunch or after work if you don't know what I'm talking about. Any park in the country.)
Especially that they launched US-only (?), but the whole world is playing anyway thanks to game's APK being spread on-line. I'm writing this from Poland, coming straight from 2 hours walk from work, catching Pokemon and leveling up on the way :).
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#68This is the same message that was released to the press yesterday. I'm surprised Google itself has not said anything, as they are also at fault for not showing the permissions workflow in the first place.
Google probably doesn't want to draw that kind of attention to itself
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not documented, Pokemon Go now asks for Notification permissions. (Which is typical of mobile games and should have been done at launch, but ironic given current circumstances.)
> should have been done at launch Generally speaking, this is the worst way to do it, as the app hasn't made a case for why it needs to send notifications. It should do it in a contextual way so the user understands that notifications will enhance their experience of the app.
Why is it the worst way? It would make total sense to combine those ideas.
Re: Pokemon Go – Permissions Update
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> should have been done at launch Generally speaking, this is the worst way to do it, as the app hasn't made a case for why it needs to send notifications. It should do it in a contextual way so the user understands that notifications will enhance their experience of the app.
Why is it the worst way? It would make total sense to combine those ideas.
Typically the user should be primed, given reason for what the notifications will entail, how frequent they might be and so on. It makes users much more receptive to them if you tell then why they should want to have this optional feature enabled, rather than a blind notification popup in first launch.