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

Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

ericmigi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#701

Post by presentation »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #268

I think people forget that Apple is not making devices for the Hackernews community. They are making devices for people that just want something that works pretty well and has reasonable security - even to the extent of protecting them from themselves. They have other things to do with their time than learn about security vulnerabilities and how to avoid them. They want to just click 'yes' on every popup and expect t…

I kind of agree - while I personally don't like to be treated like a dummy because I do feel like I know what I'm doing with tech, I wouldn't trust e.g. my parents with that power.

If Apple wants to be the brand for the tech illiterate that's fine—the real problem is that their hardware (and to a lesser extent some of their software) is actually a lot better than the competition, especially every since the M1 CPU came out.

So people like me and other HN denizens are left to hope that either some competitor actually becomes competitive; or Apple positions itself in such a way that they can simultaneously provide the "dummy mode" for dummies, and the "power mode" for people like me.

For the latter option, they clearly don't want to do it, probably not because they don't trust power users to do power user things; but because leaning on the dummies for cover helps them protect their walled garden.

Cue great frustration.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#702

Post by matheusmoreira »

joshstrange wrote: post #298
matheusmoreira wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Other then being lazy, which is totally ok. It's not OK. This collective laziness and convenience is our number one enemy. People don't want to be responsible, they want some corporation to manage everything so they don't have to think about stuff. We need more people to take responsibility and use Linux and free software and hardware. Owning the computing system means being responsible for it, and we need to get p…

This is such an incredibly HN take. What are you seeing in the world that would led you to think the average Joe can use Linux without someone like us supporting them? Maybe not day to day but they are absolutely going to run into pain points like “Netflix is low quality” or “I need to install this windows app for this new gizmo I bought”. It’s a fantasy world that Linux desktop is good enough for most people, it jus…

It doesn't matter if it's "good enough". These are our systems, they're the only things that are truly ours. The alternative is to become serfs in a trillion dollar corporation's digital fiefdom.

My sincere wish is for "average Joes" to stop being so average. I want them to start taking responsibility for their systems so that we can all enjoy the freedom that brings. Freedom to own the computers and do whatever we want with them, not just what the corporations allow us to do.

If they keep choosing the convenient fiefdom, it's going to destroy everything the word "hacker" ever stood for.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#703

Post by alphan0n »

xenodium wrote: post #478
alphan0n wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every accessory that is compatible with a device and supports MAP must: >•.. >•.. >•Not provide a user interface for sending messages. Devices do not support sending messages using MAP. From: “Accessory Design Guidelines for Apple Devices” [0] [0] https://www.bluetooth.com/wp-content/uploads/attachments/Blu...

It's been a little while since I've worked in the space, but it's worth checking a newer revision as this wording may no longer be present https://developer.apple.com/accessories/Accessory-Design-Gui... From a technical standpoint, there is no limitation for an accessory to implement the profile.

Yeah, the profile supports it, but Apple doesn’t support all the implementations as outlined in the profile.

I’ve been barking up this tree for nearly a decade.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#704

Post by _aavaa_ »

macrocosmos wrote: post #665
_aavaa_ wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better than voting with your wallet is voting with your vote and getting regulations in place.

You state that as if it is fact despite there being no evidence to support that viewpoint.

Emphasizing voting with your wallet means those with the most money dictate how things work. Google and Apple vote with their wallet all the time. When they’re buying competitors, buying preferential treatment for each other, and buying law makers and regulators.

We aren’t going to out bid them on any of these things. We have to make it illegal, and vote in people who will enforce the laws.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#705

Post by CivBase »

lynx97 wrote: post #430
chamanbuga wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is cap. I worked on heads up glasses, and one of our issues was the lack of integration with Apple's iMessage ecosystem. Device makers are willing to go through several security measures, like deploying the MFi chips and certification. However, at best this gives you access to the notification system, not iMessage itself. You are able to respond to messages via the notification framework, but not integrate direc…

As a user, I am totally fine with Apple restricting access to iMessage. In fact, now that I read this, I want them to do this, thanks Apple.

It's absolutely wild seeing comments like this on a supposed hacker community.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#706

Post by windexh8er »

vessenes wrote: post #101

I guess I’ll take the contra here on messages integration — moving a message over BLE to untrusted hardware and worse accepting them back into iMessage is a massive, massive change in the security boundary and therefore security architecture and therefore security promises that apple makes on iMessage. I do not believe average smartwatch users understand what they’d be doing if they got this. I do not believe vendors…

If you don't think that a walled garden locked into an ecosystem of hardware isn't already a cess pool - then I don't know what is.

Hardware should be able to be interoperable. Apple chooses not to, it's in their best interest because they claim "security" and "privacy" for it's users. Security theater for the masses.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#707

Post by windexh8er »

lynx97 wrote: post #430
chamanbuga wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is cap. I worked on heads up glasses, and one of our issues was the lack of integration with Apple's iMessage ecosystem. Device makers are willing to go through several security measures, like deploying the MFi chips and certification. However, at best this gives you access to the notification system, not iMessage itself. You are able to respond to messages via the notification framework, but not integrate direc…

As a user, I am totally fine with Apple restricting access to iMessage. In fact, now that I read this, I want them to do this, thanks Apple.

As a user you should be fine with the ability to restrict access to iMessage. Not locked out of it with hardware you own and interoperability dictated by the vendor who also wants you to buy their watch.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#708

Post by bigstrat2003 »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #648
lynx97 wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably dont get your sarcasm. But I never had a problem with Lightning. In the long run, I like the switch to USB-C... But when I got my first iPhone, USB-C wasn't invented yet, so... Also, I like the AppStore for its reviews, and would actually NEVER activate an alternative appstore. No need to weaken my security on purpose. I know, its apparently an unpopular opinion here, but that is mostly because many people…

Yup, Apple made Lightning because USB-C wasn't a thing yet and MicroUSB is awful. Lightning is a whole lot better than MicroUSB, and they've been using it since 2012 . MiniUSB B was pretty OK, Micro was just way too thin to be stable and would snap off frequently, in addition to being not very secure and hard to orient. Mini was thicker though, so while it worked fine for the HTC Apache and other Windows Mobile phone…

MicroUSB is fine, and Apple should've just used that (like every other phone manufacturer did, with great success). But Apple also has the world's biggest NIH complex, so they decided to invent a proprietary standard rather than go with something interoperable.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#709

Post by presentation »

crazygringo wrote: post #538
rednafi wrote: post #139

There's nothing new here. From AirDrop to AirPods, Apple's MO is to lock you into their ecosystem and be as belligerent as possible toward any non-Apple gizmo. Couple that with social and network effects, and you have a perfect formula for monopolizing a market without continuously improving the tech.

> and you have a perfect formula for monopolizing a market without continuously improving the tech. ...but the Apple ecosystem has the best tech. M chips, AirPods Pro, Apple Watch, iPad, Pencil, I mean the tech is great . Apple isn't monopolizing anything. They're competing like hell and winning because their tech is best. The real question is why the Android and Microsoft ecosystems don't do better at improving thei…

I just wish that they didn't feel the need to block out competitors to compete on an even playing field - I agree that their hardware is great, but if it's so great it should be able to dominate the market without hobbling competitors on iOS.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#710

Post by fooqux »

bigiain wrote: post #580
lynx97 wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user, I am totally fine with Apple restricting access to iMessage. In fact, now that I read this, I want them to do this, thanks Apple.

Yep. Same. I do not want 3rd party hardware/software vendors to have unrestricted access to the messaging app on my phone that is the only option my bank and PayPal and a bunch of other critical services use for 2FA. Especially not when the software they want to run is JavaScript, with all it's well known npm dependancy nightmares, _and_ from a founder and team that openly admit iPhones are a second class citizen in…

> And especially especially not when the founders have previously shown their colors when they rugpulled all their customers and effectively bricked all the devices they'd sold.

As a Pebble user for a long time, I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here. If you're talking about Fitbit halting services, I can't exactly blame the founder of Pebble for that. Can I blame him for the poor business decisions that led to needing to sell to Fitbit? I guess, but I'm not a business person nor a CEO and have no idea what transpired to lead up to that. But I'm reasonably sure it wasn't malice as you seem to imply.

Post reply on HN