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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#881

Post by cowsandmilk »

kraf wrote: post #857
lanyard-textile wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh whatever :P Don’t be condescending about a mindset you don’t experience yourself. I ran debian as my daily driver for like half my life; now I’m on mac and never have to worry about my friggin wifi driver.

It's been many years since I had my last driver issue. I find that impressive considering how many different platforms Linux has to run on. Have you noticed how bad the Docker experience is on Macs though, after how many years?

Not sure how that’s the fault of MacOS

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#882

Post by lawn »

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…

The hardware seems pretty good.

The software has taken a nosedive though and Android has overtaken iPhone in many (most?) aspects.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#883

Post by amelius »

uni_baconcat wrote: post #849
amelius wrote: post #815

Break them open like we did with Bell telephony. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System PS, why keep people defending this locked down consumer brand?

But Apple is neither monopoly nor infrastructure company. Bell telephony has no relevance in this case.

They run infrastructure (iMessages is communication infrastructure).

And you don't need to be a strict monopoly to be subject to antitrust law.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#884

Post by saagarjha »

shuckles wrote: post #692
tavavex wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like it, use it. Why not let other people augment the ecosystem? If Apple allowed Pebble to get full permissions and it all turned out to be the extremely unsafe, buggy disaster that everyone here chooses to portray it as, then you can still buy an Apple Watch. In what way does shutting out the competition benefit you?

How many users do you think call Apple everyday to complain about issues with their third party, knockoff AirPods lookalikes? Could you imagine why Apple could be protective of the user experience of their hardware and sensitive to that user experience being compromised by poorly implemented or nonfunctional peripherals? For every Pebble user, how many people might buy ripoff Apple Watches?

I would not be surprised if more people called every day about how their AirPods aren’t working as expected.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#886

Post by realusername »

crazygringo wrote: post #524
sigmar wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't you make that argument for literally any anticompetitive practice? Like in the 1990s: "Microsoft isn't making an OS for people that want to try different browsers"

Only if they're a monopoly. In the 1990's, Microsoft Windows had over 90% of operating system market share. They were a monopoly. iPhones are only 58% versus Android in the US right now. That's nowhere close to monopoly. Globally Android has 71%. Android is thriving. With Windows, you didn't have a choice. With iOS and Android, you have choice.

If it's not a duopoly, then why there's no competition between the play store and the app store to get developers or users from each other?

The only tariff change ever made on the appstore was as a reaction to an antitrust lawsuit and copied straight to Google. Just that is enough of a proof.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#887

Post by xenodium »

alphan0n wrote: post #703
xenodium wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

I did for some time too. Look into it again :)

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#888

Post by angulardragon03 »

Avamander wrote: post #323
joshstrange wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MDM is not easy but you can enroll devices after the fact, pre-enrollment isn’t the only option. But yes, it’s a PITA to deal with even at the best of times.

You can, but that does not give you a supervised device, as I said.

On macOS the enrolment is supervised either way. You can also get a supervised enrolment on an iOS device that isn’t in any ABM instance - there is more than one path to supervision.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#889

Post by jjcob »

crazygringo wrote: post #531
wpm wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quicktime Player.app gets an entitlement called `com.apple.private.tcc.allow`, giving it unprompted access to the Camera, Microphone, and Screen Capture. An MDM administrator, managing a computer or device owned by an organization, cannot grant those permissions to anything without user consent. For good reason! So why the *fuck* does Apple think they're entitled to?

> So why the *fuck* does Apple think they're entitled to? Because they manufactured the device, and you bought it? And honestly, I support them. Because starting QuickTime is a user action, and it only records when I want it to. QuickTime is an app I trust. I don't trust an organization admin not to record me without my consent. As we've heard the horror stories of schools spying on students with school laptops while…

If you followed the Apple Security scene for a bit, you'll notice that a lot of exploits make use of special permissions granted to Apples own apps and services. If you find a way to run your code in Quicktime Player, or to control Quicktime Player, you can circumvent the privacy dialog.

Do you trust Quicktime Player to be free of exploitable bugs or behaviors?

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#890

Post by Wowfunhappy »

msh wrote: post #811
pyrale wrote: post #790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spammers sending spam through ble ?! They might just as well beat you up and take your wallet.

No, they would on their own phones automate sending spam to the iMessage network using ble at the interface.

You can already use a Mac to automate iMessage. It supports Applescript.
Post reply on HN