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

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#891

Post by IshKebab »

jedbrooke wrote: post #54
sabellito wrote: post #18

Some 6 years ago I bought new bluetooth headphones. Every time I'd put them on, my macbook would open apple music (I didn't even know it was installed). Every time. No way to disable it, I really tried. Stopped shy of doing some kernel stuff. Sold that laptop, and have never touched anything apple since. Probably never will. The hardware's good, everything else is an embarrassing mess. Sent from my Ubuntu.

just in case anyone else is running in to this problem, there is a solution https://github.com/tombonez/noTunes this will prevent itunes/apple music from opening

Should have called it byeTunes.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#892

Post by jelling »

rambambram wrote: post #370
eddythompson80 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they mean cap as 'lie' in genz speak. 'No cap' = 'No lie'. in a sentence "I saw an alligator today. No cap"

Gen Z speak? I thought it was 'hood speak' or something. Like: I'm going to cap your sorry ass. I'm not a native English speaker, so what do I know.

Etymology: like others said, the old version of cap was short for a bullet. And that term most likely comes from “cap guns” which are/were you guys for kids that had a tiny tiny amount of gunpowder/similar so they made a small noise when fired.

So a bit of speculation, but it’s possible that the word cap has inverted twice over the years, from a toy/fake bullet, to a real bullet, and now back to being a synonym for fake, which it originally was.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#893

Post by snapcaster »

celsoazevedo wrote: post #107
snapcaster wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Operating system made by advertising company is why it's a deal breaker for me

Don't search for "apple ad business" or you'll be very disappointed. :)

I am of course, but at least they have revenues not tied to spying. I'm not a corporate fanboy so all of this stuff disappoints me, just not going to make the perfect the enemy of the good

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#894

Post by snapcaster »

kelnos wrote: post #96
snapcaster wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Operating system made by advertising company is why it's a deal breaker for me

GGP mentions "user experience" being "infinitely better". I don't think Android being made by an advertising company has much if anything to do with it. I also don't see iOS and Android having much of a usability gap. At this point, they have very similar feature sets, and the UX is fairly well-polished, even on Android -- where yes, it took them a lot longer to get there. For the most part, if you think that either…

Agreed, for me it's idealogical not strictly technical. They both seem pretty functional

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#895

Post by ig1 »

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…

This is incorrect. It's trivial to reverse engineer and use the imessage API and there's third party services which will give you access to it.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#896

Post by crazygringo »

jjcob wrote: post #889
crazygringo wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

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

I trust they aren't there intentionally, and that they'll be patched in a security update as soon as Apple discovers them. In this regard, QuickTime is just part of the entire OS. No software is perfect. Bugs might be anywhere. But the permission dialogs are meant to protect the OS from third-party threats, not to protect the OS from Apple software.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#897

Post by crazygringo »

NotPractical wrote: post #749
crazygringo wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui... Presumably the DoJ wouldn't have sued Apple for being a monopoly if it was impossible for them to legally qual…

The DoJ can sue over whatever they want. They also lose suits all the time. So now it's up to a court decision to make the determination, and it may very well be that Apple is not, contrary to the DoJ's assertion.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#898

Post by theshrike79 »

NotPractical wrote: post #618
vv_ wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> having a smartphone is becoming a necessity for being a functional part of the society This is correct, as in some countries, you use your phone to authenticate access to banking applications and payments (e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart-ID ). However, I find it a bit of a stretch to claim that having iMessage access on a smartwatch is essential for being a functional member of society. Corporations will…

> people can simply switch to an Android phone Giving all your data to Google (an adtech company) is not an acceptable solution. Not to mention that it's incredibly difficult to leave the Apple ecosystem, by design.

It's not easy to degoogle either. Just Youtube alone is next to impossible to get rid of.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#899

Post by baseballdork »

socksy wrote: post #841
kulahan wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walled gardens are not inherently bad. I DO thank Apple for the App Store. It’s half the reason I have an iPhone. I WANT to be able to download any stupid thing in there without a care in the world re: viruses or other damaging experiences. This is not to say every aspect of their walled garden is good, but I’m more than happy to accept those problems in light of the benefits I personally value. This is all to say: i…

I never understand this viewpoint — I understand what you're saying but there's no advantage to this over the Play Store model on Android. You can have the walled garden, and also not restrict people's freedom — on Android I'm sure the number of people that use any other store than the play store or even side load apps are vanishingly small. To even be able to do it you have to enable it deep in the settings. And eve…

For myself, the point is that I don't have to download another app store ever. If fortnite wants to get me (and roughly 50% of US mobile users) to play their game, they _have_ to follow the rules of the app store we have decided suits us best. If, however, other app stores are allowed, then there are no rules. No gatekeeper.

I prefer the gatekeeper, in this case.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#900

Post by thedangler »

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…

couldn't they make it so it requires permission access with face recognition, thumb print, or pin to give it temp access that needs to be renewed.
Post reply on HN