5 ms·

Android is implementing this in 6.0. No reason to make this a fanboy war. In any case, the app would probably say "Oh, I can't have camera? Well you can't have

by johnmaguire2013 11y ago

Android is implementing this in 6.0. No reason to make this a fanboy war. In any case, the app would probably say "Oh, I can't have camera? Well you can't have app." And it's not like you weren't warned on the page with "37 permissions".

awqrre 11y ago
Actually, part of the problem is that they don't have to ask for 37 permissions... they are grouped together in such large groups that you don't know what permissions they are really after. Cyanogenmod has Privacy Guard that I think can help with this privacy nightmare.
- azinman2 11y ago
  The bigger issue is that they provide no context. "Facebook wants to send Sms" seems really odd until there's some feature like inviting someone that would obviously require sending Sms. Contextually asking for this permission then is much more reasonable, especially since the app can be used otherwise. Clearly certain permissions like camera may be the entire reason for the app, but the more sinister stuff like location tracking is often not the primary purpose.
sossles 11y ago
On the AppStore, apps are required to gracefully degrade where permissions are not granted, and you can be rejected for not doing that. That seems unlikely to be enforced on the Play Store.
- verbify 11y ago
  Can anyone confirm if that is the case with uber? On Android, if location isn't enabled, you can't use uber. And before anyone claims location services are necessary to find the user and stop ddos attacks - I've ordered uber before for people in other parts of town, and I'm a signed in user with a track record of making payments.
  - culturestate 11y ago
    Yes, you can set an arbitrary point as the pickup address on Uber for iOS without Location Services.
  - HappyTypist 11y ago
    As much as I respect not wanting to share location, the average user tends to be quite un-tech-savvy. Say that on average users without location services enabled makes 5x more wrong requests - that can result in hundreds of thousands of lost driver hours.
    - rdancer 11y ago
      Yes, and if that were a problem, we would not have Uber for iOS. There are whole classes of apps that cannot be made for iOS (it used to be the case of custom keyboards & ad blockers, for example). Because security in general, and privacy in particular, are non-negotiable on iOS.
- sroerick 11y ago
  This is not the case with iOS snapchat. Disabling the camera prevents app use.
  - qq66 11y ago
    I haven't used Android, but culturally it seems like iOS developers try to deliver as much as they can with the permissions you give them. A voice recording app would probably just refuse to function without microphone access, but a video app will typically simply record a silent video if you give camera access but deny microphone access. I don't know if this is enforced by Apple's review process or whether it's an emergent custom.
    - sroerick 11y ago
      Snapchat records silent videos if you disable microphone access, but disallows access to the entire app if you disable camera function. You cannot even read other people's snaps without enabling camera. I deleted the app because of this function.
JoshMnem 11y ago
It isn't a fanboy war. The Android permission system is terrible, and users cannot get a sense of what apps are able to do. I've used Android since Galaxy I. I've never used an iPhone.
- notatoad 11y ago
  As the parent comment says, this is now fixed. Android has moved to an iOS style permissions system in 6.0
  - JoshMnem 11y ago
    It isn't fixed on my phone, and we've already suffered through years of it.
    - y4mi 11y ago
      root your phone and install a permission manager. or use cyanogenmod and enable the built-in.
      - JoshMnem 11y ago
        I would like to do that, but I don't want to risk turning my phone into a brick just to get basic root permissions.
        tedks 11y ago
        Well, fortune favours the bold. You can take that risk or you can be cattle for all the apps that want you to actually watch the ads they support themselves with. Make your choice.
    - sangnoir 11y ago
      The quickest solution to your years of suffering would be getting an iPhone.
siculars 11y ago
Fandoy war? This basic privacy/security feature has been in iOS since forever. It is as common sense as you can get. Not having it is actually outright hostile towards users. I've used both Android and iOS for some time and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that iOS is far superior. In the meantime... talk to me when Android gets this basic feature in 6.0.
- andrewguenther 11y ago
  "I've used both Android and iOS for some time and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that iOS is far superior." Nope, no fanboying here, move along folks.
- thomasahle 11y ago
  > This basic privacy/security feature has been in iOS since forever. IOs originally had no permission system at all. > talk to me when Android gets this basic feature in 6.0. Half a year ago.
  - Tloewald 11y ago
    Or October for non-developers. Was that half a year ago? Oh and it only works for apps targeting the latest APIs, which is how many apps?
- tarblog 11y ago
  >has been in iOS since forever Granular permissions have only been in iOS since version 6.0, which came out 3 years ago. The first version of iOS was 8 years ago. For a feature that's "as common sense as it gets" we sure got along fine without it for half a decade.
  - JoBrad 11y ago
    I wouldn't say we were getting along fine without it. There were some pretty big privacy breaches[1], which helped move Apple forward. I think Google and Android are great, but on this topic they have held out for as long as possible, it seems[2]. [1] http://www.cnet.com/news/path-shares-photos-oh-and-uploads-your-contacts-too/ http://www.cnet.com/news/path-shares-photos-oh-and-uploads-y... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/20/android-apps-permission-app-ops http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/20/android-ap...

awqrre 11y ago

Actually, part of the problem is that they don't have to ask for 37 permissions... they are grouped together in such large groups that you don't know what permissions they are really after. Cyanogenmod has Privacy Guard that I think can help with this privacy nightmare.

azinman2 11y ago
The bigger issue is that they provide no context. "Facebook wants to send Sms" seems really odd until there's some feature like inviting someone that would obviously require sending Sms. Contextually asking for this permission then is much more reasonable, especially since the app can be used otherwise. Clearly certain permissions like camera may be the entire reason for the app, but the more sinister stuff like location tracking is often not the primary purpose.

sossles 11y ago

On the AppStore, apps are required to gracefully degrade where permissions are not granted, and you can be rejected for not doing that. That seems unlikely to be enforced on the Play Store.

verbify 11y ago
Can anyone confirm if that is the case with uber? On Android, if location isn't enabled, you can't use uber. And before anyone claims location services are necessary to find the user and stop ddos attacks - I've ordered uber before for people in other parts of town, and I'm a signed in user with a track record of making payments.
- culturestate 11y ago
  Yes, you can set an arbitrary point as the pickup address on Uber for iOS without Location Services.
- HappyTypist 11y ago
  As much as I respect not wanting to share location, the average user tends to be quite un-tech-savvy. Say that on average users without location services enabled makes 5x more wrong requests - that can result in hundreds of thousands of lost driver hours.
  - rdancer 11y ago
    Yes, and if that were a problem, we would not have Uber for iOS. There are whole classes of apps that cannot be made for iOS (it used to be the case of custom keyboards & ad blockers, for example). Because security in general, and privacy in particular, are non-negotiable on iOS.
sroerick 11y ago
This is not the case with iOS snapchat. Disabling the camera prevents app use.
- qq66 11y ago
  I haven't used Android, but culturally it seems like iOS developers try to deliver as much as they can with the permissions you give them. A voice recording app would probably just refuse to function without microphone access, but a video app will typically simply record a silent video if you give camera access but deny microphone access. I don't know if this is enforced by Apple's review process or whether it's an emergent custom.
  - sroerick 11y ago
    Snapchat records silent videos if you disable microphone access, but disallows access to the entire app if you disable camera function. You cannot even read other people's snaps without enabling camera. I deleted the app because of this function.

JoshMnem 11y ago

It isn't a fanboy war. The Android permission system is terrible, and users cannot get a sense of what apps are able to do. I've used Android since Galaxy I. I've never used an iPhone.

notatoad 11y ago
As the parent comment says, this is now fixed. Android has moved to an iOS style permissions system in 6.0
- JoshMnem 11y ago
  It isn't fixed on my phone, and we've already suffered through years of it.
  - y4mi 11y ago
    root your phone and install a permission manager. or use cyanogenmod and enable the built-in.
    - JoshMnem 11y ago
      I would like to do that, but I don't want to risk turning my phone into a brick just to get basic root permissions.
      - tedks 11y ago
        Well, fortune favours the bold. You can take that risk or you can be cattle for all the apps that want you to actually watch the ads they support themselves with. Make your choice.
  - sangnoir 11y ago
    The quickest solution to your years of suffering would be getting an iPhone.

siculars 11y ago

Fandoy war? This basic privacy/security feature has been in iOS since forever. It is as common sense as you can get. Not having it is actually outright hostile towards users. I've used both Android and iOS for some time and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that iOS is far superior. In the meantime... talk to me when Android gets this basic feature in 6.0.

andrewguenther 11y ago
"I've used both Android and iOS for some time and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt that iOS is far superior." Nope, no fanboying here, move along folks.
thomasahle 11y ago
> This basic privacy/security feature has been in iOS since forever. IOs originally had no permission system at all. > talk to me when Android gets this basic feature in 6.0. Half a year ago.
- Tloewald 11y ago
  Or October for non-developers. Was that half a year ago? Oh and it only works for apps targeting the latest APIs, which is how many apps?
tarblog 11y ago
>has been in iOS since forever Granular permissions have only been in iOS since version 6.0, which came out 3 years ago. The first version of iOS was 8 years ago. For a feature that's "as common sense as it gets" we sure got along fine without it for half a decade.
- JoBrad 11y ago
  I wouldn't say we were getting along fine without it. There were some pretty big privacy breaches[1], which helped move Apple forward. I think Google and Android are great, but on this topic they have held out for as long as possible, it seems[2]. [1] http://www.cnet.com/news/path-shares-photos-oh-and-uploads-your-contacts-too/ http://www.cnet.com/news/path-shares-photos-oh-and-uploads-y... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/20/android-apps-permission-app-ops http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/20/android-ap...