9 ms·

I feel less vengeful satisfaction from this one, but I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. I just hope it doesn't backfire. On a totally per

by _bxg1 8y ago

I feel less vengeful satisfaction from this one, but I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. I just hope it doesn't backfire. On a totally personal level, I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies.

rising-sky 8y ago
Similar concerns. I think this might, in the long term, be detrimental to Apple if companies begin to revolt against their overarching, seemingly totalitarian power regardless of if the intent is noble. As mentioned in a separate Verge article- "One giant platform declared another giant platform’s market research program inappropriate, then disappeared it with a Thanos-style finger snap" also from same article, attributed to Nilay Patel "Hi, I’m the nagging voice in the back of your head pointing out that it’s pretty intense that Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones." Edited for punctuation
- dewey 8y ago
  Don’t quote text with code blocks please, it’s unreadable on mobile.
  - rising-sky 8y ago
    sorry, fixed
  - hinkley 8y ago
    I'm on a 1080p display and it's still unreadable because you get arbitrary scrollbars that have nothing to do with browser width.
  - snazz 8y ago
    At least on iOS, you can scroll sideways (awkwardly) to read this kind of text.
- _bxg1 8y ago
  Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.
  - izacus 8y ago
    Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.
    - ceejayoz 8y ago
      Google will have explicitly accepted very specific terms at a corporate, much-reviewed-by-legal level when they got their enterprise certificate. It's not a "visiting this site means you're bound by the TOS" sort of situation.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      > Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. The difference is that Facebook and Google agreed to and were fully aware of the terms beforehand.
    - AnonymousPlanet 8y ago
      > I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different. Remember those cyberpunk stories where not the elected governments but rivaling multinational companies are the law? This is how we get there.
    - zepto 8y ago
      Google and Facebook signed contracts and then broke the terms. That’s what makes it different.
- outlog 8y ago
  "Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones." no - you are free to run any code on YOUR phones with the enterprise program - you are clearly not free to run any code on OTHERS phones using this program..
  - the_duke 8y ago
    That doesn't change the point. As a user, I can not choose what code to run on my iPhone. The only way to run a non-official app would be if the app was open source: put it in testflight for your personal use. This is the main reason I have sworn off all Apple devices.
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      You can sign and install apps yourself.
    - zepto 8y ago
      It does change the point. As a user, you can run any code on your phone. If someone won’t give you the code, but instead will only supply it via Apple’s store, that’s between you and the supplier.
      - the_duke 8y ago
        As a developer with a Mac and the knowledge how to do this. That is a very limited subset of iPhone users.
        hk__2 8y ago
        People who want to run their own code on their smartphone are probably already a very limited subset of all users.
        mrep 8y ago
        If it were possible, many more companies would sidestep the app store like how Fortnite did that with the android play store. The only reason Fortnite used Apple's app store is because Apple has made it practically impossible to side load apps.
jdietrich 8y ago
It's worth bearing in mind that Google pay Apple billions of dollars a year to be the default search engine on iOS. To my eyes, Apple clearly have the upper hand in this relationship. https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3063669/google-is-paying-over-gbp16bn-to-apple-for-two-years-as-safaris-primary-search-engine https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3063669/google-is-...
- robarr 8y ago
  let’s not be naives... apple is happy getting billions of dollars from google, who use this data for exactly the same thing than facebook, and it is much less transparent to the user that the opt in from the facebok app. There are no saints here even if apple has a privacy stance far better for us users than the other two parties.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
    That seems to be cynicism of the rather unhelpful variant. If, as you admit yourself, Apple is far better in terms of privacy, would it not be helpful, even if they are not perfect, to praise their (relative) sainthood and bury them with money? That way, they would be reward for their strategy, might double-down on it (maybe even achieving perfection in your very smart and perpetually critical eyes), and inspire others to follow their lead.
- nostrademons 8y ago
  Android has 85% of the worldwide smartphone market. Apple doesn't exactly have the upper hand in the relationship, but they have enough leverage to make it sting if they decide not to cooperate and to force a reasonable settlement. In my mind, a reasonable settlement includes not installing spyware on users' iPhones through the enterprise development program, so it looks like they're doing precisely that.
  - zapzupnz 8y ago
    > Android has 85% of the worldwide smartphone market I think a mistake to make here is thinking that Apple gives a toss.
RobLach 8y ago
What's Google going to do? Make their own phone?
matwood 8y ago
> I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. Not really. If any lone developer/small company did this, Apple would have banned the whole developer account.
- hellofunk 8y ago
  Is this merely a conjecture on your part, or do you have a source confirming that this would in fact happen to an arbitrary company?
- briandear 8y ago
  [citation needed]
seanalltogether 8y ago
For me, this is just another reason to be unhappy with the Apple distribution model. I work with IOT devices and we have enough trouble getting Apple to approve our app store releases. We need Enterprise Certs from time to time as a release valve for the inconsistent review policies that stop us from getting into the app store in a predictable manner.
- jimbokun 8y ago
  Maybe not a great idea to post this where an Apple employee is likely to read it? Sounds like you just confessed to violating Apple's terms.
beerlord 8y ago
Can someone explain how Facebook or Google hiring testers willing to expose 100% of their personal usage via an opt-in, paid program impacts consumers? Why should we 'applaud' Apple for this? Isn't it perfectly reasonable for companies like Google and Facebook to run deep user testing?
- IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
  If you agree that privacy has a certain value (and Google and Facebook obviously do which is why they paid for invading it) then it’s just a matter of degree from this to selling your kidney. The argument is somewhat moot, anyway. Apple has simply decided that privacy is a tenet of their value proposition, that value is reflected in their contacts granting in-house certificates, and these companies broke the terms of these contracts.
  - mrep 8y ago
    > Apple has simply decided that privacy is a tenet of their value proposition, Yeah, that's just marketing. If they really cared, they wouldn't accept a 9 billion dollar payout per year to make Google the default search engine for IOS.
    - IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
      See my other comment in this thread about the ineffectiveness of blanket cynicism to either effect change or make you appear so, so smart.
- lern_too_spel 8y ago
  Because Apple has frivolous restrictions on what users can do on their phones, and the violators knew this ahead of time. Rules are rules. Apple is likely shooting themselves in the foot here. These companies' IT departments will no longer be able to support iOS devices for accessing intranet resources, which means no engineers will be using iOS devices as daily drivers, which means their iOS apps will fall further behind their Android apps in quality.
- 8y ago
rhizome 8y ago
On the other hand: screw them both. They knew the terms, they have the same ones in their own ToS/Rules/etc. I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies. In what way does Apple have anything to fear from FB or Google, or even depend on either of them at all? Where is the "force" going to come from, their users threatening to switch to Android? I don't think these incidents would be enough to lend that eventuality any weight.
sneak 8y ago
Apple does not have any obligation to enforce rules consistently from the standpoint of those it enforces against. Apple should enforce when and where will sell the most hardware. Apple is a phone manufacturer, not a government. They can and should selectively enforce to promote their brand values—some of which are security and privacy.

by _bxg1 8y ago

rising-sky 8y ago

Similar concerns. I think this might, in the long term, be detrimental to Apple if companies begin to revolt against their overarching, seemingly totalitarian power regardless of if the intent is noble. As mentioned in a separate Verge article- "One giant platform declared another giant platform’s market research program inappropriate, then disappeared it with a Thanos-style finger snap" also from same article, attributed to Nilay Patel "Hi, I’m the nagging voice in the back of your head pointing out that it’s pretty intense that Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones." Edited for punctuation

dewey 8y ago
Don’t quote text with code blocks please, it’s unreadable on mobile.
- rising-sky 8y ago
  sorry, fixed
- hinkley 8y ago
  I'm on a 1080p display and it's still unreadable because you get arbitrary scrollbars that have nothing to do with browser width.
- snazz 8y ago
  At least on iOS, you can scroll sideways (awkwardly) to read this kind of text.
_bxg1 8y ago
Yeah, I read that article. It was a pretty bad take. Apple isn't "Thanos-snapping", it's enforcing its own terms of use which are very clearly laid out. Both Facebook and Google knowingly breached those terms, and they got caught. That's all there is to it.
- izacus 8y ago
  Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. Google can make the terms of use "None of our services and any kind of services deployed on Google Cloud may ever be displayed on an Apple device" and it will have the same legitimancy. I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different.
  - ceejayoz 8y ago
    Google will have explicitly accepted very specific terms at a corporate, much-reviewed-by-legal level when they got their enterprise certificate. It's not a "visiting this site means you're bound by the TOS" sort of situation.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    > Since terms of use are something Apple makes up, I don't really see the difference. The difference is that Facebook and Google agreed to and were fully aware of the terms beforehand.
  - AnonymousPlanet 8y ago
    > I don't know why there's so many people who think putting something in a bullet point as a policy/law just makes it somehow different. Remember those cyberpunk stories where not the elected governments but rivaling multinational companies are the law? This is how we get there.
  - zepto 8y ago
    Google and Facebook signed contracts and then broke the terms. That’s what makes it different.
outlog 8y ago
"Apple can simply decide to prevent people from running code on their phones." no - you are free to run any code on YOUR phones with the enterprise program - you are clearly not free to run any code on OTHERS phones using this program..
- the_duke 8y ago
  That doesn't change the point. As a user, I can not choose what code to run on my iPhone. The only way to run a non-official app would be if the app was open source: put it in testflight for your personal use. This is the main reason I have sworn off all Apple devices.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    You can sign and install apps yourself.
  - zepto 8y ago
    It does change the point. As a user, you can run any code on your phone. If someone won’t give you the code, but instead will only supply it via Apple’s store, that’s between you and the supplier.
    - the_duke 8y ago
      As a developer with a Mac and the knowledge how to do this. That is a very limited subset of iPhone users.
      - hk__2 8y ago
        People who want to run their own code on their smartphone are probably already a very limited subset of all users.
        mrep 8y ago
        If it were possible, many more companies would sidestep the app store like how Fortnite did that with the android play store. The only reason Fortnite used Apple's app store is because Apple has made it practically impossible to side load apps.

jdietrich 8y ago

It's worth bearing in mind that Google pay Apple billions of dollars a year to be the default search engine on iOS. To my eyes, Apple clearly have the upper hand in this relationship. https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3063669/google-is-paying-over-gbp16bn-to-apple-for-two-years-as-safaris-primary-search-engine https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3063669/google-is-...

robarr 8y ago
let’s not be naives... apple is happy getting billions of dollars from google, who use this data for exactly the same thing than facebook, and it is much less transparent to the user that the opt in from the facebok app. There are no saints here even if apple has a privacy stance far better for us users than the other two parties.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
  That seems to be cynicism of the rather unhelpful variant. If, as you admit yourself, Apple is far better in terms of privacy, would it not be helpful, even if they are not perfect, to praise their (relative) sainthood and bury them with money? That way, they would be reward for their strategy, might double-down on it (maybe even achieving perfection in your very smart and perpetually critical eyes), and inspire others to follow their lead.
nostrademons 8y ago
Android has 85% of the worldwide smartphone market. Apple doesn't exactly have the upper hand in the relationship, but they have enough leverage to make it sting if they decide not to cooperate and to force a reasonable settlement. In my mind, a reasonable settlement includes not installing spyware on users' iPhones through the enterprise development program, so it looks like they're doing precisely that.
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  > Android has 85% of the worldwide smartphone market I think a mistake to make here is thinking that Apple gives a toss.

RobLach 8y ago

What's Google going to do? Make their own phone?

matwood 8y ago

> I respect that they're applying their rules consistently. Not really. If any lone developer/small company did this, Apple would have banned the whole developer account.

hellofunk 8y ago
Is this merely a conjecture on your part, or do you have a source confirming that this would in fact happen to an arbitrary company?
briandear 8y ago
[citation needed]

seanalltogether 8y ago

For me, this is just another reason to be unhappy with the Apple distribution model. I work with IOT devices and we have enough trouble getting Apple to approve our app store releases. We need Enterprise Certs from time to time as a release valve for the inconsistent review policies that stop us from getting into the app store in a predictable manner.

jimbokun 8y ago
Maybe not a great idea to post this where an Apple employee is likely to read it? Sounds like you just confessed to violating Apple's terms.

beerlord 8y ago

Can someone explain how Facebook or Google hiring testers willing to expose 100% of their personal usage via an opt-in, paid program impacts consumers? Why should we 'applaud' Apple for this? Isn't it perfectly reasonable for companies like Google and Facebook to run deep user testing?

IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
If you agree that privacy has a certain value (and Google and Facebook obviously do which is why they paid for invading it) then it’s just a matter of degree from this to selling your kidney. The argument is somewhat moot, anyway. Apple has simply decided that privacy is a tenet of their value proposition, that value is reflected in their contacts granting in-house certificates, and these companies broke the terms of these contracts.
- mrep 8y ago
  > Apple has simply decided that privacy is a tenet of their value proposition, Yeah, that's just marketing. If they really cared, they wouldn't accept a 9 billion dollar payout per year to make Google the default search engine for IOS.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
    See my other comment in this thread about the ineffectiveness of blanket cynicism to either effect change or make you appear so, so smart.
lern_too_spel 8y ago
Because Apple has frivolous restrictions on what users can do on their phones, and the violators knew this ahead of time. Rules are rules. Apple is likely shooting themselves in the foot here. These companies' IT departments will no longer be able to support iOS devices for accessing intranet resources, which means no engineers will be using iOS devices as daily drivers, which means their iOS apps will fall further behind their Android apps in quality.
8y ago

rhizome 8y ago

On the other hand: screw them both. They knew the terms, they have the same ones in their own ToS/Rules/etc. I'd rather Facebook feel the hurt for its audacity than Apple be forced to backtrack because they made too many enemies. In what way does Apple have anything to fear from FB or Google, or even depend on either of them at all? Where is the "force" going to come from, their users threatening to switch to Android? I don't think these incidents would be enough to lend that eventuality any weight.

sneak 8y ago

Apple does not have any obligation to enforce rules consistently from the standpoint of those it enforces against. Apple should enforce when and where will sell the most hardware. Apple is a phone manufacturer, not a government. They can and should selectively enforce to promote their brand values—some of which are security and privacy.