3 ms·

People are very enthusiastic about this but this is actually not going to gain a lot of traction because - it's more difficult to implement than FB sign in and

People are very enthusiastic about this but this is actually not going to gain a lot of traction because - it's more difficult to implement than FB sign in and websites don't get any of the benefits - it works with apple devices, and it will be a nightmare to use in other devices, esp. if the user uses the private email - Apple would control and route the emails of the user and the app! This is a big privacy hole imho. - Apple drops users or apps without second thoughts from their ecosystem, and the web is not used to this (and is not going to change) - Maintaining new sign options is already a hassle, adding a new one that will only be accessible to a relatively small user base, with a number of hoops makes it seem less worth it. On the plus side though, you do know that users coming from apple sign in are probably richer and better monetizable.

coder543 7y ago
> but this is actually not going to gain a lot of traction You're forgetting the part where Apple is going to mandate that app developers must offer Sign In With Apple if the app offers any social logins like Facebook or Twitter, and that the Sign In With Apple option is strongly suggested to be the first one on the list. It absolutely will gain traction.
- buboard 7y ago
  it will never be more popular than fb because they don't have the user base. And this only applies for new signups, generally there is no option to switch from fb sign in -> apple sign in.
- jaydz 7y ago
  I think the more likely scenario will be apps removing social logins and implementing their own login logic.
  - dev_tty01 7y ago
    Huh? Add a handful of lines of code in your iOS/Mac app to add another login button or implement a whole server based authentication scheme? Maintain and keep secure the server based authentication for the lifetime of your app? That is not at all likely given the relative cost in money and time between the two choices.
    - jaydz 7y ago
      A real email address is too important for businesses. Maybe indies or really small teams will use Apple sign in, but I doubt VC funded apps will.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
scarface74 7y ago
- it's more difficult to implement than FB sign in and websites don't get any of the benefits It's standard OATH just like FB - Apple drops users or apps without second thoughts from their ecosystem, and the web is not used to this (and is not going to change) That's no more of an issue than if you are using any other IDP that could also drop you. Maintaining new sign options is already a hassle, adding a new one that will only be accessible to a relatively small user base, with a number of hoops makes it seem less worth it. iOS users are a small user base?
- buboard 7y ago
  > It's standard OATH just like FB Doesn't it require an active developer subscription? > That's no more of an issue than if you are using any other IDP Google and FB are pretty lenient about who is allowed to use their sign in and i haven't heard of any horror stories. Comparatively apple is very aggressive in removing apps. > iOS users are a small user base? It's like 12-25% of users which is not a lot and it is very highly overlapping with people having FB/google accounts already, so it definitely seems like an "optional" sign in option.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You’re not selling an app worldwide. In the affluent countries: http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide -United States 54% -United Kingdom 49% http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/japan http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/japan - Japan 70% https://www.statista.com/statistics/861532/australia-mobile-os-share/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/861532/australia-mobile-... -Australia 56% Even if you take into consideration poorer countries, the more affluent population still has iOS devices.
monkin 7y ago
> and websites don't get any of the benefits What kind of benefits FB offers for websites?
- olliej 7y ago
  A real email address they can spam? :D
  - buboard 7y ago
    You have to get the user's permission to get their email address. FB sign in allows you to access the entire FB graph api (with permissions)

coder543 7y ago

> but this is actually not going to gain a lot of traction You're forgetting the part where Apple is going to mandate that app developers must offer Sign In With Apple if the app offers any social logins like Facebook or Twitter, and that the Sign In With Apple option is strongly suggested to be the first one on the list. It absolutely will gain traction.

buboard 7y ago
it will never be more popular than fb because they don't have the user base. And this only applies for new signups, generally there is no option to switch from fb sign in -> apple sign in.
jaydz 7y ago
I think the more likely scenario will be apps removing social logins and implementing their own login logic.
- dev_tty01 7y ago
  Huh? Add a handful of lines of code in your iOS/Mac app to add another login button or implement a whole server based authentication scheme? Maintain and keep secure the server based authentication for the lifetime of your app? That is not at all likely given the relative cost in money and time between the two choices.
  - jaydz 7y ago
    A real email address is too important for businesses. Maybe indies or really small teams will use Apple sign in, but I doubt VC funded apps will.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

scarface74 7y ago

- it's more difficult to implement than FB sign in and websites don't get any of the benefits It's standard OATH just like FB - Apple drops users or apps without second thoughts from their ecosystem, and the web is not used to this (and is not going to change) That's no more of an issue than if you are using any other IDP that could also drop you. Maintaining new sign options is already a hassle, adding a new one that will only be accessible to a relatively small user base, with a number of hoops makes it seem less worth it. iOS users are a small user base?

buboard 7y ago
> It's standard OATH just like FB Doesn't it require an active developer subscription? > That's no more of an issue than if you are using any other IDP Google and FB are pretty lenient about who is allowed to use their sign in and i haven't heard of any horror stories. Comparatively apple is very aggressive in removing apps. > iOS users are a small user base? It's like 12-25% of users which is not a lot and it is very highly overlapping with people having FB/google accounts already, so it definitely seems like an "optional" sign in option.
- scarface74 7y ago
  You’re not selling an app worldwide. In the affluent countries: http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide -United States 54% -United Kingdom 49% http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/japan http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/japan - Japan 70% https://www.statista.com/statistics/861532/australia-mobile-os-share/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/861532/australia-mobile-... -Australia 56% Even if you take into consideration poorer countries, the more affluent population still has iOS devices.

monkin 7y ago

> and websites don't get any of the benefits What kind of benefits FB offers for websites?

olliej 7y ago
A real email address they can spam? :D
- buboard 7y ago
  You have to get the user's permission to get their email address. FB sign in allows you to access the entire FB graph api (with permissions)