4 ms·

> It might be possible for companies like Facebook to rewrite their code to use an iOS 10+ Notification Service app extension to decrypt the notifications inste

by comex 7y ago

> It might be possible for companies like Facebook to rewrite their code to use an iOS 10+ Notification Service app extension to decrypt the notifications instead, but that requires major code changes and has additional limitations. Perhaps, but iOS 10 is now 3 years old; Facebook has had plenty of time to make those major code changes, as opposed to continuing to use VoIP push notifications for things other than VoIP.

dan-robertson 7y ago
Facebook aren’t obliged to make a change just because they can. Taking something that works and changing it for its own sake is something people very often get annoyed about.
- acdha 7y ago
  > Taking something that works and changing it for its own sake That's a somewhat misleading way to characterize this: VoIP apps are still going to be just fine using the VoIP API. The question is whether legacy code should preclude Apple taking steps to act on their users' behalf. Given the number of people I know who uninstalled Messenger so their phone could make it through the workday without a charge, I'm pretty sure most people will shed no tears for someone at Facebook having to do the job they are very well paid to do.
  - dan-robertson 7y ago
    I don’t get what you’re trying to say? The GP says the new api which Facebook should use has been available 3 years, implying that fb ought to have made the change long ago. I say they had no reason to make the change in the last three years [because Apple are dropping support for the old api now and only announced this recently]. And you say that’s wrong (so FB should have made the change 3 years ago) because ... the app will have been fine? Or because Apple behave nobly? I don’t see how it follows.
    - acdha 7y ago
      I’m saying that Facebook was using an API for something other than what it was designed for, and thus I don’t feel much sympathy for them having to change their code when the API contract is more strictly enforced. It’s just a cost of doing business at that point.

by comex 7y ago

dan-robertson 7y ago

Facebook aren’t obliged to make a change just because they can. Taking something that works and changing it for its own sake is something people very often get annoyed about.

acdha 7y ago
> Taking something that works and changing it for its own sake That's a somewhat misleading way to characterize this: VoIP apps are still going to be just fine using the VoIP API. The question is whether legacy code should preclude Apple taking steps to act on their users' behalf. Given the number of people I know who uninstalled Messenger so their phone could make it through the workday without a charge, I'm pretty sure most people will shed no tears for someone at Facebook having to do the job they are very well paid to do.
- dan-robertson 7y ago
  I don’t get what you’re trying to say? The GP says the new api which Facebook should use has been available 3 years, implying that fb ought to have made the change long ago. I say they had no reason to make the change in the last three years [because Apple are dropping support for the old api now and only announced this recently]. And you say that’s wrong (so FB should have made the change 3 years ago) because ... the app will have been fine? Or because Apple behave nobly? I don’t see how it follows.
  - acdha 7y ago
    I’m saying that Facebook was using an API for something other than what it was designed for, and thus I don’t feel much sympathy for them having to change their code when the API contract is more strictly enforced. It’s just a cost of doing business at that point.