3 ms·
> you have no actual evidence about why Apple implemented this feature You mean, other than what is clearly explained in the article? “In early 2018, a pair o
by mindgam3 7y ago
> you have no actual evidence about why Apple implemented this feature
You mean, other than what is clearly explained in the article?
“In early 2018, a pair of major shareholders urged Apple’s board of directors to do something about youth screen addiction... Nine months later, Apple launched Screen Time”
> and also zero insight into what incentivizes Apple
Would you care to provide any counter evidence or insights of your own, or do you generally prefer defending your position via ad hominen attacks?
- swatcoder 7y agoI can't weigh in on Apple's internal process, but that explanation you quoted from the article is far from convincing to me. In fact, having been in the industry for a very long time, it makes the whole article smell pretty naive. It's _extremely_ unlikely that Screen Time went from nothing to launch in nine months. It's a deceptively complex feature that requires support throughout the OS as well its own foreground and background components. Between product design, prioritizing, development, and testing, they'd probably been exploring the idea for several _years_ before that shareholder pressure appeared. Did they maybe rush the work out early because of the growing pressure? I'd buy that. To me, being pressured to rush it out would even explain some of the rough edges discussed in the article without having to assume Apple was reluctant. I can't know if I'm right, but neither can you or the article's authors. It turns out that there are quite a few ways to make sense of all the facts that are out there, and any final conclusions we draw probably just emerge from our own biases.
- fzzzy 7y agoDo you actually think Screen Time, a feature with deep, pervasive integration all through the operating system, was completed in 9 months?