17 ms·

Said it better than I could've – there are some pretty obvious reasons why Rambo's account could've been suspended, the clear violation of NDAs being the main o

by atonse 7y ago

Said it better than I could've – there are some pretty obvious reasons why Rambo's account could've been suspended, the clear violation of NDAs being the main one, with him publishing information about unreleased products. I'm honestly kind of surprised they let him keep his Developer account all this time. My bigger issue here is the complete lack of transparency or visibility into the process. It's this kind of stuff is why I strongly support some government action to change the current state of affairs with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS. These companies have been notoriously opaque in how they make such decisions (and sometimes inconsistent), and the fact that their stores are monopolies on their platforms makes this much worse.

mortenjorck 7y ago
> My bigger issue here is the complete lack of transparency or visibility into the process. This is indeed the core of the problem. If Apple provided a clear citation, e.g. “the following protected information was shared under your name at this URL on this date, which violates section xyz of your developer agreement,” it would still be unfortunate, but it would be miles ahead of Apple’s maddening “for more information please reread” stance.
- giancarlostoro 7y ago
  This is an issue with a lot of companies and industries. It's getting really old, and I really hope we see it happen to actual senators so we can see some damn change over it. I'd love to read about how Paypal shutdown some senators account or campaign donation account or whatever, maybe then we will see congress start to turn tables. If you're going to discontinue service with a client then provide proper background into why that is. It's a damn courtesy.
  - jjeaff 7y ago
    Unfortunately, the official internal policy seems to be to shut down accounts and then if someone turns out to be well connected or is able to get some press coverage, then they get unblocked. So senators will never need to worry.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
    Note that for certain financial services, perhaps including PayPal, they may not legally be allowed to explain why they closed your account.
    - ethbro 7y ago
      That's debatable. In fact, it's probably more accurate to say "It's legally more perilous for them to explain why they closed your account." Which is a distinction when it comes to possible ways to fix the problem. I'm absolutely in favor of a "right to examine" law around algorithmic decisions that impact an individual.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. And, even if they cited whatever part of whatever agreement, it would just be onto the next excuse. It's a bottomless pit of arguing that solves nothing. It's the same reason reddit moderators don't answer when you ask why you got banned. Either you know why and you're just trying to weasel out of it, or you don't know why and you're a bad contributor in general, or you don't know why and don't care and just want back in. And the answer to all three is no. Why? Because who cares about you? You're one of millions. You're one infinitesimal speck in a deluge of others, all providing similar things but who are following the rules. You are not special. You are replaceable. After you're gone, 5 other developers will take your place, paying their dues, and following the rules, and you won't be missed. Nobody's app idea is so fucking star spangled awesome as to make them above the rules. You wanna play in Apple's sandbox? Cool, they're happy to have you. Do it right. And if you don't, they'll boot you out. Simple as.
  - chipsa 7y ago
    If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.
    - FussyZeus 7y ago
      They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?
      - rootusrootus 7y ago
        Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
- threeseed 7y ago
  How do we know Apple didn't provide that ? If the author is being disingenuous and misrepresenting why likely was banned then I am sure other facts are being left out as well.
  - ninju 7y ago
    > If the author is being disingenuous and misrepresenting why likely was banned then I am sure other facts are being left out as well. And how do you know the author is being disingenuous ?
    - rodgerd 7y ago
      He's suggesting that, out of the blue, Apple have suspended his account and he can't imagine any possible reason why. If he's been reverse engineering and publish the results of developer-only pre-releases in violation of his T&Cs, then he has a pretty good idea why.
- fortran77 7y ago
  So if you want to stop a successful Apple developer (maybe a competitor), just write blog posts using his name about Apple beta, internal, or reversed engineered things.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jrockway 7y ago
Apple is banning journalists from submitting apps to the App Store because they don't like the coverage they're getting? That is worrying.
- fetus8 7y ago
  That's not what's happening. Rambo is known for reverse engineering Apple beta's and pulling information regarding unreleased products and then publishing that info via 9to5mac. As many other people in this thread have mentioned, it likely violates the terms of the Apple Developer Agreement.
  - im3w1l 7y ago
    How does the user benefit from not being able to install Rambo's apps?
    - fetus8 7y ago
      What does this have to do with what's happening? According to the post Rambo published, his apps are still available on the App Store.
      - heavyset_go 7y ago
        > What does this have to do with what's happening? Because the market is punished due to Apple's opaque policies and politics. Lack of competition and options hurts the entire market.
    - HelloNurse 7y ago
      Sarcasm aside, Apple benefits from having an effective way to retaliate against Rambo; signing up for a developer account and using it was, sadly, an imprudent move that gave Apple leverage against him. There should be some form of legal protection, for example limiting company control of app stores (which would be a basic anti-monopoly measure).
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
cmcd 7y ago
with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS The App Store is the only Apple supported way to release apps, there are unsupported third party app stores as well. Lack of transparency is not good, but I'm not sure what the issue is with there being only one officially supported way to download apps. It is Apple's product and software, they are selling the "Apple Experience" as much as the hardware. Having a single store with strict guidelines and QC helps to ensure the most consistent experience. If you only care about using the hardware how you see fit you can JailBreak and get access to almost anything. You take the same risks you would if there were other, easier to access, unsupported ways to download unmoderated apps.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  > The App Store is the only Apple supported way to release apps, there are unsupported third party app stores as well. On iOS, these are nothing more than hacks.
  - cmcd 7y ago
    Right, third party app stores are not officially supported and for good reason. I am not sure what the alternative is, create a unmoderated free for all app store? That goes pretty heavily against the Apple ecosystem's philosophy and would make it easy for people to download damaging apps which Apple would then get blamed for because they added an official channel for installing them.
    - vageli 7y ago
      > and would make it easy for people to download damaging apps which Apple would then get blamed for because they added an official channel for installing them. Do Android users blame Google or the phone manufacturer when they download a damaging app?
      - cmcd 7y ago
        Yes they do, the most recent example is apps using a vulnerability to steal images. Many people are blaming Google and Samsung for not addressing this problem sooner and of course having a faulty permissions system that allowed this in the first place. Samsung is frequently attacked for security issues since they take so long to push out updates. Apple avoids these problems entirely by sandboxing apps and thoroughly reviewing functionality before accepting. It is very rare to hear about security issues for iOS yet we hear about a new one for Android monthly. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2019/11/19/google-confirms-android-camera-security-threat-hundreds-of-millions-of-users-affected/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2019/11/19/google-c...
johndubchak 7y ago
> I strongly support some government action to change the current state of affairs with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS A very slippery slope that will not end well for anyone, i.e. Apple, end users, and developers included. This is something I wouldn't advocate for personally and I'm not an Apple fanboi. I don't particularly care for the closed ecosystem but it does create security advantages and Apple is making efforts to protect users more so than greedy Corporate interests when it comes to data and privacy rights. My $0.02 *edit: formatting of quoted text.
- DarkmSparks 7y ago
  Im not clear what security advantage is offered to anyone by the oligopoly that is mobile app stores right now. To me it actually suggests iOS must be incredibly insecure if their security is so reliant on the Apple approval system. Can you even imagine where node.js would be if only microsoft could approve modules?
- akira2501 7y ago
  > A very slippery slope that will not end well for anyone, An anti-trust case against an established monopoly is a slippery slope? I'm having trouble understanding the fear here. > I don't particularly care for the closed ecosystem but it does create security advantages Anyone can claim "security advantages" from their walled garden, there's nothing particular about their implementation that grants them any additional security. Further, there are plenty of instances where Apple has had to remove malware and violating apps well _after_ they had been released to the store so it's not entirely clear what the true advantage for the consumer is here. > and Apple is making efforts to protect users more so than greedy Corporate interests when it comes to data and privacy rights. Do you believe this is the only model? Why should the manufacturer of my computer have any reason to be "protecting my privacy." Why are they involved in that discussion in the first place?
  - zepto 7y ago
    There is no established monopoly.
  - 7y ago
fjabre 7y ago
This 100%. Government needs to get involved. Apple is clearly using its monopolistic power as shield against any kind of accountability. Devs have absolutely no recourse against this monopoly.
- pdonis 7y ago
  > Government needs to get involved. I don't see how this would improve the situation, and it would most likely make it worse. > Devs have absolutely no recourse against this monopoly. Devs have no right to demand that Apple let them into their ecosystem. It belongs to Apple. The ultimate dev recourse is not to go complaining to the government but to build their own ecosystem that out-competes Apple's. Good luck.
  - fjabre 7y ago
    Out compete Apple? You cant be serious. Unless you have a phone that uses quantum entanglement to communicate at FTL no one is out competing Apple anytime soon.
    - xvector 7y ago
      Google out-competed Apple long ago with Android in terms of marketshare.
    - pdonis 7y ago
      > Out compete Apple? You cant be serious. And if that's the answer, then devs who don't like how Apple manages their ecosystem should simply go find some other kind of coding to do.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - Reelin 7y ago
        Do you actually think it's an acceptable state of affairs for a company to be able to unilaterally put a non-competing and unrelated company out of business on a whim? Apple isn't a traditional distribution channel. If FedEx bans me, I can switch to UPS (or USPS, or ...); if Apple bans me, for all practical purposes I can't compete in the mobile space in the US anymore.
behnamoh 7y ago
> I strongly support some government action to change the current state of affairs with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS. I couldn't disagree more. IMO governments should be kept separate from business matters as long as those businesses don't pose a threat to the nation. Otherwise, it'd be against the freedom of individuals and companies to involve government agencies into the matter.
- Reelin 7y ago
  I agree with the ideal of minimal regulation. However, everyone is forced to participate in and depend on the local economy. It absolutely must remain functional, stable, and reasonably tolerable to live and do business within. The problem is that when a company controls a large enough chunk of a given market, their policies have the potential to cause serious harm. Regarding Apple, many of the counter arguments here seem to focus only on the consumer protection aspect of things. The more serious issue IMO is the business aspect - in the US, a company can't produce a viable mobile solution without targeting both Apple's and Google's app stores. For better or worse, these privately controlled app stores have become equivalent to essential public infrastructure from a business perspective.
partyboat1586 7y ago
Being opaque gives them power. It makes people afraid of what might get them banned so they start self censoring stuff that's not even in the official rules.

by atonse 7y ago

mortenjorck 7y ago

> My bigger issue here is the complete lack of transparency or visibility into the process. This is indeed the core of the problem. If Apple provided a clear citation, e.g. “the following protected information was shared under your name at this URL on this date, which violates section xyz of your developer agreement,” it would still be unfortunate, but it would be miles ahead of Apple’s maddening “for more information please reread” stance.

giancarlostoro 7y ago
This is an issue with a lot of companies and industries. It's getting really old, and I really hope we see it happen to actual senators so we can see some damn change over it. I'd love to read about how Paypal shutdown some senators account or campaign donation account or whatever, maybe then we will see congress start to turn tables. If you're going to discontinue service with a client then provide proper background into why that is. It's a damn courtesy.
- jjeaff 7y ago
  Unfortunately, the official internal policy seems to be to shut down accounts and then if someone turns out to be well connected or is able to get some press coverage, then they get unblocked. So senators will never need to worry.
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
  Note that for certain financial services, perhaps including PayPal, they may not legally be allowed to explain why they closed your account.
  - ethbro 7y ago
    That's debatable. In fact, it's probably more accurate to say "It's legally more perilous for them to explain why they closed your account." Which is a distinction when it comes to possible ways to fix the problem. I'm absolutely in favor of a "right to examine" law around algorithmic decisions that impact an individual.
FussyZeus 7y ago
This is impossible at scale and a waste of a companies' time. Apple doesn't care if your account is reinstated. Odds are (just like the author here) you know exactly why your account is suspended. If you honestly don't, then you didn't do your due diligence in signing up. And, even if they cited whatever part of whatever agreement, it would just be onto the next excuse. It's a bottomless pit of arguing that solves nothing. It's the same reason reddit moderators don't answer when you ask why you got banned. Either you know why and you're just trying to weasel out of it, or you don't know why and you're a bad contributor in general, or you don't know why and don't care and just want back in. And the answer to all three is no. Why? Because who cares about you? You're one of millions. You're one infinitesimal speck in a deluge of others, all providing similar things but who are following the rules. You are not special. You are replaceable. After you're gone, 5 other developers will take your place, paying their dues, and following the rules, and you won't be missed. Nobody's app idea is so fucking star spangled awesome as to make them above the rules. You wanna play in Apple's sandbox? Cool, they're happy to have you. Do it right. And if you don't, they'll boot you out. Simple as.
- chipsa 7y ago
  If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?
    - rootusrootus 7y ago
      Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
threeseed 7y ago
How do we know Apple didn't provide that ? If the author is being disingenuous and misrepresenting why likely was banned then I am sure other facts are being left out as well.
- ninju 7y ago
  > If the author is being disingenuous and misrepresenting why likely was banned then I am sure other facts are being left out as well. And how do you know the author is being disingenuous ?
  - rodgerd 7y ago
    He's suggesting that, out of the blue, Apple have suspended his account and he can't imagine any possible reason why. If he's been reverse engineering and publish the results of developer-only pre-releases in violation of his T&Cs, then he has a pretty good idea why.
fortran77 7y ago
So if you want to stop a successful Apple developer (maybe a competitor), just write blog posts using his name about Apple beta, internal, or reversed engineered things.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

jrockway 7y ago

Apple is banning journalists from submitting apps to the App Store because they don't like the coverage they're getting? That is worrying.

fetus8 7y ago
That's not what's happening. Rambo is known for reverse engineering Apple beta's and pulling information regarding unreleased products and then publishing that info via 9to5mac. As many other people in this thread have mentioned, it likely violates the terms of the Apple Developer Agreement.
- im3w1l 7y ago
  How does the user benefit from not being able to install Rambo's apps?
  - fetus8 7y ago
    What does this have to do with what's happening? According to the post Rambo published, his apps are still available on the App Store.
    - heavyset_go 7y ago
      > What does this have to do with what's happening? Because the market is punished due to Apple's opaque policies and politics. Lack of competition and options hurts the entire market.
  - HelloNurse 7y ago
    Sarcasm aside, Apple benefits from having an effective way to retaliate against Rambo; signing up for a developer account and using it was, sadly, an imprudent move that gave Apple leverage against him. There should be some form of legal protection, for example limiting company control of app stores (which would be a basic anti-monopoly measure).
- diffeomorphism 7y ago

cmcd 7y ago

with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS The App Store is the only Apple supported way to release apps, there are unsupported third party app stores as well. Lack of transparency is not good, but I'm not sure what the issue is with there being only one officially supported way to download apps. It is Apple's product and software, they are selling the "Apple Experience" as much as the hardware. Having a single store with strict guidelines and QC helps to ensure the most consistent experience. If you only care about using the hardware how you see fit you can JailBreak and get access to almost anything. You take the same risks you would if there were other, easier to access, unsupported ways to download unmoderated apps.

saagarjha 7y ago
> The App Store is the only Apple supported way to release apps, there are unsupported third party app stores as well. On iOS, these are nothing more than hacks.
- cmcd 7y ago
  Right, third party app stores are not officially supported and for good reason. I am not sure what the alternative is, create a unmoderated free for all app store? That goes pretty heavily against the Apple ecosystem's philosophy and would make it easy for people to download damaging apps which Apple would then get blamed for because they added an official channel for installing them.
  - vageli 7y ago
    > and would make it easy for people to download damaging apps which Apple would then get blamed for because they added an official channel for installing them. Do Android users blame Google or the phone manufacturer when they download a damaging app?
    - cmcd 7y ago
      Yes they do, the most recent example is apps using a vulnerability to steal images. Many people are blaming Google and Samsung for not addressing this problem sooner and of course having a faulty permissions system that allowed this in the first place. Samsung is frequently attacked for security issues since they take so long to push out updates. Apple avoids these problems entirely by sandboxing apps and thoroughly reviewing functionality before accepting. It is very rare to hear about security issues for iOS yet we hear about a new one for Android monthly. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2019/11/19/google-confirms-android-camera-security-threat-hundreds-of-millions-of-users-affected/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2019/11/19/google-c...

johndubchak 7y ago

> I strongly support some government action to change the current state of affairs with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS A very slippery slope that will not end well for anyone, i.e. Apple, end users, and developers included. This is something I wouldn't advocate for personally and I'm not an Apple fanboi. I don't particularly care for the closed ecosystem but it does create security advantages and Apple is making efforts to protect users more so than greedy Corporate interests when it comes to data and privacy rights. My $0.02 *edit: formatting of quoted text.

DarkmSparks 7y ago
Im not clear what security advantage is offered to anyone by the oligopoly that is mobile app stores right now. To me it actually suggests iOS must be incredibly insecure if their security is so reliant on the Apple approval system. Can you even imagine where node.js would be if only microsoft could approve modules?
akira2501 7y ago
> A very slippery slope that will not end well for anyone, An anti-trust case against an established monopoly is a slippery slope? I'm having trouble understanding the fear here. > I don't particularly care for the closed ecosystem but it does create security advantages Anyone can claim "security advantages" from their walled garden, there's nothing particular about their implementation that grants them any additional security. Further, there are plenty of instances where Apple has had to remove malware and violating apps well _after_ they had been released to the store so it's not entirely clear what the true advantage for the consumer is here. > and Apple is making efforts to protect users more so than greedy Corporate interests when it comes to data and privacy rights. Do you believe this is the only model? Why should the manufacturer of my computer have any reason to be "protecting my privacy." Why are they involved in that discussion in the first place?
- zepto 7y ago
  There is no established monopoly.
- 7y ago

fjabre 7y ago

This 100%. Government needs to get involved. Apple is clearly using its monopolistic power as shield against any kind of accountability. Devs have absolutely no recourse against this monopoly.

pdonis 7y ago
> Government needs to get involved. I don't see how this would improve the situation, and it would most likely make it worse. > Devs have absolutely no recourse against this monopoly. Devs have no right to demand that Apple let them into their ecosystem. It belongs to Apple. The ultimate dev recourse is not to go complaining to the government but to build their own ecosystem that out-competes Apple's. Good luck.
- fjabre 7y ago
  Out compete Apple? You cant be serious. Unless you have a phone that uses quantum entanglement to communicate at FTL no one is out competing Apple anytime soon.
  - xvector 7y ago
    Google out-competed Apple long ago with Android in terms of marketshare.
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > Out compete Apple? You cant be serious. And if that's the answer, then devs who don't like how Apple manages their ecosystem should simply go find some other kind of coding to do.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - Reelin 7y ago
      Do you actually think it's an acceptable state of affairs for a company to be able to unilaterally put a non-competing and unrelated company out of business on a whim? Apple isn't a traditional distribution channel. If FedEx bans me, I can switch to UPS (or USPS, or ...); if Apple bans me, for all practical purposes I can't compete in the mobile space in the US anymore.

behnamoh 7y ago

> I strongly support some government action to change the current state of affairs with regards to the App Store being the only way to get apps on iOS. I couldn't disagree more. IMO governments should be kept separate from business matters as long as those businesses don't pose a threat to the nation. Otherwise, it'd be against the freedom of individuals and companies to involve government agencies into the matter.

Reelin 7y ago
I agree with the ideal of minimal regulation. However, everyone is forced to participate in and depend on the local economy. It absolutely must remain functional, stable, and reasonably tolerable to live and do business within. The problem is that when a company controls a large enough chunk of a given market, their policies have the potential to cause serious harm. Regarding Apple, many of the counter arguments here seem to focus only on the consumer protection aspect of things. The more serious issue IMO is the business aspect - in the US, a company can't produce a viable mobile solution without targeting both Apple's and Google's app stores. For better or worse, these privately controlled app stores have become equivalent to essential public infrastructure from a business perspective.

partyboat1586 7y ago

Being opaque gives them power. It makes people afraid of what might get them banned so they start self censoring stuff that's not even in the official rules.