3 ms·
Well, that, and also if they don't remove FB login, then the would be required to also implement Sign in with Apple. They didn't want to implement Sign in with
by dilap 6y ago
Well, that, and also if they don't remove FB login, then the would be required to also implement Sign in with Apple.
They didn't want to implement Sign in with Apple, so they had to remove FB login.
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoWhich is a pretty anti-competitive move on Apple's part. They're essentially using their control of the iOS ecosystem to benefit unrelated products. I seem to remember that those kinds of actions didn't work out well for Microsoft :)
- JohnTHaller 6y agoApple takes many anti-competitive and consumer-hostile actions. They can freely get away with it, though, as they aren't a monopoly.
- frogpelt 6y agoAlso, they will argue that they are doing it for privacy and security reasons which are benefits to users. But I don't know how much a judge would care about that.
- scarface74 6y agoHow is this user hostile - forcing app developers to give users a choice that doesn’t give the app developer your real email?
- JohnTHaller 6y agoI said "Apple takes many anti-competitive and consumer-hostile actions. They can freely get away with it, though, as they aren't a monopoly." I did not say this action was consumer-hostile.
- stephenr 6y agoSo, forcing them to give users a choice is somehow equivalent to... forcing vendors to not give customers a competitors browser? Ok sure. That seems totally the same. Not at all as ridiculous as the invented "monopoly of iOS" that people use to justify the claim Apple is abusing a monopoly position. Next thing you'll complain Coca Cola is abusing its monopoly position on Coke.