35 ms·

My small revenge on Apple

• spinningarrow 5y ago
  Seems a bit petty to me. As a developer I empathize with the possible lack of documentation (I don’t know, I never tried to integrate Sign In with Apple) but as a user I actually am super happy with it. Nowadays any iOS app that doesn’t support logging in with Apple makes me think twice about whether I really need the app.
  • dkdbejwi383 5y ago
    > Nowadays any iOS app that doesn’t support logging in with Apple makes me think twice about whether I really need the app. I agree. I only create accounts for things reluctantly. Because 1. Why do you want my email address, or DOB, or whatever else? I don't want your marketing, and 2. I can't be bothered, I downloaded your app because I have something I want to get done.
    • pjerem 5y ago
      > Why do you want my email address Because Apple's SSO will not be eternal and nobody wants to have a tier as a proxy on an important account credential. Apple SSO is ok for throwaway account where your account has no "sentimental value" that you can't recreate easily. But the author of this post maintains a social network : nobody wants to be locked out a social network. I have active accounts on websites that existed back when Apple was fighting not to die and I would have totally lost access to them if I had to sign-in to them through my Lycos account.
      • wokwokwok 5y ago
        You’ve got to be kidding. Don’t use apple SSO because apple might not exist one day? You may as well argue not signup to anything using gmail because, heck, google might go out of business. There is no benefit to users in giving your “real” details to service providers; the benefit is entirely on their side. You can argue that Apple is harming the opportunities for 3rd party developers, sure, taking advantage of them? Sure. …but let’s not try to frame this as somehow “pro consumer” to give your email away so people can spam you with notifications and offers to lift their engagement rates. That is pure BS.
        • simion314 5y ago
          >Don’t use apple SSO because apple might not exist one day? >You may as well argue not signup to anything using gmail because, heck, google might go out of business. I assume OP point is that Apple or Google could still exists but your accounts might not exist, maybe you get banned or just decide you don't want to use Apple/Google/FB anymore.
        • ascar 5y ago
          I don't think your tone is warranted and in the spirit of this community. I don't agree with GP's fear of Apple SSO vanishing without a transition period to something else, but the general premise that this form of login is not eternal but rather short lived in the grand scheme of things is reasonable and doesn't warrant your aggressiveness. Also you might get locked out of your Apple account for a number of reasons and will then lose access to much more than just Apple services.
          • imwillofficial 5y ago
            And this is a risk for the user to take on, night a choice that should be left to a petty developer.
          • user-the-name 5y ago
            It is also not really a valid argument here, given that the service we are talking about was offering Facebook and Google login options, which share the exact same issue, but with the added privacy violations of those platforms.
            • j2bax 5y ago
              Facebook and Google login were options in addition to standard email sign up.
              • user-the-name 5y ago
                And Sign in with Apple is another option in addition to those.
      • martimarkov 5y ago
        Sign In with Apple allows you to share your email so you are incorrect. If I decide to hide my email and be locked out - my choice. Developers and companies are greedy for data. Why do we have the expectation that emails should be shared? I constantly say don’t send me marketing and some services send. On my part I report them as spam every time so that algos start blocking them as they are breaking our contract and are malicious. For every service I’ve built allow the user to create an account with email, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Twitter, Facebook and to later untie their account and move to email. Also if they ever get locked out from their oauth account they can use the email to create a password and login via the normal way.
        • pjerem 5y ago
          > Also if they ever get locked out from their oauth account they can use the email to create a password and login via the normal way. This is exactly my point ! You can't recover your account if you don't know the mail used for registration. Even if you remembered it, no check could be made if Apple stopped to proxy the mails for one or another reason. With other providers, you could always recover an account because your email address would let you prove the ownership of the account.
          • gowld 5y ago
            What if my email address stops getting mail for one or another reason?
            • dkdbejwi383 5y ago
              Then it loses marketing value and data hungry companies no longer care
              • Redoubts 5y ago
                The point is Apple relay goes under is the same risk as gmail goes under.
      • Nextgrid 5y ago
        Apple's SSO may not be eternal but it's also very unlikely to disappear overnight. If it is indeed going to be phased out you will have advance notice of this and a transition period. I agree that in a perfect world you'd provide your real email address and solve this problem. But developers and companies have repeatedly proven themselves to not be trustworthy and the majority will misuse any contact details for spam which users do not want. In fact there wouldn't be a business case (nor appeal to end-users) for Sign in with Apple if this wasn't a real problem.
        • jjav 5y ago
          > Apple's SSO may not be eternal but it's also very unlikely to disappear overnight. If it is indeed going to be phased out you will have advance notice of this and a transition period. They may well offer notice and time when they cancel the service in some future. They won't offer any of that if they happen to erase your account just because though, as has happened to many people.
      • fmajid 5y ago
        Don't forget in your threat model that Apple can cancel your account at any time for any reason whatsoever. They've even done it to security researchers using Apple's own bug bounty program. If that happens, you are stranded with those accounts effectively inaccessible to you forever. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/04/20/man-sues-apple-for-terminating-apple-id-with-24k-worth-of-content https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/04/20/man-sues-apple-fo...
        • Redoubts 5y ago
          How does this threat model compare to using gmail or hotmail for your account access?
        • nyuszika7h 5y ago
          So? Google can also cancel your account at any time for any reason whatsoever, and good luck getting it back unless you're a celebrity with connections or manage to make a big enough fuss about it on social media. Using the same logic, you should not use Gmail then.
          • pjerem 5y ago
            Exactly, you should not use Gmail then. But that's off-topic.
            • LadyCailin 5y ago
              It isn’t though, because the developer had no problem offering that as a social login.
          • cesarb 5y ago
            > Google can also cancel your account at any time for any reason whatsoever [...] Using the same logic, you should not use Gmail then. Actually, under that logic it's only that you shouldn't use the @gmail.com domain; it should be fine to use Gmail with your own domain, since that allows you to recover if your Google account is canceled (just change the MX to another email provider). Another thing you can do is to never use your Google account for anything other than email; that should reduce the chances of the account being canceled for no obvious reason. For instance, it's been reported that, if you used your Google account for Youtube, and Google decided your real name was not your real name (which it wanted due to the Google Plus integration with Youtube), your whole Google account could be canceled; that risk could be avoided by just never logging into Youtube with your Google account.
      • jclardy 5y ago
        Then your issue isn't with Apple's SSO, it is with all SSO providers. Facebook/Google login are not eternal. The only difference is the proxy, which can be disabled. Any website offering SSO options would have a sunset period to move it over if a provider went under...and if they don't, they are likely defunct at that point anyways...
      • elzbardico 5y ago
        Apple may not be eternal, but probably will still be around for many decades after your app is completely forgotten. I still have the same IBM and Oracle accounts from the 90's. Big enterprises tend to stick around for a friggin long time.
  • mrtksn 5y ago
    There's a market for being anti-Apple that's not always based on reasonable ideas. It's popular especially among Web technologists, so maybe if your product targets them it could be a growth hack to "take revenge" and attack the Goliath, then create a literature around that "brave endeavour" that promotes your product.
    • tonyedgecombe 5y ago
      It’s popular amongst a few noisy individuals.
  • shellac 5y ago
    Petty and hysterical. The part where the developer puts the word 'privacy' in scare quotes is a bit of a red flag for me. Suggesting that "accept[ing] two "social logins": Google and Facebook. All was well." does not fill me with confidence that the developer respects privacy concerns.
    • raxxorrax 5y ago
      These login methods are the least privacy preserving methods to do a login. The identity provider instantly knows which services you use.
    • webmobdev 5y ago
      Only the naive and the ignorant believe that Apple cares about users privacy. All their "privacy" features are just designed to collect more and more data about its users. Even unnecessary data. And they get away with it because of marketing that leads people like you to believe that they can be "trusted" with your data - the same data they use, and will use, to make more money. They have already restarted their advertising network again, like before. They claim they are no longer part of PRISM, a US government program that allowed big tech to sell user data to government agencies.
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      • RL_Quine 5y ago
        They implemented end to end encryption in iMessage to collect more data? There's a vast array of technical instances where apple has gone above and beyond to implement privacy preserving technology, even when they weren't talking about it. This is, like the OP, hysteria without any basis in fact.
        • ksec 5y ago
          >They implemented end to end encryption in iMessage to collect more data? iMessage backed up on iCloud where Apple has key to decrypt.
  • tomduncalf 5y ago
    Agreed, Sign In with Apple is a fantastic feature from a user point of view and I also think twice about signing up for an app which does not support it
  • kraf 5y ago
    Protest is an important form of participation in a democracy, it's not petty at all. Forcing developers to add Apple ID as a sign-in method is the petty thing. The developers have no power unless they unionize in some form which seems absolutely impossible. So it seems to me that it's all a developer can really do to make a statement and I think it's brave.
    • user-the-name 5y ago
      It is not "petty", it is a way to ensure all users get access to a privacy-conscious method of logging in without giving up your privacy to Google or Facebook. Being this angry at having to give users the option of better privacy really isn't a great look.
      • collaborative 5y ago
        No one is forcing users to use Google or FB. They can do traditional email signup
        • nyuszika7h 5y ago
          That is definitely not true for every app. There was never any clause in the App Store guidelines that you must provide traditional email signup. At least this way, the social-only apps will be forced to provide you a more privacy-preserving alternative, and for ones that don't use social logins anyway, nothing changes.
          • collaborative 5y ago
            Of course, my comment was related to the app of the post Groups specifically Which used to offer both social sign-up (FB and Google) and a traditional email sign-up option You probably don't know that in this case, Groups was also forced to include AppleID or risk being removed from the App Store Removing all social logins from this point to ensure compliance would have definitely affected all users who had originally signed in with FB/Google, way before AppleID ever existed
  • karlkloss 5y ago
    I'm the opposite. I NEVER use a third party login, my it be Apple, Google, Facebook or whatnot. If your website/app doesn't offer their own independent login, I don't even think once whether I really need it.
    • fmajid 5y ago
      Agreed. I find the mere sight of the Facebook or Google logo off-putting and resent the implication that it is a higher-priority login mechanism than email, a sort of act of fealty of the app/web developer to the big platform middlemen. I run my own mail server so it's easy for me to implement vendor-specific email addresses that cannot be correlated with other vendors', but more and more companies are offering that as a service nowadays, DuckDuckGo most recently: https://www.spreadprivacy.com/introducing-email-protection-beta/ https://www.spreadprivacy.com/introducing-email-protection-b... I do use GitHub federated login, but only for apps like vulnerability scanners that do need OAuth access to my repos.
    • raxxorrax 5y ago
      I use them as a developer to offer it to users, not Apple though and not for apps. But I wouldn't want any of those companies know which services I use. I am fine with using Auth0 or other third party providers, but only if I have to. You don't even need to verify the mail in my cases, you could even use a completely fictious one. Clean, easy, anonymous. Not really sure about smartphone hell, but most identity providers offer up the mail of the user anyway. Maybe that is different in phoneland though.
    • mattxxx 5y ago
      I think preferring to use the website/app's own login makes initial sense, but distributing your personal information around opens you up to more opportunities to get tracked/pwned/leaked/whatever. I used to prioritize the domain's own login, but now I'm starting to mix in some logins with Apple... I just prefer to have _less_ people have my personally identifiable information.
    • CryptoBanker 5y ago
      Agreed, it screams two things to me. First that the company is supremely interested in collecting my personal information beyond what I would normally expect to provide. Second that they’re just too lazy to implement their own user system. Neither is a good thing
  • webmobdev 5y ago
    No, not at all petty. Kudos to the developer for standing up to the bullies that Apple and Google (and other tech companies) often are. Apple really needs to be reminded harshly that it is the developers that add value to their platform. And to share another perspective, I never use login from another service as it means you are sharing more data with them, and you become hostage to their whims and fancies they call their "terms and conditions". So if one day they don't like the app / service you have been using for whatever reason, they can bar you from logging into it without giving you any choice for it.
  • wayneftw 5y ago
    Apple is the most petty entity that I have to deal with on a regular basis. They refuse to automatically capitalize the words Linux or Windows but they'll practically force you to capitalize the phrase "app store" even though they don't have a real trademark on it. They'll try to change your vocabulary from "installing" to "side loading" just to protect their business model. They'll reject your app for looking too different. They're so petty that I think there's probably another word that I should be using to describe the level of pettiness that they've reached. Machiavellian perhaps.
    • kec 5y ago
      The autocorrect dictionary contains the name of every app on your device. It’ll learn Linux organically eventually, maybe Windows depending on how much home improvement you do….
  • elzbardico 5y ago
    Before apple introduced apple id, there was a annoying tendency of applications offering only third-party authentication from either google or facebook. Compared to Google or Facebook, Apple is definitely the lesser evil and an acceptable compromise between trusting Google or Facebook and the inconvenience of creating a login for every app. Forcing the implementation of Apple ID on applications that use other providers is actually increasing customer choice for me.
• bloniac 5y ago
  Apple really has locked down its ecosystem. It’s kinda depressing that there isn’t more choice and competition in the mobile space. Your choices are Android and apple.
  • dkdbejwi383 5y ago
    As someone who owns multiple Apple devices and is generally pretty happy with their hardware and services, I agree. I wish there was at least a third option, if not more competition in this space. RIP Windows Phone, WebOS, Meego, Firefox OS, et al
    • zdkl 5y ago
      FfOS would have been a great alternative. I kinda still hope that a similar software setup (boot to browser, sandbox all the things to there) will one day be flashable to any generic handheld device, like older Android phones or the Pinephone.
      • pabs3 5y ago
        FirefoxOS still exists as the proprietary KaiOS, and the open fork of it, GerdaOS. https://gerda.tech/ https://gerda.tech/
      • input_sh 5y ago
        It's still there. A fork of it is #3 most popular OS: https://www.kaiostech.com/ https://www.kaiostech.com/ It just targets devices your probably don't want to use (as in with physical buttons), so you haven't heard of it.
        • zdkl 5y ago
          In fact I use it daily in my 3310, buttons and all, as a replacement for my <model forgotten> FFOs phone from a few years back. From that experience I can tell you it has nothing in common from the user point of view.
    • 5y ago
• RL_Quine 5y ago
  This seems extremely petty, does the author actually think that this reflects well on them? It really doesn't.
  • quenix 5y ago
    That's what I was thinking. This is a stupid article.
• snemvalts 5y ago
  I wouldn't obsess over the design of Apple's "Sign up with Apple" button, if the default darkmode just applies an inverted filter (inverting Google's and Facebook's logo in addition to the UI), and paddings and margins are all over the place.
  • ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
    Someone else was complaining about Apple rejecting their app, over the Sign In With Apple feature. They cast it as “kafkaesque.” They showed a screengrab of their app, and they had altered the design of the button, by filling it with gray (I agree that Apple’s choices are fugly). The writer couldn’t understand why Apple kept rejecting their app, and Apple’s rejection reason was not helpful at all (we often need to read tea leaves to figure out why our apps were rejected. It’s because they have a limited selection of canned responses). Recoloring a branding element will definitely trigger a rejection. The Apple Brand is the most valuable brand in the world, and they won’t brook having it reinterpreted. No corporation would allow this, if they had a choice.
    • dep_b 5y ago
      I remember Facebook doing the same if you wanted their stuff on your website. You can't make the Facebook button the same color as all of your other buttons.
    • Dylan16807 5y ago
      The rejection reason was that the option did not exist. It was the very first option. Calling that Kafkaesque is fine, and there is no reason for you to act so smug.
      • ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
        > there is no reason for you to act so smug. I'm not smug. I'm battle-scarred. I'll lay odds that I've had a lot more rejections than you have, and probably gotten a lot more pissed off at Apple. Being an experienced Apple developer (since 1986), means that I have been incandescent with rage at Apple -many times. All of us have. Apple can be a real pain to work with. I still develop for Apple, but I am not a "fanboi." BTW: The rejection reason says that, because it's canned. It covers a lot of areas. I have received many such vaguely-worded rejections, and had to figure out why they bounced the app. In a couple of cases, I have been able to get people on the horn (PROTIP: Don't be calling them "smug," and be polite, even though you want to throttle them), where they have explained the issue. [EDIT]: Also, branding is something that a lot of geeks don't understand, but it is very important (and valuable). Many of the seemingly insane moves by Apple are because they are building and/or protecting their brand. That "smugness" is actually a deliberate part of their brand. I don't think that it's a good idea for their fans to reflect it. In terms of branding, a corrupted branding element is exactly the same as no branding element (except it's legally actionable). Speaking of which, did anyone see this week's John Oliver show? I get the feeling that HBO is a bit peeved with Disney.
• gregoriol 5y ago
  While the grudge against Apple is real and has been discussed time and time again, the revenge described here is a joke: no-one will seriously use a web version when an app is available, the experience is really not as good, the findability is not there and for many apps device-features will be missing.
  • muxator 5y ago
    When given the possibility, I always use the web version over a native app. I do not want to install as few software as possible on my device, and (at least for the time being) the security model of the browser is well-known and customizable (to an extent).
  • carlob 5y ago
    The browser supports ad blockers, apps do not. It's a no brainer.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    I used to agree with this. That was before I developed the web version and was able to compare real performance. Web (WASM) beats both Android and iOS native apps. Only downside is initial data transfer (1.2MB). A bit funny since the iOS app is 20MB and the Android one is 5MB
    • gregoriol 5y ago
      Do you have some source or docs on what you did? You probably didn't need any device feature like the camera?
      • collaborative 5y ago
        I haven't made the source public yet. Still too much work and I am not 100% sure about the implications. Camera can be accessed no problem I haven't used any JS framework other than what's absolutely necessary for running the few WASM components
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• Dobbs 5y ago
  This seems a bit trashy and tone deaf. Apple does have plenty of problems, and shouldn't be as rich as it is, but that doesn't justify ignoring the legitimate complaints that lead to apple's work to hide email addresses and personal information from vendors. I might want to use app Foo, I might even want to have an account on app Foo for syncing purposes, but that doesn't mean I want marketing emails, and spam, and all sorts of other crap from the makers of app Foo.
  • Closi 5y ago
    > that doesn't mean I want marketing emails, and spam, and all sorts of other crap from the makers of app Foo. And, more importantly, all sorts of other crap from the companies that Foo decided to disclose your email to.
    • dspillett 5y ago
      > that Foo decided to disclose your email to. Or, just as often, anyone that has picked up my address from lists originally obtained via a hack of some sort because one of those entities has had lax security.
      • Closi 5y ago
        Yep. And as an added benefit of the email relay, we can now see exactly which app shared all your emails or got hacked.
• ChrisRR 5y ago
  Good luck posting anything anti-apple on this site. The fanboys will be out in droves Where as the advert for an apple keyboard gets voted right to the top
  • collaborative 5y ago
    Thanks, spot on
  • quenix 5y ago
    This isn't cleverly anti-Apple, it's just petty. I have plenty a gripe against some things Apple does, but the piece here makes a net zero good points.
  • newbie578 5y ago
    It is hilarious how for a site which is populated by "educated" and "experienced" people, when the subject becomes Apple and how they are not perfect, the very same ones become a herd where they protect their shepherd. I would be most happy if Apple was the only one out of Big Tech to get regulated. Let them have their Microsoft moment, and for the wolf to lose it's fangs.
• anonleb4 5y ago
  If you were that big of a company you'd do the same to protect your turf.
  • dspillett 5y ago
    Maybe true, but “because everyone else is doing it” was never a good defence in the playground and shouldn't be in the adult world either. If Apple ran off a cliff, would you?
• vletal 5y ago
  I'm usually exposing my email address while using Apple ID. When I'm logging from non Apple devices I want to be able to log using Facebook or Google and recover my account for this very reason.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• egghese 5y ago
  The author's revenge seems to be against his users who opted to used Sign In with Apple. Since they will be the one suffering because they trusted to use the particular app. I can find merit in complaining about apple's restriction in accessing payments. But SignIn with Apple, as a user I will always opt for that given my email won't be available with a third party forever for them to spam or sell. I have integrated SignIn with Apple both in an app and backend. I never felt it was particularly difficult or under-documented.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    Apple forced Groups to choose between having AppleID, or losing Sign in with Google/FB. That would have been equally bad for existing users who had chosen Google/FB before Apple ID was even a thing. Perhaps Groups would have happily adopted Apple ID if it hadn't been forced on it At the end of the day Groups is a passion project. So it can be used to contribute to a world where developers aren't taken for granted Apple ID was buggy as hell when it first came out. Apple users will have to understand that Apple's policies can have an impact in what they get from developers. Apple only cares about $ and PR, wish it weren't this way
    • martimarkov 5y ago
      From your post I get that you don’t particularly care about the users who use you it app as you are not offering any way to transition users. I think apple cares about their users and platform, they just care about your passion project and I can understand how that triggers you. But the users belong to the apple ecosystem. You are essentially a guest there and more importantly the user has a choice to privacy. Most of my friends buy iPhone because of ApplePay, Sign in, and now throwaway emails. Apple just caters to them and forces all developers to respect that. As an engineer I never experienced any issues when integrating with Sign in. I’ve used it in 3 apps already in the past 2 years. There was also a very long grace period.
      • gowld 5y ago
        I was raised to treat guests with respect.
• salimmahboubi 5y ago
  While other comments see this as petty. I see it as justified, big tech knows no limit. Independent app developers are making less and less
  • Aaargh20318 5y ago
    Yeah, shame on Apple for protecting their user’s privacy. So evil of them to not allow 3rd party developers to harvest user’s e-mail addresses for no reason whatsoever.
    • collaborative 5y ago
      No reason whatsoever != password recovery At the end of the day you've made your choice. You believe the reason Apple does this is to protect your privacy. You can't see that they want to close you in and make sure they are the only contact you ever have with anyone. This is to get your $. You're in fact paying a premium because they artificially inflate the price of every software you buy (think fees) I don't "harvest" (fancy word) emails for anything other than basic password recovery, but just so you know, spam filters are pretty good these days
      • Aaargh20318 5y ago
        > You can't see that they want to close you in and make sure they are the only contact you ever have with anyone. You don’t see that I want to only have to deal with one party. I don’t want 74637728 different logins if I can help it.
        • collaborative 5y ago
          That's great I want to not be forced by Apple to add things to my app. I want to add them willingly
          • Aaargh20318 5y ago
            And that’s why Apple forces it, because we all know you won’t add it willingly.
• camillomiller 5y ago
  Wow. What an ideologically loaded article. I distrust right away anyone who writes like this. You just lack any credibility to build a structured and constructive discourse.
• djxfade 5y ago
  The only ones that is hurting by this, is your potential customers. I see it as a lose/lose situation
• throwaway4good 5y ago
  I think this is silly and doesn’t make the developer / product look good. Instead of yelling angrily at the clouds, maybe focus on copy writing and graphical layout, if you want your product to go further.
  • throwaway4good 5y ago
    On second thought - given this is on top of hn - is this some sort of guerilla marketing? If so, more power to you.
    • dnh44 5y ago
      The tech community has loved operating system flamewars since at least the usenet days. This blog post serves as pretty good bait to draw in contestants so I assume that people wanting to engage have upvoted it.
• Toutouxc 5y ago
  > The best way to convince Apple prisoners is to tell them what they need. Trust must only belong to Apple. Give them your money, your will, your worship, your everything. Apple will keep you safe > Perhaps Apple customers deserve the luxury of "choice" (between different Apple devices, of course) I don't understand the tone. Do these people actually not understand that different people have different preferences and priorities? Or is it a pose of some kind? I mean, it's 2021, Apple has been on fire pretty much continuously since 2007, they're making a killing everywhere they go and they're, as we speak, pulling off the biggest and smoothest on-the-fly architecture transition ever. Is it still not clear to some people that Apple users genuinely enjoy using Apple devices and that the company clearly does something right?
  • rovek 5y ago
    Your second quote conveniently chops out the main point of the article, which is that Apple abuse their dominance to force developers into having no choice.
    • Toutouxc 5y ago
      Because dev experience isn't what my post was about. I don't agree with some of the ways Apple treats developers, but I mostly agree with how they treat users and I genuinely like (MacBook) or at least understand and respect (iPhone) their products.
      • dandellion 5y ago
        What happens when Apple stops being on fire, and you are trapped in their ecosystem and can't get out? I won't argue that Apple makes the nicest and most comfortable golden cuffs, but in the end they're still chains.
        • imwillofficial 5y ago
          Thats a users risk, not a devs
        • 5y ago
• notafraudster 5y ago
  The author is writing as if the two players in the game are developers and Apple; but there are three players in the game: developers, users, and Apple. Most of the readers of this piece are users, because developers are users just as much as they're developers. Privacy-preserving federated login options are a good thing. Knowing that the app, which may or may not have security or data protection, has less access to my information is good. I don't necessarily like Facebook, Google, or Apple having access to my information, but if they're the only ones, it's still better than having the app developer have it. Moreover, Apple's login is presented to the user as a user-positive feature: I can obfuscate my personal information conveniently. I like that. If an app didn't have federated login, I'd make a judgment call about whether or not I want to create an account. Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. But if it does have a federated login option, I'd like them to support a variety of options, including Apple. I'm not sure Apple should mandate it in the way they do, I can appreciate that the developer feels strongarmed... in the same way that I'm sure credit card processors engage in shady strongarming behavior of retailers. But I'd still rather go to stores that take credit in addition to (or instead of) cash, and I don't find it noble that the developer is writing that being forced to do something that his users would benefit from is bad for him. I then read the second post the author wrote about getting his app removed from the Play store for not including a link to the privacy policy and it kinda comes off the same way. I don't necessarily like Google arbitrarily removing stuff with no notice, but I do like that Google has decided that a privacy policy should be a requirement of an app, and I sort of resent the guy complaining that he shouldn't have to follow that rule, which benefits me. He characterizes this as a "bad experience for users". I don't really agree.
  • CivBase 5y ago
    I agree with pretty much everything you said. My only concern is that by forcing devs to support Apple ID, Apple has effectively eliminated all incentive they have to make it a compelling experience for users and developers. Whatever Apple decides to do with Apple ID from here, everyone else just has to deal with it. I really like the idea that an SSO can also server as the single point of trust for personal information like an email address. I just wish Apple let that feature speak for itself. I wish they put in the effort to make Apple ID a popular auth solution because both devs and users actually want it - not because they're forced to have it.
• wdb 5y ago
  PayPal is even worse than Apple, they keep your money hostage without any notice
• thom 5y ago
  There appear to be multiple threads to the backstory explaining some of the bitterness that the developer is clearly feeling, and I can understand the frustration at the ever-changing table stakes required to get a seat at the mobile app table, but this is an appalling attitude to what is an entirely valid and useful privacy feature.
  • raxxorrax 5y ago
    But it isn't a privacy feature. A privacy feature would be to create an account with a password without mail validation. I you use Apple ID, Apple gets the info which services you are using. The service might request additional infos about your person. Most people will always confirm that in reality. This way many services will end up with more user information. Many people will just share everything but might think about it if they needed to provide this info manually. It is maybe a privacy feature because Apple might be better than Google or Facebook. Well...
    • Jcowell 5y ago
      Privacy , like security , has its own “threat models” and compromises depending on who you’re trying to get privacy from. So this is absolutely a privacy feature and it astonishes me that amount of people who don’t get this and try a No True Scotsman.
      • raxxorrax 5y ago
        True, it often depends on who you trust. My mail provider would need to parse my mails to get info about what services I use. Identity providers have those apps registered and grand token for specific services. They know exactly when a user is logging to specific services. This data doesn't even need to be evaluated further, Apple would have a neat list about the services you use. Still, the usual mail registration offers more flexibility and gives the user more control. So, email registration is a privacy feature if you argue like this. Security wise it is a decent solution, but also a single point of failure. It is hard to argue this to be a privacy feature. It is only one if you trust Apple more than the other services and different forms of auth isn't possible.
• Vake93 5y ago
  I had to integrate apple sign-in and it was pretty straightforward implementation. I don’t know what’s so difficult and why the author has opted to create a sub par experience for the users of his product…
• elramon 5y ago
  someone is a bit frustrated here, cringe
• joshuaissac 5y ago
  Revenge against Apple users, not Apple. Apple users who are also users of his product. If he actually wants to help users, he can let users click through via Apple login on his site, then ask those users to also authenticate via one of the other methods (e-mail, Google or Facebook) and link the two. That way, he would be able to let his users still log in to their accounts via e-mail if Apple tries to shut him down (like Google did temporarily). I think his focus should be on limiting potential damage to his users, not exacting revenge against large companies.
• joejohnston 5y ago
  stick it to the man!
• avnigo 5y ago
  > So here is my small revenge: I am refusing to port Apple ID to the web version. Apple users who logged into Groups via the app with Apple ID will need to create a second account. Am I hurting myself? Am I shooting myself in the foot? Probably. But this is war So, help me understand here -- the revenge is punishing their users that signed up with Apple ID? In what way is this revenge against Apple?
  • randyrand 5y ago
    Because websites that do this will associate Sign In with Apple as being inferior / worse for interop.
• tzfld 5y ago
  Time to admit, tech giants don't want any further important players in the field than those large ones existing today. Probably will never see a Netflix or Facebook banned from different ecosystems/app stores but if you are a medium/smaller or even a larger one you are seen as a threat.
  • user-the-name 5y ago
    None of this makes any sense. All players, big and small, are required to follow App Store rules. Those rules say that if you offer third-party sign in, you have to also offer Sign in with Apple. Nothing to do with how big or small you are, and nothing to do with being seen as a threat.
• danpalmer 5y ago
  Similar to how in-app purchase/subscription fees of 30% just _does not work_ for certain kinds of business with certain kinds of margin, Sign in with Apple has limitations far beyond other social sign-in systems that mean it is a complete non-starter for certain businesses. Like us. We have Facebook sign in (appropriate for our market), but couldn't integrate Sign in with Apple because the email private relay limits how you can send email to it so much, and we use the email address as a fraud signal for some payment providers. It comes down to the fact that we share email addresses and Apple have stopped that from working. They see it as stopping advertising and spam, but in our case they're preventing certain payment options, delivery notifications, refund notifications, all the sorts of emails that users tell us again and again are very important to them. We're not sharing emails without consent, we're doing it where users know what's being shared and why, and want these features. Edit: I wrote up a bunch of these issues at the time it was launched: https://danpalmer.me/2019-07-02-on-signing-in-with-apple/ https://danpalmer.me/2019-07-02-on-signing-in-with-apple/
  • user-the-name 5y ago
    If your users actually value those emails, they will share their email with you. If they do not share your email, that means they do not actually value your emails as much as you seem to think.
  • WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
    Can you present your users with explanation that "increased privacy provided by Apple" comes with a price in the form of degraded customer experience? Sorry, but you can't both have your cake and eat it, too? I might believe your intentions are noble, but for one of you there are hundreds if not thousands of bad apples, so to speak, and the controls Apple is giving me as the user help mitigate it somewhat. And there are initially good apples that turn bad after a while — as their authors are desperately seeking ways to get into black, or just sell their apps to some unscrupulous businesses.
  • drclau 5y ago
    But you can still ask the user to provide the email address (and I think I've seen this already in some apps), even if the user signs in with Apple w/ hidden email, right? Since you say you are already asking for permission to share the email address, why would this be a problem? You now have to ask for the email and the permission to share it. A negative answer from the user would mean you are not allowed to share it anyway, so why have the email address in the first place then? Or am I missing something?
• draw_down 5y ago
  It’s funny this guy thinks Apple users don’t want this functionality. A lot of us absolutely do. I don’t care about your app and I don’t care about maintaining yet another stupid account. And I don’t want your emails. Sorry.
• chemmail 5y ago
  This is also something what happens to Apple Music. My friend recently got family and he had extra logins so I join his group with my iphone but my wife has android. Lo and behold they actually have an Apple music app on android. Try as I may i cannot get her logged into it. What i had to do is use another iPhone, sign in and accept the Apple music sub on the iPhone before it would work on the Android. Luckily I still have a collection of iPhones or no Apple music for android ppl.
• joedoejr 5y ago
  I want to thank you on behalf of Google, Facebook and all third party ad aggregators you selling client tracking and data (including emails). The more app developers will be hostile to their clients, the more profits we can squeeze from our platforms keeping it old new norm. Keep the classy work, don’t forget, it is your app, your rules! Fck users! Fck them hard!
• WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
  > The best way to convince Apple prisoners is to tell them what they need. Trust must only belong to Apple. Give them your money, your will, your worship, your everything. Apple will keep you safe While I firmly believe anyone's data can be breached, and Apple ain't no exception, it's more likely for a Joe Random Developer to make his unauthenticated document-based database listen on a public IP address than Apple. I say that even taking into account my firm opinion that Apple is very inept at clouds among their peers, evidenced by the atrocious quality of practically all their network-based offerings. > But Apple developers must be told, threatened, shut down if necessary. All developers, not only Apple's! At least Apple has some leverage over its paying developers. I wish it started harassing them over unreasonable memory/CPU usage too, but it's hard to do if your own platform is guilty as charged. > Am I hurting myself? Am I shooting myself in the foot? Probably. But this is war Petty and reminds me of scaring a hedgehog with a naked butt.
• schipplock 5y ago
  So the creator/developer of "The King of Organigrams and Family Trees" (that's the title of the app's website (https://www.groupsapp.online https://www.groupsapp.online)) is complaining that Apple is giving its users the ability to hide their email information, am I right? So isn't this a good thing? For me, it is. I don't want to give away my actual email address. I get too much spam already. So I thank Apple for this feature. And of course, it's terrible Apple doesn't allow their login button image to be altered so that an average user could quickly identify it as "oh yes, this is Apple". However, I don't see why this could be not good. Also, as an end-user, I don't care if the Apple button is black, the Facebook button is blue, etc. It seems it's always the others who are wrong (see this: https://javierantonsblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/my-app-just-got-removed-with-no-prior.html https://javierantonsblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/my-app-just-go...). I'm not so sure about the app. From these two posts alone, I wouldn't trust this app.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether you trust the app or not The fact is, I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too The only purpose an email address serves is password recovery. Period TBH I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money. I make no money and don't intend to cash out because I am passionate about what I do. It's so frustrating to see how people blindly favor big tech
    • dmitriid 5y ago
      > I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too - "privacy and security are top priorities". and then - Wants to force users to only use the least private log ins: via Facebook and Google - Is pissed when privacy-conscious users hide their emails via Sign-in with Apple > I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money. Yes, yes they are. So why do you trust FB and Google and force your users to use those log in methods?
• dgudkov 5y ago
  Why the drama? Why not use a web app instead of a native app?
• BulgarianIdiot 5y ago
  > So here is my small revenge: I am refusing to port Apple ID to the web version. Apple users who logged into Groups via the app with Apple ID will need to create a second account. Am I hurting myself? Am I shooting myself in the foot? Probably. But this is war So in the headline you call it "revenge on Apple". Apple is hurting, supposedly. In the content you say the above thing. You're hurting supposedly. The only option that's missing is the correct one. You're not hurting Apple, and you're not hurting yourself. You're hurting your users. As an iPhone/Mac user, we don't need developers who lead these confusing, petty ideological battles with Apple at our expense. Wanna win your tiny, tiny "war"? Good, remove your app from the AppStore, we need less garbage in there, and if Apple did their job right they'd have done this for you already.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• gowld 5y ago
  I'm happy that this person is amusing themself. I liked the part where the author says Google and Facebook are good, but Apple is bad, and then two paragraphs later says Google betrayed him, but still prefers to make war on Apple. I don't think Apple will notice or care. No one is going to drop their iPhone for "Groups".
  • collaborative 5y ago
    I'm happy that you are happy then :-) Although I never said I liked Google, just that "all was well" with having 2 social logins. It sounds more funny the way you describe it though
• qeternity 5y ago
  Anyone who puts privacy in quotes has totally lost the plot. Is it really so inconceivable to some two-bit developer that I absolutely do trust Apple more than I trust them? Hell, I trust Apple more than I trust Facebook and Google. Apple ID is my go to SSO these days. Is Apple perfect? No. But this is a game of lesser of evils.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    Hi, here the 2-bit dev You don't need to choose between Apple, FB, or Google. You can sign up with your email address, which means these companies get no analytics on your behavior The reason "privacy" is in quotes is that some of us have started seeing through what Apple really means every time they use the word. As the EU's Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager has recently said regarding their Apple probe, privacy can't be an excuse to stifle competition. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/07/02/eu-antitrust-head-warns-against-apple-using-privacy-security-to-stave-off-competition https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/07/02/eu-antitrust-head...
    • djrogers 5y ago
      > You can sign up with your email address You’re still missing it - we don’t trust YOU with our email address. Before today we didn’t know who you are or what you stand for, and we didn’t trust you with our email address. After today, I’m sure I wouldn’t trust you with my private relay address, as you clearly care very little about your users.
      • collaborative 5y ago
        On the contrary, I care very much about my users. Precisely because of this I am campaigning against Apple because they seek to extend their powers beyond reasonable measure. It is in everyone's interest, mine and the interest of my users, that Apple doesn't get to dictate us what we can and cannot do on their platform. But even worse is that Apple gets to dictate to us what we MUST do, which is the case in contention and a serious fault in my view I get it, you trust Apple. But are you Apple? If not, then why do you defend what is clearly very unreasonable and anti-competitive behavior?
• coldtea 5y ago
  >3 Weeks ago Google temporarily removed Groups from their Google Play store with no warning. This has led me to start working on a "web" version that will withstand the whims of big tech. So here is my small revenge: I am refusing to port Apple ID to the web version. Apple users who logged into Groups via the app with Apple ID will need to create a second account. I think he took his revenge from the wrong company...
  • collaborative 5y ago
    You put those 2 sentences together but they actually belong in separate paragraphs. The latter is a closing statement to the entire post. And the former says that a web version is in the works But nevermind, it sounds more funny the way you put it
    • coldtea 5y ago
      >You put those 2 sentences together but they actually belong in separate paragraphs. They belong in two successive paragraphs. And the Google thing is a non-sequitur otherwise, given that most of the post he laments against Apple ID's requirements.
• downvote_korok 5y ago
  off-topic:- We use only SMS. Our family owns a grocery chain in NorthEast India, Last I built a ecommerce app where only login method is through SMS (OTP). Initially we thought this will be very bad. But now we have a significant amount of revenue coming from the app (Native and Web). In india most of the Govt and Private apps use only SMS as login method.
  • mnw21cam 5y ago
    Beware. SMS is not secure.
    • ksec 5y ago
      But it is the only method where people understand and use. And social engineering / account take over from MNO are something that is non-existent in many countries.
• Popegaf 5y ago
  While I agree that Apple is evil and all, war would be convincing others to quit Apple or to stop developing for it and make a significant dent in their XXXbn. A small message and loss of users probably won't do it. Maybe make your app a Progressive Web App, make it with Flutter and available everywhere besides iOS, stop (or don't if you haven't yet) buying any Apple devices, sell the ones you can't root and put Linux on the ones where it's possible, start or join an anti-Apple group that pushes against it spreading, etc. Maybe that'll be more effective. The effort is appreciated though.
• hrbf 5y ago
  Stopped reading immediately after “Apple had to convince their fans…”.
• viktorcode 5y ago
  > We are denied customer interaction And that is why I am still an Apple customer. Or, 'prisoner', by author's words.
• oxymoran 5y ago
  Do you guys not understand that Apple doesn’t really care about developers? You all are just a replaceable means to an ends. Everything they do is either for the benefit of Apple or it’s users. Stop whining about it.
• jerrysievert 5y ago
  > For example, I am absolutely sure that Groups would have had loads of more IAPs had I been allowed to offer Paypal on top of Apple Pay and what not hm. I can't see it as a bad thing that there weren't a ton of additional IAP micropayments in an app.
• mosselman 5y ago
  This is a perfect example of why Sign in with Apple is so great: it hides my e-mail and real name from people like the author who are clearly intent on using this information to sell me stuff I don't want.
  • imwillofficial 5y ago
    Exactly, they are totally cool with a Facebook login, but decry an Apple login. Incredible. Literally.
    • collaborative 5y ago
      nah, I'm cool with both, so long as no one is forcing me to add them to my app. Which Apple is doing, so go figure
      • imwillofficial 5y ago
        No nobody is forcing you to do anything. You want to be in the App Store, you go by Apple’s User respecting rules. I’m cool with that.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    To this date, I have sent 0 marketing emails trying to sell stuff. Heck, I don't even try to sell anything, I develop out of love and passion. The only reason email is needed is for password recovery But yes, Apple is great. Again, Apple is great. Apple good, good good good
    • BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
      > To this date To this date. Tomorrow, though, no one knows. > I have sent 0 marketing emails trying to sell stuff. "I", "I", "I". It's not you. It's me. I don't care what you say you're going to do with it. I don't want to give you my email address to store in another database. I'm sure you're very nice, but sorry not sorry. > The only reason email is needed is for password recovery You don't need my email at all if I can use Apple ID. The fourth sentence on the page says "sending personalized emails" as if it's no big deal. I don't care what you think the purpose or value of your emails is. I don't want emails from any app unless it's a support response to an email I sent first.
• rob_c 5y ago
  I just wish we'd move on, skip the next 10 years of this and end up where this will likely go, an "open" standards of sort where you have a unified ID system that allows you to connect your different accounts with different providers. Working in academia where OAuth2 is now (finally) being pushed heavily by certain converts who look upto "big tech" as having all the answers. It's annoying obvious to the people having to work this however that big-tech in this case is way behind where they could be in this regard. It's not "simple" there's always money and power which the article alludes to, but as a user, I just want my account of "me" where I can use secure tokens issued from each authority once they've accepted that I'm probably me. Until this is all resolved and unified a lot of this song and dance just reminds me I'm more and more the paying product for most systems.
  • rudian 5y ago
    Is this year 2000? Because pretty sure someone tried OpenID a decade ago and that was replaced.
• matttrotter 5y ago
  Will David beat Goliath? We'll find out...
• ppetty 5y ago
  I stopped reading here, at "who cares!” That was where I started to agree. Most of the language and tone is so negative I lost interest during the first paragraph. I’ve probably already read a constructive version elsewhere, but if I haven’t so be it.
• ajaimk 5y ago
  OP is the problem. When your “revolt” is to actually hurt your users as a petty act of aggression towards Apple, then you are the problem.
• mwexler 5y ago
  Does "sign in with X" not lock you into X's ecosystem? That is, if I lose my Apple account or my Google account due to their judgement of my actions, have I lost access to the services I authed via those accounts? That is, if I change my email, most services allow that data to migrate to the new username. Do the "sign in with X" allow the same capabilities? (I ask from ignorance, not from sarcasm, I really don't know.)
  • sleepydog 5y ago
    Theoretically a service could allow you to convert an externally authenticated account to one protected by a password. In practice, I haven't found any services that allow it. I've found plenty that support conversion in the other direction.
    • Orphis 5y ago
      Spotify used to do this.
• tintt 5y ago
  TIL that login through Apple ID shields my data from the service that I’m logging in. Idk about the dev side, but as a user I like it. I may start using this feature after all.
• allenu 5y ago
  This is a very strange “revenge” and the idiom of “cutting your nose off to spite your face” applies perfectly to it. I don’t understand the end game here. Users are annoyed about lack of Apple ID sign-in on the web and so stop buying Apple products as a result?
• somehnacct3757 5y ago
  I like the angle of "Sorry, Apple ID only works on Apple devices." The rest of the popup seems unprofessional and would make me reconsider using the software, out of fear for what other unprofessional things may end up happening. But the bit I highlight is a nice jab at Apple and something I think you can get away with professionally in a web app. It mars their login brand a bit by showing that it isn't useful everywhere.
  • collaborative 5y ago
    Thanks, the web app isn't published yet and I will take this into consideration
    • echelon 5y ago
      Thank you for fighting the good fight. Apple is making it impossible to have real customers and real businesses. They're turning us into serfs of their unfair ecosystem. It's one thing to build interconnected products, but to grow the pie so large that all commerce and communication with 50% of Americans goes through their polished gates, to be stripped, taxed, and even cloned, is an abuse of power and position. It's a strip mining of our industry. An over fishing that has greatly decreased the probability of success for small, independent players. Until the DOJ forces them to open up (or break up), we're stuck in this war zone. I'm going to follow in your footsteps. Hopefully many more do as well.
      • collaborative 5y ago
        Thanks mate, I will gladly join you in being downvoted and add that in the long term it would really help if us developers got more organized. We need collective action. I have a few thoughts on this, anyone who wishes to join forces in carrying this baby can get in touch at javierantonf@hotmail.com
    • wlesieutre 5y ago
      For a more professional notice, I'd try something more like "Apple required us to choose between either supporting Sign-in with Apple in the iOS app, or disabling the logins of all existing users who had signed in with Google and Facebook. In protest of these abusive requirements, sign-in with Apple will not be supported online."
• leokennis 5y ago
  Yeah I don't care about your personal beef with Apple. If you make me go through hoops or hamper my enjoyment/use of your app because I am an Apple user, I am going to stop using your app. I'm not going to stop using an iPhone or the excellent "sign in with Apple" service just so I can run your app, I will find an alternative.
• robteix 5y ago
  I'm confused about the "revenge" aspect of this. Seems like you're doing what Apple is asking you to do -- implementing Apple Sign-In -- and then going the extra mile to make sure your users have a worse experience than they should otherwise have. How is that revenge on Apple?
• S_A_P 5y ago
  Not saying I don't see where you are coming from, but will echo what other people have said here and can say the message sounds a bit unprofessional. I would also encourage you to look at this from a users point of view. They generally care about none of this stuff. They don't want to know about your "war" with apple, and just want to use what you built. It is a bad look. Edit: It seems that 2 weeks ago you had a beef with Google as well. Maybe this blog is your way of venting the sorts of frustrations that come with developing your app. To offer some unsolicited advice. Take the time to learn and fully understand how the social logins work, and focus on providing the best experience possible. Badmouthing Google and Apple(and is Facebook next?) is not the way to get traction.
• yalogin 5y ago
  I don’t get these kind of posts. Apple ID is mandated for a reason. If OP can declare war the least they can do is provide technical reasons about why they are declaring war, instead of a couple UI buttons and lot of anti-apple prose. I was looking for atleast a link to the technical reasons.
• Angostura 5y ago
  This guy is taking revenge on his users not Apple. I trust Apple with my login details and I like their option to let me hide my real email. I’m not logging in with Facebook or Google. It’s not Apple he’s hurting.
• crad 5y ago
  I think what the author is missing here is context. Some (many it would seem) prefer the curated walled garden approach that the Apple ecosystem has. Not for hype, not because we're brainwashed, but rather because we enjoy the consistency and overall experience more than the "Linux Desktop on my phone" experience you get with other platforms. The post comes across as angry and immature.
• nicholasjarr 5y ago
  Looks more like a revenge on the users to me. If he put it on the app why not put it in the web version too? I'm not a fan of Apple's guidelines, but this won't change a thing on the guidelines.
• clint 5y ago
  What a cry baby
• cwizou 5y ago
  There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with Apple's policies, or lack of documentation, or undocumented API changes, or even the dismissive tone they can take when talking about 3rd party developers (especially when defending against various anti-trust inquiries), but that's a very weird thing to be angry about. Apple mandates changes all the time, and mandating Apple ID if you already use 3rd party logins is about the least controversial thing I can think of, and the most uncontroversially pro-privacy, pro-user, with incredibly small drawbacks and requirements feature I can think of. iCloud Private relay comes a close second on real user benefits (there are certainly way more drawbacks for the web at large). At least it's decently documented (try Homekit documentation for a counter point), it's really not a huge job to implement, and there's a clearly stated purpose, force developers to give a "social" sign up that won't harvest their data. That's exactly the kind of leaning on devs that's a 100% win for end users and that I, as a user and dev expects and wants to see from them. Less unannounced/undocumented screen saver api changes please, though, but I wouldn't cry a tear either on a ban on 3rd party "SDKs" that harvest any data. Personally, I think adding a Facebook login to an app is a terrible thing to do, and the excuses of "just because it's convenient for users/will increase my signups" just don't fly with me, but that's just my strongly biased opinion. Ranting (so inaccurately) to your users like that though? I think we can come to a broad consensus that it won't achieve a thing and doesn't exactly will fill your users with confidence about what you do with their data?
• jeroenhd 5y ago
  This is the pettiness I'd feel embarrassed about if I'd ever let it come to fruition. Restricting Apple ID to the mobile app seems more than enough, the snarky popup goes too far. As a user, I don't care about your personal beef with Apple. Simply explaining that the button was added because of Apple's restrictions in the first place and that you never wished to support it in the first place should suffice. I appreciate your willingness to lose customers to make a point against Apple. A little more... nuance would probably make it a lot easier to gather support from others.
• jrsj 5y ago
  Honestly the whole app could probably use a UI overhaul. The button looking different than other social logins isn’t the problem; the app looking completely alien to any version of iOS released in the last 10 years is the problem.
• uncomputation 5y ago
  Dude, apps small and large still send personalized emails. If you want your users’ names so bad, just ask. It seems like you would just prefer to do name = google_data_json.name rather than ask your users for their name and let them decide if they want to give it to you. This is exactly why I love that Apple introduced Sign In with Apple; it gives the user more control over what they want to give out since it’s their data. Also your revenge is not on Apple. They’re a behemoth and won’t notice. You pointed this out in your post so you are obviously aware of it but the only people you are hurting are yourself and your users. If you know this and willingly charge along, all I can say is that says a lot more about you than it does about Apple. Good luck.
• addison-lee 5y ago
  > look ugly and inconsistent Hate to break it to you, your app is already ugly, the thin black border around the Apple sign in doesn’t change the fact the rest of the app looks awful. Also you’re not getting “revenge” on Apple, you are just fucking over your users who use Apple.
  • csmpltn 5y ago
    > "Hate to break it to you, your app is already ugly, the thin black border around the Apple sign in doesn’t change the fact the rest of the app looks awful. Also you’re not getting “revenge” on Apple, you are just fucking over your users who use Apple." What's going on with this entire awful thread? A bunch of Apple fanboys crucifying the developer for refusing to play by Apple's rules? The developer has every right to do what they did, they don't own you or Apple a thing. Stop acting so entitled and just fuck off.
    • joshstrange 5y ago
      > What's going on with this entire awful thread? A bunch of Apple fanboys crucifying the developer for refusing to play by Apple's rules? I mean they are playing by Apple's rules (they support Apple ID on iOS), all they are "refusing" is refusing to allow users to login to their Groups account using Apple ID on a different platform that supports it. That's their prerogative but they aren't sticking to Apple, they are sticking it to their users all while pretending they are standing up to "the man". > The developer has every right to do what they did, they don't own you or Apple a thing. This is true, that doesn't mean they are immune from criticism from their decision, especially a decision they took the time to blog about and post to HN. > Stop acting so entitled and just fuck off. There is nothing entitled in the comment you are responding to, just facts about what they are doing to their own users.
    • addison-lee 5y ago
      The developer has every right to do what they did just as I have every right to call out their bullshit. Why don’t you fuck off?
• djrogers 5y ago
  Wow. Artificially creating a limitation, specifically to get revenge against users that chose Sign In With Apple, is a really, really @ick move. For those who don’t know, SIWA is fully supported for web logins, and it’s implementation is pretty easy. As the author seems to be active here, let me add my voice to those who are saying I will never choose to use an app written by someone with this level of disdain for me.
• xondono 5y ago
  I find this ridiculous. If you force me to use email login, I’m going to feed you a burner email (thank you fastmail!) and call it a day. The difference with AppleID is that I get a much better experience, my device automatically does what I would do anyway. You don’t want to support a feature? It’s you app, do what you want. But the post reads like some lame justification (and a petty one at that).
• wetjen 5y ago
  I think you need to shorten the copy a bit. “Since we were coerced into supporting Apple’s sign on with our iOS app, we’re sandbagging them in return by not supporting their sign-on here.”
• amykhar 5y ago
  I'm perfectly happy with Apple helping me keep my email address out of the author's hands. If he wants it that badly, it's probably not anything that's in my best interest.
• sam0x17 5y ago
  "Hype" and "Extortion" track so well as an explanation for how Apple tackles pretty much any problem. My eyes are opened.
• johnny_b_g 5y ago
  Too many Apple fanboiz everywhere. They've infested every corner of the Internet.
• basisword 5y ago
  Unbelievably unprofessional. If I was a user, even if I was unaffected, I wouldn’t be using any of your software anymore. Treating your users with contempt because of your personal feelings towards a company is bizarre.
• cdubzzz 5y ago
  > Am I hurting myself? Am I shooting myself in the foot? Probably. But this is war I don't think shooting yourself in the foot is necessarily a strong tactic in war.
• vermilingua 5y ago
  Something that I haven’t seen mentioned anywhere else in this thread is what to me is the killer feature of Signin with Apple: I now don’t need to remember which of the (sometimes >6) SSOs I used to log into an app. If SSO is present, it’s Apple, if it’s not, it’s in my pw manager. Privacy is a nice plus but for me, the best part is precisely what is pissing this guy off.
• Pokepokalypse 5y ago
  Highly passive-aggressive. I like it.
• heartunderbread 5y ago
  This is one of the reasons why I tend to avoid public-facing mobile app development, the developer ecosystem just feels so restrictive. The alternative here is that I forego publishing on the app store, drastically reducing the audience outreach.
• fennecfoxy 5y ago
  Interesting the comments here, rather than addressing the issue of "is it okay for Apple to force implementation of their own services in addition to others" the discussion is more "well, nobody's _forcing_ you to do this". When does it stop then? If Spotify releases their app to the store, do they have to include Apple music functionality in their app? If I have an app with a "listen to this on spotify" button, do I also have to have a "listen to this on Apple music" button? See no evil, I guess.
• stiltzkin 5y ago
  My small revenge on never recommend this app.