4 ms·

Not objecting. I don't need email addresses for the case of AppleID users. 100% true I do need them for everyone else who comes from traditional signup Howeve

Not objecting. I don't need email addresses for the case of AppleID users. 100% true I do need them for everyone else who comes from traditional signup However, you seem to have missed the point. My problem is not AppleID, my problem is that Apple forced it on my app and threatened to shut me down if I didn't include it

yalogin 5y ago
Forcing it on you is what gives their users the privacy assurance/functionality of using the app and not giving the apps their emails. They want you to redesign your app so that you don’t rely more n mail to provide functionality. It’s a good thing, even for you.
- collaborative 5y ago
  I don't dispute that it is a good thing. I object to the method of implementing it by force I am an Apple customer as much as an iPhone user is. But Apple chooses to treat me as an employee, after having charged me (and paid me nothing). Do I have the right to be upset? Could they not have sweetened AppleID by encouraging users to ask devs to implement it or even by reducing our dev annual fee by some $? I think it would also have worked
  - Bud 5y ago
    I think you need to review what "by force" actually means.
  - elzbardico 5y ago
    You can remove the other third-party login options and offer only email+password. Part of the reason people pay the Apple premium (which is definitely a fact) is because of platform consistency. We are paying more so things are consistent, I expect to not being forced to use a google or facebook account, I expect to have a single place to manage my subscriptions. If I didn't like that, why in hell would I pay more to be in the apple ecosystem???
    - collaborative 5y ago
      Here there is a conflict of interest. Who gets to choose to "expect" more? Arguably, I pay more $ to Apple than you (on top of the value I add). Let's see: 1 dev subscription 4 iPhones to test 2 iPads to test 2 macs to develop Why do you get to "expect" things from me, and why does Apple get to force me to serve you in a certain way that keeps changing over time and then threatens to hide my work if I don't comply? I don't know, it just doesn't seem fair. I am happy to work for free because I like what I do, but then being told to do things or risk being banned is just too much for my taste I think I will just leave the App Store when my web version is finished. Too much trouble for nothing
      - elzbardico 5y ago
        You don't understand, do you? The average apple customer values the consistency of experience in the platform far more than your application. In the grand scheme of things, I am pretty sure you removing your application from the apple store would be an objective loss for customers, but that loss pales in the sight of the benefit of not being compelled to use google or facebook as the only way to login into an application as it is so common in android. The average apple customer values consistency and is far less tolerant of deviations from that than the average microsoft or google customer. The whole point in paying more for apple is because we value order, predictability and consistency. Windows customers are not used to that. Windows Hello may be a good thing for them, but they don't expect the same degree of consistency, if your windows Application doesn't use it, they don't complain, this is life. But apple customers, like you it or not, expect IOS features to be widely available on IOS applications. We literally pay for that, and as there are vastly more consumers like me, than developers like, it doesn't matter if we bought half the hardware you buy, because as a customer class, end users absolutely dwarf developers. I completely understand your personal frustration. But this is on you, your choices of providing your work for free deliberately. Most customers don't want to be back on the situation where you either choose between facebook login or tedious manual account creation, just because it will inconvenience some developers. The whole, raw point is exactly that. It may sound cruel, but we WANT you to be forced to implement stuff that is consistent with IOS guidelines, best practices or even features. Customers can be cruel like that.
pokot0 5y ago
You don't want to understand. Apple users are happy that they forced you. They like the AppleID experience and nobody would care to implement it if they didn't force developers. I know it's frustrating for you, but this is the core of why Apple users stick to Apple. They decided to trust and share their data with one single company (Apple) instead of an overwhelming amount of small companies. And it's not just about data; Apple users trust Apple to design a competiting device and a refined user experience and they don't have to do the work for themselves. They just buy the next Apple device and they trust Apple to do the work for them. I know it's not for everyone, but if a subset of people like it and they decide to buy into it.... why are people getting mad? Apple is the result of what Apple users want. If you don't like them you can develop your app for Android users or whatever else you like.
- InsomniacL 5y ago
  > Apple users are happy that they forced you. As an Apple user I'm not happy they forced this. It's manipulative forcing even more platform lock-in for the average joe which empowers other anti-trust practices too. You're argument that an Apple user is happy at the point of use doesn't justify anti-trust behaviour which is to the overall detriment of people. Apple seem to get away with far too much just because they're 'Apple'. Imagine the mess we would be in if every auth provider had the same policy.
  - elzbardico 5y ago
    Your position would make sense if besides forcing the implementation of Apple Id, Apple forbade the use of any other authentication method. This is not the case. You can even offer google authentication in your app. You can also move to android and authenticate to the same app still using apple id, the developer can also offer the chance to link this existing account with another credential. So, there's absolutely no lock-in. And indeed most apple users are happy with that, as it gave me the choice not to have to keep using google or facebook authentication.
  - pokot0 5y ago
    I understand your anti-trust point and I agree to some extent. But this is not something you can blame on Apple. You need to go to your politicians. You can't expect a company to self-regulate its dominance position. In general I believe a much better way of dealing with this form of dominance is taxing the dominant companies agressively and use that money to fund open source competition.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
garblegarble 5y ago
>However, you seem to have missed the point. My problem is not AppleID, my problem is that Apple forced it on my app and threatened to shut me down if I didn't include it My understanding is that Apple only force you to include this if you provide other third-party login options. This is a consumer-friendly feature that Apple is forcing you to implement so that your users on Apple platforms can choose to use your app's one-click third party login functionality whist still retaining control about what personal data they share with you. Apple's platforms require a variety of consumer- and privacy-friendly features from developers who choose to release apps on them, and you could make your same argument against any of them (e.g. not tracking the user without their permission) That Apple does this and holds third-party developers to standards for privacy and consumer-friendliness is why I (and many others) use their platforms.
- elzbardico 5y ago
  Yes, It keeps app developers from forcing you to use google or facebook, giving you at least the option to use Apple Id, which frankly, for all practical purposes, is definitelly a lesser evil.
krustyburger 5y ago
Right, except that your “problem” is also the relationship Apple has with its customers. You did nothing to build the trust and loyalty that you mock in your snarky write-up. Apple did, to the point that their users would prefer to trust them with their personal information over someone else (you). The tone of your whole piece is sophomoric- you essentially suggest that all of Apple’s customers are uninformed and lacking agency (unlike you). All of this because you could no longer automatically glom some people’s emails for whatever future use you dream up? I hope you realize how you’re coming off. Frankly, I wouldn’t be keen on you having my email. You might accuse me of “sitting on my butt” or worse if you decide I’m not a good customer or whatever.
- collaborative 5y ago
  For what it's worth I'd like to apologize to anyone who identifies as an Apple user and has been offended by my tone. I intended to add a bit of humor but I know that perspective can make things feel a lot different Please replace every mention of "Apple user" with "Apple". It really is the only wrong party here
  - walls 5y ago
    You definitely nailed the tone you were going for, you're just not liking the response.
    - collaborative 5y ago
      Nah, I just feel sorry for any Apple user out there that was offended by my words. It happens everywhere. I generally don't place a lot of importance on these things, but it's rude to make fun of people's (core) beliefs

yalogin 5y ago

Forcing it on you is what gives their users the privacy assurance/functionality of using the app and not giving the apps their emails. They want you to redesign your app so that you don’t rely more n mail to provide functionality. It’s a good thing, even for you.

collaborative 5y ago
I don't dispute that it is a good thing. I object to the method of implementing it by force I am an Apple customer as much as an iPhone user is. But Apple chooses to treat me as an employee, after having charged me (and paid me nothing). Do I have the right to be upset? Could they not have sweetened AppleID by encouraging users to ask devs to implement it or even by reducing our dev annual fee by some $? I think it would also have worked
- Bud 5y ago
  I think you need to review what "by force" actually means.
- elzbardico 5y ago
  You can remove the other third-party login options and offer only email+password. Part of the reason people pay the Apple premium (which is definitely a fact) is because of platform consistency. We are paying more so things are consistent, I expect to not being forced to use a google or facebook account, I expect to have a single place to manage my subscriptions. If I didn't like that, why in hell would I pay more to be in the apple ecosystem???
  - collaborative 5y ago
    Here there is a conflict of interest. Who gets to choose to "expect" more? Arguably, I pay more $ to Apple than you (on top of the value I add). Let's see: 1 dev subscription 4 iPhones to test 2 iPads to test 2 macs to develop Why do you get to "expect" things from me, and why does Apple get to force me to serve you in a certain way that keeps changing over time and then threatens to hide my work if I don't comply? I don't know, it just doesn't seem fair. I am happy to work for free because I like what I do, but then being told to do things or risk being banned is just too much for my taste I think I will just leave the App Store when my web version is finished. Too much trouble for nothing
    - elzbardico 5y ago
      You don't understand, do you? The average apple customer values the consistency of experience in the platform far more than your application. In the grand scheme of things, I am pretty sure you removing your application from the apple store would be an objective loss for customers, but that loss pales in the sight of the benefit of not being compelled to use google or facebook as the only way to login into an application as it is so common in android. The average apple customer values consistency and is far less tolerant of deviations from that than the average microsoft or google customer. The whole point in paying more for apple is because we value order, predictability and consistency. Windows customers are not used to that. Windows Hello may be a good thing for them, but they don't expect the same degree of consistency, if your windows Application doesn't use it, they don't complain, this is life. But apple customers, like you it or not, expect IOS features to be widely available on IOS applications. We literally pay for that, and as there are vastly more consumers like me, than developers like, it doesn't matter if we bought half the hardware you buy, because as a customer class, end users absolutely dwarf developers. I completely understand your personal frustration. But this is on you, your choices of providing your work for free deliberately. Most customers don't want to be back on the situation where you either choose between facebook login or tedious manual account creation, just because it will inconvenience some developers. The whole, raw point is exactly that. It may sound cruel, but we WANT you to be forced to implement stuff that is consistent with IOS guidelines, best practices or even features. Customers can be cruel like that.

pokot0 5y ago

You don't want to understand. Apple users are happy that they forced you. They like the AppleID experience and nobody would care to implement it if they didn't force developers. I know it's frustrating for you, but this is the core of why Apple users stick to Apple. They decided to trust and share their data with one single company (Apple) instead of an overwhelming amount of small companies. And it's not just about data; Apple users trust Apple to design a competiting device and a refined user experience and they don't have to do the work for themselves. They just buy the next Apple device and they trust Apple to do the work for them. I know it's not for everyone, but if a subset of people like it and they decide to buy into it.... why are people getting mad? Apple is the result of what Apple users want. If you don't like them you can develop your app for Android users or whatever else you like.

InsomniacL 5y ago
> Apple users are happy that they forced you. As an Apple user I'm not happy they forced this. It's manipulative forcing even more platform lock-in for the average joe which empowers other anti-trust practices too. You're argument that an Apple user is happy at the point of use doesn't justify anti-trust behaviour which is to the overall detriment of people. Apple seem to get away with far too much just because they're 'Apple'. Imagine the mess we would be in if every auth provider had the same policy.
- elzbardico 5y ago
  Your position would make sense if besides forcing the implementation of Apple Id, Apple forbade the use of any other authentication method. This is not the case. You can even offer google authentication in your app. You can also move to android and authenticate to the same app still using apple id, the developer can also offer the chance to link this existing account with another credential. So, there's absolutely no lock-in. And indeed most apple users are happy with that, as it gave me the choice not to have to keep using google or facebook authentication.
- pokot0 5y ago
  I understand your anti-trust point and I agree to some extent. But this is not something you can blame on Apple. You need to go to your politicians. You can't expect a company to self-regulate its dominance position. In general I believe a much better way of dealing with this form of dominance is taxing the dominant companies agressively and use that money to fund open source competition.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

garblegarble 5y ago

>However, you seem to have missed the point. My problem is not AppleID, my problem is that Apple forced it on my app and threatened to shut me down if I didn't include it My understanding is that Apple only force you to include this if you provide other third-party login options. This is a consumer-friendly feature that Apple is forcing you to implement so that your users on Apple platforms can choose to use your app's one-click third party login functionality whist still retaining control about what personal data they share with you. Apple's platforms require a variety of consumer- and privacy-friendly features from developers who choose to release apps on them, and you could make your same argument against any of them (e.g. not tracking the user without their permission) That Apple does this and holds third-party developers to standards for privacy and consumer-friendliness is why I (and many others) use their platforms.

elzbardico 5y ago
Yes, It keeps app developers from forcing you to use google or facebook, giving you at least the option to use Apple Id, which frankly, for all practical purposes, is definitelly a lesser evil.

krustyburger 5y ago

Right, except that your “problem” is also the relationship Apple has with its customers. You did nothing to build the trust and loyalty that you mock in your snarky write-up. Apple did, to the point that their users would prefer to trust them with their personal information over someone else (you). The tone of your whole piece is sophomoric- you essentially suggest that all of Apple’s customers are uninformed and lacking agency (unlike you). All of this because you could no longer automatically glom some people’s emails for whatever future use you dream up? I hope you realize how you’re coming off. Frankly, I wouldn’t be keen on you having my email. You might accuse me of “sitting on my butt” or worse if you decide I’m not a good customer or whatever.

collaborative 5y ago
For what it's worth I'd like to apologize to anyone who identifies as an Apple user and has been offended by my tone. I intended to add a bit of humor but I know that perspective can make things feel a lot different Please replace every mention of "Apple user" with "Apple". It really is the only wrong party here
- walls 5y ago
  You definitely nailed the tone you were going for, you're just not liking the response.
  - collaborative 5y ago
    Nah, I just feel sorry for any Apple user out there that was offended by my words. It happens everywhere. I generally don't place a lot of importance on these things, but it's rude to make fun of people's (core) beliefs