5 ms·

Honest answer: yes I don't even hold a grudge against Apple. This is just me trying to make the world a better place. It's in everyone's interest that Apple do

Honest answer: yes I don't even hold a grudge against Apple. This is just me trying to make the world a better place. It's in everyone's interest that Apple doesn't gain authority to force us to do things (don't forget, devs also are Apple customers)

askafriend 5y ago
As a user, I don’t trust your “honest answer”. On the other hand, I absolutely trust Apple - my relationship with them spans over a decade and countless products/experiences. I’m happy that they’re forcing devs to offer Apple Sign On as an option when other social logins are also offered. As a user, I trust Apple far more than any 3rd party dev. I pay a premium to Apple because of their platform and the types of things they enforce. I want you to understand that as a user, this is exactly what I want Apple to do and I pay extra for it.
haswell 5y ago
But what you're telling me is that your opinion about Apple here supersedes my own wishes/wants/goals as an end-user. This reads like "I know what's best, despite what Apple users say they want, and I'm going to make the world a better place by ignoring my users and telling them what they want is actually bad for them", despite the fact that this is actually a beneficial feature to users, even if it could be construed as a benefit to Apple as well (arguments can certainly be made). > It's in everyone's interest that Apple doesn't gain authority to force us to do things The rulebook to participate in this ecosystem is a mile thick. Why is this the issue that you choose to make a fuss over? There are a a myriad of other rules that are even more heavy handed, that actually are to the detriment of end users to protect Apple's walled-garden. Picking a feature that arguably makes user's lives better seems tone deaf at best, and actively harmful to a broader message about openness at worst.
sbuk 5y ago
The thing is, Apple only 'force' you to add their option if you have an app on the store and offer another form of public federated identity provider. If you don't want to offer Apple as an option, then don't offer anyone else. Look at the context of why they have enforced it. Privacy is hard. The concern is that that the majority identity providers/brokers in use are Facebook and Google. I'll happy listen to the 'competition' argument as it does have a little merit. However, when weighed up against the notion that these two are the only real choice for a significant volume of apps, it is extremely worrisome from a privacy point of view. Neither have a reason to respect end users, or you as a developers privacy because that's how they make money.

askafriend 5y ago

As a user, I don’t trust your “honest answer”. On the other hand, I absolutely trust Apple - my relationship with them spans over a decade and countless products/experiences. I’m happy that they’re forcing devs to offer Apple Sign On as an option when other social logins are also offered. As a user, I trust Apple far more than any 3rd party dev. I pay a premium to Apple because of their platform and the types of things they enforce. I want you to understand that as a user, this is exactly what I want Apple to do and I pay extra for it.

haswell 5y ago

But what you're telling me is that your opinion about Apple here supersedes my own wishes/wants/goals as an end-user. This reads like "I know what's best, despite what Apple users say they want, and I'm going to make the world a better place by ignoring my users and telling them what they want is actually bad for them", despite the fact that this is actually a beneficial feature to users, even if it could be construed as a benefit to Apple as well (arguments can certainly be made). > It's in everyone's interest that Apple doesn't gain authority to force us to do things The rulebook to participate in this ecosystem is a mile thick. Why is this the issue that you choose to make a fuss over? There are a a myriad of other rules that are even more heavy handed, that actually are to the detriment of end users to protect Apple's walled-garden. Picking a feature that arguably makes user's lives better seems tone deaf at best, and actively harmful to a broader message about openness at worst.

sbuk 5y ago

The thing is, Apple only 'force' you to add their option if you have an app on the store and offer another form of public federated identity provider. If you don't want to offer Apple as an option, then don't offer anyone else. Look at the context of why they have enforced it. Privacy is hard. The concern is that that the majority identity providers/brokers in use are Facebook and Google. I'll happy listen to the 'competition' argument as it does have a little merit. However, when weighed up against the notion that these two are the only real choice for a significant volume of apps, it is extremely worrisome from a privacy point of view. Neither have a reason to respect end users, or you as a developers privacy because that's how they make money.