3 ms·

It doesn't seem like the author is complaining about having to contact someone at Apple to have these permissions in an app you are building to distribute. If t

It doesn't seem like the author is complaining about having to contact someone at Apple to have these permissions in an app you are building to distribute. If this was for distribution, that could have made sense, but apparently this request for permission is way before that: you need to contact them simply to be able to use the feature on your own device, without distributing it anywhere. This is like being asked to get permission from IETF in order to run an HTTP server on your computer, it just doesn't make sense.

iainmerrick 5y ago
Exactly, it should use the same process as other “advanced” features like payments or push notifications: you toggle a flag in the app entitlements file, it works by default for local development, but you can’t distribute on the App Store without a review.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> This is like being asked to get permission from IETF in order to run an HTTP server on your computer, it just doesn't make sense. The iPhone was never intended to cater to developers writing personal-use, general computing software on their own devices, though. I know it’s an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don’t expect my iPhone to be an open development platform and I’m fine with that, even though I’m also a developer and software enthusiast. Realistically, how many people would even be impacted by this restriction on multicast packet sending for personally-developed apps for personal use only? The number is vanishingly small relative to the total iPhone user base. It makes sense that Apple wouldn’t go out of their way to cater to that ultra-niche use case which can still get the access they need by requesting the permission. I know people get angry that the iPhone doesn’t cater to every single niche personal use case, but honestly I’m fine with that. If I need to write a custom app for personal use that does something unique, I’m not going to reach for an iPhone anyway. However, I use an iPhone as my primary phone because Apple has focused on the things that matter for making it a good phone that does phone things well, which is exactly what most of us actually need.
- lukeschlather 5y ago
  This isn't really that niche. "Personal use" apps are just another word for prototype. It is incredibly damaging to innovation if you can't even build a little prototype without submitting a request to Apple.
- shaan7 5y ago
  > It makes sense that Apple wouldn’t go out of their way to cater to that ultra-niche use case which can still get the access they need by requesting the permission. Well, its not about expecting Apple to put more effort to enable some feature. In many cases enabling that feature is less effort and Apple instead goes "out of their way" to disable such things. _That_ is the problem - and it is not specific to iPhone, things like this have happened in the past on MacBooks too (see https://github.com/onmomo/superdrive-enabler/blob/master/src/superdriveEnabler.c#L13 https://github.com/onmomo/superdrive-enabler/blob/master/src...)
- feanaro 5y ago
  Your stance is going to have lots of unforeseen network effects which will in the end leave you with no general purpose computer at all. What you will be able to run will be dictated by large multi-national conglomerates which will double as some kind of quasi-states. Is this really the future you want to see?

iainmerrick 5y ago

Exactly, it should use the same process as other “advanced” features like payments or push notifications: you toggle a flag in the app entitlements file, it works by default for local development, but you can’t distribute on the App Store without a review.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> This is like being asked to get permission from IETF in order to run an HTTP server on your computer, it just doesn't make sense. The iPhone was never intended to cater to developers writing personal-use, general computing software on their own devices, though. I know it’s an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don’t expect my iPhone to be an open development platform and I’m fine with that, even though I’m also a developer and software enthusiast. Realistically, how many people would even be impacted by this restriction on multicast packet sending for personally-developed apps for personal use only? The number is vanishingly small relative to the total iPhone user base. It makes sense that Apple wouldn’t go out of their way to cater to that ultra-niche use case which can still get the access they need by requesting the permission. I know people get angry that the iPhone doesn’t cater to every single niche personal use case, but honestly I’m fine with that. If I need to write a custom app for personal use that does something unique, I’m not going to reach for an iPhone anyway. However, I use an iPhone as my primary phone because Apple has focused on the things that matter for making it a good phone that does phone things well, which is exactly what most of us actually need.

lukeschlather 5y ago
This isn't really that niche. "Personal use" apps are just another word for prototype. It is incredibly damaging to innovation if you can't even build a little prototype without submitting a request to Apple.
shaan7 5y ago
> It makes sense that Apple wouldn’t go out of their way to cater to that ultra-niche use case which can still get the access they need by requesting the permission. Well, its not about expecting Apple to put more effort to enable some feature. In many cases enabling that feature is less effort and Apple instead goes "out of their way" to disable such things. _That_ is the problem - and it is not specific to iPhone, things like this have happened in the past on MacBooks too (see https://github.com/onmomo/superdrive-enabler/blob/master/src/superdriveEnabler.c#L13 https://github.com/onmomo/superdrive-enabler/blob/master/src...)
feanaro 5y ago
Your stance is going to have lots of unforeseen network effects which will in the end leave you with no general purpose computer at all. What you will be able to run will be dictated by large multi-national conglomerates which will double as some kind of quasi-states. Is this really the future you want to see?