15 ms·

Apple blocked the FlickType Watch keyboard then announced a clone of it

1003 points by kilotaras 5y ago

germandiago 5y ago
I am against regulations but I still find these practices anticompetitive. Not sure what the conclusion should be here. On one side this runs on Apple platform:"it is my platform, I rule it". On the other hand, they have a de-facto position to abuse by just kicking out companies at will to enlarge their businesses and monoplolize them... I wish there was choice beyond Apple and Android. I am myself starting to look for alternatives. Espcially because of privacy concerns. Things like these at the end go against us customers.
- sofixa 5y ago
  > I am against regulations but I still find these practices anticompetitive I really don't know how anyone can see this sort of crap and say they're against regulations. The market obviously isn't fixing itself, do you have any other solution?
  - p2t2p 5y ago
    Whats the point of market fixing itself in this situation? "Market fixing itself" describe relationships between consumer and supplier. In this case "consumer" is better off so seems like market works as intended. Developer's being f-ed over is sad thing but unless the situation for developers is so bad that they abandon App Store in troves then nothing will fix anything. Also one could argue that overall situation is pretty-pleasing for everyone, apps that do not go into Apple's territory (system stuff) seem to be thriving and don't complain too much. I'd rather them not to regulate it because they start with Apple and end up killing shareware and everything else. Who knows what kind of crazy stuff they'll invent for open source, can they outlaw it? I'd rather them to not even start.
    - radmuzom 5y ago
      > In this case "consumer" is better off so seems like market works as intended. How is the consumer better off when a choice for them has been removed? If Apple's keyboard is superior, then consumers will automatically chose that and not buy this guy's software. How is this "nanny state" behaviour by Apple justified?
      - p2t2p 5y ago
        I assumed that they get this option for free instead of buying an app and less stuff to install generally. If Apple's option is worse (which I doubt, at least for English) and/or original app is free then probably consumer suffers a bit. But if consumer is worse off then it is better because AFAIK American anti-monopoly system focuses on consumer's well-being so the more examples of consumer being worse off the easier to attract courts and regulators, isn't it?
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    But I get a warm fuzzy feeling if the market does fix itself!
  - germandiago 5y ago
    then the topic would shift to who regulates the regulator. And there are very EVIL incentives in having regulators. More free market is a way better solution. I agree it is a shitshow.But it is also true that these companies created products. What does a regulator do? Regulate and having incentives to regulate in certain directions (come on we all have seen that). However they bring zero value to people (unlike Apple, for example, with all its defects) There are sooo many absurd regulations that prevent people from building businesses or even working that Ithink we should start there. And later, and only later talk aboutthe rest. Just my two cents.
    - germandiago 5y ago
      Besides the rain of negatives I am getting, something I expected, it seems I got a negative in this last reply. It seems that regulators would be kind of gods where there is nothing else to say about it. I am still waiting for a real, logical reply to who regulates regulators. After all, we live in an overregulated world where people always complain about corporations. However, much of this power is accumulated through lobbying to legislators. Do you people really think that regulating MORE is better? I bet this is not the good way to go... Again, just my two cents from my intellectually honest (I can be wrong, of course) analysis by seeing what I see day by day.
  - p2t2p 5y ago
    Also another note is that I believe sooner or later regulators will come after them. And after what they've shown today they'll have only themselves to blame and what they've shown today. Unfortunately whole community will suffer because of them being insufferably arrogant.
  - wccrawford 5y ago
    I see it another way: It's already got regulations to protect powerful people. Either remove those, or grant protections to everyone else, too. What those people are really saying is that the regulations that exist are the ones they want, and no more.
  - scns 5y ago
    For me "The market will fix itself" is just a neoliberal lie, no amount of repeating it will make it true. <edit>Sadly many people believe people who speak with conviction. A family member shared similar crap (oh noes, i will have to pay more for gas) in a private group</edit> History has shown over and over that left to their own devices people will act in their own self interest. And from a biological point of view it would even be the correct thing to do IMHO. But we ain't running hungry through the wilderness no more. A win-win would be better for everyone. I think inequality creates fear. Even in those who profit, the fear of loosing their wealth. There was a case of a town in the US, were the population was pretty homogenous, their culture forbade the flaunting of wealth, so everybody acted humble and even dressed the same. Then the younger generation went to college out of town, came back with a differnt mindset. Pools were built, cars bought, inequality made obvious for everyone to see. What happenend? Cases of heart disease were low before, but rose afterwards. Found a link: https://www.unimedliving.com/living-medicine/illness-and-disease/the-roseto-effect-a-lesson-on-the-true-cause-of-heart-disease.html https://www.unimedliving.com/living-medicine/illness-and-dis... (edit) formatting
    - germandiago 5y ago
      it is not my position. Nothing to do with neoliberalism the fact that regulating also has evil incentives. We live in a regulated world where many corporations have de-facto privilege because of overregulation yet people ask for more regulation. It is as if I am a soldier and hit you and you ask for an army to feel safer on the basis that "soldiers should be good in theory, they are here to protect us"and u see it again and again and ignore the facts.
      - scns 5y ago
        Sorry if i gave you the impression i accuse you of that. That was not my intention. Well, even if regulation has loopholes for bad actors, is it better to live in a world without it?
        germandiago 5y ago
        a world with fewer regulations makes way more difficult monopolies and privileges through more free competition. The problem is when someone pretends to be capitalist and regulates for friends (crony capitalism). What if they did not have the power to do it? Then it would be clearly better. Our world reached development in an environment with very little regulation. Now they are trying to regulate everything. Later we need welfare blabla and lots of stuff. Some people pay and others take it. Bc u have all kind of rules. Derregulating means let people do. If people can earn a life without this creators of scarcity I am prerty sure that we would need far fewer social helps and would have cheaper services. This uswd to be the trend. We are breaking it... Bad news. This is not what we want? I want that.
  - luckylion 5y ago
    Doesn't the market fix it? I don't have such issues on Android, that's why I don't buy Apple. Most customers just don't care about any of that, so they continue to buy Apple.
  - germandiago 5y ago
    because alternatives are even more evil. Just go to socialist countries and told me what they achieved besides oppression and poverty.
fareesh 5y ago
I remember reading the founder's blog post about this, very unfortunate
anshumankmr 5y ago
Wouldn’t it have been easier to have just acquired the keyboard app?
- lolc 5y ago
  Maybe easier, but not necessarily cheaper.
- nieve 5y ago
  IIRC they tried hard to push him into selling.
- Le_Dook 5y ago
  They tried several times but were turned down. They started blocking it around that time.
- scyzoryk_xyz 5y ago
  An acquisition in the current anti-trust climate might not have been advisable.
- jpcrs 5y ago
  > In one blatant example, Eleftheriou said he was approached by Apple’s head of mobile keyboard technology, Randy Marsden. The latter (who created the Swype keyboard) wanted to buy FlickType to add a native QWERTY for the Apple Watch and improve typing on the device. When Eleftheriou rejected Apple, it refused to remove copycat and scam apps from the App Store. I think he lost his chance. https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-paying-ios-app-is-suing-apple-for-exploiting-small-developers/ https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-...
  - smashah 5y ago
    You think they lowballed him?
    - abcd_f 5y ago
      Unless this guy had a patent, any offer is a good offer. It’s not a terribly complicated feature to do from scratch and it does logically belong to the OS. Blocking it from the store was an ass move, if it indeed happened as described and there’s no hidden context.
nikkinana 5y ago
They got Sherlocked!
bobowzki 5y ago
I believe "Sherlocked" is the term used.
- jamil7 5y ago
  In a lot of the cases (not necessarily this one) it's a welcome addition to build some useful app directly into the OS - the flashlight or flux are two examples I can think of.
  - amelius 5y ago
    Better integration has always been Apple's argument.
- jtbayly 5y ago
  Sherlock was never blocked. Just cloned. Edit: Watson was name. See child comment.
  - shellac 5y ago
    You mean Watson was never blocked. Sherlock was the Apple tool that (in version 3) took heavy inspiration from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Watson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Watson. Allegedly etc etc.
  - bengale 5y ago
    Alfred seems live fine alongside spotlight too.
    - Hamuko 5y ago
      Alfred has a lot more features. For example I constantly use the clipboard manager in Alfred and as far as I know, Spotlight has no such functionality. Of course, Alfred was always designed to work alongside Spotlight since all the actual indexing relies on Spotlight.
    - jagger27 5y ago
thought_alarm 5y ago
Alternatively, Apple prevented people from wasting their money on a feature that was about to be built into the OS.
- avh02 5y ago
  this falls in to the same category of reasoning (IMO) as "you're holding it wrong." - it doesn't answer the underlying issue (in this case - that apple's obviously being unreasonable to the developer) There are other ways to solve the "wasting their money" problem - offer refunds or similar (again, not at the expense of the developer)
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  That's interesting because in later iOS versions apple actually started to allow replacement keyboard apps, including paid for ones. Remember, money "wasted" on apps is straight revenue for Apple. It's why they want to win the case against Epic (and by extension Netflix, Spotify, etc) so badly, because they get a sweet 15% on every purchase made at minimal cost.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- sydthrowaway 5y ago
  Well that actually makes sense
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- K5EiS 5y ago
  Lets remove firefox and opera from the app store too then, since there is already a built-in browser.
  - scns 5y ago
    It is only a skin for Safari, Chrome too.
- deleted 5y ago
Loic 5y ago
iBooks was also a rip-off, let us kill the nice work of a developer.
- caslon 5y ago
  Ah, yes, reading documents on a computer. A keyboard. Both of these are things that have never been done outside of the Apple ecosystem before Apple made their copies. I don't like Apple, but come on. Reading documents is what computers have historically proven best at, and a keyboard is a pretty logical extension of any given electronic device. Would sure save everyone a lot of time if these things were built in.
  - Loic 5y ago
    It was the presentation of the books mimicking exactly the work of somebody else. Sorry, I should have explained more. Apple contacted (if I can remember) the original author, had friendly discussions about the way he was doing the stuff, and then simply copied everything into the default app. This is only from memory, but for me, the pattern is the same.
    - popcube 5y ago
      can't they juat hired rhat guy...
  - mhh__ 5y ago
    Is an iPhone the same as an Android? They're both phones after all?
    - caslon 5y ago
      If you're not copying code, you're just doing what everyone else does: Creating a loose derivative of something else. There's never been an original creative work.
- viktorcode 5y ago
  No the app itself, the book collection interface: wooden shelf with books on it.
NKosmatos 5y ago
Very typical of Apple, using opaque approval procedures. They're acting like bullies because they didn't get what they wanted and because they have the money/power to do so. Apple wanted to buy FlickType but they didn't agree on the price or Eleftheriou didn't want to sell (I doubt it), and so from then onwards started the downhill ride. I fully support Eleftheriou on this just for the principle, but if I were in his place I would have agreed at a very large sum from Apple (even lower from what I had in mind) just so that we could all be happy right now ;-)
- jb1991 5y ago
  > Apple wanted to buy FlickType but they didn't agree on the price or Eleftheriou didn't want to sell (I doubt it) Man, these Apple threads are always so full of open speculation. Edit: I find it very interesting that after multiple downvotes, suddenly I'm getting downvotes on lots of older comments of mine also. Are folks just going into comment histories to go on a downvote rampage?
  - LeoNatan25 5y ago
    This is not a speculation, it is according to Kosta Eleftheriou, the developer of FlickType.
  - sodality2 5y ago
    > In one blatant example, Eleftheriou said he was approached by Apple’s head of mobile keyboard technology, Randy Marsden. The latter (who created the Swype keyboard) wanted to buy FlickType to add a native QWERTY for the Apple Watch and improve typing on the device. When Eleftheriou rejected Apple, it refused to remove copycat and scam apps from the App Store. https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-paying-ios-app-is-suing-apple-for-exploiting-small-developers/ https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-...
    - buran77 5y ago
      Blocking the app was probably just a dick move and revenge in response to the rejection. The two softwares aren't actually competing, one now comes with the OS whether you want it or not. If Apple now bans the use of an alternative keyboard despite it not breaking the rules then that's the real issue: they'd be arbitrarily choosing when to apply or ignore the stated terms of use of the store. Reinstating the app later on once the damage is done is a small price to pay from Apple's perspective. On the other hand if your product is actually just a feature for someone else's product you're always exposing yourself to a situation where the product developer just builds that feature in. Think of other fields where you may offer an aftermarket solution like a car seat heating cover but the market evaporates the moment the manufacturer starts offering that as standard.
aixi 5y ago
I don't think this is a very popular take, but swipe keyboards are extremely common right now; I don't believe Apple had an ulterior motive here.
- arvinsim 5y ago
  That would be believable if Apple allowed Flicktype and released their own version later. The fact that they blocked it does show ulterior motive.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - germandiago 5y ago
    At least it is suspicious in fact.
- LeoNatan25 5y ago
  Apple blocked FlickType with the reason that full keyboards are not allowed on Apple Watch. Then they introduced their own. No ulterior motives?
  - aixi 5y ago
    but what is there to gain for Apple in this situation? it's not like it's a paid app
- IncRnd 5y ago
  It's not a popular take, because you are ignoring the history of the situation that has been mentioned a large number of times on this page and in the article.
  - aixi 5y ago
    i insist, what is there to gain for Apple in this case? this is a free update even for older watches
cblconfederate 5y ago
Apple's gig workers have no longer justification to complain when their boss steals from them. They knew where they are going and fully chose it
- JadeNB 5y ago
  This sure sounds like "they were asking for it", which is tasteless regardless of context.
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    implying that ios developers are victims? (not that i disagree)
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  Why do I feel like we're heading to a future where all consumer facing SW, tech, entertainment is just walled gardens controlled by the handful of trillion dollar megacorps and as a developer or content creator on their platform (or gig worker as you call them) you will basically have the choice of putting up with their bullying/abuse with no chance of recourse or go hungry like how many youtubers wake up with their cannels banned or deleted overnight byt a bot without any chance of fighting back?
  - scns 5y ago
    Because you may have forgotten that you still have a choice? The rider (mind) is pretty weak compared to the elephant (animal), but still strong enough to convince itself its' thoughts are correct. Thoughts beget feelings, watch them. There is always light at the end of the tunnel.
qwerty456127 5y ago
> Apple had begun rejecting updates for the app because it required full system access, a fact that Eleftheriou disputed, saying that it still worked without the permissions. Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years.
- kevingadd 5y ago
  Ever heard of optional features?
  - JadeNB 5y ago
    Why not ask for the extra permissions when you need them for the extra features?
    - spywaregorilla 5y ago
      Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did?
      - JadeNB 5y ago
        > Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did? None at all, no, and I did not mean to assert that they didn't. I was not saying anything about the program itself, only responding to the claim that permissions had to be requested for optional features (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538104): > Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years. which was a response to a question about why the permissions were requested if they were not necessary (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538036 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538036): > Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years. Since the permissions become necessary when the user chooses to use the optional features, I took kevingadd to be claiming that the permissions had to be requested whether or not the optional features were used.
beermonster 5y ago
It’s flux all over again. Sometimes they just buy out the app developer. think they did this with Dark Sky?
- 0x000000001 5y ago
  I have the new Weather app in iOS 15 which is the replacement for Dark Sky and they made it better. This was surprising to me. I can't set custom alerts anymore for e.g., umbrella or UV, but the automatic alerts are exactly how I wanted them anyway... and it's nice that the app changes which data is shown based on the current conditions: if it's going to rain, the map shows weather radar instead of temperature
  - shantara 5y ago
    And unlike Dark Sky there is no iPad version of the native weather app.
- beezischillin 5y ago
  AstroPad also had this happen to them: https://astropad.com/sherlocked-by-apple/ https://astropad.com/sherlocked-by-apple/
- Bud 5y ago
  Apple actually bought Dark Sky, lock, stock, and barrel. (And developers.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22739839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22739839
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
q_andrew 5y ago
Apple is pulling a Lotus/Excel maneuver, except at least Lotus was still allowed to run on Windows at the time.
- tremon 5y ago
  at least Lotus was still allowed to run on Windows at the time Microsoft did not have a way to block Lotus from running on Windows at the time (other than intentionally breaking their system calls, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
tumblewit 5y ago
So here is how I see it for these big tech companies(I know it’s terrible but I believe that’s just how it is sadly). Medical professionals have malpractice insurance / budget where if a doctor was to make a mistake and was sued for it then it is used to settle. Similarly companies like Apple seem to feel like they keep doing what is right for their own personal interests and profits while at the same time set aside money to settle such cases and see it as collateral damage. Even if you were to get a tough judge in a case like this you’d still as Apple at best get a slap on the wrist with a few hundred thousand or a million in fines to some individual developer. The only difference between medical professionals and big tech is that once a medical professionals licence is pulled he can’t practice medicine again. I wonder what similar punishment big tech should get for pulling such stunts.
- scns 5y ago
  Set aside? Just take it from the penny jar that is as big as a small country.
mfrw 5y ago
Aptly put by the author: See you in court @Apple https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  Does the author stand a chance against the army of ivy league lawyers of a trillion dollar megacorp? I guess it would help if he's also American (don't know where he's from) so he could fight Apple on home turf and use the jury system on his side like "Evil megacorp steals from the little guy" (does it even work like this in the US or did I watch too many movies?), but I'm more curious how a lawsuit would go if he'd be in a jurisdiction different than the US. Like, if for example, the author would be Russian, could he sue Apple's Russian legal entity and they would just shrug it off as "Yeah, that's not us who screwed you, go to the US and sue the Apple US HQ."? As a non-lawyer I'm really curious how the legal system works for such disputes.
  - mfrw 5y ago
    I am no expert; but I would never bet my money that justice will be served :(
  - tomtimtall 5y ago
    I think no, but that army matches on quite a large load of cash, so they’ll likely offer him a settlement agreement which means he “losses” but gets paid. Not fair by any account, but I think that’s what is likely to happen.
    - Teckla 5y ago
      If Apple settles, wouldn't that incentivize other developers to sue Apple for the same and similar reasons? I'd think Apple would want to win the case to discourage other developers from doing the same thing.
  - scns 5y ago
    We will only know if they try. Their lawyers may be handsomely rewarded if they win. Justice may be blind, we will see. Disclaimer: Sorry for postvac ramblings
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pluc 5y ago
They have been doing this since Cydia marketplace. The whole pull-down drawer concept was on a jailbroken app and now it's on both iOS and Android. There's too many of those to list.
- Invictus0 5y ago
  In that case, I believe they actually hired the guy that did that tweak.
  - Bud 5y ago
    As they've hired many other developers in similar circumstances. That would seem to demonstrate "caring about" developers, in my mind at least, but many seem to disagree. :)
hughrr 5y ago
Oh Apple is really starting to head up to the top of my vendor shit list these days. I’ve already dumped their entire ecosystem after the CSAM shit.
- Bud 5y ago
  In favor of which comparable ecosystem that does a better overall job for you on privacy issues, as a whole?
  - hughrr 5y ago
    I’m removing myself from the concept of an ecosystem and choosing software based on individual merit at the moment.
    - Bud 5y ago
      Yeah, except that's not a real choice. That's pretending the issue does not exist and pretending that you can avoid privacy issues with a piecemeal choice. But you can't, of course. Cobbling together your own solution doesn't obscure the fact that you will almost inevitably end up with something that respects your privacy much less, which was my original point.
      - hughrr 5y ago
        The real choice turned out you don’t need to solve a lot of the problems and don’t need an ecosystem and don’t need to create a problem that doesn’t need to be solved. Example. Numbers on my iPhone. Fuck it, use libreoffice on my laptop and have no online spreadsheet solution. Didn’t really need it. Sometimes things can wait. Shrug.
- FearlessNebula 5y ago
  Me too. And I used to be an actual fanboy who defended them on Reddit. I have grown increasingly disillusioned with their philosophies to the point where I switched to Android and will soon be switching to Linux when my Framework laptop ships.
tiffanyh 5y ago
I thought the reason why iOS blocked both SMS apps and Keyboard apps is because they wanted to ensure rogue app developers aren't invading your privacy and/or spamming (e.g. key loggers or sending SMS you didn't compose).
- Bud 5y ago
  Yes. Because it was. And it was, and remains, a good reason. I get why the developer might be ticked, in this case, but I still think it's a stretch to speak of "cloning" a very very basic QWERTY keyboard, and the breathtakingly-original concept of putting a keyboard onto a touchscreen. /s As if that is some kind of grand-scale theft of intellectual property. Please.
  - croes 5y ago
    Doesn't sound basic to me "Limited Vision. FlickType is designed to be as accessible as possible, featuring large keys, highly readable visual announcements, high-contrast color themes, and much more. Type With Your Ears. FlickType can speak back to you when you type or edit, enabling a completely eyes-free writing experience. People who are blind write millions of words every month using it, typing just as fast as everyone else. Comfortably Smart. Say goodbye to painfully slow editing operations. Delete and change entire words with a single flick of your finger. Control the cursor directly from the keyboard. When typing, don't slow down and try to be accurate. Simply tap-type where it feels right and FlickType's unique algorithm will find the correct word from the pattern of your taps."
  - system16 5y ago
    That dismissive argument could be used for virtually any app on the App Store. Developers are limited in nature by the APIs Apple expose, so there is very little chance of anything breathtakingly original appearing on the platform.
throwthere 5y ago
Meh. The problem is FlickType requires network access during use. The App store licensing is ok with keyboards, it's not ok with keyboards that get network access. This, Apple perceives as a major privacy issue-- one for the possibility of keylogging, but also for the broader possibility of the always-on logging that the weather apps are infamous for. edit: Sorry, I didn't include the source, the Developer License Agreement. Here's a link (relevant section on page 23) -- https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-developer-program/Apple-Developer-Program-License-Agreement-20210607-English.pdf https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-de...
- regnerba 5y ago
  According to this tweet from the author, that isn't the reason Apple gave for removing it: https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 They simply said keyboards on the watch are not allowed.
- alisonkisk 5y ago
  Why does Apple enable a feature that no one is allowed to use? assert !(KEYBOARD_ACCESS && NETWORK_ACCCESS) is much cheaper than manually checking every app.
- danachow 5y ago
  You’re kidding right? There is no such restriction on keyboards. How do you think the Bitmoji keyboard works?
- Someone 5y ago
  The weird thing is: it only required network access if you used it while VoiceOver is off (https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/16/22627515/flicktype-ios-keyboard-discontinued-blind-visually-impaired https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/16/22627515/flicktype-ios-ke...) I can’t think of a technical reason for that.
  - amiantos 5y ago
    As with all things on the internet, and especially people complaining loudly about something, there's obviously more to the story. The guy complaining isn't going to tell us the entire unfettered truth and explain why his app needs this network access, and Apple isn't going to say anything because they literally do not care what a bunch of techie people think. The whole story stank of BS from the beginning, but people online love supporting the person who portrays themselves as an underdog battling the big evil company, so they set their critical thinking skills aside and jump on the bandwagon.
whywhywhywhy 5y ago
They've done this so many times there is a word for it, it's no secret how they treat their developer community. Yet you still keep building apps on their platform.
djohnston 5y ago
Developing mobile tools seems like such a hazard with these walled gardens
- OldHand2018 5y ago
  In the financial world, it is generally accepted that you get no reward if you take no risk.
Symmetry 5y ago
What made me leave the iPhone ecosystem, many years ago, was when they pulled all the podcatchers off the app store because they were going to be adding podcast support to iTunes soon. Not only that but getting podcasts from iTunes at the time meant plugging your iPhone into your computer running iTunes, much less convenient than having your phone download things over WiFi. Especially since I was using Linux and didn't have a computer that could run iTunes.
- d35007 5y ago
  When was this? Based on https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2005/06/28Apple-Takes-Podcasting-Mainstream/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2005/06/28Apple-Takes-Podcast..., it looks like Apple added podcast support to iTunes in 2005. The iPhone wasn’t released until 2007 and the App Store didn’t exist until 2008.
  - Symmetry 5y ago
    I was using an iPhone 3GS so it would have been 2009 or 2010. I might very well have been mistaken about podcast support in iTunes being new given that I didn't use iTunes.
  - VortexDream 5y ago
    I assume he means this, where Apple banned a podcast app because it "duplicated existing functionality". https://www.networkworld.com/article/2346233/apple-shows-true-colors--bans-iphone-apps.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/2346233/apple-shows-tru...
    - d35007 5y ago
      Thanks. Apple has arbitrarily banned so many apps that I guess I just forgot about this one. It's hard to imagine a time when iPhones couldn't download podcasts over the air. I can understand why banning Podcaster would have made OP sour on Apple.
  - jjcon 5y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Podcasts https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Podcasts The actual podcasts app was released in 2012
croon 5y ago
So they do this right after winning over Epic in court? Way to drum up support for anti-trust regulation there, Tim.
- mdoms 5y ago
  Why should Apple be concerned about anti trust in USA when they just won a case they should very obviously have lost and it's clear American regulators have been asleep at the wheel for decades?
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    > In sum, given the totality of the record, and its underdeveloped state, while the Court can conclude that Apple exercises market power in the mobile gaming market, the Court cannot conclude that Apple’s market power reaches the status of monopoly power in the mobile gaming market. That said, the evidence does suggest that Apple is near the precipice of substantial market power, or monopoly power, with its considerable market share. Apple is only saved by the fact that its share is not higher, that competitors from related submarkets are making inroads into the mobile gaming submarket, and, perhaps, because plaintiff did not focus on this topic.
    - mdoms 5y ago
      I didn't say anything about "monopoly". One of the most common fallacies when discussing this topic is that anti trust only applies to monopolies. This is dead wrong.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
        What? I didn't say anti trust only applies to monopolies. According to the judge Apple is violating anti trust and walking right up to the line of being a monopoly. It's interesting. My quote is taken straight from the ~180 page ruling.
danielktdoranie 5y ago
Based Tim Apple
mensetmanusman 5y ago
Sherlocking should be illegal. Apple wants to sell hardware, they should stay in their lane.
kelvin0 5y ago
They've come a long way from building personal computers in Wozniak's garage. In the process they've transformed into the 'big brother' from their 1984 T.V. ad campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R706isyDrqI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R706isyDrqI
- Someone 5y ago
  It was the garage of Jobs’ parents, and not even that. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/05/steve-wozniak-apple-starting-in-a-garage-is-a-myth https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/05/steve-woz...: The commonly shared tale is that Apple was not only founded in the garage of 2066 Crist Drive in Los Altos, California – Jobs’s family home – but that the first Macs were designed and built in the garage as the company was bootstrapped. “The garage is a bit of a myth,” Wozniak told Businessweek. “We did no designs there, no breadboarding, no prototyping, no planning of products. We did no manufacturing there.” […] “The garage didn’t serve much purpose, except it was something for us to feel was our home,” said Wozniak. “We had no money. You have to work out of your home when you have no money.”
  - kelvin0 5y ago
    Duly noted!
refracture 5y ago
Apple's behavior here doesn't surprise me.. there's a history of this kind of thing.. what would surprise me however is if the developer didn't see this coming after Apple made purchase offers.. were the offers insultingly small?
- arvinsim 5y ago
  Just because a corporation have loads of money doesn't mean they will not lowball offers.
sundvor 5y ago
There's a very Australian term that perfectly describes Apple at this point, similar to Punts but starting with a C. That's exactly what they are, for pulling off stuff like this. They're clearly abusing their monopoly here. I hope this will bite them in the face.
judge2020 5y ago
Watch keyboard? How does that work? Did it use the iPhone as a proxy to swipe on the watch (since there are obviously no APIs to custom keyboards on the watch).
- IncRnd 5y ago
  Your very comment makes it seem as if there was innovation with the keyboard that Apple took.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    No, just that there’s no way to create a custom watch keyboard that I know of. I’m wondering if they managed to do so and if it required using private APIs or something.
- dagmx 5y ago
  It was a standalone app that you'd type within, and then use the equivalent to the share sheet to send it to other apps. A video of it in action here: https://youtu.be/KYnAB4jYJV4 https://youtu.be/KYnAB4jYJV4 So it did take you out of a flow to do it.
criley2 5y ago
There is no way to have a fair App Store where the organization approving your app is the same organization creating apps to compete with you. This is a fundamental, existential problem with the App Store model. You can't compete with Apple; they simply will not let you.
- jkestner 5y ago
  Elizabeth Warren agrees: https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... She used Amazon as the example but thinks the same about the App Store. As much as I agree with her, the problem with this has been, where do you draw the line between applications and system software? What can be included out of the box? This has constantly changed as companies like Apple vertically integrate the user experience.
- amiantos 5y ago
  So... what are you saying? Apple shouldn't be allowed to improve the software for their own products? There should be a law that prevents Apple from building a keyboard for Apple Watch and consumers have to buy a third party keyboard made by a guy who still won't explain why the keyboard needed "network access OR VoiceOver to be turned on"? Seems fishy to me. I think I'd prefer the keyboard Apple makes.
  - wayneftw 5y ago
    Apple shouldn’t be allowed to lock out alternative app stores.
kgwxd 5y ago
When they released Pencil, there was already a product called Pencil for the iPad by the company FiftyThree. It was fairly big at the time but I never heard anything about how that effected them.
luxuryballs 5y ago
This is dumb I still think the high barrier of entry is good for the App Store. Let Apple call the shots, let the developers who are concerned focus on a different platform if they become that worried that developing for Apple devices is high risk, if it reaches a fever pitch Apple will adjust, if not then it’s probably not a big enough problem. Unlike in healthcare I think it’s reasonable in this environment to sacrifice the few for the betterment of the most and for Apple to have the rights to control their own platform.
- modo_mario 5y ago
  >let the developers who are concerned focus on a different platform if they become that worried that developing for Apple devices is high risk So basically don't develop for half of the market and then if google uses similar anticompetitive tools (as they have) just don't develop at all.
- Drew_ 5y ago
  The App Store doesn't have a high barrier of entry. The barrier is low and completely based on whatever Apple's product strategy is at the moment. Sometimes also based on arbitrary feelings from Apple execs like Phil Schiller.
mikehearn 5y ago
> A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain, but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch. This is wrong, as far as I can tell. The watch app is still in the App Store. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/flicktype-watch-keyboard/id1359485719 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/flicktype-watch-keyboard/id135... I just installed it and verified that it works, although the Watch keyboard itself is hidden behind a $10 in-app purchase.
ajay-b 5y ago
Classic Apple.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
whatever1 5y ago
Unless they can establish theft of IP, I don’t think that Eleftheriou has any chance to win on the grounds of monopolistic behavior. Apple can claim that they were developing for years the feature and did not release it for UX reasons. Apple also does not charge for the app, so consumers were not harmed. I think that spotify has a much stronger case, given the fact that apple is selling a directly competing service with an obvious price and bundling / integration advantage
- probably_wrong 5y ago
  > Apple also does not charge for the app, so consumers were not harmed. As far as I understand, those two things are unrelated. Lack of competition by itself is considered to hurt consumers. Assuming that Apple's choice was based on monopolistic behavior (which is for the courts to decide), whether they got money while doing it is not relevant.
mabbo 5y ago
This is the key problem when a market-maker is also a market participant. When the same entity setting the market rules, deciding who is violating them, and collecting the market data is also an active competitor against everyone else in that market. It's not a fair playing field. Apple knows that, but pretends that it is. I say it's a problem, but I don't have a solution. It's hard to say "Apple can't make apps for the iPhone". Or "Amazon can't sell stuff on Amazon". Or "Google can't by ad space on Google Ads". There clearly needs to be some sort of laws to restrict these kinds of behaviours, to encourage a diverse and open economy rather than rigged games.
- rebuilder 5y ago
  I guess that leaves “Apple can’t dictate what programs can be run on iPhones”
  - VortexDream 5y ago
    No, there's a huge difference between locking out competitors entirely from offering the same kind of app Apple is and, say, removing an app for being adware. Anticompetitive behavior is more subjecting third party apps to rules that their own apps aren't subject to. Or arbitrarily changing the rules to suit their own apps. Any number of behaviors really that affect competitors and prevent them from competing with Apple's apps.
- kamkazemoose 5y ago
  One solution would be to force Apple to break up into seperate firms. So you have Apple App Store, and Apple app maker as seperate firms, and Apple app maker is required to be treated as any other app developer in the app store.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  >This is the key problem when a market-maker is also a market participant. Yes! During the last US election cycle I thought Elizabeth Warren was smart to make a point of this about Amazon... I don't think this issue gets enough attention and very few people seem to care. There are numerous ways this is an unfair practice, and the problem gets worse as the marketplace owner continues to grow and devour competitors. https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-criticizes-amazon-for-seller-practices-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-criticizes-...
lovemenot 5y ago
It seems there might have been a personal problem between a founder and an ex-founder - now Exec. They're from a different generation but the same domain. We don't know why Apple's offer was rejected. But in a case like this, it is conceivable that it was felt the Swype founder had demeaned his successor's achievements. That this exec alone was singled out by name suggests that the negotiation's breakdown might have been triggered by a clash of personalities. If so - despite having already delivered their fait accompli - in the interest of fairness Apple should remake its previous offer. This time with heightened sensitivity to the pair of egos.
tinus_hn 5y ago
He probably feels like an antivirus vendor on the Windows platform.
qwertyuiop_ 5y ago
At the end of the day the Apple App Store leadership needs to clearly make clear in the terms of service that there is a possibility Product people who internally take credit for most of these features may copy the app features and set the expectations really really low. No more handwringing on AppStore bans and copying features. Just come out and say we do it, so 3rd party developers are not glimmery eyed.
skygazer 5y ago
I paid for and use FlickType on the watch. It’s clever, but it always sucked it was a stand-alone app. It was a very limited and cumbersome workaround for an obviously missing OS feature. Copy and paste isn’t even a thing on the watch, so text was mostly trapped in the app. Everyone that used the app knew it would vastly better if a keyboard were supported natively by Apple across the whole OS. It was mostly a tantalizing proof of concept. I feel sorry for the Sherlocked developer, but this is a huge improvement. I recall Apple had previously said they tested and abandoned an on-screen watch keyboard for the Series 0, as the screen was too small. And yesterday they said the screen was finally large enough for a keyboard. I think Flicktype proved it was viable on a smaller screen, and Apple is being crappy limiting availability to the new watch. I don’t know if Apple legally or morally owes the developer anything. I doubt it, but I’m all for them sorting it out in court.
- skygazer 5y ago
  It seems the letter from Apple that the dev posted on Twitter (which was cropped, excluding the date) was actually from 2019 and not sent recently -- it was his initial rejection before the app was finally approved. A bit misleading, whether intentional or not -- if it was intentional, it cleverly fanned the flames. Props to the dev for gorilla marketing skill. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/15/apple-refutes-flicktype-developers-account-of-app-store-issues https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/15/apple-refutes-fli...
amiantos 5y ago
Has no one noticed that this app in question is still on the App Store? First result on google when you search for "Apple Watch keyboards". This makes me even more suspicious of the guy creating all this outrage. It's also not very well reviewed.
- jjcon 5y ago
  He didnt claim it was removed - i believe he was blocked from updating the app
  - mikehearn 5y ago
    The article seems to make that claim: "A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain [in the App Store], but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch."
    - jjcon 5y ago
      Im not familiar with all the history nor what they mean there, but this is a better source and i think explains the story better. I havent seen the dev make that claim at least. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/iphone-keyboard-for-blind-to-shut-down-as-maker-cites-apple-abuse-of-developers/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/iphone-keyboard-...
    - croes 5y ago
      Could it be that there is a free version and a payed one?
- croes 5y ago
  The low ratings mostly complain about lack of language support especially german seems to be missed. And the posted screenshot says it's removed from sale, maybe there were two versions, a free one and a payed one.
znpy 5y ago
Literally kicking a competitor out of business. If this isn't a monopolistic behaviour...
KETpXDDzR 5y ago
Reminds me of Amazon copying successful products as "Amazon Basic" articles. https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-uses-seller-data-copy-products-alleges-house-antitrust-report-2020-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-uses-seller-data-copy...

1003 points by kilotaras 5y ago

I am against regulations but I still find these practices anticompetitive. Not sure what the conclusion should be here. On one side this runs on Apple platform:"it is my platform, I rule it". On the other hand, they have a de-facto position to abuse by just kicking out companies at will to enlarge their businesses and monoplolize them... I wish there was choice beyond Apple and Android. I am myself starting to look for alternatives. Espcially because of privacy concerns. Things like these at the end go against us customers.

sofixa 5y ago
> I am against regulations but I still find these practices anticompetitive I really don't know how anyone can see this sort of crap and say they're against regulations. The market obviously isn't fixing itself, do you have any other solution?
- p2t2p 5y ago
  Whats the point of market fixing itself in this situation? "Market fixing itself" describe relationships between consumer and supplier. In this case "consumer" is better off so seems like market works as intended. Developer's being f-ed over is sad thing but unless the situation for developers is so bad that they abandon App Store in troves then nothing will fix anything. Also one could argue that overall situation is pretty-pleasing for everyone, apps that do not go into Apple's territory (system stuff) seem to be thriving and don't complain too much. I'd rather them not to regulate it because they start with Apple and end up killing shareware and everything else. Who knows what kind of crazy stuff they'll invent for open source, can they outlaw it? I'd rather them to not even start.
  - radmuzom 5y ago
    > In this case "consumer" is better off so seems like market works as intended. How is the consumer better off when a choice for them has been removed? If Apple's keyboard is superior, then consumers will automatically chose that and not buy this guy's software. How is this "nanny state" behaviour by Apple justified?
    - p2t2p 5y ago
      I assumed that they get this option for free instead of buying an app and less stuff to install generally. If Apple's option is worse (which I doubt, at least for English) and/or original app is free then probably consumer suffers a bit. But if consumer is worse off then it is better because AFAIK American anti-monopoly system focuses on consumer's well-being so the more examples of consumer being worse off the easier to attract courts and regulators, isn't it?
- mhh__ 5y ago
  But I get a warm fuzzy feeling if the market does fix itself!
- germandiago 5y ago
  then the topic would shift to who regulates the regulator. And there are very EVIL incentives in having regulators. More free market is a way better solution. I agree it is a shitshow.But it is also true that these companies created products. What does a regulator do? Regulate and having incentives to regulate in certain directions (come on we all have seen that). However they bring zero value to people (unlike Apple, for example, with all its defects) There are sooo many absurd regulations that prevent people from building businesses or even working that Ithink we should start there. And later, and only later talk aboutthe rest. Just my two cents.
  - germandiago 5y ago
    Besides the rain of negatives I am getting, something I expected, it seems I got a negative in this last reply. It seems that regulators would be kind of gods where there is nothing else to say about it. I am still waiting for a real, logical reply to who regulates regulators. After all, we live in an overregulated world where people always complain about corporations. However, much of this power is accumulated through lobbying to legislators. Do you people really think that regulating MORE is better? I bet this is not the good way to go... Again, just my two cents from my intellectually honest (I can be wrong, of course) analysis by seeing what I see day by day.
- p2t2p 5y ago
  Also another note is that I believe sooner or later regulators will come after them. And after what they've shown today they'll have only themselves to blame and what they've shown today. Unfortunately whole community will suffer because of them being insufferably arrogant.
- wccrawford 5y ago
  I see it another way: It's already got regulations to protect powerful people. Either remove those, or grant protections to everyone else, too. What those people are really saying is that the regulations that exist are the ones they want, and no more.
- scns 5y ago
  For me "The market will fix itself" is just a neoliberal lie, no amount of repeating it will make it true. <edit>Sadly many people believe people who speak with conviction. A family member shared similar crap (oh noes, i will have to pay more for gas) in a private group</edit> History has shown over and over that left to their own devices people will act in their own self interest. And from a biological point of view it would even be the correct thing to do IMHO. But we ain't running hungry through the wilderness no more. A win-win would be better for everyone. I think inequality creates fear. Even in those who profit, the fear of loosing their wealth. There was a case of a town in the US, were the population was pretty homogenous, their culture forbade the flaunting of wealth, so everybody acted humble and even dressed the same. Then the younger generation went to college out of town, came back with a differnt mindset. Pools were built, cars bought, inequality made obvious for everyone to see. What happenend? Cases of heart disease were low before, but rose afterwards. Found a link: https://www.unimedliving.com/living-medicine/illness-and-disease/the-roseto-effect-a-lesson-on-the-true-cause-of-heart-disease.html https://www.unimedliving.com/living-medicine/illness-and-dis... (edit) formatting
  - germandiago 5y ago
    it is not my position. Nothing to do with neoliberalism the fact that regulating also has evil incentives. We live in a regulated world where many corporations have de-facto privilege because of overregulation yet people ask for more regulation. It is as if I am a soldier and hit you and you ask for an army to feel safer on the basis that "soldiers should be good in theory, they are here to protect us"and u see it again and again and ignore the facts.
    - scns 5y ago
      Sorry if i gave you the impression i accuse you of that. That was not my intention. Well, even if regulation has loopholes for bad actors, is it better to live in a world without it?
      - germandiago 5y ago
        a world with fewer regulations makes way more difficult monopolies and privileges through more free competition. The problem is when someone pretends to be capitalist and regulates for friends (crony capitalism). What if they did not have the power to do it? Then it would be clearly better. Our world reached development in an environment with very little regulation. Now they are trying to regulate everything. Later we need welfare blabla and lots of stuff. Some people pay and others take it. Bc u have all kind of rules. Derregulating means let people do. If people can earn a life without this creators of scarcity I am prerty sure that we would need far fewer social helps and would have cheaper services. This uswd to be the trend. We are breaking it... Bad news. This is not what we want? I want that.
- luckylion 5y ago
  Doesn't the market fix it? I don't have such issues on Android, that's why I don't buy Apple. Most customers just don't care about any of that, so they continue to buy Apple.
- germandiago 5y ago
  because alternatives are even more evil. Just go to socialist countries and told me what they achieved besides oppression and poverty.

fareesh 5y ago

I remember reading the founder's blog post about this, very unfortunate

anshumankmr 5y ago

Wouldn’t it have been easier to have just acquired the keyboard app?

lolc 5y ago
Maybe easier, but not necessarily cheaper.
nieve 5y ago
IIRC they tried hard to push him into selling.
Le_Dook 5y ago
They tried several times but were turned down. They started blocking it around that time.
scyzoryk_xyz 5y ago
An acquisition in the current anti-trust climate might not have been advisable.
jpcrs 5y ago
> In one blatant example, Eleftheriou said he was approached by Apple’s head of mobile keyboard technology, Randy Marsden. The latter (who created the Swype keyboard) wanted to buy FlickType to add a native QWERTY for the Apple Watch and improve typing on the device. When Eleftheriou rejected Apple, it refused to remove copycat and scam apps from the App Store. I think he lost his chance. https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-paying-ios-app-is-suing-apple-for-exploiting-small-developers/ https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-...
- smashah 5y ago
  You think they lowballed him?
  - abcd_f 5y ago
    Unless this guy had a patent, any offer is a good offer. It’s not a terribly complicated feature to do from scratch and it does logically belong to the OS. Blocking it from the store was an ass move, if it indeed happened as described and there’s no hidden context.

nikkinana 5y ago

They got Sherlocked!

bobowzki 5y ago

I believe "Sherlocked" is the term used.

jamil7 5y ago
In a lot of the cases (not necessarily this one) it's a welcome addition to build some useful app directly into the OS - the flashlight or flux are two examples I can think of.
- amelius 5y ago
  Better integration has always been Apple's argument.
jtbayly 5y ago
Sherlock was never blocked. Just cloned. Edit: Watson was name. See child comment.
- shellac 5y ago
  You mean Watson was never blocked. Sherlock was the Apple tool that (in version 3) took heavy inspiration from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Watson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia_Watson. Allegedly etc etc.
- bengale 5y ago
  Alfred seems live fine alongside spotlight too.
  - Hamuko 5y ago
    Alfred has a lot more features. For example I constantly use the clipboard manager in Alfred and as far as I know, Spotlight has no such functionality. Of course, Alfred was always designed to work alongside Spotlight since all the actual indexing relies on Spotlight.
  - jagger27 5y ago

thought_alarm 5y ago

Alternatively, Apple prevented people from wasting their money on a feature that was about to be built into the OS.

avh02 5y ago
this falls in to the same category of reasoning (IMO) as "you're holding it wrong." - it doesn't answer the underlying issue (in this case - that apple's obviously being unreasonable to the developer) There are other ways to solve the "wasting their money" problem - offer refunds or similar (again, not at the expense of the developer)
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
That's interesting because in later iOS versions apple actually started to allow replacement keyboard apps, including paid for ones. Remember, money "wasted" on apps is straight revenue for Apple. It's why they want to win the case against Epic (and by extension Netflix, Spotify, etc) so badly, because they get a sweet 15% on every purchase made at minimal cost.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
sydthrowaway 5y ago
Well that actually makes sense
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
K5EiS 5y ago
Lets remove firefox and opera from the app store too then, since there is already a built-in browser.
- scns 5y ago
  It is only a skin for Safari, Chrome too.
deleted 5y ago

Loic 5y ago

iBooks was also a rip-off, let us kill the nice work of a developer.

caslon 5y ago
Ah, yes, reading documents on a computer. A keyboard. Both of these are things that have never been done outside of the Apple ecosystem before Apple made their copies. I don't like Apple, but come on. Reading documents is what computers have historically proven best at, and a keyboard is a pretty logical extension of any given electronic device. Would sure save everyone a lot of time if these things were built in.
- Loic 5y ago
  It was the presentation of the books mimicking exactly the work of somebody else. Sorry, I should have explained more. Apple contacted (if I can remember) the original author, had friendly discussions about the way he was doing the stuff, and then simply copied everything into the default app. This is only from memory, but for me, the pattern is the same.
  - popcube 5y ago
    can't they juat hired rhat guy...
- mhh__ 5y ago
  Is an iPhone the same as an Android? They're both phones after all?
  - caslon 5y ago
    If you're not copying code, you're just doing what everyone else does: Creating a loose derivative of something else. There's never been an original creative work.
viktorcode 5y ago
No the app itself, the book collection interface: wooden shelf with books on it.

NKosmatos 5y ago

Very typical of Apple, using opaque approval procedures. They're acting like bullies because they didn't get what they wanted and because they have the money/power to do so. Apple wanted to buy FlickType but they didn't agree on the price or Eleftheriou didn't want to sell (I doubt it), and so from then onwards started the downhill ride. I fully support Eleftheriou on this just for the principle, but if I were in his place I would have agreed at a very large sum from Apple (even lower from what I had in mind) just so that we could all be happy right now ;-)

jb1991 5y ago
> Apple wanted to buy FlickType but they didn't agree on the price or Eleftheriou didn't want to sell (I doubt it) Man, these Apple threads are always so full of open speculation. Edit: I find it very interesting that after multiple downvotes, suddenly I'm getting downvotes on lots of older comments of mine also. Are folks just going into comment histories to go on a downvote rampage?
- LeoNatan25 5y ago
  This is not a speculation, it is according to Kosta Eleftheriou, the developer of FlickType.
- sodality2 5y ago
  > In one blatant example, Eleftheriou said he was approached by Apple’s head of mobile keyboard technology, Randy Marsden. The latter (who created the Swype keyboard) wanted to buy FlickType to add a native QWERTY for the Apple Watch and improve typing on the device. When Eleftheriou rejected Apple, it refused to remove copycat and scam apps from the App Store. https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-paying-ios-app-is-suing-apple-for-exploiting-small-developers/ https://hitechglitz.com/the-creator-of-the-previous-highest-...
  - buran77 5y ago
    Blocking the app was probably just a dick move and revenge in response to the rejection. The two softwares aren't actually competing, one now comes with the OS whether you want it or not. If Apple now bans the use of an alternative keyboard despite it not breaking the rules then that's the real issue: they'd be arbitrarily choosing when to apply or ignore the stated terms of use of the store. Reinstating the app later on once the damage is done is a small price to pay from Apple's perspective. On the other hand if your product is actually just a feature for someone else's product you're always exposing yourself to a situation where the product developer just builds that feature in. Think of other fields where you may offer an aftermarket solution like a car seat heating cover but the market evaporates the moment the manufacturer starts offering that as standard.

aixi 5y ago

I don't think this is a very popular take, but swipe keyboards are extremely common right now; I don't believe Apple had an ulterior motive here.

arvinsim 5y ago
That would be believable if Apple allowed Flicktype and released their own version later. The fact that they blocked it does show ulterior motive.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- germandiago 5y ago
  At least it is suspicious in fact.
LeoNatan25 5y ago
Apple blocked FlickType with the reason that full keyboards are not allowed on Apple Watch. Then they introduced their own. No ulterior motives?
- aixi 5y ago
  but what is there to gain for Apple in this situation? it's not like it's a paid app
IncRnd 5y ago
It's not a popular take, because you are ignoring the history of the situation that has been mentioned a large number of times on this page and in the article.
- aixi 5y ago
  i insist, what is there to gain for Apple in this case? this is a free update even for older watches

cblconfederate 5y ago

Apple's gig workers have no longer justification to complain when their boss steals from them. They knew where they are going and fully chose it

JadeNB 5y ago
This sure sounds like "they were asking for it", which is tasteless regardless of context.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  implying that ios developers are victims? (not that i disagree)
ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Why do I feel like we're heading to a future where all consumer facing SW, tech, entertainment is just walled gardens controlled by the handful of trillion dollar megacorps and as a developer or content creator on their platform (or gig worker as you call them) you will basically have the choice of putting up with their bullying/abuse with no chance of recourse or go hungry like how many youtubers wake up with their cannels banned or deleted overnight byt a bot without any chance of fighting back?
- scns 5y ago
  Because you may have forgotten that you still have a choice? The rider (mind) is pretty weak compared to the elephant (animal), but still strong enough to convince itself its' thoughts are correct. Thoughts beget feelings, watch them. There is always light at the end of the tunnel.

qwerty456127 5y ago

> Apple had begun rejecting updates for the app because it required full system access, a fact that Eleftheriou disputed, saying that it still worked without the permissions. Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years.

kevingadd 5y ago
Ever heard of optional features?
- JadeNB 5y ago
  Why not ask for the extra permissions when you need them for the extra features?
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did?
    - JadeNB 5y ago
      > Do you have reason to believe that's not what they did? None at all, no, and I did not mean to assert that they didn't. I was not saying anything about the program itself, only responding to the claim that permissions had to be requested for optional features (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538104): > Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years. which was a response to a question about why the permissions were requested if they were not necessary (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538036 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28538036): > Then why did it even ask for full system access? Did it? IMHO developers of the apps which ask for any permissions besides those technically necessary for performing the actual function the user installs the app for should be warned once and then banned for years. Since the permissions become necessary when the user chooses to use the optional features, I took kevingadd to be claiming that the permissions had to be requested whether or not the optional features were used.

beermonster 5y ago

It’s flux all over again. Sometimes they just buy out the app developer. think they did this with Dark Sky?

0x000000001 5y ago
I have the new Weather app in iOS 15 which is the replacement for Dark Sky and they made it better. This was surprising to me. I can't set custom alerts anymore for e.g., umbrella or UV, but the automatic alerts are exactly how I wanted them anyway... and it's nice that the app changes which data is shown based on the current conditions: if it's going to rain, the map shows weather radar instead of temperature
- shantara 5y ago
  And unlike Dark Sky there is no iPad version of the native weather app.
beezischillin 5y ago
AstroPad also had this happen to them: https://astropad.com/sherlocked-by-apple/ https://astropad.com/sherlocked-by-apple/
Bud 5y ago
Apple actually bought Dark Sky, lock, stock, and barrel. (And developers.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22739839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22739839

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

q_andrew 5y ago

Apple is pulling a Lotus/Excel maneuver, except at least Lotus was still allowed to run on Windows at the time.

tremon 5y ago
at least Lotus was still allowed to run on Windows at the time Microsoft did not have a way to block Lotus from running on Windows at the time (other than intentionally breaking their system calls, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432608).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

tumblewit 5y ago

So here is how I see it for these big tech companies(I know it’s terrible but I believe that’s just how it is sadly). Medical professionals have malpractice insurance / budget where if a doctor was to make a mistake and was sued for it then it is used to settle. Similarly companies like Apple seem to feel like they keep doing what is right for their own personal interests and profits while at the same time set aside money to settle such cases and see it as collateral damage. Even if you were to get a tough judge in a case like this you’d still as Apple at best get a slap on the wrist with a few hundred thousand or a million in fines to some individual developer. The only difference between medical professionals and big tech is that once a medical professionals licence is pulled he can’t practice medicine again. I wonder what similar punishment big tech should get for pulling such stunts.

scns 5y ago
Set aside? Just take it from the penny jar that is as big as a small country.

mfrw 5y ago

Aptly put by the author: See you in court @Apple https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Does the author stand a chance against the army of ivy league lawyers of a trillion dollar megacorp? I guess it would help if he's also American (don't know where he's from) so he could fight Apple on home turf and use the jury system on his side like "Evil megacorp steals from the little guy" (does it even work like this in the US or did I watch too many movies?), but I'm more curious how a lawsuit would go if he'd be in a jurisdiction different than the US. Like, if for example, the author would be Russian, could he sue Apple's Russian legal entity and they would just shrug it off as "Yeah, that's not us who screwed you, go to the US and sue the Apple US HQ."? As a non-lawyer I'm really curious how the legal system works for such disputes.
- mfrw 5y ago
  I am no expert; but I would never bet my money that justice will be served :(
- tomtimtall 5y ago
  I think no, but that army matches on quite a large load of cash, so they’ll likely offer him a settlement agreement which means he “losses” but gets paid. Not fair by any account, but I think that’s what is likely to happen.
  - Teckla 5y ago
    If Apple settles, wouldn't that incentivize other developers to sue Apple for the same and similar reasons? I'd think Apple would want to win the case to discourage other developers from doing the same thing.
- scns 5y ago
  We will only know if they try. Their lawyers may be handsomely rewarded if they win. Justice may be blind, we will see. Disclaimer: Sorry for postvac ramblings

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pluc 5y ago

They have been doing this since Cydia marketplace. The whole pull-down drawer concept was on a jailbroken app and now it's on both iOS and Android. There's too many of those to list.

Invictus0 5y ago
In that case, I believe they actually hired the guy that did that tweak.
- Bud 5y ago
  As they've hired many other developers in similar circumstances. That would seem to demonstrate "caring about" developers, in my mind at least, but many seem to disagree. :)

hughrr 5y ago

Oh Apple is really starting to head up to the top of my vendor shit list these days. I’ve already dumped their entire ecosystem after the CSAM shit.

Bud 5y ago
In favor of which comparable ecosystem that does a better overall job for you on privacy issues, as a whole?
- hughrr 5y ago
  I’m removing myself from the concept of an ecosystem and choosing software based on individual merit at the moment.
  - Bud 5y ago
    Yeah, except that's not a real choice. That's pretending the issue does not exist and pretending that you can avoid privacy issues with a piecemeal choice. But you can't, of course. Cobbling together your own solution doesn't obscure the fact that you will almost inevitably end up with something that respects your privacy much less, which was my original point.
    - hughrr 5y ago
      The real choice turned out you don’t need to solve a lot of the problems and don’t need an ecosystem and don’t need to create a problem that doesn’t need to be solved. Example. Numbers on my iPhone. Fuck it, use libreoffice on my laptop and have no online spreadsheet solution. Didn’t really need it. Sometimes things can wait. Shrug.
FearlessNebula 5y ago
Me too. And I used to be an actual fanboy who defended them on Reddit. I have grown increasingly disillusioned with their philosophies to the point where I switched to Android and will soon be switching to Linux when my Framework laptop ships.

tiffanyh 5y ago

I thought the reason why iOS blocked both SMS apps and Keyboard apps is because they wanted to ensure rogue app developers aren't invading your privacy and/or spamming (e.g. key loggers or sending SMS you didn't compose).

Bud 5y ago
Yes. Because it was. And it was, and remains, a good reason. I get why the developer might be ticked, in this case, but I still think it's a stretch to speak of "cloning" a very very basic QWERTY keyboard, and the breathtakingly-original concept of putting a keyboard onto a touchscreen. /s As if that is some kind of grand-scale theft of intellectual property. Please.
- croes 5y ago
  Doesn't sound basic to me "Limited Vision. FlickType is designed to be as accessible as possible, featuring large keys, highly readable visual announcements, high-contrast color themes, and much more. Type With Your Ears. FlickType can speak back to you when you type or edit, enabling a completely eyes-free writing experience. People who are blind write millions of words every month using it, typing just as fast as everyone else. Comfortably Smart. Say goodbye to painfully slow editing operations. Delete and change entire words with a single flick of your finger. Control the cursor directly from the keyboard. When typing, don't slow down and try to be accurate. Simply tap-type where it feels right and FlickType's unique algorithm will find the correct word from the pattern of your taps."
- system16 5y ago
  That dismissive argument could be used for virtually any app on the App Store. Developers are limited in nature by the APIs Apple expose, so there is very little chance of anything breathtakingly original appearing on the platform.

throwthere 5y ago

Meh. The problem is FlickType requires network access during use. The App store licensing is ok with keyboards, it's not ok with keyboards that get network access. This, Apple perceives as a major privacy issue-- one for the possibility of keylogging, but also for the broader possibility of the always-on logging that the weather apps are infamous for. edit: Sorry, I didn't include the source, the Developer License Agreement. Here's a link (relevant section on page 23) -- https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-developer-program/Apple-Developer-Program-License-Agreement-20210607-English.pdf https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/terms/apple-de...

regnerba 5y ago
According to this tweet from the author, that isn't the reason Apple gave for removing it: https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 https://twitter.com/keleftheriou/status/1437845736951992321 They simply said keyboards on the watch are not allowed.
alisonkisk 5y ago
Why does Apple enable a feature that no one is allowed to use? assert !(KEYBOARD_ACCESS && NETWORK_ACCCESS) is much cheaper than manually checking every app.
danachow 5y ago
You’re kidding right? There is no such restriction on keyboards. How do you think the Bitmoji keyboard works?
Someone 5y ago
The weird thing is: it only required network access if you used it while VoiceOver is off (https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/16/22627515/flicktype-ios-keyboard-discontinued-blind-visually-impaired https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/16/22627515/flicktype-ios-ke...) I can’t think of a technical reason for that.
- amiantos 5y ago
  As with all things on the internet, and especially people complaining loudly about something, there's obviously more to the story. The guy complaining isn't going to tell us the entire unfettered truth and explain why his app needs this network access, and Apple isn't going to say anything because they literally do not care what a bunch of techie people think. The whole story stank of BS from the beginning, but people online love supporting the person who portrays themselves as an underdog battling the big evil company, so they set their critical thinking skills aside and jump on the bandwagon.

whywhywhywhy 5y ago

They've done this so many times there is a word for it, it's no secret how they treat their developer community. Yet you still keep building apps on their platform.

djohnston 5y ago

Developing mobile tools seems like such a hazard with these walled gardens

OldHand2018 5y ago
In the financial world, it is generally accepted that you get no reward if you take no risk.

Symmetry 5y ago

What made me leave the iPhone ecosystem, many years ago, was when they pulled all the podcatchers off the app store because they were going to be adding podcast support to iTunes soon. Not only that but getting podcasts from iTunes at the time meant plugging your iPhone into your computer running iTunes, much less convenient than having your phone download things over WiFi. Especially since I was using Linux and didn't have a computer that could run iTunes.

d35007 5y ago
When was this? Based on https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2005/06/28Apple-Takes-Podcasting-Mainstream/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2005/06/28Apple-Takes-Podcast..., it looks like Apple added podcast support to iTunes in 2005. The iPhone wasn’t released until 2007 and the App Store didn’t exist until 2008.
- Symmetry 5y ago
  I was using an iPhone 3GS so it would have been 2009 or 2010. I might very well have been mistaken about podcast support in iTunes being new given that I didn't use iTunes.
- VortexDream 5y ago
  I assume he means this, where Apple banned a podcast app because it "duplicated existing functionality". https://www.networkworld.com/article/2346233/apple-shows-true-colors--bans-iphone-apps.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/2346233/apple-shows-tru...
  - d35007 5y ago
    Thanks. Apple has arbitrarily banned so many apps that I guess I just forgot about this one. It's hard to imagine a time when iPhones couldn't download podcasts over the air. I can understand why banning Podcaster would have made OP sour on Apple.
- jjcon 5y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Podcasts https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Podcasts The actual podcasts app was released in 2012

croon 5y ago

So they do this right after winning over Epic in court? Way to drum up support for anti-trust regulation there, Tim.

mdoms 5y ago
Why should Apple be concerned about anti trust in USA when they just won a case they should very obviously have lost and it's clear American regulators have been asleep at the wheel for decades?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  > In sum, given the totality of the record, and its underdeveloped state, while the Court can conclude that Apple exercises market power in the mobile gaming market, the Court cannot conclude that Apple’s market power reaches the status of monopoly power in the mobile gaming market. That said, the evidence does suggest that Apple is near the precipice of substantial market power, or monopoly power, with its considerable market share. Apple is only saved by the fact that its share is not higher, that competitors from related submarkets are making inroads into the mobile gaming submarket, and, perhaps, because plaintiff did not focus on this topic.
  - mdoms 5y ago
    I didn't say anything about "monopoly". One of the most common fallacies when discussing this topic is that anti trust only applies to monopolies. This is dead wrong.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
      What? I didn't say anti trust only applies to monopolies. According to the judge Apple is violating anti trust and walking right up to the line of being a monopoly. It's interesting. My quote is taken straight from the ~180 page ruling.

danielktdoranie 5y ago

Based Tim Apple

mensetmanusman 5y ago

Sherlocking should be illegal. Apple wants to sell hardware, they should stay in their lane.

kelvin0 5y ago

They've come a long way from building personal computers in Wozniak's garage. In the process they've transformed into the 'big brother' from their 1984 T.V. ad campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R706isyDrqI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R706isyDrqI

Someone 5y ago
It was the garage of Jobs’ parents, and not even that. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/05/steve-wozniak-apple-starting-in-a-garage-is-a-myth https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/05/steve-woz...: The commonly shared tale is that Apple was not only founded in the garage of 2066 Crist Drive in Los Altos, California – Jobs’s family home – but that the first Macs were designed and built in the garage as the company was bootstrapped. “The garage is a bit of a myth,” Wozniak told Businessweek. “We did no designs there, no breadboarding, no prototyping, no planning of products. We did no manufacturing there.” […] “The garage didn’t serve much purpose, except it was something for us to feel was our home,” said Wozniak. “We had no money. You have to work out of your home when you have no money.”
- kelvin0 5y ago
  Duly noted!

refracture 5y ago

Apple's behavior here doesn't surprise me.. there's a history of this kind of thing.. what would surprise me however is if the developer didn't see this coming after Apple made purchase offers.. were the offers insultingly small?

arvinsim 5y ago
Just because a corporation have loads of money doesn't mean they will not lowball offers.

sundvor 5y ago

There's a very Australian term that perfectly describes Apple at this point, similar to Punts but starting with a C. That's exactly what they are, for pulling off stuff like this. They're clearly abusing their monopoly here. I hope this will bite them in the face.

judge2020 5y ago

Watch keyboard? How does that work? Did it use the iPhone as a proxy to swipe on the watch (since there are obviously no APIs to custom keyboards on the watch).

IncRnd 5y ago
Your very comment makes it seem as if there was innovation with the keyboard that Apple took.
- judge2020 5y ago
  No, just that there’s no way to create a custom watch keyboard that I know of. I’m wondering if they managed to do so and if it required using private APIs or something.
dagmx 5y ago
It was a standalone app that you'd type within, and then use the equivalent to the share sheet to send it to other apps. A video of it in action here: https://youtu.be/KYnAB4jYJV4 https://youtu.be/KYnAB4jYJV4 So it did take you out of a flow to do it.

criley2 5y ago

There is no way to have a fair App Store where the organization approving your app is the same organization creating apps to compete with you. This is a fundamental, existential problem with the App Store model. You can't compete with Apple; they simply will not let you.

jkestner 5y ago
Elizabeth Warren agrees: https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... She used Amazon as the example but thinks the same about the App Store. As much as I agree with her, the problem with this has been, where do you draw the line between applications and system software? What can be included out of the box? This has constantly changed as companies like Apple vertically integrate the user experience.
amiantos 5y ago
So... what are you saying? Apple shouldn't be allowed to improve the software for their own products? There should be a law that prevents Apple from building a keyboard for Apple Watch and consumers have to buy a third party keyboard made by a guy who still won't explain why the keyboard needed "network access OR VoiceOver to be turned on"? Seems fishy to me. I think I'd prefer the keyboard Apple makes.
- wayneftw 5y ago
  Apple shouldn’t be allowed to lock out alternative app stores.

kgwxd 5y ago

When they released Pencil, there was already a product called Pencil for the iPad by the company FiftyThree. It was fairly big at the time but I never heard anything about how that effected them.

luxuryballs 5y ago

This is dumb I still think the high barrier of entry is good for the App Store. Let Apple call the shots, let the developers who are concerned focus on a different platform if they become that worried that developing for Apple devices is high risk, if it reaches a fever pitch Apple will adjust, if not then it’s probably not a big enough problem. Unlike in healthcare I think it’s reasonable in this environment to sacrifice the few for the betterment of the most and for Apple to have the rights to control their own platform.

modo_mario 5y ago
>let the developers who are concerned focus on a different platform if they become that worried that developing for Apple devices is high risk So basically don't develop for half of the market and then if google uses similar anticompetitive tools (as they have) just don't develop at all.
Drew_ 5y ago
The App Store doesn't have a high barrier of entry. The barrier is low and completely based on whatever Apple's product strategy is at the moment. Sometimes also based on arbitrary feelings from Apple execs like Phil Schiller.

mikehearn 5y ago

> A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain, but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch. This is wrong, as far as I can tell. The watch app is still in the App Store. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/flicktype-watch-keyboard/id1359485719 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/flicktype-watch-keyboard/id135... I just installed it and verified that it works, although the Watch keyboard itself is hidden behind a $10 in-app purchase.

ajay-b 5y ago

Classic Apple.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

whatever1 5y ago

Unless they can establish theft of IP, I don’t think that Eleftheriou has any chance to win on the grounds of monopolistic behavior. Apple can claim that they were developing for years the feature and did not release it for UX reasons. Apple also does not charge for the app, so consumers were not harmed. I think that spotify has a much stronger case, given the fact that apple is selling a directly competing service with an obvious price and bundling / integration advantage

probably_wrong 5y ago
> Apple also does not charge for the app, so consumers were not harmed. As far as I understand, those two things are unrelated. Lack of competition by itself is considered to hurt consumers. Assuming that Apple's choice was based on monopolistic behavior (which is for the courts to decide), whether they got money while doing it is not relevant.

mabbo 5y ago

This is the key problem when a market-maker is also a market participant. When the same entity setting the market rules, deciding who is violating them, and collecting the market data is also an active competitor against everyone else in that market. It's not a fair playing field. Apple knows that, but pretends that it is. I say it's a problem, but I don't have a solution. It's hard to say "Apple can't make apps for the iPhone". Or "Amazon can't sell stuff on Amazon". Or "Google can't by ad space on Google Ads". There clearly needs to be some sort of laws to restrict these kinds of behaviours, to encourage a diverse and open economy rather than rigged games.

rebuilder 5y ago
I guess that leaves “Apple can’t dictate what programs can be run on iPhones”
- VortexDream 5y ago
  No, there's a huge difference between locking out competitors entirely from offering the same kind of app Apple is and, say, removing an app for being adware. Anticompetitive behavior is more subjecting third party apps to rules that their own apps aren't subject to. Or arbitrarily changing the rules to suit their own apps. Any number of behaviors really that affect competitors and prevent them from competing with Apple's apps.
kamkazemoose 5y ago
One solution would be to force Apple to break up into seperate firms. So you have Apple App Store, and Apple app maker as seperate firms, and Apple app maker is required to be treated as any other app developer in the app store.
micromacrofoot 5y ago
>This is the key problem when a market-maker is also a market participant. Yes! During the last US election cycle I thought Elizabeth Warren was smart to make a point of this about Amazon... I don't think this issue gets enough attention and very few people seem to care. There are numerous ways this is an unfair practice, and the problem gets worse as the marketplace owner continues to grow and devour competitors. https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-criticizes-amazon-for-seller-practices-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-criticizes-...

lovemenot 5y ago

It seems there might have been a personal problem between a founder and an ex-founder - now Exec. They're from a different generation but the same domain. We don't know why Apple's offer was rejected. But in a case like this, it is conceivable that it was felt the Swype founder had demeaned his successor's achievements. That this exec alone was singled out by name suggests that the negotiation's breakdown might have been triggered by a clash of personalities. If so - despite having already delivered their fait accompli - in the interest of fairness Apple should remake its previous offer. This time with heightened sensitivity to the pair of egos.

tinus_hn 5y ago

He probably feels like an antivirus vendor on the Windows platform.

qwertyuiop_ 5y ago

At the end of the day the Apple App Store leadership needs to clearly make clear in the terms of service that there is a possibility Product people who internally take credit for most of these features may copy the app features and set the expectations really really low. No more handwringing on AppStore bans and copying features. Just come out and say we do it, so 3rd party developers are not glimmery eyed.

skygazer 5y ago

I paid for and use FlickType on the watch. It’s clever, but it always sucked it was a stand-alone app. It was a very limited and cumbersome workaround for an obviously missing OS feature. Copy and paste isn’t even a thing on the watch, so text was mostly trapped in the app. Everyone that used the app knew it would vastly better if a keyboard were supported natively by Apple across the whole OS. It was mostly a tantalizing proof of concept. I feel sorry for the Sherlocked developer, but this is a huge improvement. I recall Apple had previously said they tested and abandoned an on-screen watch keyboard for the Series 0, as the screen was too small. And yesterday they said the screen was finally large enough for a keyboard. I think Flicktype proved it was viable on a smaller screen, and Apple is being crappy limiting availability to the new watch. I don’t know if Apple legally or morally owes the developer anything. I doubt it, but I’m all for them sorting it out in court.

skygazer 5y ago
It seems the letter from Apple that the dev posted on Twitter (which was cropped, excluding the date) was actually from 2019 and not sent recently -- it was his initial rejection before the app was finally approved. A bit misleading, whether intentional or not -- if it was intentional, it cleverly fanned the flames. Props to the dev for gorilla marketing skill. https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/15/apple-refutes-flicktype-developers-account-of-app-store-issues https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/15/apple-refutes-fli...

amiantos 5y ago

Has no one noticed that this app in question is still on the App Store? First result on google when you search for "Apple Watch keyboards". This makes me even more suspicious of the guy creating all this outrage. It's also not very well reviewed.

jjcon 5y ago
He didnt claim it was removed - i believe he was blocked from updating the app
- mikehearn 5y ago
  The article seems to make that claim: "A separate version for the Apple Watch would remain [in the App Store], but then Apple pulled that one as well, telling Eleftheriou that keyboards aren’t allowed on the Apple Watch."
  - jjcon 5y ago
    Im not familiar with all the history nor what they mean there, but this is a better source and i think explains the story better. I havent seen the dev make that claim at least. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/iphone-keyboard-for-blind-to-shut-down-as-maker-cites-apple-abuse-of-developers/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/08/iphone-keyboard-...
  - croes 5y ago
    Could it be that there is a free version and a payed one?
croes 5y ago
The low ratings mostly complain about lack of language support especially german seems to be missed. And the posted screenshot says it's removed from sale, maybe there were two versions, a free one and a payed one.

znpy 5y ago

Literally kicking a competitor out of business. If this isn't a monopolistic behaviour...

KETpXDDzR 5y ago

Reminds me of Amazon copying successful products as "Amazon Basic" articles. https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-uses-seller-data-copy-products-alleges-house-antitrust-report-2020-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-uses-seller-data-copy...