6 ms·

Very nice! Could this be published in the App Store, or does it use any APIs Apple considers off-limits? I'm regularly frustrated by modern phone's complete in

by lxgr 1y ago

Very nice! Could this be published in the App Store, or does it use any APIs Apple considers off-limits? I'm regularly frustrated by modern phone's complete inabilities to allow any communication when outside of mobile network or Wi-Fi coverage, not even within the two large walled gardens. It would be so easy for Apple to extend iMessage to work peer-to-peer, at least between people that have already messaged each other before and while both screens are on. That's literally how AirDrop works, and having to send a "Notes" text back and forth is just silly.

dzhiurgis 1y ago
I'd much rather Apple allow running something like this (open source) myself rather than use their "just trust me bro" store.
- Tika2234 1y ago
  [dead]
- OsrsNeedsf2P 1y ago
  I've never understood this argument. Apple spends billions of dollars vetting their store for high quality apps. You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source. As much as people want to be "leet" and run 3rd party software, it's inherently insecure and that's why Apple shuts it down.
  - aguacaterojo 1y ago
    > You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source. You don't need to because you compile it from source yourself
  - noman-land 1y ago
    This might sound crazy but some people want the freedom to use their belongings however they want instead of having artificial child locks placed on them by trillion dollar corporate daddies.
    - woleium 1y ago
      But, sadly, as evidenced by apple’s share price, not enough people.
      - pjerem 1y ago
        That’s only because there is only one alternative that is more or less equally shitty (Android) and no room for any competition whatsoever. It’s not like people really have options to choose when it comes to choosing a smartphone. It’s easy to have a growing share price when you are a duopoly. You don’t have to serve your users.
        immibis 1y ago
        Android may be shitty but it allows you to install an APK you downloaded from god knows where, and that's enough of a deal-making feature for me. I also own a Linux phone, but I don't use it. Maybe one day someone will create one that's actually usable...
        pjerem 1y ago
        That was not the point of the discussion. I could answer "iOS may be shitty but it doesn't phone home every touch and your health data stays local". I really don't want to argue abour iOs vs Android. I used both. They are both shit made to lock their users in an ecosystem that solely benefits Google or Apple. I really couldnt care more about arguing which is worse, I would just want the market to allow something better than both for me, the user.
  - thejazzman 1y ago
    They shut it down because 30%. There was a version of Apple at a point in time where I agree with your rhetoric. They have completely lost credibility to uphold that position IMO. Apple definitely does not spend billions guaranteeing "quality". To prove my point, where does Apple even define what they consider "quality"? How can you quantify such an aubjecrive and ambiguous term? They spend billions paying out the 70% they don't pocket. Heck, They don't even adhere to their own HIG nor let us revert to past (objectively higher quality) versions of iOS.
    - pjerem 1y ago
      Also, the store is fulfilled with _billions_ of shitty apps.
    - 8fingerlouie 1y ago
      The 30% also covers refunds, legal stuff (not stuff IN your app, but regarding the sale of it), taxes, GDPR and much more. The infrastructure running the app store probably also isn't cheap. I'm not saying Apple doesn't profit from it, but they're not just pocketing every penny. As for "quality", they mostly check that your app isn't using unauthorized APIs, or doing other scetchy stuff, like leeching all of your data. They couldn't care less if your app is bad, thats' between you and your potential users. Does it work ? apparently so. Apple catches around 2 million apps every year that are rejected for those reasons. Android has about the same amount of apps, but there they're caught by Kaspersky (and others) after they're published. That doesn't mean that malware isn't making its way through the App Store review, the damage will be somewhat limited if it can't use private APIs. I should add that here in the EU, where we’ve had 3rd party app stores for over a year, nobody uses them. The absolutely biggest one, Epic Games, has attracted about 29 million users across both iOS and Android, out of a population of 450 million.
      - bigyabai 1y ago
        > the damage will be somewhat limited if it can't use private APIs. That's a runtime feature, it has nothing to do with the App Store.
  - __MatrixMan__ 1y ago
    > You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source Sure you can: build it and check the hash. If the maintainer prepared for such a check ahead of time it can be as simple as: wget https://github.com/owner/foo-project/releases/download/.../foo sha256sum foo # make note of this nix build github:owner/foo-project sha256sum result/bin/foo # it should match this A pinky promise from a corporation can never be more trustworthy than something that we can all verify locally. Of course there's still the should-you-trust-this-code part of the problem, but at least bad guys in that case must operate in public view, which is--once again--a stronger deterrent to shenanigans than anything that happens behind closed doors at Apple.
    - Tokumei-no-hito 1y ago
      OP was referring to apps downloaded from the app store. you can't get a build hash from a downloaded app to then compare to a source build.
  - dzhiurgis 1y ago
    You obviously build it yourself. IMO ultimate solution is for Apple to curate some sort open source store where they vet the source and builds "in public".
  - TiredOfLife 1y ago
    > Apple spends billions of dollars vetting their store for high quality apps. Rofl. And citation needed.
apetresc 1y ago
Legit curious what the use case would be, that would justify Apple adding it in. Like, when do you need to text someone who's within Bluetooth range but somehow has no WiFi or cell reception?
- darknavi 1y ago
  Airplane
  - woleium 1y ago
    and the reason they probably cite as why they don’t, children with no sim or wifi.
    - darkwater 1y ago
      It would be trivial to be disabled by iParents
  - nabeards 1y ago
    I use Berkanan for just this purpose. Sometimes my partner and I don’t sit next to each other, and it’s an easy way to message.
- dewey 1y ago
  On top of that “It would be so easy” is almost never true for a billion users network with all kinds of edge cases. Seems like a very narrow use case when there’s things missing from iMessage that could be way more appealing for a bigger group of users.
  - lxgr 1y ago
    I’d agree if Airdrop, which includes offline identification via users’ address books, didn’t already exist. That seems to be by far the hardest part.
    - dewey 1y ago
trklausss 1y ago
Looks like it, at least on the README, section "Building for Production" mentions it. I'm a bit more concerned that it is a niche application. Not having Mac myself, can't compile it without going through the hassle of getting the environment running. It would be better if the application was built is something a bit more cross-platform, as I find the idea really good. Not sure if the "mesh network" part would work though, as you need a really high enrolled-device density in order for it to work further than just an office (it's BT after all). I guess the "Fork" button is there for a reason, or maybe a new repo with some other stack.

by lxgr 1y ago

dzhiurgis 1y ago

I'd much rather Apple allow running something like this (open source) myself rather than use their "just trust me bro" store.

Tika2234 1y ago
[dead]
OsrsNeedsf2P 1y ago
I've never understood this argument. Apple spends billions of dollars vetting their store for high quality apps. You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source. As much as people want to be "leet" and run 3rd party software, it's inherently insecure and that's why Apple shuts it down.
- aguacaterojo 1y ago
  > You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source. You don't need to because you compile it from source yourself
- noman-land 1y ago
  This might sound crazy but some people want the freedom to use their belongings however they want instead of having artificial child locks placed on them by trillion dollar corporate daddies.
  - woleium 1y ago
    But, sadly, as evidenced by apple’s share price, not enough people.
    - pjerem 1y ago
      That’s only because there is only one alternative that is more or less equally shitty (Android) and no room for any competition whatsoever. It’s not like people really have options to choose when it comes to choosing a smartphone. It’s easy to have a growing share price when you are a duopoly. You don’t have to serve your users.
      - immibis 1y ago
        Android may be shitty but it allows you to install an APK you downloaded from god knows where, and that's enough of a deal-making feature for me. I also own a Linux phone, but I don't use it. Maybe one day someone will create one that's actually usable...
        pjerem 1y ago
        That was not the point of the discussion. I could answer "iOS may be shitty but it doesn't phone home every touch and your health data stays local". I really don't want to argue abour iOs vs Android. I used both. They are both shit made to lock their users in an ecosystem that solely benefits Google or Apple. I really couldnt care more about arguing which is worse, I would just want the market to allow something better than both for me, the user.
- thejazzman 1y ago
  They shut it down because 30%. There was a version of Apple at a point in time where I agree with your rhetoric. They have completely lost credibility to uphold that position IMO. Apple definitely does not spend billions guaranteeing "quality". To prove my point, where does Apple even define what they consider "quality"? How can you quantify such an aubjecrive and ambiguous term? They spend billions paying out the 70% they don't pocket. Heck, They don't even adhere to their own HIG nor let us revert to past (objectively higher quality) versions of iOS.
  - pjerem 1y ago
    Also, the store is fulfilled with _billions_ of shitty apps.
  - 8fingerlouie 1y ago
    The 30% also covers refunds, legal stuff (not stuff IN your app, but regarding the sale of it), taxes, GDPR and much more. The infrastructure running the app store probably also isn't cheap. I'm not saying Apple doesn't profit from it, but they're not just pocketing every penny. As for "quality", they mostly check that your app isn't using unauthorized APIs, or doing other scetchy stuff, like leeching all of your data. They couldn't care less if your app is bad, thats' between you and your potential users. Does it work ? apparently so. Apple catches around 2 million apps every year that are rejected for those reasons. Android has about the same amount of apps, but there they're caught by Kaspersky (and others) after they're published. That doesn't mean that malware isn't making its way through the App Store review, the damage will be somewhat limited if it can't use private APIs. I should add that here in the EU, where we’ve had 3rd party app stores for over a year, nobody uses them. The absolutely biggest one, Epic Games, has attracted about 29 million users across both iOS and Android, out of a population of 450 million.
    - bigyabai 1y ago
      > the damage will be somewhat limited if it can't use private APIs. That's a runtime feature, it has nothing to do with the App Store.
- __MatrixMan__ 1y ago
  > You can't even verify the build you get off Github was compiled from the same posted source Sure you can: build it and check the hash. If the maintainer prepared for such a check ahead of time it can be as simple as: wget https://github.com/owner/foo-project/releases/download/.../foo sha256sum foo # make note of this nix build github:owner/foo-project sha256sum result/bin/foo # it should match this A pinky promise from a corporation can never be more trustworthy than something that we can all verify locally. Of course there's still the should-you-trust-this-code part of the problem, but at least bad guys in that case must operate in public view, which is--once again--a stronger deterrent to shenanigans than anything that happens behind closed doors at Apple.
  - Tokumei-no-hito 1y ago
    OP was referring to apps downloaded from the app store. you can't get a build hash from a downloaded app to then compare to a source build.
- dzhiurgis 1y ago
  You obviously build it yourself. IMO ultimate solution is for Apple to curate some sort open source store where they vet the source and builds "in public".
- TiredOfLife 1y ago
  > Apple spends billions of dollars vetting their store for high quality apps. Rofl. And citation needed.

apetresc 1y ago

Legit curious what the use case would be, that would justify Apple adding it in. Like, when do you need to text someone who's within Bluetooth range but somehow has no WiFi or cell reception?

darknavi 1y ago
Airplane
- woleium 1y ago
  and the reason they probably cite as why they don’t, children with no sim or wifi.
  - darkwater 1y ago
    It would be trivial to be disabled by iParents
- nabeards 1y ago
  I use Berkanan for just this purpose. Sometimes my partner and I don’t sit next to each other, and it’s an easy way to message.
dewey 1y ago
On top of that “It would be so easy” is almost never true for a billion users network with all kinds of edge cases. Seems like a very narrow use case when there’s things missing from iMessage that could be way more appealing for a bigger group of users.
- lxgr 1y ago
  I’d agree if Airdrop, which includes offline identification via users’ address books, didn’t already exist. That seems to be by far the hardest part.
  - dewey 1y ago

trklausss 1y ago

Looks like it, at least on the README, section "Building for Production" mentions it. I'm a bit more concerned that it is a niche application. Not having Mac myself, can't compile it without going through the hassle of getting the environment running. It would be better if the application was built is something a bit more cross-platform, as I find the idea really good. Not sure if the "mesh network" part would work though, as you need a really high enrolled-device density in order for it to work further than just an office (it's BT after all). I guess the "Fork" button is there for a reason, or maybe a new repo with some other stack.