4 ms·

Launching other apps can be done by any app right now, but the app package needs some info saying the app is able to handle a certain data type or open a certai

by pi18n 14y ago

Launching other apps can be done by any app right now, but the app package needs some info saying the app is able to handle a certain data type or open a certain URL protocol. I am an Objective-C developer and I love the SDKs on the iPhone, but I am just so tired of Apple's bullshit regarding using our devices the way we want to. I'm tired of waiting for them to enable basic features like phone number black/whitelists. My next device will be a Nexus. Then I can run apps in the background other than music, share data between apps, sideload apps from third parties, run a mobile terminal, run mobile scripting languages, and basically be free to use my hardware as I'd like.

nicholassmith 14y ago
"I'm tired of waiting for them to enable basic features like phone number black/whitelists." Keep in mind that's a basic feature for you, not necessarily for all. I wouldn't use it, so I'd prefer Apple to work on X/Y/Z feature instead. Feature priority is hard to work out at the best of times, because no matter what gets picked someone will be disappointed.
- lesterbuck 14y ago
  My long term interest is in Android, but I switched to an iPhone a year ago to follow that ecosystem, too. The first thing I did was buy three call blocking apps from the App Store, none of which worked at all. After reading all the horror stories about the vaunted App Store approval process to protect innocent iPhone users from bad apps, I realized it was all marketing FUD. When an app has 99% bad reviews, all saying "doesn't work" and it stays in the app store, that is Apple fraud.
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    Developer community demanded Apple reduced their ban hammer swing, they did. They get a lot of crap that slips through the net because of it, however when complaints are made they seem to respond, the problem being a review isn't a complaint. Well, the problem being Apple isn't draconian enough now really.
    - lesterbuck 14y ago
      I just want to confirm my understanding of the argument you are making: Because Apple backed off a bit on the huge list of things one cannot do with an app, they now have a pass to approve apps that, by definition, cannot ever work on their platform, and can be demonstrated to not work at all by ... trying to use them? Maybe I'm missing the point of your comment.
- pi18n 14y ago
  What you're arguing against is not the point of my statement. If the vendor does not implement something like that, it should still be available as a third-party software. It doesn't need to be a security problem using a system like permissions. If they had a reasonable system there would be multiple options for blacklists. I'm not irritated that they choose to implement feature X over feature Y, I am irritated because there's no way to implement feature Y at all without their most holy consent. Something like a blacklist is simple and useful, why can't we have it? Why can't we have mobile interpreters for our scripting languages? Why can't we have apps that download articles while we sleep, without us babysitting the phone to make sure they are open, and add them to a reading list? It's a small computer. It's ridiculous to restrict it as it is.

by pi18n 14y ago

nicholassmith 14y ago

"I'm tired of waiting for them to enable basic features like phone number black/whitelists." Keep in mind that's a basic feature for you, not necessarily for all. I wouldn't use it, so I'd prefer Apple to work on X/Y/Z feature instead. Feature priority is hard to work out at the best of times, because no matter what gets picked someone will be disappointed.

lesterbuck 14y ago
My long term interest is in Android, but I switched to an iPhone a year ago to follow that ecosystem, too. The first thing I did was buy three call blocking apps from the App Store, none of which worked at all. After reading all the horror stories about the vaunted App Store approval process to protect innocent iPhone users from bad apps, I realized it was all marketing FUD. When an app has 99% bad reviews, all saying "doesn't work" and it stays in the app store, that is Apple fraud.
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  Developer community demanded Apple reduced their ban hammer swing, they did. They get a lot of crap that slips through the net because of it, however when complaints are made they seem to respond, the problem being a review isn't a complaint. Well, the problem being Apple isn't draconian enough now really.
  - lesterbuck 14y ago
    I just want to confirm my understanding of the argument you are making: Because Apple backed off a bit on the huge list of things one cannot do with an app, they now have a pass to approve apps that, by definition, cannot ever work on their platform, and can be demonstrated to not work at all by ... trying to use them? Maybe I'm missing the point of your comment.
pi18n 14y ago
What you're arguing against is not the point of my statement. If the vendor does not implement something like that, it should still be available as a third-party software. It doesn't need to be a security problem using a system like permissions. If they had a reasonable system there would be multiple options for blacklists. I'm not irritated that they choose to implement feature X over feature Y, I am irritated because there's no way to implement feature Y at all without their most holy consent. Something like a blacklist is simple and useful, why can't we have it? Why can't we have mobile interpreters for our scripting languages? Why can't we have apps that download articles while we sleep, without us babysitting the phone to make sure they are open, and add them to a reading list? It's a small computer. It's ridiculous to restrict it as it is.