3 ms·
Cool for people who use Loopt I guess BUT this is really not fair to other developers (especially the competitors of Loopt). It feels like one of those "Well,
by mitchellh 17y ago
Cool for people who use Loopt I guess BUT this is really not fair to other developers (especially the competitors of Loopt).
It feels like one of those "Well, if I let YOU do it I have to let EVERYONE do it" type of things, and AT&T should have said no.
I also find it interesting that Apple isn't mentioned anywhere in the deal, which is strange because the article makes it seem that AT&T has the power to just tell Apple to break one of its developer rules for a special case. Shady, if I do say so myself.
- chrismear 17y agoFrom the article: "The app isn't running in the background; it's working server-to-server." So presumably all they've done is a deal with AT&T to access the cell-location data for a subscriber, and using the app to tie that into their Loopt identity. Nothing special going on inside the iPhone OS.
- sh1mmer 17y agoI wondered about this. It was discussed about how Pre sends a location update with its debug bundle. I wondered why Apple didn't send a location update when they pole for the push update. It wouldn't have to happen every time, but once every 5-10 minutes would be a good balance of phone battery and timeliness.
- cyunker 17y agoInteresting. So it shouldn't affect battery life.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- icey 17y agoSince when does AT&T have to be the arbiter of fairness? They are a company that wants to make money; evidently they've decided that this will help them do so. If anything, other developers should be excited about the fact that there may be some other options for monetization than direct app store sales.