Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The Pebble was very obviously hampered by iOS limitations. In order to offload any code to the phone, you either had to write the code in Javascript (so it was basically a web app) or direct the user to manually download a separate companion app from the App Store. If iOS killed the companion app because it hadn't been opened on the iPhone recently (because, y'know, you were using it on your watch and not your phone), you had to manually relaunch the app on your phone.

This is all before even getting into things like ecosystem integration.



The Pebble was released in 2013. The two way communication SDK with Pebble was released in May of 2013. In February of 2015, the 2.0 Pebble SDK was released with further integrations.

The first iWatch was announced in September 2014 and released in April of 2015.

The Pebble was discontinued in 2016.

What integrations are you expecting Apple to have released prior to its own release? What functionality did iOS lack that android provided that hampered Pebble's development on iOS?


"The first iWatch was announced in September 2014 and released in April of 2015."

Just a side note: apple has in past started limiting other companies products as soon as they decide to create a competitor and sometimes years before it hits the market.

IIRC Spotify has been bitten by this at least once, which resulted in a lawsuit.


What limitations did Apple place in 2013 (or 2014 or 2015) that reduced the functionality of Pebble in light of a forthcoming iWatch?

If it was a "it worked and then Apple took away this API that we were going to use" that would be one thing. If it was "the iPhone didn't have the functionality for other devices to read messages over BlueTooth until 2015 with iOS 8" - that's a different claim.


I don't know about Pebble, but Tile got restricted really hard once Apple decided to make the Apple Tag. There's many rants/statements from the Tile CEO on this subject.

So this behavior isn't a relic of old APIs


https://www.macrumors.com/2021/05/04/tile-ceo-on-competition...

> > If you look at the history between Tile and Apple, we had a very symbiotic relationship. They sold Tile in their stores, we were highlighted at WWDC 2019, and then they launched Find My in 2019, and right when they launched their Find My app, which is effectively a competitor of Tile, they made a number of changes to their OS that made it very difficult for our customers to enable Tile. And then once they got it enabled, they started showing notifications that basically made it seem like Tile was broken.

> Prober is talking about changes that Apple made to location services permissions. For privacy purposes, Apple stopped making it easy for apps to get permanent access to a user's location. Apps in iOS 13 were not initially allowed to present an "Always Allow" option when requesting location access, and the feature had to be enabled in the Settings app. Apple also started sending regular reminders to customers letting them know their location was being used.

> Tile was not happy with these privacy changes and that privacy tweak set Tile against Apple, with Tile in 2019 calling on Congress to "level the playing field."

> > The main points of differentiation of AirTags vis a vis Tile are enabled by platform capabilities that we don't have access to.

> Apple has, in fact, launched the Find My network that gives third-party accessories some of the same access that AirTags have, and Find My network accessories will be able to access the U1 chip in the iPhone 11 and 12 models much like the AirTags, but Tile won't be able to use the Find My network unless it abandons its own app and infrastructure, which it is likely unwilling to do.

> Prober said that Tile has been "seeking to access" the U1 chip since its introduction in the iPhone , and has been denied.

----

Should Apple have a "grant once for app, always allow location service?" (note: this would allow an innocuous app to turn into a tracker with a later update). Or should Apple have a "this app has accessed your location {N} times in the last 24 hours?" ... or some other functionality?

Is "grant once, always allow" a security risk for users?

For U1 chip access: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/nearbyinteraction/... and https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2021/10165/


> Should Apple have a "grant once for app, always allow location service?" (note: this would allow an innocuous app to turn into a tracker with a later update)

Users should be allowed to grant grant “always” permission, for that app version. The next time it gets updated, they get hit with the prompt again.

In fact I’d like that to happen for all permissions, so I regularly review them, and I know when an app update has occurred.


At a minimum if there were no changes in permissions wanted a notification saying X app updated and is using the same permissions, click here to see how many times each permissions was used (with the more privacy related ones at the top of the list) would be nice.

Then you don't run the risk of normalizing people always just clicking allow on the prompt that happens all the time (hello windows 7 UAC), which still giving them easy diacoverability and hints of poor behavior with existing permissions.


> Users should be allowed to grant grant “always” permission, for that app version. The next time it gets updated, they get hit with the prompt again.

I think users would hate that since they don't understand why the app keeps asking again and again. Some apps are updated on a weekly basis.


Apps can change their functionality without an official update as long as they can access the internet, and if they're enabling secret trackers they have no reason not to do this.


Does Apples own stuff have the same limitations?


Yes. And you need to go and configure them in settings if you want them to have the access. https://www.idownloadblog.com/2020/08/24/manage-widget-locat...

The example given there is the Weather app and widget which I've gotten notifications for myself.

You will also note:

> Navigation apps like Google Maps, Waze, Apple Maps, and so forth work best when they can pinpoint your exact location with precision. But a weather app, on the other hand, works just fine even if it’s only allowed to determine the city where you live or just an approximate region.

Maps, Messages, HomeKit, Clock, Siri, Weather, Wallet - they're all in there. System services too (and you can disable the system service's access to location data - e.g. Apple Pay Merchant Identification, Compass Calibration, Setting Time Zone).

For things that like to access the location in the background (Weather especially does this) you may get "Weather" has been using your location in the background. An example of this can be seen at https://www.lifewire.com/turn-on-mobile-location-services-41...

Its not just "I am using the location data always" but also "this has been accessing your location in the background" which is the type of thing that Tile does.

Apple tends to not have apps that access location information in the background and so this sort of message is not one that people tend to see. Weather is the one that does for weather alerts.

Apple Maps doesn't access location in the background so one wouldn't ever see the a message from it.


I have received these messages for e.g. the weather app, but never Find My. Find My seems to be immune.


"Find my".app (for lack of a better designator) doesn't use the location information in the background. Weather.app does use location services in the background. Weather (like all user space apps) can also be restricted to only getting the approximate location rather than exact location.

Find my system is part of the operating system itself - not an application running in user space. It can be disabled in the "Share My Location" settings in Location services in settings and in System Services "Find My iPhone" because that part of is not a user space app running but rather part of the kernel.


Yes, but isn't that an example of Apple giving special privileges to their own product? How would Tile go about doing this?


What functionality that Apple has are you suggesting be extended to Tile?

Access to the U1 chip? They can do that.

Show up in Find My? Let's get some standards for secure and authenticated transmission of item location to other parties.

Have Apple's phones automatically detect 3rd party BTLE products and report their whereabouts to a 3rd party? This is a privacy nightmare. Side note - why Apple's phones? How about a patch to Android too?

Something else?


From OOP,

> Apple stopped making it easy for apps to get permanent access to a user's location.

> The main points of differentiation of AirTags vis a vis Tile are enabled by platform capabilities that we don't have access to.

Apple makes it easy for their product (AirTags) to have always on location permissions. Apple makes it hard for their competitor (Tile) to have always on location permissions.

Apple is using their ecosystem to advantage their AirTag business instead of competing on the same playing field as Tile.


You are asking to have Apple pick up random BLE messages and send them to various 3rd party vendors with corresponding location information?

Does Tile have a secure way of receiving those messages that does not compromise the security and anonymity (exposing the identity of either the device or the receiver, or the location of either) of the person whose device picked up the message so that this can be implemented in Android core and Apple?


Pre launch of AirTags, users could opt in to always on location permissions for the Tile app. Post launch of AirTags, Apple makes it hard for Tile users to have always on location permissions.

> You are asking to have Apple pick up random BLE messages and send them to various 3rd party vendors with corresponding location information?

I'm not asking for anything. This is just one of many examples of the form: Apple offers API for 3rd party accessory, accessory is successful, Apple launches 1st party accessory, Apple restricts 3rd party accessory API.

Is this behavior illegal? The Department of Justice says it is. The courts will decide.


there are many examples on this, IOS makes warning messages for other developer apps, but none for their own apps. I received warnings that google maps has used my background location, or than google photos or synology photos have access to my photos, but not a message on the same access from apple maps or apple photos.


> IOS makes warning messages for other developer apps, but none for their own apps.

This is not true. Apple's own apps, like the Weather widget, will display location permission "nag" screens occasionally just like third-party apps do.

> ... but not a message on the same access from apple maps or apple photos.

Apple Maps doesn't use your location in the background. It only uses your location while the app is open, or while you're actively navigating using it.

Apple Photos is your photos. It'd be weird to warn the user that it "has access" to itself.


The complaint is outlined directly in the document

https://x.com/ericmigi/status/1770832870870827149


Well to begin with, it is my understanding that the specific limitations listed still exist. Can Bluetooth devices remotely start apps now, or keep them in the background? I only used Pebble as an example because I owned a Pebble, I'm not familiar with Garmen's watches.

But seperately, I think it's really bad for innovation if no new product categories can exist unless Apple makes them first! You can imagine a different type of company that would have been delighted to work with Pebble and add functionality to their operating system, because third party compatibility strengthens their core product.

And of course, if this were the Mac, Pebble would not have needed Apple's cooperation...


Bluetooth devices can start apps in the background. I have two that do this, Beddit and <redacted because they famously don't let you mention you have one>.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: