This is so true, and the magnitude of this is not immediately apparent unless you’ve worked in an agency / freelanced building iOS applications. You have no idea how many user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown completely out of the water with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that". It wins arguments in favour of the user instantly and permanently.
I’ve run up against Apple’s capricious review process more times than I can count, so I’ve got more reason than most to complain about it. But it’s impossible for me to argue that these rules don’t help the user when I’ve personally seen it happen so many times. It’s a double-edged sword to be sure, and I believe the best way of balancing things in favour of the end-user is to be more open than Apple is, but there are undeniable benefits to the user with the current system.
Not really, this has just been a PR exercise that I'm watching with fascination - the real news is that they've shifted focus away from their own shortcomings. The real news here is that iOs14 allows unrestricted clipboard access. Think about that for a moment. Instead of actually fixing the issue, they choose to highlight it and call out apps for using the platform in a way they have allowed.
> The real news here is that iOs14 allows unrestricted clipboard access.
Every OS does, no? Which steps has Android or Windows taken? (genuinely curious)
In my opinion, an example of Apple practices which are bad for customers is their line on progressive web apps. Apple limits support as they cannot keep control of their platform and revenue stream. I would argue however, that installable web apps are great for user experience, especially since it helps less resourceful businesses provide a good product for mobile devices. I'll admit there are privacy concerns regarding access to phone features from a web app, so Apple's arguments in blocking some (but not all) of these have some merit.
If you look beyond just the App Store policies, this general practice appears to me to limit innovation on the web platform, as Apple is invested in keeping apps the only first class citizen on their platform.
Once they have a few slow quarters and pull the lever on taking a cut of app mediated real-world services, we may see 10-30% of each Taxi ride going to Apple.
I think they have mechanisms for distributing apps within an organization.
University students normally bring their own devices so don't fit into that model
Do you mean that universities can distribute iOS apps to iOS devices without using the App Store?
>Use the program only to create proprietary, in-house apps for internal use, and to distribute these apps privately and securely to employees within the organization.
Not sure if there is another programme that would work for universities
Even if you take payment through your app that you built with your own payment processor.
Why is Apple standing between me and my school again? They made a profit off of the hardware that I purchased from them and now they’re just standing there stopping me from paying for what I want on the device that I bought.
HEY acquired customers outside of the app but still wasn't allowed.
The argument for ongoing App Store funding is that it has to scale with the number of apps available, each requiring hours of human work to review and police.
Apple has done a lot to curtail scummy developer practices and protect users.
You could go over each of their App Store policies and see how few of them are "at the expense of their customers."
Not the least are their privacy and anti-tracking protections. iOS 14 already caught many apps (including Discord and Instagram) stealing our clipboard data and secretly accessing camera, mic and location.
Claiming Google is "user-centric" and Apple isn't, usually means taking the side of the corporations that are hurt by limited access to user data.