by robteix on 9/24/20, 10:27 PM with 120 comments
by wvenable on 9/24/20, 11:39 PM
When he wasn't old enough to learn about dark patterns, we didn't expose him to any! Now that he's older, dark patterns are something we talked to him about and he understands. No matter how restrictive you make an app store, you're never going to eliminate sources of manipulation. Each failure, including one of his accounts getting "hacked", is an opportunity for learning.
What's not an opportunity is locking down the entire world so children can't screw up.
by Valkhyr on 9/25/20, 12:56 AM
Fundamentally, my opinion is that Apple (or any device manufacturer) should not be restricted what an end user can or cannot do with a device they own, and that includes restricting what software can be installed. I largely switched away from iOS (I still have an iPad for drawing and reading, but my phone is Android) because I philosophically resent this patronizing approach.
BUT I also think that most of the points in the linked article have merit, and frankly the App Store has become a dumpster of clone apps and scammy pay-to-win games.
To me the obvious solution from a technical point of view would be to allow side-loading and alternative app stores on iOS. If Apple's store were just one way among many to install software on iOS (but the only one enabled out of the box), Apple could and should be much more selective in what they allow in their store, without impacting choice for customers who go looking for it.
It would also be trivial to implement parental controls to block non-Apple sources on kids' phones/school devices/etc.
Of course, Apple would then have a much harder time to justify themselves rent-seeking from pay-to-win apps :troll:
by kartayyar on 9/24/20, 11:06 PM
But I don't think I like any solutions which involves giving Apple more power to disintermediate developers from users even more.
I consider limiting the kinds of apps that developers can build a free speech issue.
I think making an "Editors Choice Lite" label would help. I.e. that apps can sign up for an optional extra level of vetting to indicate they are free of some of the monetization dark patterns listed in this post.
by thatsethnz on 9/24/20, 11:29 PM
This is a great rule. As a father of similarly aged kids (10, 9, 4) this is exactly what I would like to have happen at my house. Unfortunately, I have found games like this difficult to surface on the app store. Is there a decent source for games like this?
Also, Apple needs to think of the impact that the prevalence of these kinds of apps has on their revenue - I spend money on steam, epic, ps4 games etc. mostly because this isn't an issue. (Or is very clearly signposted) But I am unwilling to spend money even on iphone games that are really enjoyed because the antipatterns discussed in this post have made it difficult to trust the vendor. The bottom line is, if I could trust them, I would spend more.
by cafed00d on 9/24/20, 10:57 PM
Heck, after hearing about Zoom's debacle with the Facebook SDK, I feel like Apple should make it impossible for 3rd party devs to use non-Apple approved SDKs.
but sigh, I know I'm afraid this viewpoint is not shared by many in the developer world.
by tomovo on 9/24/20, 11:15 PM
I just got charged 0.30£ by Niantic, the publisher of Pokemon Go, to verify my age during the user registration process. The payment was initiated from the iOS app and done through a web form. No IAP.
Now I can only hope Niantic doesn't charge me for something my kids do in the game.
This is exactly the kind of thing I fully expect Apple to protect me from.
by trashburger on 9/24/20, 11:03 PM
by darrinm on 9/25/20, 3:15 AM
Imagine if one company set the rules for allowable websites. What would (wouldn’t) they ban?
Instead the Web is wonderfully open and parents, schools, individuals, even nations can choose configurable filters to have a web that aligns with their values.
by makecheck on 9/24/20, 11:57 PM
I would greatly expand the last point on filters: I want lots of knobs so that I can permanently banish from view all the schemes that I hate. It would instantly make the Store much more valuable to me. Incidentally it would also increase value for store-runners, since I would actually start buying things again instead of closing the Store in disgust because I couldn’t find anything I wanted after an hour of scrolling through trash.
by p1necone on 9/24/20, 11:29 PM
Technological filtering is not the solution to raising your kids. If you're worried about them seeing harmful content you can't be giving them unsupervised access to a general computing device.
Imagine how crippled the iDevice experience would have to be to stop kids from accessing anything questionable - it's not tenable to fix this problem just via app store reviews. However I can imagine a password protected browser and appstore toggle option being useful - then you could have a bunch of parent vetted games and learning stuff available, without giving the kids access to anything you don't know about while they're not supervised.
Also question whether you're doing more harm than good - I suspect I would not have followed the lucrative software dev career path that I have if my parents had heavily policed my "screen time" and internet access.
And on AppStore Reviews - they can't be made stricter unless they're also made more consistent. The current problem that people complain about isn't so much that they're too strict, it's that the rules are almost a black box and are not applied consistently.
by hellotomyrars on 9/25/20, 4:14 AM
It boggles the mind that the author writes that they trust both Google and Apple to keep the platform safe but then goes on to decry shitty F2P applications designed to exploit you. Google has a pretty high-profile incidence of failing to catch malicious apps and Apple is not immune.
That said, the article reads somewhat as old man yells at cloud. There is certainly a ton of low-hanging fruit in the app store designed to extract maximum value of out of whales. There are also parental controls on an iPad. Moreso, I don't think it's healthy to allow your one-year old to plop down in front of an iPad and expect Daddy Apple to know what's best for them.
Apple is not your child's parent, you are. There is definitely an amount of social pressure on children of a certain age to have access and familiarity with certain things (Fortnite, currently) that allow them social cache, but your one-year old is not privy to this and you made the choice to give them an iPad.
My personal criticisms of the Apple App review process are much more pointedly centered around the unevenness in enforcement. Certain big players are afforded leeway that smaller players are not and it's gross. I appreciate the fact that a human is looped into the app review process unlike the Play store which is full of dramatically more garbage, but Apple should enforce their standards more evenly.
by sassypotato on 9/25/20, 8:03 AM
by andreygrehov on 9/25/20, 12:26 AM
To instill good taste in my kids, I buy quality, well-designed and well-developed games. It's just that simple ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
by TedDoesntTalk on 9/25/20, 2:59 AM
> I have kids aged 10, 7 and 4
So you want to protect your children because you can’t parent effectively? And you get to decide the criteria for approved apps with your short list of acceptable financial transactions?
What about grown ups who have the ability to delay gratification and who can police themselves? Why should your rules for children affect me? (And by the way, I also have small children, but I know how to parent their screen time)
This is another “save the children!” fire alarm. Save your own children, don’t push it on Apple to parent them.
I’m glad you don’t have any power over my world.
by Jasper_ on 9/26/20, 8:45 AM
by tomc1985 on 9/25/20, 12:01 AM
by grumple on 9/25/20, 9:20 AM
by zb1plus on 9/25/20, 12:02 AM
by jasonlotito on 9/25/20, 4:02 AM
by systemvoltage on 9/25/20, 1:19 AM
I only see one sided opinions from Developers here on HN. What happened to your sense of understand that capitalism ensures that companies will do every bit to milk privacy and money from the customers by hook or by crook. Do you not realize this or refuse to accept? Just look at what LinkedIn app on iPhone was doing until Apple decided to alert the user when it uses the clipboard.
Apple isn't doing this out of charity. Theyre doubling down on software + hardware security because that's their market differentiation from the rest of the Ad-tech horror show.
Vast number of actions Apple takes are siding the with the consumer. I also want my own device to be hackable, but iPhone is no small toy. It has my entire life on it. As a consumer, I pay the Apple tax so I am not constantly worrying about security and privacy. As a hacker, I want to be able to run Doom on my iPhone. Why is one side so difficult to understand? I am all for pushing Apple to make their devices repairable, more eco friendly, cheaper, better, highly secure, hackable upon concent, but gosh - it's like an article after article here bashing Apple without any balanced form of discussion. Selling a device that contains your entire life to millions of people is very different from selling a linux box to a bunch of hackers. You should realize both sides of the coin and debate.
by Dahoon on 9/25/20, 12:51 AM
by ksec on 9/25/20, 8:23 AM
On one hand, Apple is acting like a console maker, like Sony Playstation and Nintendo, collecting 30% from gaming. Which is fair enough for console. On the other hand there are zero quality control on the games going into App Store like other Console platform. Other than making sure their Apps uses IAP and Apple Payment system.
Apple will tell you how millions of their customers go to their store for their favourite Apps.
You see, this is correct except customers dont have anywhere to go for Apps. It implies in most peoples mind, where App Store attract foot traffic like in High Street Retail Store, when App Store is the only store in the high street.
It also implies ( or not ) people are discovering Apps within App Store. As with retail store you go into shopping with discovery pattern. But App Discover hasn't been happening in App Stores for years. Which means App Store is more like a warehouse. A regulated, curated, efficient warehouse where it is the only place you can get anything if you live in the "Apple" State.
The whole reason why Apple doesn't tighten any of these Dark Pattern is because it strikes at the very foundation of the App Store profits and revenue engine. Estimated 80% of App Store Revenue are from Gaming. Most of them are IAP. We are talking about potentially 10 billion annual raw profit at stake.
But In my view, none of the above are a problem on their own.
( Skip the part below if you dont want any negativity. It is rant-ish. )
What I have problem with is when Apple start telling me how much they love their customers, and how great their App Store is. And how they enrich people's live. How millions of customers go to their favourite Apps Store ( Remember there is only one App Store? ) App Store's problem has been there for years, they knew about the discovery in App Store problem, that is including Searching which in 2020 Apple cant make App Store searching actually work with decent accuracy. No longer can you use Google has the best search engine as excuses as in the mid 2010s, Searching is pretty much a solved problem, especially at the relatively small scale of App Store, and much more so for Apple with hundreds of billions in the bank. And yet what did they do? They introduced placement Ads on App Store. ( Another Rent seeking profit machine )
Adding in the discovery of lying by omission or spinning in the Apple vs Qualcomm case, It is clear Tim Cook's Apple isn't about the "best product" as Steve Jobs will put it. But extracting maximum profits and value from its customers at the expense of user experience ( App Store and Apple Retail) and product excellence ( MacBook Keyboard [1] ). Along with the new push of Services Revenue with Apple Care+ and increasing KPI percentage of Genius Bar employees on AppleCare / new Product sold from Apple Retail Store ( Not sure if this is the case in US ). And that is why you see all quote for any MBP repair are now trending towards new MBP pricing. No longer is Apple Retail their to best serve its customers. All of these are extracting profits just like any other companies.
Again none of these would have mattered if it was from any other company. But once you start placing the company being Good and love, I am going to raise the bar much higher, especially for Apple. And there are a lot hypocrisy.
[1] People may want to check the 2nd hand price of Pre 2015 MBP and Post 2015 MBP. I think the market has a clear voice in which is worth more and more reliable. Not just the Keyboard but generally the whole package.
by Fnoord on 9/24/20, 11:13 PM
The way I see it, it is the way it is due to the inequality in the world, and because we dislike paying directly for something. It doesn't make sense for a developer in India to ask 10 USD for an application when only middle and upper class people in USA can afford it. Hence, you get alternative methods of earning money such as IAP (which makes it less clear you spend money), currency tokens (idem), advertisement (stealing the user's time; imagine you'd be forced to solve captcha's for other people during this time? Having your CPU time used for mining?), tracking ("if they don't wanna pay, I'll just use their PII. Cheapskates!"), malware (idem), ...
Sure, something like GDPR might protect EU people from some of the above. What are they going to do in above example, going after developer from India? Of course not. Those who lay low are getting away with it, and the wheels of justice grind slowly.
Perhaps the parent should screen the application or game before allowing the kid to use it. Read a review site for games for children. Check out the age requirement. Learn what your kids likes and dislikes. And then, buy the (virtual) present for them.
I'll be using my Pocketsprite (portable game emulator) to install games appropriate for the age of my kid. Plus, its locked down as well, without some kind of store on it because it has no direct Internet connection. Its actually why I bought it specifically. Graphically these games might be less good, but Tetris is at its core still Tetris, looks be damned. The time before the Internet was the status quo has its charms. I've also selected a bunch of games on Steam which I regard as appropriate. Of course, she's free to dislike any of these, including Tetris (she already loves Duplo though).
We have so much choice though. Just open Netflix right now. There's no way you can watch all that. Same with Steam, no way you can play all that. Same with screening that content. Back in the days, on my Gameboy I only had a couple of games. Less choice made the things I did own more precious. Anyway, hence I'd say curate a couple of good choices (games, movies, series, toys, ...). There's no way you'll find the best of the best; they just gotta be good enough for develop and/or enjoy themselves.
by LudwigNagasena on 9/24/20, 11:07 PM
by drevil-v2 on 9/25/20, 12:39 AM
Epic et al can f* off
by snazz on 9/24/20, 11:05 PM