Developers Behind F.lux Call on Apple to Allow F.lux App for iOS Devices

[oneMadRssn]

9.3 hasn't been released. Apple could simply take the health angle themselves.

And why would that angle matter at all? Just because a company cares about health and wellness doesn't mean they should be allowed special privileges. The company I just made up cares about your health and will turn your phone off at night to keep from waking you. I demand Apple give us root access to do so! That claim is just as valid as the one f.lux is making.

Apple can do whatever it wants. I don't think Apple ever promised anyone the AppStore would be fair, and Apple has routinely denied apps for features implemented in the OS later. They can do this, but I think it's wrongheaded in this case, and a bit harmful to Apple in the long term.

First, f.lux isn't asking for root access. All Apple has to do is open up one interface command that allows apps to adjust hue, and to run in the background. Just like Spotify playing music in the background all day long doesn't require root access, just like Facebook pulling updates in the background doesn't require root access, just like Flickr auto-uploading photos soon after I take them automatically doesn't require root access. I'm not sure where you got that they want some level of access that would let anyone run wild with malicious intent. Furthermore, hue adjustment can be added to the list of security privileges in iOS. Just like users have to approve apps access to location or photos or address book or whatever, they would approve access to "night shift".

Second, f.lux is clearly interested in developing this feature to a more advanced and complicated level than simple sun-rise to sun-set schedule, with a constant hue adjustment. They want access to the part of the iOS user-base that is ready and willing to use their app in order to take this idea to the next level. Just spitballing here: Maybe they can use the front-facing camera and light-sensor to detect the kind of lighting in your room and automatically adjust the hue dynamically? Maybe they can automatically determine your sleep schedule from your usage pattern and set the hue-adjustment schedule that way? Maybe they have much better ideas? Either way, I don't see how it harms users nor Apple to let them do this.

Third, even if Apple doesn't let them make a proper app, why not let them make a ResearchKit app or something to let them experiment on willing users, just like Apple touts in their ads? Worst-case scenario, it's a waste of time. Best-case scenario is f.lux discovers something good. They can't brag about how much potential there is for scientific and medical research there is on iOS, and then in the same breath deny access to a legitimate and popular company doing research in a medical area for no good reason.

Finally, Apple has this bad habbit of cutting out apps while implementing the same feature. They are totally within their right to do so, but doing so always erodes developer confidence just a bit, and doing so always spends a little bit of Apple's hard-earned good will. I don't think it's worth it.

 

[macintologist]

Okay I didn't cringe when reading that statement. Nicely done, fellows.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Whiners

Guten nacht, herr Eddy.

 

[Glideslope]

With respect, Apple has never allowed anyone access to the display APIs and for good reason. They don't want people or apps jacking with the display.

F.lux's so called patents are a joke and worthless. The whole idea of making the display cooler during sundown was extensively researched and published by many other scientists and doctors, not F.lux.

You can't patent changing the colors and color temp of a display. Every TV in existance, every monitor or lcd display for a computer can do this.

Apple's implementation is simple. You turn it on if you want it, use a slider to make it warmer or cooler to your preference. And either select sundown to sunup or define your own schedule. I can literally do he same thing on my tv... Minus the scheduling part.

Thank you. There is still hope in here.

 

[Rogifan]

They should be sued for implementing the "Night Shift Mode" which is a clear blatant rip off of F.Lux. Honestly this is such BS and of course all the ignorant MacRumors posters are like "BWAH HAHA APPLE STOLE IT LOL SUX TO BE U" and ignorant people on Facebook are going to be like "OMG It's so INNOVATIVE".

Do they have a patent on this? doesn't seem like it's something they invented so what could they sue for?

 

[Fiestaman]

4- With Night Shift being built into 9.3, and yes it's freakin awesome, what is the point of having F.lux? Apples implementation is stupid simple and 'just works'. F.lux is way over complicated. And if you look at their FAQ on their website you'll the large cluster F it is.

Sorry, but you're just having user error. I have had no issues with F.lux in the many years I've used it on multiple mobile devices and multiple Macs. Apple may have implemented a "stupid simple" solution, but F.lux did that years ago and more. There's no need for you to customize it if that's too daunting. They simply give you the option to if you'd like. People need to stop crapping on the ability to customize. One may be overwhelmed and may not be able to figure it out but I can, so don't try and tie my hands because it's too much for you. Handicapping the world for one's own shortcomings is misguided at best.
F.lux may be a little too technical for you which is why you are having issues but in my eyes, it is already "stupid simple." Apple's solution will simply be to strip away any customizability so there's much less possibility of user error from the technologically inept.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Agreed. Now Apple has come up with the perfect solution, nobody needs F.lux on their iOS devices to clone a core OS feature.

Did you take a poll or is that smoke blowing out your ___?
You don't have to answer, it's a rhetorical question.

When MS pulled this s___, they were rightly called out for being the evil empire.
I got news for you, Apple's just another money grubbing evil empire.

 

[alvindarkness]

Agreed. Now Apple has come up with the perfect solution, nobody needs F.lux on their iOS devices to clone a core OS feature.

Except those devices Apple have excluded from having the feature thanks to planned obsolesence. Here are some devices that wont have Night Shift -:

• iPad 2
• iPad 3
• iPad 4
• iPad mini
• iPod Touch 5G
• iPhone 5
• iPhone 5c

Not to mention their implementation isnt complete. I'll continue to jailbreak and install F.lux.

 

[Quu]

f.lux are gonna be even more pissed when Apple integrate this in OS X 10.12 later this year.

Lots of apps have become unnecessary with OS X updates. Things like quicksilver and the multiple desktops app come to mind from the past among many others.

 

[ValiumEater]

Former Apple employee here, still have all iOS and Mac OS X stuff, but this notion that every company Apple takes ideas from are "whiners" has got to stop. They take ideas from smaller companies all the time and incorporate them as "features" instead of buying the company for a pittance. Apple took this idea straight up and put it into their OS, just like they've done with numerous other "features" which are really the ideas of small companies that have worked to implement them in really well done ways. I guess great artists do in fact "steal".

 

[teknishn]

Apple has taken 3rd party software and incorporated it in all its OS'es for decades. Hence the term "sherlocked" after they incorporated nearly all of the Sherlock features into OSX. They even did it with my software Auganizer by copying it into Logic Pro, and it was my lively hood at the time.

This is standard issue for any os on any platform. People build apps to fill the gaps where features are missing from OSs. At the same time all the OS makers want to continually enhance their product by adding features that may already be in other OSs and apps. Sometimes it's origin and ground breaking, and sometimes it's something borrowed that was sorely lacking and in high demand.

 

[manu chao]

Apple looks like a bunch of dicks not allowing this in the app store.

There is a very simple rule for apps on iOS, whatever you do in one app should never affect anything outside this app. It is a fundamental principle that allowed everybody to install stuff at will without any fear of borking things up, of doing any damage. F.lux clearly breaks that rule.

There are very few calculated exceptions from this rule:

1. Third-party apps can add, modify and delete calendar entries (maybe a few other things like reminders).
2. Third-party apps can add images and videos to the camera roll (but they cannot delete them).
3. Third-party apps can add health, motion, and fitness data (as managed by the Health app).

What these have in common is that they allow multiple apps to have read and write access to shared databases or data stores (like the camera roll). Third-party apps have read access to a number of additional data stores (eg, music, videos). Note however, that every app has to be granted explicit access to each of these databases or data stores, which are considered privacy considerations.

Giving an app access to how colours are displayed on the screen (when using other apps) would be completely different thing.

 

[a.gomez]

taking stuff from the Jail break community or buying random stuff (siri, iads, apple music) is how apple gets new mobile services and features - nothing new. except the things they take from android

 

[teknishn]

Fanboys. Former Apple employee here, still have all iOS and Mac OS X stuff, but this notion that every company Apple takes ideas from are "whiners" has got to stop. They take ideas from smaller companies all the time and incorporate them as "features" instead of buying the company for a pittance. Apple took this idea straight up and put it into their OS, just like they've done with numerous other "features" which are really the ideas of small companies that have worked to implement them in really well done ways. I guess great artists do in fact "steal".

Why don't you site some examples of note... And they need to be features that are not on every other platform already as well. And let's not site F.lux who gives away a simple program for adjusting display for free based on the research of others.

 

[rekhyt]

Flux shouldn't be an app.

It's a system feature at most.

 

[manu chao]

Apple needs to just buy them out and call it a day, they have the money.

You certainly wouldn't want Apple to buy them out. Or do you see Apple continue offering versions of f.lux to Windows and Android users?
[doublepost=1452819131][/doublepost]

All apps can listen in on your microphone, or track your location or scan your contacts or peek through the camera. But turning your screen a bit yellow? No, we can't think of any way to stop that being a massive security breach.

There is a difference between read access and write access (and every read access has to be approved by the user for every single app individually). Third-party apps can read the camera roll and add to it, but they cannot delete from it. If an app that changes the colour of the screen misbehaves, it could make the whole phone unusable in an extreme case. Getting access to information is one thing, modifying information is completely different thing.

 

[usarioclave]

This is a great example of selling a feature instead of a product.

Why wouldn't you want a third-party app to take control of the screen? What could possibly go wrong?

 

[vladi]

Have those API's ever been available to developers? No? Then they can shut up.

They don't have API for screen temperature? Sometimes I wonder how in the hell did iOS got so much developers on board.

 

[lostngone]

iOS is a walled garden it has always been that way. This should not be a surprise to these people or anyone that has ever developed anything on iOS. Apple makes the rules on what you can and can not do pretty clear.

 

[manu chao]

Except those devices Apple have excluded from having the feature thanks to planned obsolesence.

Everybody complains how slow older devices are on the latest OS. And that is while Apple is already cutting some features that are performance hogs from the OS these older devices get. So what is planned obsolescence: Offering features (including general OS versions) that slow devices down or cutting features (that would otherwise slow devices down). It seems, whatever Apple does on this front they get blamed.

 

[appledefenceforce]

It's time that Google and Apple stop ripping off smaller developers for features. If you want to use them at least have the decency like M$ and buy them out.

 

[jonnysods]

These guys are legends, let them get their app on the store! Or buy them out if you are going to steal their idea!

 

[ZipZap]

Apple can do whatever it wants. I don't think Apple ever promised anyone the AppStore would be fair, and Apple has routinely denied apps for features implemented in the OS later. They can do this, but I think it's wrongheaded in this case, and a bit harmful to Apple in the long term.

First, f.lux isn't asking for root access. All Apple has to do is open up one interface command that allows apps to adjust hue, and to run in the background. Just like Spotify playing music in the background all day long doesn't require root access, just like Facebook pulling updates in the background doesn't require root access, just like Flickr auto-uploading photos soon after I take them automatically doesn't require root access. I'm not sure where you got that they want some level of access that would let anyone run wild with malicious intent. Furthermore, hue adjustment can be added to the list of security privileges in iOS. Just like users have to approve apps access to location or photos or address book or whatever, they would approve access to "night shift".

Second, f.lux is clearly interested in developing this feature to a more advanced and complicated level than simple sun-rise to sun-set schedule, with a constant hue adjustment. They want access to the part of the iOS user-base that is ready and willing to use their app in order to take this idea to the next level. Just spitballing here: Maybe they can use the front-facing camera and light-sensor to detect the kind of lighting in your room and automatically adjust the hue dynamically? Maybe they can automatically determine your sleep schedule from your usage pattern and set the hue-adjustment schedule that way? Maybe they have much better ideas? Either way, I don't see how it harms users nor Apple to let them do this.

Third, even if Apple doesn't let them make a proper app, why not let them make a ResearchKit app or something to let them experiment on willing users, just like Apple touts in their ads? Worst-case scenario, it's a waste of time. Best-case scenario is f.lux discovers something good. They can't brag about how much potential there is for scientific and medical research there is on iOS, and then in the same breath deny access to a legitimate and popular company doing research in a medical area for no good reason.

Finally, Apple has this bad habbit of cutting out apps while implementing the same feature. They are totally within their right to do so, but doing so always erodes developer confidence just a bit, and doing so always spends a little bit of Apple's hard-earned good will. I don't think it's worth it.

Accurate and well said.

 

[RedWing512]

My biggest problem with this—and correct me if I am wrong—but the developers of f.lux have petitioned for a while to get the app into the App Store, and repeatedly Apple denied them, only to take the premise for themselves and bake it straight into iOS.

To me, that's just downright slimy and low. I understand the whole thing about wanting to improve on the OS, but at least compensate the devs or something.

And what's worse—at least in my eyes—I'm sure whatever API that f.lux needed could have been given to decs for public access without much fuss or security issues. I use a similar app on my Android called Twilight that works quite well and I have not experienced any adverse effects in my time using it.

Just another case of Apple being a bully and enforcing that good-ol walled garden.

 

[appledefenceforce]

That warchest money is for questionable brand asset acquisitions like Beats, instead of being used with a modicum of integrity to pay original creators for intellectual property, that's later to be implemented as a 'revolutionary innovative feature'.

People need to get over the Beats acquisition. If anything it's a good deal at a time because what Apple got from the acquisition: top mainstream headphone brand (yeah that's right, no normal consumers were dying to get their hands on the latest bose or sennheiser headphones); the music streaming technology that is powering Apple music, personnel, and last but not least Jimmy, who has tremendous industry connections. It's ridiculous that laymen on this forum, obviously have no ideas how to run a public company or even have any knowledge behind the scene, keep dispensing their business acumen and wisdom.

And no Apple has not called Apple music revolutionary or innovative. It's an evolution of music.