Apples’ apps do present the same dialogue. I just tried with Find my...This totally _is_ anti-competitive. Apple's own apps should present the same dialog.
Additionally, I think Apple could improve the UX by not having the user go to the Settings app but rather confirm the "Always" option inside the app, just in a subsequent dialog.
I support this change. All my location settings are either never, or while using. Only weather is always.
It depends. You assume that most apps are there to get you. They are not. One could prevent any given app from tracking your location before. Nothing changes here.
Wow, good one. Apple can’t clamp down on these apps soon enough.Sorry to bust your bubble, but weather apps are sharing your travels with others. You may think that you're protected because you're limiting surveillance to specific apps with seemingly innocent purposes, but unless you read their TOS, chances are they are collecting on the behalf of others.
https://gizmodo.com/lawsuit-accuses-weather-channel-app-of-misleading-users-1831506990
Thank you for a clear and concise post of the process.By the way, the article is actually incorrect. The user is not required to use manually intervene in order to explicitly grant the “Always Allow” privilege... by design, they would be asked again at a later point. Because of this, it would be a violation of the Guidelines to ask the user to open the Settings app and forcibly grant the “Always Allow” privilege.
These complaining developers are aware of this fact, but they are being disingenuous, because they don’t like the way Apple is doing this.
Apple's intent is that the act of granting the “Always Allow” privilege should be a separate decision, and should also be as non-intrusive as possible to the user. From a development standpoint, it works like this (detailed in this WWDC 2019 video):
View attachment 853314
- As a developer, in your code, you should request “Always Allow” as you normally would.
- The user will see the new prompt which does not have the “Always Allow” option.
- If they grant “Allow While In Use” privileges, your app will actually be granted “provisional authorization” for the “Always Allow” privilege.
- The developer should now simply proceed to do the things for which they need that permission for: e.g., set up some geofences, and start monitoring for notifications, whatever.
- If the developer has coded their app according to the guidelines, at some point later, when an location-based event is triggered, the user will be prompted again— and this time, they’ll have the option to grant the “Allow Always” privilege, at which point the provisional authorization will be made permanent.
Wow, good one. Apple can’t clamp down on these apps soon enough.
I’ll delete the weather app from my phone and I actually have location services turned off for the weather app.If Apple does, people had better not complain about paying a monthly subscription fee to get weather information or other similar services and entertainment.
Personally, I don't want Apple's protections if Apple doesn't allow the same degree of restrictions for its own activities. Otherwise, Apple is making it possible for them to be the sole provider of your interests. The idea that Apple anonymizes their observance of your activities is somehow benign is laughable to marketers. Marketers don't need to know who you are. They are interested in what you are (your demographic) and where you are.
The stock weather app?Sorry to bust your bubble, but weather apps are sharing your travels with others. You may think that you're protected because you're limiting surveillance to specific apps with seemingly innocent purposes, but unless you read their TOS, chances are they are collecting on the behalf of others.
https://gizmodo.com/lawsuit-accuses-weather-channel-app-of-misleading-users-1831506990
The stock weather app?
I’ll leave it to the reader to dig into it.It's not clear. Apple's TOS doesn't prohibit Apple from monitoring your usage of the app. Since Apple doesn't have its own meteorological tools, it has to partner with someone who does. But who is it? Is it the Weather Channel TV network? Or is it IBM, who purchased the weather channel's IP, including other weather forecasting products (I use Weather Underground, a crowd-sourced weather tool served by IBM). If the partner is the TV network, it would understandably like data that would let it improve its own products. Regardless which partner it is, what are the terms of the deal?
Can't you make these settings via MDM/Apple Configurator?Ugh, more Apple knows best BS. This is going to be such a pain in the butt for my deployment of iOS devices.
For ll of you saying that it's simply one trip to settings, take a second and think about what use cases are going on outside of your ignorant little world.
I have hundreds of iPhones deployed, and many people do NOT know how to use a smartphone. Apple constantly takes user convenience away these days, all in the name of privacy and security, meanwhile it is getting more and more inconvenient to use their devices.
Now I'm going to have to write up documentation explaining how to change this setting as location services are critical to some of our in-house apps (tracking GPS for mileage purposes so our agents can get paid for their travel, for example).
FU Apple and your nannying ways. Can't wait to move my deployment over to Android.
they don't have to play fair. they've been using private APIs that third party apps have no access to since the beginning of the app store.
By the way, the article is actually incorrect. The user is not required to use manually intervene in order to explicitly grant the “Always Allow” privilege... by design, they would be asked again at a later point. Because of this, it would be a violation of the Guidelines to ask the user to open the Settings app and forcibly grant the “Always Allow” privilege.
These complaining developers are aware of this fact, but they are being disingenuous, because they don’t like the way Apple is doing this.
Apple's intent is that the act of granting the “Always Allow” privilege should be a separate decision, and should also be as non-intrusive as possible to the user. From a development standpoint, it works like this (detailed in this WWDC 2019 video):
View attachment 853314
- As a developer, in your code, you should request “Always Allow” as you normally would.
- The user will see the new prompt which does not have the “Always Allow” option.
- If they grant “Allow While In Use” privileges, your app will actually be granted “provisional authorization” for the “Always Allow” privilege.
- The developer should now simply proceed to do the things for which they need that permission for: e.g., set up some geofences, and start monitoring for notifications, whatever.
- If the developer has coded their app according to the guidelines, at some point later, when an location-based event is triggered, the user will be prompted again— and this time, they’ll have the option to grant the “Allow Always” privilege, at which point the provisional authorization will be made permanent.
It could be a beta issue, probably will be fixed in the gm if that’s the reason."at some point later, when an location-based event is triggered, the user will be prompted again— and this time, they’ll have the option to grant the “Allow Always” privilege"
This is not happening for my case, could you please confirm if this is happening ?
Oh, not a single like.Has anyone liked your comment? No. I wan't the apps, but I don't want them tracking me ALL OF THE TIME. Apparently so do many, many people on here. I suspect you are one of the devs. Learn from what Apple are trying to pursue and action the changes to make your app better.
Oh, not a single like.