App Developers Claim Apple's iOS 13 Location Tracking Changes Are Anti-Competitive

[GlamCheese666]

It's pretty disheartening to see how ignorant and uninformed so many people are. They rail against "Big Brother" or whomever they think cares enough about their tiny lives to take their data, including location and do something nefarious with it. So they applaud Apple for making it harder for applications to use location data, despite the fact this can make it problematic for some apps to work correctly. They will then bitch and moan when said app doesn't work right. Yet all along Apple still has ALL THE ACCESS TO EVERYTHING ON YOUR iDEVICE INCLUDING YOUR LOCATION! It ins't about privacy, in this day and age privacy is an illusion unless you live 100% off the grid. This is about Apple having all the info and not sharing it with the developers of apps who are providing value to these devices by building apps for them and then not allowing them the resources they need to make it work.

I know many will say then don't have our app on iDevices, but it is not that simple when some of these apps are required by business and there are other factors at work.

I hate Apple. their business practices are predatory and this is just one more example. Their greed and arrogance know no bounds and they don't even innovate anymore.

"Please oh please Apple TELL me how to properly use my device because I am too stupid to know the right and wrong way on my own. I am afraid to think for myself!" - Apple Lemming

It’s not paranoia if our data WAS mined and used against us like Facebook/Cambridge Analytica was proven to be guilty of in the 2016 election. Now it’s now up to the developers to ADAPT and MAKE IT WORK. That’s their job, while Apple places rules and restrictions to protect the consumer.
also....Apple doesn’t get your location data unless you share it, and even then it’s only fragmented and anonymous...
You should probably do a bit more research before ranting

 

[nibfiledotcom]

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):

1. As a developer, in your code, you should request “Always Allow” as you normally would.
2. The user will see the new prompt which does not have the “Always Allow” option.
3. If they grant “Allow While In Use” privileges, your app will actually be granted “provisional authorization” for the “Always Allow” privilege.
4. 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.
5. 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.

 

[swingerofbirch]

For me it's a UX problem.

I don't really see it as a privacy issue because I don't think the pop-up saying "Always allow" could be any more clear.

I have the same frustration every time I want to turn the Camera's resolution down from 4K when I'm low on space and have to navigate to Settings.

Apple has cumbersome UX in both instances. I think it's bad design more than privacy focused.

Edit: Nevermind. It seems the post right above mine says the article was incorrect and so this is sort of moot.

 

[Will.O.Bie]

No app is worth tracking my location every single second. I've downloaded and deleted apps in the past if they don't give me an option to be tracked only when I'm using their app. Besides, if those apps are tracking you in the background, battery life would be cut in half of its capabilities. Thanks Apple!

 

[MauiPa]

it's not anti competitive if users can switch to a comparable platform

apple having it easier on their own apps is just one of the benefits of spending billions of dollars on building out the platform.

it's no different than google including chrome browser out of the box in the pixel device but mozilla has to ask users to click through several times to install firefox

And what apple apps are tracking you all the time? all the apple apps have the same options as third-party apps. Not seeing your point, sorry

 

[Will.O.Bie]

Because of the developers' constant privacy abuses, I've reached a point where I don't trust most of the apps.
With smartphones being so ubiquitous, we're turning into the Borg collective where everyone is connected into the hive.

Resistance is futile, you must assimilate.

 

[I7guy]

I think what some are missing here as that these same rules (according to the developers) don't apply to Apple's own apps. Once again it becomes apple playing the "our platform our apps come first", but spin it as "user privacy".

Not true. Apples apps, except find my, as the article states will go through the same process.

 

[Mutepointer]

I understand what app developers are getting at here, but honestly, users who aren't savvy enough to go into the Privacy settings and change the option to "Always Allow" when necessary are the exact people who probably shouldn't be continually tracked by an app.

Exactly. But in any case, law enforcers can track us law abiders without permission. Maybe we should similar options for them.

 

[MauiPa]

Not true. Apples apps, except find my, as the article states will go through the same process.

And if you check in location services, even FindMy has the same toggle, so I am not sure what you meant. But your point about apple apps having the same restrictions is spot on.

 

[TonnyM]

So they want to keep tracking and listening to us... I fully support the changes Apple implements.

 

[MauiPa]

Exactly. But in any case, law enforcers can track us law abiders without permission. Maybe we should similar options for them.

is that unreasonable? Most would think so, I'm sure, so where is the 4th amendment?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]"

 

[Crowbot]

I understand what app developers are getting at here, but honestly, users who aren't savvy enough to go into the Privacy settings and change the option to "Always Allow" when necessary are the exact people who probably shouldn't be continually tracked by an app.

I still see people who don't lock their phones. Sometimes you have to force people to be safe. Apple does this partly by requiring a locked device to host the Wallet.

 

[Swift]

if some program wants to know where I am at every minute of the day, they don't get checked "Always". If that means it doesn't work well, then I don't need to the program.

 

[Tech198]

Any changes you make though, there are these that will always turn the other way though. Particularly when the option has always bee round for longer..

It moved to Settings... so what? Its still convenient ? If you don't wanna plough into Setting app, use search.. to make it easier..

The same thing happen when temporary Wi-fi and Bluetooth in Control center didn't do what it previously did as well.. The dust settled back then, and it will here.
In fact, i hope while Apple were at it they "fixed" how many times you must answer this popup..

Twice actually... once when you install apps, and another when you re-open.. like Weather, or purchased apps you (re)-download

That to me is a long standing issue, much more than this one mentioned.

 

[nibfiledotcom]

It moved to Settings... so what?

Nope it’s even easier than that; the user actually will be asked again later in a dialog box (see my post above).

 

[Swift]

Allowing other people to use a "always allow" does not force you to do anything, nor does it track you specifically. Stop being paranoid.

But it does. Can the app sell its data about you? Well, it has one thing that is very marketable: your location of an extended period. "Why, the person was shot within ten minutes of him making a call from three blocks away." Add in datapoint on you to get 5000 points, and they know what kind of person you are, and therefore, how to convince you as an individual. Apple doesn't want to be in that market.

 

[NickName99]

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):

1. As a developer, in your code, you should request “Always Allow” as you normally would.
2. The user will see the new prompt which does not have the “Always Allow” option.
3. If they grant “Allow While In Use” privileges, your app will actually be granted “provisional authorization” for the “Always Allow” privilege.
4. 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.
5. 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.

View attachment 853314

Thank you for posting this! MacRumors really should update the article with this info.

 

[PlayUltimate]

Making users go out of their way to enable "always allow location tracking" is a great decision. Too many people will hit "always allow" by accident and end up being tracked forever by apps.

App developers having to beg users to enable always-on tracking is a great thing.

You could always turn it off in Settings in the same way that will now need to be used to turn it on.

 

[hagjohn]

In the latest beta, when I go into and select never, it doesn't change it. It stays as Ask. It doesn't happen all the time.

 

[ghostface147]

Nevermind. Didn’t read all the way through.

 

[S.B.G]

I disagree that these devs say the move is "anti-competitive". I retort that the move Apple has made it pro-user privacy. I mean, who do they think they're competing against to claim anti-competitive? Who gains the advantage of tracking now? The end user? Yeah, we gain the advantage. So **** tracking apps.

 

[Crowbot]

I have yet to see a single news account of the person being harmed by app tracking him/her. I am sure there might have been some cases but still. It's such an insignificant issue that I'd rather companies opt for convenience over forced security.

Back when seat belts in cars were required to be installed, lots of people still didn't use them so the car companies put in seat sensors and buzzers to get people to use them. The outcry to put in cutoff switches was massive and they did. I don't know if it's still the case with newer cars. But disabling a safety feature isn't my favorite thing to do.

 

[Swift]

is that unreasonable? Most would think so, I'm sure, so where is the 4th amendment?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]"

The mere location has been, legally, seen as an inevitable. You need information from the phone company, and that will give you, "Is he on Facebook." That's a treasure trove. Add in voter records, the DMV, soon you have a lot of data that can all be linked, and then they know who you are.

I believe the Supreme Court did guarantee location privacy under certain conditions. If the police or court wants to investigate you, getting the judge to grant you a search warrant is fine with me. You shouldn't be able to destroy privacy by just sticking two cookies in your app, and downloading the data.

 

[fontman]

Good Thing Thanks Apple .

 

[rlhamil]

This change is good for consumers. App developers have proven they cannot be trusted.

These apps probably have legit uses. But Apple didn’t ruin it for them. Abusive developers did. If everyone played nice then this wouldn’t have happened.

You can opt in if you really want it.

In addition to privacy issues, apps that are always tracking run down the battery faster.

Usually the app providers want to make $$, and any appearance of providing a valuable service is simply a way of doing that. Mostly it's kind of harmless, geographically targeted advertising. Apple enables some of this: if a Wallet store card has the right information associated with it, it will usually pop up a notification when you're in or very near one of the stores of that chain. That's fairly convenient, and as long as nothing else is done with the information, not a big deal. But other than that, or actually running a mapping app, or responding to a user query, or very rare cases of emergency services as in one example in the article, tracking is IMO at least potentially intrusive (with no real way of knowing whether it is or isn't), a waste of battery, and at best contributing to information overload.

I thought of a feature I'd like: a travel mode toggle (preferably handy, on control center and adjustable via Siri, ) that would enable or disable always-on tracking regardless of whether individual apps had been granted permission. This is different from the overall location services toggle, because it would not affect foreground tracking, but simply allow one to easily enable background tracking (perhaps automatically turning off after 24 hours) only when it was useful. Unlike other location services settings, that should probably also be adjustable with a shortcut.