Can you provide proof they haven’t, or that they were even aware of the API’s existence in the first place given the fact several devs have come forward stating they absolutely weren’t?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Gave Zoom Access to Special API to Use iPad Camera During Split View Multitasking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You can't ask for something you don't know exists. Pick a side.
Looks like some players' playing fields are leveler than others'.
You can not prove a negative.
what you seem to think should happen is Apple should go, “Hey teams. Zoom asked for this. You may want access too so here it is“
But firstly randomly granting access to non standard systems to everybody just because they might is a terrible idea. In every industry accessing raised privileges requires a request.
Second, where does it stop? What if want to make a video app to talk the guinea pigs while multi tasking?
At some point it was asked for by somebody that didn’t know it existed.
I have no proof. But it would be fair to assume Apple didn’t go “Hey zoom, want this to make your app better but keep it hush?”
Its far more likely that Zoom ran into a constraint. Then worked with Apple to resolve it after presenting a reasonable case for their need.
But does FaceTime even have access to this api? I know that whenever I move to another app, my camera goes off - people frequently ask what I’m doing because “they can’t see me any more”. Maybe Zoom are trialling a new feature that has yet to be released to the general public?
It's quite interesting because even Apple's own iMessage don't have this entitlement....
It’s not even available on FaceTime yet so there’s that.
The bias here is strong. Unfortunately the perception doesn’t bode well for Apple, but it’s a really simple matter … it doesn’t have to be conspirative. Think about it, seriously … how would Apple ever be able to develop APIs if “no one” was ever granted the ability to test it before releasing it to the general public at WWDC?
The truth is, every company that steps on stage at any keynote or Apple event, has “always” been given inside access to APIs / things not available to the general public. Complaining about it would be like every developer at WWDC complaining that they didn’t get a chance to be on stage too.
It may gave been a conspiracy, or maybe it was simply a normal process of development. I do not know which is the case, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is, what will the masses without understanding how software is developed, what will they think, is all that matters.
But as a developer, if I didn’t give people exclusive access before something even goes beta, that would be a significant problem. It’s through that access that those who’d use it help define how it might work. And at the end we may decide, “actually it’s not good enough yet (too many security flaws), let’s delay (or scrap this).”
With WWDC coming up, I’m not surprised by this at all. If they didn’t do it, and only left it to the limited perception of their in-house team, that would be very silly. It makes sense to tap outside teams that specialize in using or building upon such things.
Epic is making an argument using things that are common sense (for those in that field), and it jars the minds of those that don’t know or understand why it “has to be done”, but shifts the landscape of feelings. This isn’t looking too good. Because it’s a valid argument of inequality, even if it’s almost always necessary in the development world (not just software development follows that pattern, but hardware and product development does also).
The truth is, every company that steps on stage at any keynote or Apple event, has “always” been given inside access to APIs / things not available to the general public. Complaining about it would be like every developer at WWDC complaining that they didn’t get a chance to be on stage too.
It may gave been a conspiracy, or maybe it was simply a normal process of development. I do not know which is the case, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is, what will the masses without understanding how software is developed, what will they think, is all that matters.
But as a developer, if I didn’t give people exclusive access before something even goes beta, that would be a significant problem. It’s through that access that those who’d use it help define how it might work. And at the end we may decide, “actually it’s not good enough yet (too many security flaws), let’s delay (or scrap this).”
With WWDC coming up, I’m not surprised by this at all. If they didn’t do it, and only left it to the limited perception of their in-house team, that would be very silly. It makes sense to tap outside teams that specialize in using or building upon such things.
Epic is making an argument using things that are common sense (for those in that field), and it jars the minds of those that don’t know or understand why it “has to be done”, but shifts the landscape of feelings. This isn’t looking too good. Because it’s a valid argument of inequality, even if it’s almost always necessary in the development world (not just software development follows that pattern, but hardware and product development does also).
Last edited:
This is probably the case, Apple giving some developers permission to use “beta” features that will most likely be available to everyone in the future. Probably this is one if the features coming to everyone (and facetime) in iOS 15
This the worst part.
Its something I was taught early in my working life.
It doesn’t matter what you actually did or did not do. Only what people perceived you did.
I remember, I had to switch to paper and pencil in my exam and had to hold the paper into the camera because I couldnt use my pencil and my notes app and the camera at the same time.. It would stop the camera if you switch apps and you have to be seen at all times during the exam.
iPad Pro 2018... whats a Computer? ehem.
iPad Pro 2018... whats a Computer? ehem.
This is what happens when corporations engage in situational ethics...they end up having no ethics at all.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
It’s a little bit unsettling that this API should be considered “special”.
It seems that FaceTime can also do it in split screen multitasking. I’m wondering whether it is something that is being tested for general release in iPadOS 15 next month as you said.
There are multiple problems to this.
For one, Apple claims that developers have equal access. That's a weird claim because it's obviously untrue.
Second, if only the big folks like Zoom get privileged access, it skews the ability for companies to become big in the first place. Google was founded in 1998. Imagine it had instead started in 2008, just a decade later, in a world where companies like Apple decide who gets privileged access and who doesn't. No way would they have been able to grow the way they did.
Should every app get access to camera multitasking? No. That's why it's an entitlement in the first place: so that developers can request it, and App Review can then scrutinize whether that's an appropriate use. But that's not what Apple is doing here: they're adding another layer on top of App Review.
But all video call apps have this constraint. Apple solved it for FaceTime (which is a whole other can of worms), then for Zoom. What about Teams, Skype, dozens of other video call apps? What about apps that don't have clout?
Yet equal access is never given to consumers for iOS to downgrade or upgrade to an iOS version of their choice.
Aren’t all Apple customers equal in these options?
Or I don’t know maybe about a year ago something major happened in the world and zoom at the time was really the only way to video conference or even go to school for some people so Apple went crap…..and allowed it use so like umm people could use an iPhone or iPad to survive and not have to go out an buy something new.
The most worrying part is that probably Apple received money for allowing this. That’s really bad!
And this is precisely why the iPad (running iPad OS) will never be a full computer replacement - only a complimentary device, no matter how much horsepower they stuff in it, like the new M1 iPad Pros.
Privacy is our main concern at Apple
because we make money selling yours!
because we make money selling yours!