Parental Control App Developers Urge Apple to Make Screen Time APIs Available for Third-Party Apps

[rjohnstone]

Seems like it's you who doesn't understand what an API does. An API exposes methods to access data. There is no way of preventing the app from using the API to get data, yet prevent the developer from also seeing that data. That is why developers are limited in how they can use Touch ID, for example. Touch ID can authorize a log in, but the developer has no access to the fingerprint or user's data associated with the fingerprint.

That would be infeasible with screen time since the third-party app needs the data to do its job.

I work with them every day. And yes, you can restrict the data access.
Basically you implement a secure API key that creates the unique auth token between the two devices (child and parent) to setup a secure transfer of data.
The developer has no reason to be paired with the end users device.

 

[az431]

And people can do whatever they want to respond to Apple's self-selfing business practices, such as buying 30% fewer iPhones vs last year.

There's that garbage 30% number again, made up by some research company with zero access to any actual data, and plainly wrong given that Apple announced a 17% drop in iPhone revenue.

Not to mention that you conveniently overlook increases in just about every other product and service, to justify your ridiculous position that people are not buying iPhones because they don't like policies like removing screen time apps.

The more likely reason is that China's economy is in the toilet, the exchange rate is less favorable compare to last year, and Huwaei offers a compelling alternative at a time when people there are under financial pressure.

But feel free to ignore reality to perpetuate your fantasy that people are exacting revenge on Apple by buying 30% less iPhones than last year.

 

[BootsWalking]

There's that garbage 30% number again, made up by some research company with zero access to any actual data, and plainly wrong given that Apple announced a 17% drop in iPhone revenue.

Unit sales is number of iPhones sold. Revenue is unit sales x ASP. You're comparing two different stats and then saying one is wrong because it's different than the other.

Not to mention that you conveniently overlook increases in just about every other product and service, to justify your ridiculous position that people are not buying iPhones because they don't like policies like removing screen time apps.

My post was about the drop in iPhone sales vs Apple's business practices in that segment. Why would I mention revenue in Apple's other business units?
[doublepost=1556748524][/doublepost]

It wasn't 30%...it was 17% (official numbers, not made up speculation from a research company).

And guess what...

iPad up 20%
Services up 16%
Wearables up 30%

Investors already knew the iPhone was a mature product and Apple is shifting to other businesses I mentioned, which is why the stock went up 5% today and was up 7% until the market crapped out.

People are not switching...they are buying wearables and services. Active devices were a record over 1.4B and record highs in all markets.

Those are all facts. Hate on.

IDC numbers were unit sales, Apple's numbers is revenue. Is everyone confused about this?

 

[AdonisSMU]

Apple should have given APIs for developers instead of doing this. I mean I don't use ScreenTime, but developers have vested time into their products people enjoy using. Sooner or later Apple is going to get a lot of heat for this type of behavior.

They are just going to block it App Store or no App Store. Then you won't be able to say it's an App Store issue. It's absolutely a privacy issue.

 

[jonblatho]

It's not rocket science to see that Apple will never do this.

Back in iOS 9.0, Apple made an important (and breaking) change to UIApplication.canOpenURL(...), which an app can use to tell whether it can open a URL (namely apps' custom URI schemes such as twitter://). Now, apps must include when they submit to the App Store a list of schemes they intend to query using that method, and Apple can accept or reject based on that.

It was a difficult change but one that Apple viewed as necessary because apps were abusing this functionality to identify other apps installed on the device. If an app can open URLs beginning with twitter://, then the device has the Twitter app installed. Rinse and repeat for dozens or even hundreds of apps. This data was a goldmine for advertisers. Instead, Apple pushed developers to deep linking, which are regular HTTP(S) URLs which can be opened directly inside apps. Other apps cannot query them to see if the relevant app is installed.

If that previous example didn't make it obvious, app usage data is highly desirable to developers and, even when the data is collected with pure intent, can reveal deeply private information. There came a point where Apple found it more important to introduce that breaking change to canOpenURL in order to protect privacy than to keep it for the (vast majority of) developers who were using it as intended.

So, these developers want Apple to open up data not just on what apps are installed, but when people are using them and how long people are spending in them, requisite for any Screen Time-esque functionality outside Screen Time. This information is far more sensitive than the mere list of apps developers were surreptitiously gleaning before iOS 9! No chance Apple makes it freely available.

 

[Art Mark]

Well if Tony Faddel thinks so - by-God they better do it!

I mean, obviously having 40 companies trying to run screentime on your phone - nothing can go wrong with that. Releases those APIS - for Tony's sake.

Whatever...

-M
[doublepost=1556749835][/doublepost]

As a parent of 2 kids who uses OurPact, I sure hope they get this resolved.

OurPact has been the gold standard for parental control for some time. The interface is Apple simple and intuitive...though the setup process isn't. But to be fair - has anyone taken a look at what it *really* takes to lock down a kids phone using screen time and parental controls from Apple? It's a heck of a slog to get it all set up...and you pretty much have to have the device in hand to make changes.

Nice thing about OurPact is that I can make changes in allowed apps, grant and block use any time from my device...theirs could be a continent away.

My wife and I both use OurPact and have for quite a while now, it gives us a good level of comfort that our kids are safe on the internet (safari is blocked!) and the "just one more thing..." in minecraft has been cut to nothing..when time is up, it's up.

I realize you can do similar/the same things in the Apple controls, but OurPact is popular for a reason...it's easy to use and does what it says.

I'm not sure 'gold standard' works here. I mean, you like it. How about just saying that? I'm not sure any one App I happen to like is a 'gold standard' and worthy of awe.

 

[paulcons]

Does nobody see the hypocrisy here? Cupertino CREATES that MDM API in the first place... why, to allow companies to keep uber tight control over their employees phones. Suppose because the company actually buys those phones. So they are saying that human beings have NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY when they use a company supplied phone. So some devs realize that using this stuff CAN give parents good access to restricting what their kids are doing at the same time they are buying said kids these kinds of mobile devices. So then they close these guys down, shouting about privacy concerns?? Excuse me, we are talking about parents of little Johnny & Janet, 8 and 11 years old. So it's OK to violate grown folks privacy, but not children's? I am not buying any of this crap, it's all about the only app doing this belongs to them in the first place.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Does nobody see the hypocrisy here? Cupertino CREATES that MDM API in the first place... why, to allow companies to keep uber tight control over their employees phones. Suppose because the company actually buys those phones. So they are saying that human beings have NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY when they use a company supplied phone. So some devs realize that using this stuff CAN give parents good access to restricting what their kids are doing at the same time they are buying said kids these kinds of mobile devices. So then they close these guys down, shouting about privacy concerns?? Excuse me, we are talking about parents of little Johnny & Janet, 8 and 11 years old. So it's OK to violate grown folks privacy, but not children's? I am not buying any of this crap, it's all about the only app doing this belongs to them in the first place.

Companies that give their employees devices have the legal right to monitor them, just like they monitor your work computer. Apple didn’t make that decision, it was decided in the courts. You might not like that or agree with it, and you can of course quit your job if that situation isn’t acceptable to you, but you don’t have a privacy right to hide what you’re doing on your employer’s devices. There’s no violation of your privacy because you have no right of privacy to begin with. Cupertino has nothing to do with that.

btw there’s no Apple app, paid or free, that does Screen Time; it’s built into the OS. Apple doesn’t benefit financially in any way from blocking these apps. In fact, they lose 15/30% of all the revenue those companies receive from sales of those apps. This whole anticompetitive claim is ridiculous, and the complaints to regulatory bodies will fail.

 

[MEJHarrison]

So they are saying that human beings have NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY when they use a company supplied phone.

That seems perfectly reasonable. The company owns the device, they should have access to it. If a person wants privacy, they shouldn't be trying to obtain it from a device owned by someone else.

In other news, an employee shouldn't expect privacy from their company email, company computers, company network, hallway conversations, etc. If I want privacy at work, I pull out my personal device that isn't on the my company's public wifi. If I don't want them reading my email, I send it from my personal device. If I don't want them knowing what sites I visit, I browse on my personal device. If I want to look at porn, I do that on my personal device. If I want to make a personal phone call, I do that on my personal device in a private space. I assume that anything that happens on my work computer can be discovered by my company and adjust my habits accordingly.

 

[341328]

And I suppose blocking Spotify from Siri access was about “security” also? Please Apple.

 

[Baymowe335]

Unit sales is number of iPhones sold. Revenue is unit sales x ASP. You're comparing two different stats and then saying one is wrong because it's different than the other.



My post was about the drop in iPhone sales vs Apple's business practices in that segment. Why would I mention revenue in Apple's other business units?
[doublepost=1556748524][/doublepost]

IDC numbers were unit sales, Apple's numbers is revenue. Is everyone confused about this?

No, I’m not confused. I understand the numbers probably better than most here. I’m quoting revenue because it’s official. I also don’t believe ASPs have risen meaningfully, so I’d guess more of a 17-20% unit sales decline...not 30%. I don’t believe in extrapolation of data, so 30% is a fake number to me.

That said, no investor is surprised the unit sales for iPhones are down, but we recognize the move to services and wearables. That’s a big reason why the stock is up, not down. In fact, people thought iPhone revenue would be down more than it was.

 

[az431]

That’s a reasonable compromise I think.
[doublepost=1556747633][/doublepost]
It can be similar to location services where you’re prompted that an app wants access, and you need to approve.

That's exactly how profiles work, but as we've seen countless times, people will approve just about anything without knowing exactly what they are getting into. And one access is granted, it's impossible to know exactly what is being shared and impossible to delete the data once it's in the hands of a third party.

 

[341328]

As a parent of 2 kids who uses OurPact, I sure hope they get this resolved.

OurPact has been the gold standard for parental control for some time. The interface is Apple simple and intuitive...though the setup process isn't. But to be fair - has anyone taken a look at what it *really* takes to lock down a kids phone using screen time and parental controls from Apple? It's a heck of a slog to get it all set up...and you pretty much have to have the device in hand to make changes.

Nice thing about OurPact is that I can make changes in allowed apps, grant and block use any time from my device...theirs could be a continent away.

My wife and I both use OurPact and have for quite a while now, it gives us a good level of comfort that our kids are safe on the internet (safari is blocked!) and the "just one more thing..." in minecraft has been cut to nothing..when time is up, it's up.

I realize you can do similar/the same things in the Apple controls, but OurPact is popular for a reason...it's easy to use and does what it says.

Well said. And Apple shouldn’t force users to go and reconfigure everything in their own product.

 

[az431]

Unit sales is number of iPhones sold. Revenue is unit sales x ASP. You're comparing two different stats and then saying one is wrong because it's different than the other.

My post was about the drop in iPhone sales vs Apple's business practices in that segment. Why would I mention revenue in Apple's other business units?
[doublepost=1556748524][/doublepost]

IDC numbers were unit sales, Apple's numbers is revenue. Is everyone confused about this?

First, only one of these is a "stat," and that is the number released by Apple. The other is a bunch of made up crap by a third-party marketing research company that derives its revenue from the same companies it researches.

Second, Unit sales = Revenue / ASP. Unless ASP has significantly increased (or Apple is flat out lying about the 17% revenue drop), then the 30% decrease in unit sales is a bunch of crap. But it is unlikely that ASPs have increased much since the iPhone X was released since the product mix and pricing has remained largely the same. We do know that Apple lowered prices in China and India, so if anything ASPs have decreased or stayed flat, but not increased.

And finally, you're trying to bolster an argument that Apple's financial picture is weakening because of its business practices. But the only way your specious argument can even get off the ground is by focusing on a single product line, for which demand dropped in a single market during a weaker economy and exchange rate.

The average consumer knows little about Apple's business practices and developer relationships, and even those who do aren't going to buy a different phone out of spite or protest.
[doublepost=1556757376][/doublepost]

And I suppose blocking Spotify from Siri access was about “security” also? Please Apple.

This is news to all of us. Last I checked I am able to use Siri with Spotify.
[doublepost=1556757634][/doublepost]

Does nobody see the hypocrisy here? Cupertino CREATES that MDM API in the first place... why, to allow companies to keep uber tight control over their employees phones. Suppose because the company actually buys those phones. So they are saying that human beings have NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY when they use a company supplied phone. So some devs realize that using this stuff CAN give parents good access to restricting what their kids are doing at the same time they are buying said kids these kinds of mobile devices. So then they close these guys down, shouting about privacy concerns?? Excuse me, we are talking about parents of little Johnny & Janet, 8 and 11 years old. So it's OK to violate grown folks privacy, but not children's? I am not buying any of this crap, it's all about the only app doing this belongs to them in the first place.

MDM is for managing enterprise devices used by adults in connection with that business, and provides extremely limited ability to see a user's behavior. It is also not available to or permitted to be used by the general public.

Screen time is for monitoring the activities of children, and provides nearly unlimited information about the child's behavior. It can be used by anyone with iOS 12 installed.

But I'm thinking you still don't see the problem with your argument.
[doublepost=1556757868][/doublepost]

I work with them every day. And yes, you can restrict the data access.
Basically you implement a secure API key that creates the unique auth token between the two devices (child and parent) to setup a secure transfer of data.
The developer has no reason to be paired with the end users device.

What you just proposed makes zero sense. A token would simply authenticate the two devices for the purpose of allowing access. The data itself cannot be encrypted because then the app would not be able to use it. And if the data is not encrypted then the developer would be able to view it and store it.

The only solution is for Apple to crunch the data then provide it via the API in a way that it is anonymized, but obviously that won't work either. And even if it was not anonymized, Apple would be providing the same data it already provides directly to parents via Screen Time. Then you'd have the equivalent of a fart app with just a different icon.

 

[bwillwall]

So basically make it easy for any developer to see what I'm doing on my phone at all times? Yeah sounds great. Thanks NYT, you're the real heroes of personal freedom...

 

[0924487]

I’m confused about this. It’s not like screen time feature is gonna bring revenue to Apple. The more Apple do first party in iOS the better for the users. Take look at the calculator market for iPad. If Apple made an iPad calculator app we don’t have to deal with all those stupid ad fused subscription based calculators.
[doublepost=1556759417][/doublepost]Per App Store guideline. Apps should not attempt to function OS-wise and should not affect other apps on the device. Just like F.lux app, Apple pulled it because it is affecting iOS globally. That’s not an open market for developers. That’s Apple’s.

 

[BootsWalking]

First, only one of these is a "stat," and that is the number released by Apple. The other is a bunch of made up crap by a third-party marketing research company that derives its revenue from the same companies it researches.

Second, Unit sales = Revenue / ASP. Unless ASP has significantly increased (or Apple is flat out lying about the 17% revenue drop), then the 30% decrease in unit sales is a bunch of crap. But it is unlikely that ASPs have increased much since the iPhone X was released since the product mix and pricing has remained largely the same. We do know that Apple lowered prices in China and India, so if anything ASPs have decreased or stayed flat, but not increased.

The disparity between the analysts's 30% unit drop estimate vs Apple's reported 17% revenue drop implies a shift toward higher ASPs, which in turn obviously would mean the premium phones are selling in strong numbers whereas the lower-end phones are not.

And finally, you're trying to bolster an argument that Apple's financial picture is weakening because of its business practices. But the only way your specious argument can even get off the ground is by focusing on a single product line, for which demand dropped in a single market during a weaker economy and exchange rate.

The average consumer knows little about Apple's business practices and developer relationships, and even those who do aren't going to buy a different phone out of spite or protest.

Nope, that wasn't what I was arguing at all, and that's the second time you're using that mischaracterization of what I posted. I said specifically that the iPhone unit sale decline was related to Apple's business practices. You keep bringing Apple's bigger financial picture into the argument but that wasn't what I was referencing at all.

 

[lunarworks]

ScreenTime honestly should have been there 5 or 6 years ago, when these things started getting into the hands of kids.

 

[dwaite]

And I suppose blocking Spotify from Siri access was about “security” also? Please Apple.

Spotify has the same level of access as any other developer

 

[BuddyTronic]

Privacy rights for kids is something that should be protected.

I see a lot of talk about money, but it is human dignity that needs to be considered most.

 

[Gutwrench]

MDM technology is intended for enterprise users to manage their company-owned devices, and Apple says the use of MDM by consumer-focused apps carries privacy and security concerns

MR (Joe), did Apple really say that? If so, did you or anyone think to challenge it?

 

[JRobinsonJr]

The problem with what you describe is that there is no way to distinguish between parents/kids and criminals who would use the above mechanism for nefarious purposes, which is precisely why it doesn't exist, yet.

Sure there is. Some combination of Family Sharing and multi-user authentication could easily be combined to provide security.

 

[Digimom76]

Providing the right APIs to the developers seems to be the right solution. Our family started using Mobicip few years ago for its most efficient internet filter after evaluating few other products in the market. Few months ago , they announced major upgrade to their product for screen time limits and individual app blocking. We have a mix of Android, iOS, chromebooks and mac books in our household and it was easier to manage them with mobicip. Now, they have gone back to their filtering only solution on iOS devices due to Apple's move. And Apple's screen time feature is very glitchy.

 

[TimFL1]

As a parent of 2 kids who uses OurPact, I sure hope they get this resolved.

OurPact has been the gold standard for parental control for some time. The interface is Apple simple and intuitive...though the setup process isn't. But to be fair - has anyone taken a look at what it *really* takes to lock down a kids phone using screen time and parental controls from Apple? It's a heck of a slog to get it all set up...and you pretty much have to have the device in hand to make changes.

Nice thing about OurPact is that I can make changes in allowed apps, grant and block use any time from my device...theirs could be a continent away.

My wife and I both use OurPact and have for quite a while now, it gives us a good level of comfort that our kids are safe on the internet (safari is blocked!) and the "just one more thing..." in minecraft has been cut to nothing..when time is up, it's up.

I realize you can do similar/the same things in the Apple controls, but OurPact is popular for a reason...it's easy to use and does what it says.

Have you tried it again on 12.2? They, afaik, added a way to remotely change screen time limits for kid devices there. I think you only ever need to have access to their device once during setup (which you would also need to have for the app).


Realistically speaking, no 3rd party app can beat a good and indepth first party down to the metal implementation like Screen Time is. It already tracks and manages everything with the flick of a button, why would I install an app to do a potential inferior job (or the exactly same one the OS already does for you due to using a potential system level API), just for the bonus of having a potentially fancier UI?
It‘s just devs who see their livelihoods taken away that cry for Apple to open up the feature set. It‘s all about money.

 

[Spacetime Anomaly]

Can’t Apple see they are blocking a huge market for developers pretending they can cure peoples will-power problems?