Tim Cook Threatened to Remove Uber From the App Store Over iPhone Tagging Tactics

[Radon87000]

Sure, but Apple will also suffer huge customer backlash for removing something that so many of iPhone users rely on daily. It would be a PR nightmare.

No they wont. Are you saying people will stop buying iPhones because of no Uber?

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Tim is right on this one.

 

[I7guy]

He was personally invited and given a talking to. Other developers recieve a formal email and a termination notice

And you don't know if this hasn't happened before, as you only know this one time as it's been reported. so don't go making assumptions you can't prove.

Can't live without Uber. Its made everything so much easier

For you, I don't have the app and won't use them.

Apple Maps is using outdated data

It's better than other Nav/ poi apps.
[doublepost=1493039305][/doublepost]

No they wont. Are you saying people will stop buying iPhones because of no Uber?

It could happen.

 

[Solomani]

This story is very up-Lyfting for me.

 

[6836838]

What about the fact they monitor ones location 5 minute after a drop-off. There is no option to have GPS turned on only when the app is in use. Subsequently, I turn off GPS completely for Uber.

 

[cswifx]

Apple should've just pulled the app. Any app that violates user privacy or the T&C has no place in the App Store.

 

[Zaft]

The concept of equality has always been more of an aspiration than a reality. With wealth comes greater power and influence. You can't expect a small time app developer to be accorded the same attention or treatment as a more influential, major player like Uber or Facebook.

Banning Uber from their iOS platform would have damaged Apple as much as Uber. We can argue until the cows come home about whether Apple would have carried out their threat had Uber not capitulated, but at the end of the day, the issue was resolved and all's well that ends well.

But hey, Apple dared to expunge Google Maps from iOS, so that was clearly a dare Uber's CEO decided he wasn't prepared to take Apple up on.

And that dare didnt turn out to be a good bet. Google maps wipes the floor with Apple maps in almost every part of the country

That was one of the worst blunders Apple has had.. How in the world do you take away a mapping service and replace it with a MUCH inferior product. Here in NYC people were PISSED off that transit was gone, apple should have warned regular Joes/Marys that this would be removed with the update to IOS6 I think it was.

Falls on Tim Cook and its unacceptable. Forstall took the fall but it was more than just him.

That being said apple maps now is not that bad. I use it to track where I parked my car.

 

[StonewallBrown]

You don't get passing Uber cars to stop by waving at them either. Where I come from you can just order a taxi with a single quick phone call and there's even an Uber-style app these days.



I'm pretty sure that Uber isn't any better at peak hours and you can order a taxi like you can order an Uber.



So what's the problem? Do you have a phobia of talking to someone?



I'm pretty sure most taxi drivers do exactly the same thing (take the route the GPS gives them), or at least they do where I come from.

However I have a feeling that this is probably going to nowhere and you're just going to be arguing against a straw man version of the taxi system the same way Uber themselves does. The reality is that Uber is a taxi company where the drivers aren't trained at all, where neither the cars or the company are registered as taxi companies, where they don't even bother with proper commercial vehicle insurance, where just about all of the expenses are rolled over to the driver and where the drivers are paid so little it barely covers gas, car maintenance and really basic living expenses.

So it's not just proper taxi drivers that get screwed over when they have to compete with a company that can operate much more cheaply by simply not following any of the regulations they have to follow or be put out of business, the company probably screws over their own drivers even more than that.

You may not see an issue in some Uber drivers making so little they have to live in their cars and like a Trump supporter you're probably start going on about how the drivers are just lazy and that Uber isn't meant to be anything beyond a second job to make ends me. I however will put my foot down and demand that either the people what provide me with products and services are paid a living wage or I take my business elsewhere.

With the exception of the last paragraph, this is the same tone deafness, that caused the rise of Uber. Taxi companies refused to change practices, as technology evolved. Taxi companies wanted you to use a phone to "call" a ride. Well, they semi got what they wanted. Their possible clientele now use their phones to order. Just not to order Taxis.

 

[toph2toast]

It's about time Apple toughened up against the big companies in the App Store.

If you're an independent developer, your app is removed immediately at the slightest infraction.

If you're Facebook (background silent audio), Spotify (in-app purchase violation), or now Uber, you get a slap on the wrist and a meeting with the CEO.

Uber should have been booted from the App Store the moment this was discovered.

Not saying you're right or wrong, but this kind of practice happens daily in multiple businesses, governments, etc.

 

[Theophany]

Apart from Elizabeth Holmes, Kalanick is probably the biggest piece of **** CEO in the Valley.

 

[Abazigal]

That was one of the worst blunders Apple has had.. How in the world do you take away a mapping service and replace it with a MUCH inferior product.

Like I said, people need perspective.

Google forced Apple's hand and replacing maps was a bitter pill that was easier to swallow earlier than later.

I don't know about you, but google maps on iOS 5 was practically unusable for me. At least I got turn by turn on my 4s with iOS 6.

At the end of the day, what I feel remains of utmost importance is that Apple remains in a position of strength so it can have plenty of leverage against competitors.

After all, I see myself an Apple user for a good many years to come, and I am perfectly comfortable putting up with some short-term inconvenience in order for Apple to retain bargaining power, if it means I will benefit in the long run.

 

[Newjackboy]

It's about time Apple toughened up against the big companies in the App Store.

If you're an independent developer, your app is removed immediately at the slightest infraction.

If you're Facebook (background silent audio), Spotify (in-app purchase violation), or now Uber, you get a slap on the wrist and a meeting with the CEO.

Uber should have been booted from the App Store the moment this was discovered.

It does not work this way!

apple need the mega-apps like Uber, Facebook, Spotify too.

 

[I7guy]

It does not work this way!

apple need the mega-apps like Uber, Facebook, Spotify too.

And these apps need iOS. If uber, Facebook or Spotify disappeared tomorrow I wouldn't switch platforms for an app.

 

[davie18]

That is the best way to get attention with a protest now days. It has literally happened hundreds of times in the US over the past couple years with the various anti-trump and BLM protests. Why are you acting like blocking roads and traffic is a new thing?

How am I acting like it's a new thing? What are you talking about LOL

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

“So, I’ve heard you’ve been breaking some of our rules,” Mr. Cook said in his calm, Southern tone. Sounds just like Steve.

 

[Rob_2811]

But hey, Apple dared to expunge Google Maps from iOS, so that was clearly a dare Uber's CEO decided he wasn't prepared to take Apple up on.

Different kettle of fish. Its one thing replacing Google Maps as the default mapping service on iOS, removing Google Maps from the App Store and effectively blocking its use on the platform is quite another.

It does not work this way!

apple need the mega-apps like Uber, Facebook, Spotify too.

Yep.

And these apps need iOS. If uber, Facebook or Spotify disappeared tomorrow I wouldn't switch platforms for an app.

But lots of people would. Make no mistake it is very much in Apples interests to ensure these Apps stay on the App Store.

 

[Ted13]

I think you're being a bit hard on taxi services. The Uber idea was always going to trump anything else and was always going to be done by someone outside of the taxi industry.

I have never got an Uber and don't plan on doing so. I expect they'll have some serious competition sometime soon and I will look at using a competitor. I just hear too many stories about Uber that steers me clear of them.

A bit hard on taxi drivers? Once a week I have to go to NJ, and used to take the local taxi from the train station, now I take Uber or Lyft -- the difference in quality couldn't be any more striking, the professionalism, the clean cars, knowing how to get to the destination - I will certainly not take one of the local NJ taxis ever again.

I do understand your negative feeling about Uber, but Lyft (and in larger cities like NYC other competitors as well, not to mention subways) do exist.

 

[I7guy]

Different kettle of fish. Its one thing replacing Google Maps as the default mapping service on iOS, removing Google Maps from the App Store and effectively blocking its use on the platform is quite another.



Yep.



But lots of people would. Make no mistake it is very much in Apples interests to ensure these Apps stay on the App Store.

I can't talk for anyone other than me, my family my friends, don't know how you can.

 

[Juan007]

Good for Tim, Uber is a corrupt criminal organization. He should call them up AGAIN and let them know they will be removed unless their harassment of women stops!!

 

[Abazigal]

Different kettle of fish. Its one thing replacing Google Maps as the default mapping service on iOS, removing Google Maps from the App Store and effectively blocking its use on the platform is quite another.



Yep.



But lots of people would. Make no mistake it is very much in Apples interests to ensure these Apps stay on the App Store.

I agree. But I feel it's also important that Apple is able to assert its authority when the need arises and not let these apps run roughshod over the rules just because the companies think they are beyond reproach simply because of their size and clout. Else, what's the point of rules if you aren't going to enforce them? And letting these apps run rogue will simply mean a worse user experience for Apple users in the long run.

People liken Apple to a walled garden. Well, at least this garden is well tended to and weeded timely and bugs squashed.

Which brings me back to my original point - perspective. We can have nice things like Apple Pay precisely because we give Apple the authority to bargain with other stakeholders such as banks. Sure, we weren't first, but see how far we have come today.

I can't speak for others, but if push came to shove and the Uber app was suddenly banned on iPhones, it's a price I am willing to pay if it means the integrity of the iOS platform is preserved. Let those who wish to defect to android detect all they wish. I know where I stand on such matters.

 

[remingtonsmooth]

Actually, I think "identifierForVendor" does it mostly.

What's odd about the article is that access to the UDID was removed at least by iOS 7 in 2013 and maybe before. So by 2015 when this supposedly happened, was this only affecting non-upgraded devices?



At the front of the thread, it states the info comes from an NYT article published just yesterday:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/23/...s-uber-and-himself-to-the-precipice.html?_r=0

Click the link and read it for more details. This is good practice for any forum's news posts, btw. Always check out the source material. Often important info can be distilled out.

That's what I was thinking. There's so much wrong with this article. First, it makes it seem like they are grabbing and storing the actual UDID, which I don't think is possible, unless through some private API, in which case that would have been a violation of the TOC anyway and grounds for removal from the app store.

If they were using identifierForVendor, they were getting *a* UUID (not *the* UUID) and storing it in defaults (this is how you would go about storing any bit of information you wish to survive an app delete, and even that method isn't guaranteed) -- this is perfectly acceptable and normal behavior for an app.

But secondly, since when is 'fingerprinting' == taking a UUID (which the device provides you) and storing it? My definition of fingerprinting would be to somehow get hashes of various (preferably unique or at least low collision-potential) values supplied by the hardware and then creating a profile based on those, and storing that. You know... kind of like a 'fingerprint'. Storing a UUID isn't fingerprinting... it's more like 'name taking'.

But I guess the article would sell less clicks if it weren't sensational.

 

[Abazigal]

Daringfireball's take on the matter.

https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/uber_identifying_and_tagging_iphones

 

[now i see it]

This is an example where Apple needs uber and Uber needs Apple. There's no way Apple would can the uber app. If they did, every iPhone user that used uber would buy an Android phone.

Some apps are more important than the platform. I believe uber is one of them. It would be like Photoshop being banned from Mac. Never gunna happen.

 

[nburwell]

Excellent article written by the NY Times. Although I have both Uber and Lyft apps installed on my phone, the next time I need a ride, I'm more inclined to call a Lyft, even if I have to wait an extra couple of minutes.

As I'm sure most people are, I'm definitely not a fan of Kalanick's shady and deceptive business practices.

 

[unobtainium]

Yup, they'd get a no-warning, shadow ban like any other ex-developer with their dev and personal accounts locked and emails to Apple bounced as undeliverable. Call up Apple and they be like "what account" we can't discuss closed accounts with anybody because we already deleted your data and you don't exist, sorry.

No, they wouldn't. Deleting Uber from the App Store would have inconvenienced Apple's customers. It's easy to ban a small-time developer, not so easy when your customers would be heavily impacted.