Parental control apps clap back at Apple statement on MDM technology

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 29
    crushedcrushed Posts: 18member
    What this article fails to mention is that MDM is a feature of the Enterprise Developers Programme. It is meant for “enterprises” who need in-house apps for their own users and these apps are never meant to be released on the App Store. All these screen time apps are abusing the Enterepise Developers Programme license agreements and releasing the apps on the App Store by requiring special certificates to be installed on your devices. Irrespective of their claim of how useful these apps are, it is a breach of contract. If they want APIs for Screentime, and I sure would like to have access to those APIs this IS NOT the way to go about getting it.
  • Reply 22 of 29
    dpkrohdpkroh Posts: 34member
    crushed said:
    What this article fails to mention is that MDM is a feature of the Enterprise Developers Programme. It is meant for “enterprises” who need in-house apps for their own users and these apps are never meant to be released on the App Store. All these screen time apps are abusing the Enterepise Developers Programme license agreements and releasing the apps on the App Store by requiring special certificates to be installed on your devices. Irrespective of their claim of how useful these apps are, it is a breach of contract. If they want APIs for Screentime, and I sure would like to have access to those APIs this IS NOT the way to go about getting it.
    Getting bogged down in these technicalities is IMO failing to see the forest for the trees. The timeline of Apple’s actions doesn’t pass the smell test.

    Apple allowed these apps for years.  Quite obvious given their functionality they had to use something more than basic iOS APIs.  Apple can’t reasonably claim they did not know what these apps had been doing for years. Yet Apple approved them over and over again.

    Then after Apple finally releases its own competing feature, they begin to ban the competition.  The developers saw the need years ago and provided a solution.  Apple’s screentime interface is IMO one of the worst UIs I have ever seen.   Confusing, messy, disjointed.   Seems to me the real reason Apple is banning competing screen management apps can be summed up as “if you can”t beat them, then ban them”

    I was quite excited about the screen time feature when it was announced.  Once it tried it though, I was appalled at just how bad the interface is. I don’t use it.  Tried for a while but just not worth the time fighting with such an awful UI.


    edited May 2019 avon b7
  • Reply 23 of 29
    arlomediaarlomedia Posts: 271member
    I was quite excited about the screen time feature when it was announced.  Once it tried it though, I was appalled at just how bad the interface is. I don’t use it.  Tried for a while but just not worth the time fighting with such an awful UI.
    Not only is it a bad UI, but the actual functionality is really limited compared to third-party apps. I tried it on my daughter's phone thinking I could save a few bucks from my OurPact subscription, but after a week of trying to make it do what we needed, I gave up and went back to OurPact.
  • Reply 24 of 29
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,564member
    the monk said:

    Haha! What!?! First, I disagree with the companies on this issue and I said so. Reread. I was making the comment about the wasting money and time in the court system, when you should just take care of it in a few days in public discussion. 

    but hey, that’s alright, we all get into tirades. I know I’ve done it.
    Perhaps I was having a little tirade and it's extremely generous of you to offer that you have done the same thing. If everyone in the world was like you in this post I think we would have lots of peace in this world. On the Internet it's extremely easy to go into tirades especially when one's real name isn't given. If it helps, consider my quote of your post to be retracted; I think my post still carries a useful point without referring to yours.
  • Reply 25 of 29
    the monkthe monk Posts: 93member
    the monk said:
    lkrupp said:
    If they have a case then let them sue Apple and see. Looks to me like they’re just trying to pressure Apple through public opinion.
    Well, uh, yeah, considering the number of cases before the courts and the amount of money small companies would have to spend to sue Apple. I'm not in favor of their position, but you cannot just use the usual, "then just sue them" as a simple way to negate a point of view. And public opinion is not a bad way to settle issues. I mean, why do we have the First Amendment and these forums?
    Responsible public debate, yes.  Not deception by leaving out important points, like that MDM is specifically stated to be used in enterprise, not personal apps. 
    And your answer proves my point. In public debate, you cannot expect all parties to be honest. Your fact checking here is the point of view that will most likely prevail due to a free discussion of different points of views. Less expensive than a court case, you would agree?
  • Reply 25 of 29
    the monkthe monk Posts: 93member
    the monk said:
    lkrupp said:
    If they have a case then let them sue Apple and see. Looks to me like they’re just trying to pressure Apple through public opinion.
    Well, uh, yeah, considering the number of cases before the courts and the amount of money small companies would have to spend to sue Apple. I'm not in favor of their position, but you cannot just use the usual, "then just sue them" as a simple way to negate a point of view. And public opinion is not a bad way to settle issues. I mean, why do we have the First Amendment and these forums?
    Responsible public debate, yes.  Not deception by leaving out important points, like that MDM is specifically stated to be used in enterprise, not personal apps. 
    In public debate, you cannot expect everyone to be "responsible." You cannot outlaw that. And your retort will prove my point, as I believe it will be accepted point of view, and this is due to free discussion of all points of view, lies and truths. Less expensive than a drawn out case before U.S. law, right?
  • Reply 27 of 29
    Roy_ARoy_A Posts: 3unconfirmed, member
    I'm not sure if Apple really understand how important it is to have proper accountability and filtering app for iPhone users. If Apple doesn't allow MDM they should work together with those vendors and find a solution.
  • Reply 28 of 29
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,179member
    the monk said:
    lkrupp said:
    If they have a case then let them sue Apple and see. Looks to me like they’re just trying to pressure Apple through public opinion.
    Well, uh, yeah, considering the number of cases before the courts and the amount of money small companies would have to spend to sue Apple. I'm not in favor of their position, but you cannot just use the usual, "then just sue them" as a simple way to negate a point of view. And public opinion is not a bad way to settle issues. I mean, why do we have the First Amendment and these forums?
    Responsible public debate, yes.  Not deception by leaving out important points, like that MDM is specifically stated to be used in enterprise, not personal apps. 
    Apple has stepped back a bit from their original statement. Very recently they've modified their stance to allow for using MDM in parental control apps under certain scenarios. So now it will be decided on a per-app basis, with Apple still insisting of course that any data shared with the developer not be used for ad/promotional activities as well they should. 
Sign In or Register to comment.