[dfar1]

That and the fact that any app you download now adds you to their newsletter list. Just because I wanted to try your app, it doesn't mean I want to get tons e-mails from your company. It's so frustrating I stopped trying apps, and instead only download what I really need and/or trust.

[creichert]

Have you ever tried to make a business out of selling an app online or in an app store? How did you get users?

I definitely don't agree with "tons" of e-mails but a few promotional emails is understandable. I also don't agree with the tactics used in the article, to be clear.

[chris_7]

Why is the company's inability to get users my problem? Those emails get flagged and placed in spam, where they belong? Spam is never "understandable". Get an (explicit, non-dark-pattern) opt in or you're spam.

[creichert]

Do you consider signing up to use an app with your email opt-in?

[chris_7]

Absolutely not. I flag those as spam.

Unless it's an email notification from the service because of an action someone took... those are okay but I'd prefer them to be off-by-default.

[cmdrfred]

I just use a spare domain as a catchall in the form of "[e-mail]" then ban that address if it gets too chatty.

[copperx]

The App Store doesn't share the customer's email with the app developer, how does this happen?

[ClassyJacket]

Android.

Until Marshmallow it had no permission system at all - every app gets access to everything it wants. That's every contact's full details, your full details, all your SMS messages, your location at all times, your email address (you could see a list of what they access, at least, but couldn't stop them).

It finally became more iOS-like in Marshmallow, but first your phone has to actually get the update, then the app has to actually update to target Marshmallow or above. It doesn't retroactively apply to older apps, and Google didn't enforce that apps start supporting it - they only have to if they want to use Marshmallow specific features.

(You do have the option of manually blocking access in Settings, but you have to actively do it for every app before the app ever runs, and you'll get warnings that the app might simply break).

It's something I've frequently pointed to when Android users said that "Android gets everything first". I was enjoying my permission system back in 2008.

It's the main reason I use an iPhone, it's actually why I switched back after some time using Android (after the iPhone finally got custom keyboards). Finally, as more and more apps update, Android will become viable for me again. However, I still take issue with having to put my real name on app reviews on Android.

[hehheh]

Android pre-M had a permission system, it's just that the permissions had to be granted by the user when the app was installed (or updated, if there was a change). Many or most users didn't read the warnings or didn't care. I'd wager most users don't read the new permission dialogs, either, but what're ya gonna do.

[mehrdada]

It had a "permission system" that in effect did not provide the user with any practical choice. The non-choice was between "install this app and give everything it wants (even in the background)" and "piss off".

[ClassyJacket]

I did include that in my comment. The "system" was the list of things the app got access to if you installed it. And that's it. You couldn't grant or not grant permissions, it was just a warning of what was going to happen either way if you installed it. And essential apps like Facebook would ask for absurd permissions like phone.

The only choice you had was "install the app anyway" or "don't install".

[capkutay]

A lot of apps require email to sign up...

[scarface74]

How would an app you download get your email or get any personally identifiable information that you didn't explicitly allow it to have?