[IkmoIkmo]

I think that's fine. What's not fine is removing the app itself from the app store as it was generating $45k a year, the same week of releasing its competing app.

Either you remove it because it's against the TOS, anytime in the 1.5 years that the app existed, or leave it be. Don't 'coincidentally' remove it the same week you release a competing app. That's just nonsense.

[scarface74]

I don’t care how much it was generating. It was a severe invasion of privacy. If that’s how they made their money, nothing of value was lost.

[Jack000]

It's an invasion of privacy if the tracking is unsolicited. It's not an invasion of privacy if the tracking is the point of the app.

The app had paying users, it clearly had value to some people.

[rhinoceraptor]

The average user will not understand the implications of the tracking. And even if the tracking is benevolent today, who's to say that won't change when the company is acquired in six months?

[scarface74]

See Onava.

[em-bee]

then it should have never been allowed in the first place

[scarface74]

So Apple should have thought of every possible rule when the App Store opened in mid 2008?

[em-bee]

well no, but the removal of permissions could come with some warning so that developers have time to adapt and find other ways to solve the problem. if the developers would have known ahead of time they would have been able to invest their efforts into other directions.

[matt-attack]

The problem is that the moment iOS released Screen Time, their app instantly sat in violation of the TOS. You cannot recreate built-in functionality.

[scarface74]

I don’t know why this keeps coming up. There are apps that “duplicate” note, reminders, music, calendar, video, podcasts, etc.

There are even Siri Intents for most of them and many more in iOS 13.

[ihuman]

It was removed after the feature was announced because that was also when they changed the App Store guidelines. Previously it did not violate the rules.