[InsomniacL]

I don't use smart watches but I have an example on the trackers.

Tile created trackers and every so often I get an annoying popup

> ~"Tile has been using your location, do you want to stop this?"

Apple then created a competitor product, 'AirTags', but their product does not have these popups.

This is anti-competitive because Apple bypass the restrictions they made on their platform for their product that their competitive have to follow.

[jorvi]

Longest-running example is Apple Maps displaying mapping on the lockscreen and having special bespoke turn-by-turn notifications, using a private API to which no other navigation app has access to.

The other big one is Apple muscling itself into the music streaming market by converting Music.app into Apple Music. In a fair world, Apple would have been required to show a pop-up that offered Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, Deezer etc. in a random order. You can’t unmake an omelette, so I feel Apple should be forced to pay billions to these competing services as recompense.

[HumblyTossed]

> Longest-running example is Apple Maps displaying mapping on the lockscreen and having special bespoke turn-by-turn notifications, using a private API to which no other navigation app has access to.

This is a huge one! I love this feature, but really would like to see it shared with Google and Waze.

[positus]

People know how to use the App Store. If they want Spotify they know how to find it. It is by no means unfair, immoral, or unethical for a company to prefer and promote their own products.

On a personal note, I never in my life want to see advertisements for third-party software by default.

[oarsinsync]

> On a personal note, I never in my life want to see advertisements for third-party software by default.

You might want to avoid buying any new Apple products then, or your iPhone settings screen will regularly show you adverts for free trials for Apple News, Apple TV, Apple fitness, Apple Arcade.

Better still, unlike every other free trial in this ecosystem, these terminate the moment you cancel the trial, rather than at the end of the trial period.

[jorvi]

> People know how to use the App Store.

Apparently they didn’t because Apple Music boomed right after that change.

> It is by no means unfair, immoral, or unethical for a company to prefer and promote their own products.

It is when that company is one part of a duopoly, especially for a device pretty critical to daily life :+)

> On a personal note, I never in my life want to see advertisements for third-party software by default.

It’s a one-time pop-up, on opening the music app the first time. Same as the browser choice pop-up on your desktop. Hardly an advertisement.

[positus]

> Apparently they didn’t because Apple Music boomed right after that change.

I wonder how much offering discounted subscriptions to students or iCloud Family users also contributed to its success.

> It’s a one-time pop-up, on opening the music app the first time. Same as the browser choice pop-up on your desktop. Hardly an advertisement.

I don't like browser selection options either. Then again, I tend to use Apple's default apps unless I have an unusual reason to use something else.

[bluk]

> It is by no means unfair, immoral, or unethical for a company to prefer and promote their own products.

Unfairness is at the heart of so many antitrust lawsuits (whether successful or not). Anyone old enough to recall Microsoft in the 1990s would say that many people (not at MSFT) were pointing out how unfair bundling Internet Explorer was. You may disagree but it was one of the reasons MSFT got sued.

[tssge]

>On a personal note, I never in my life want to see advertisements for third-party software by default.

Maybe I misunderstood your point, but could you clarify a bit what you mean? If I open App Store on my iPhone, it is full of third-party software advertisements by default and I don't even know if they can be turned off.

[positus]

After downloading the software that I know I need I rarely ever open the App Store. I really only do for updates every once in a while. I don't mind them in the App Store because that is an appropriate place for them. Seeing them as apart of the normal platform UI (Microsoft Start menu, looking at you) is distasteful. I go out of my way to avoid advertisements both on and off the internet and my QOL has improved greatly as a result.

[Dylan16807]

> After downloading the software that I know I need I rarely ever open the App Store.

> Seeing them as apart of the normal platform UI (Microsoft Start menu, looking at you) is distasteful.

Then it doesn't sound like a one-time prompt as part of setup would be an issue.

[cush]

It is when they charge those companies 30%. It’s a competitive advantage only a monopoly can sustain

[heavyset_go]

You already see them on the App Store.

[mock-possum]

RIP lala.com, my first and favorite music streaming service - bought out by apple and summarily closed with previous users encouraged to migrate to Apple Music. I think I got a $15 credit or something. As if I needed a reason to further resent Apple.

[mattl]

> by converting Music.app into Apple Music

Apple made iTunes (which already supported Apple Music) into a dedicated Music app, and offloaded some of the other stuff iTunes could do into separate apps and the Finder.

[jorvi]

I’m mostly talking about iOS. Mac market share isn’t too huge, but iPhone market share in the US (where Apple Music exploded in user count immediately after) is.

Ordinarily I hate market interventions like this, but with iOS+Android being a duopoly, we don’t have a free market so special rules start to apply.

[ssully]

Not saying this to defend Apple, but last week I had that same location tracking pop up for Apples Weather app.

[rezonant]

Yes but that doesn't distract from the airtags issue, because airtags are supported by the OS itself, not a specific app. Good on Apple for applying the same rules to it's apps, but not so good on Apple for not giving Tile a way to work in the same manner as airtags.

[shagie]

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/05/04/tile-ceo-on-competition...

> > The main points of differentiation of AirTags vis a vis Tile are enabled by platform capabilities that we don't have access to.

> Apple has, in fact, launched the Find My network that gives third-party accessories some of the same access that AirTags have, and Find My network accessories will be able to access the U1 chip in the iPhone 11 and 12 models much like the AirTags, but Tile won't be able to use the Find My network unless it abandons its own app and infrastructure, which it is likely unwilling to do.

> Prober said that Tile has been "seeking to access" the U1 chip since its introduction in the iPhone , and has been denied.

---

Here's the developer docs for accessing the U1 chip https://developer.apple.com/documentation/nearbyinteraction/...

... and a presentation on the use of the U1 chip with 3rd party accessories at WWDC 2021 https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2021/10165/

[rezonant]

This is different. This is Apple saying use our network, not allowing Tile to use their own.

[shagie]

Using the U1 chip for precise location finding in the local area doesn't appear to require using the Find My network for items. That API has been opened up to all 3rd party developers - probably not initially (the "we can't get access to the U1 chip" was from May 4th, 2019. It was opened up to 3rd party developers with iOS 16 ( https://www.macrumors.com/2022/07/20/ios-16-expands-u1-enabl... ).

For "find my" integration this would suggest two things.

First, that Find My should also query some 3rd party services for location of items - that I should be able to register a 3rd party with a standard API (akin to IMAP for email) that has location tracking info. That's reasonable - I look forward to a standard (and secure) API that doesn't leak my own location data when querying it.

Secondly, if it was "I want tiles to seamlessly be found by Apple devices just like AirTags are - the entire Apple network can find them" this gets into a question of how much cryptography and security would Apple need to open up to have 3rd party BLE devices ping to other services outside of their control that may leak the location information of people walking past them. Why should {arbitrary phone creator} need to ping a 3rd party whenever someone comes within range of the BLE device? That is, if Android devices aren't required to ping Apple's Find My network when in range of an AirTag, why should Apple be required to ping Tile's servers when in range of a Tile?

[rezonant]

> how much cryptography and security would Apple need to open up to have 3rd party BLE devices ping to other services outside of their control that may leak the location information of people walking past them.

None, simply proxy it through Apple's existing servers and do not include any information about the device that found the tracker. If you are worried about rogue devices telling iPhone to ping rogue services, then just add a service whitelist to the scheme: Apple trusts Google's service and Tile's service, Google trusts Apple's service and Tile's service, but <random URL> isn't going to get pinged.

Now just make a process by which you prove legitimacy in order to get added to the list and require platform approval.

> Why should {arbitrary phone creator} need to ping a 3rd party whenever someone comes within range of the BLE device?

Because if every phone could ping the network associated with every tracker, then the strength of the network is all participating devices, not just OEM's brand. Apple gets the benefit of having a better Find My network outside the US where Android dominates, and Android gets the benefit of a better Find My network inside the US where iPhone dominates.

> That is, if Android devices aren't required to ping Apple's Find My network when in range of an AirTag, why should Apple be required to ping Tile's servers when in range of a Tile?

Required is a strong word, but Android should ping Apple's network when it sees an airtag, and I bet Google would take that deal if it were available.

All this is sidelong to the point though, that Tile cannot build an app that iPhone users can use that can tie into the beacon functionality the iPhone is already doing in order to enable Tile users with iPhones (that is, those iPhone users with the Tile app installed) have as reliable and friction-free an experience as iPhone users have with airtags.

[InsomniacL]

> probably not initially

Apple giving their tracking product a 3 or 4 year head start over it's competitors.

If you're going to compete against other products on your platform, give it a level playing field.

[HumblyTossed]

Also, Apple licenses out the Find My tech to other trackers. But... you don't get the new precision finding features.

[shagie]

> But... you don't get the new precision finding features.

https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2021/10165/ appears to suggest differently.

[HumblyTossed]

Maybe it's new because existing ones that work with Find My cannot.

[shagie]

They have to buy the chips (and integrate them) from a vendor like https://www.st.com/en/wireless-connectivity/ultra-wideband-p... or https://www.nxp.com/applications/enabling-technologies/conne...

It isn't something that any device can do by default. For example, Samsung integrated it into their Smart Tags ( https://www.androidpolice.com/samsung-smarttag-2-uwb/ )

[cpuguy83]

Not really defending Apple here since they do have an unfair advantage over on these trackers.

But even the weather app triggers that same location pop up.

[lotsofpulp]

I would bet most people already know using an Apple product and agreeing to the Find My and other terms in intial setup means Apple is always tracking you. So a pop up from Apple saying that Apple is tracking you makes no sense, it is already known, and accepted by the device user.

Someone other than Apple tracking you, however, is notable, and so people (at least I) would always want to know if someone other than Apple is tracking me via software operating on the device.

[InsomniacL]

I would bet most people buying tracking devices know those tracking devices are tracking location.

The point is Apple as a platform provider made something (location without warning) on the platform available to themselves as a platform user (Airtags), that they didn't make available to other platform users who are their competitors (Tile).

[jchw]

But, some Apple apps do in fact tell you that. This actually does make sense, too. When you collect information for one specific reason, it doesn't mean the user has granted you consent to use it for other purposes carte blanche.

One might retort "Fine, but then granting that permission once is enough." Apparently, that is only true sometimes, and only for Apple.

[Draiken]

Why? Because a user allowed them to track them when using one app, it doesn't mean should extend automatically that to every app they ever develop.

This is clearly Apple apps being treated differently.

[lotsofpulp]

>Why? Because a user allowed them to track them when using one app, it doesn't mean should extend automatically that to every app they ever develop.

The whole point of the notification is to notify you when an entity is tracking you. If you already know Apple is tracking you, then it does not make a difference if Apple's App A or App B or App C is tracking you, it is all Apple.

[Draiken]

I must be missing something because that's simply not true in Android. I can individually grant/revoke tracking permissions for each app. I assumed the same would be true for iPhone.

For me it makes no sense to make it only about the entity. It's like saying "the US government is tracking you", instead of saying "the US government is tracking you through this app right now"

[positus]

I'm pretty sure you're asked whether or not you want to enable Location Services when going through Setup Assistant during the initial device provisioning.