[HN Gopher] Unlisted App Distribution
___________________________________________________________________
Unlisted App Distribution
Author : cglong
Score : 37 points
Date : 2022-01-28 19:56 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (developer.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (developer.apple.com)
| sorry_outta_gas wrote:
| mobile apps are so 10 years ago
| anfilt wrote:
| Just allow people to put their devices in a mode that allows side
| loading Apple or let people load their own signing keys. The fact
| Apple keeps such a tight grip on hardware they don't even own
| needs to be cracked down on.
| i_like_apis wrote:
| I love that they don't allow side-loading. Long live the walled
| garden. (I mean this non-sarcastically)
| netr0ute wrote:
| Ironic
| anfilt wrote:
| You really like the idea of a company controlling property
| you own after you bought it??? Like if its optional don't
| change the defaults.
|
| The issue is starting from the boot-rom apple is effectively
| using cryptography to retain the property right of exclusion
| when it comes to what code can run on that ARM cpu.
| Effectively you have to ask apple for approval of any code
| that will run on your own hardware. If they sign the code
| they allow it run if they don't its excluded from running. If
| you have to keep asking a 3rd party to do something with
| something you bought you don't fully own it.
|
| The thing is normally a seller wishing to retain some rights
| to real or tangible property would normally require a legal
| contract between the buyer. Here however apple is using
| cryptography to bypass traditional legal means. You can buy
| an iPhone, iPad without signing any contract. Yet this
| effectively retained control of the hardware still exists.
| You cant just buy the hardware and throw linux or android on
| it short of finding a weakness in how code is loaded.
| awinter-py wrote:
| heard u want to run software on your device you bought
| krono wrote:
| This document gives the how, could anyone here perhaps give us a
| why?
|
| Genuine curiosity, provisioning is not something I deal with
| much.
|
| There are so many paths that get you the same results, that don't
| require you to hand out full control to this ever fair and
| totally predictable friend of ours.
| [deleted]
| zerkten wrote:
| It's covered after the first paragraph of the article. There
| are lots of apps that could be published as public apps, but
| you don't want to add confusion to regular users. If Acme
| publish apps to the store for the public, they may not want
| their expenses app for employees to be listed alongside the
| apps.
|
| There are also very specialist apps that require sign-ins or
| accounts that aren't available to the public. You might have a
| messaging app for end users, but have an eDiscovery app that's
| only available for a few enterprise customers that relies on
| some access that regular user accounts don't have.
| joshstrange wrote:
| For those wondering this appears to be a new offering that sits
| between their enterprise offerings and app store accounts. Right
| now if you want to offer your internal app you need to host the
| IPA's, implement your own update mechanism, and get people to
| accept your developer deep in the Settings app. I'm guessing this
| lets you take advantage of Apple's update and hosting which makes
| sense for some apps I'm sure. One of the nicer things with
| enterprise is you don't need to go through app review (mainly the
| time savings, we can push a fix as quick as we can code it). This
| isn't something my company will use but it makes total sense for
| an internal app that doesn't need rapid release ability and saves
| you from a lot of management stuff you'd otherwise be on the hook
| for.
|
| Now all I want is Apple to have a better story for "template
| apps". I know we don't want more spam in the store but getting a
| company to setup and maintain an Apple Dev account when they are
| not a tech company can be rough. I've run into this issue both
| professionally and for side projects. I'd gladly give Apple $100
| per app and/or be unlisted if I could publish multiple builds of
| the same base "template app" on the same account. Maybe they will
| relax that restriction for unlisted apps, it still wouldn't cut
| it for some cases but for at least one of my side projects it
| would be perfect.
| tobyjsullivan wrote:
| Lest anyone else be confused as I was, this is not about opening
| Apple's walled garden. It seems these unlisted apps still require
| Apple's approval and, presumably, must meet their normal
| standards. The only benefit is that your app can be private and
| will not be listed in the app store.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-01-28 23:00 UTC)