[HN Gopher] Apple Gave Zoom Access to Special API for Camera Dur...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Apple Gave Zoom Access to Special API for Camera During Split View
       Multitasking
        
       Author : bleair
       Score  : 24 points
       Date   : 2021-05-11 18:22 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.macrumors.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.macrumors.com)
        
       | latexr wrote:
       | Quick reminder that Zoom has a history of bad practices[1] and
       | that Apple themselves pushed a macOS update to undo some of their
       | shenanigans[2].
       | 
       | [1]:
       | https://gist.github.com/dacruz21/dd2480f195f5b48a9ab7af8b41c...
       | 
       | [2]: https://9to5mac.com/2019/07/10/zoom-apple-macos-update/
        
       | interestica wrote:
       | Reminders:
       | 
       | On the web, if you click "launch" 3x and kill the pop-up, Zoom
       | will then present a link for its web-based client.
       | 
       | And https://meet.jit.si/ has been a great open source alternative
       | that you can roll out on your own server if desired.
        
       | zepto wrote:
       | It's completely normal in software development to work with a
       | limited set of partners to develop and test APIs before they are
       | made available publicly. The reasons for this are fairly obvious,
       | and Apple has never made it a secret that they do so. They talk
       | about it openly at WWDC.
       | 
       | The idea that APIs should always be available to either nobody or
       | everybody simply ignores the reality of how software is built.
        
         | splatzone wrote:
         | It may be the reality, do you think it's fair on competing apps
         | that Zoom gets an edge?
        
           | zepto wrote:
           | It's a question that continues the misunderstanding.
           | 
           | Zoom gets to be a partner in this because they had an 'edge'
           | already in terms of having good product market fit and a huge
           | customer base. That's what makes them a good parter to help
           | develop the api.
           | 
           | I could today create a simple video chat app, but it would be
           | silly for Apple to make me a partner in their development
           | process because I know nothing about the users of video chat
           | and have no customers.
           | 
           | There is no benefit to the world in me just cloning Zoom, so
           | access to a small feature refinement makes no difference.
           | 
           | Generally being one of the best at what you do gives you an
           | edge because people value your experience and want to work
           | with you.
           | 
           | That is fair.
        
             | m00x wrote:
             | > There is no benefit to the world in me just cloning Zoom,
             | so access to a small feature refinement makes no
             | difference.
             | 
             | The issue is that Apple can pick and choose whoever they
             | want which is anti-competitive. It's certainly not the
             | first time they've done this, but it's a shitty business
             | tactic.
             | 
             | Everyone should have the same opportunities.
        
             | jraph wrote:
             | If you develop APIs that requires feedback and testing,
             | what forces you to keep it secret instead of making it
             | public and clearly marking it as beta / experimental?
             | 
             | > There is no benefit to the world in me just cloning Zoom
             | 
             | There is no benefit in preventing you from using these API.
             | What if you clone Zoom, with a better business model and/or
             | making it open source?
             | 
             | Or if you create a product that finds an unforeseen
             | application to these new APIs? Your feedback is valuable
             | too.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | > If you develop APIs that requires feedback and testing,
               | what forces you to keep it secret instead of making it
               | public and clearly marking it as beta / experimental?
               | 
               | The fact that you want feedback from only people you
               | trust.
               | 
               | > There is no benefit to the world in me just cloning
               | Zoom > > There is no benefit in preventing you from using
               | these API.
               | 
               | Yes there is. If the APIs are not ready, then developers
               | cannot rely on them.
               | 
               | Making them available has costs, regardless of how they
               | are labeled.
               | 
               | > What if you clone Zoom, with a better business model
               | and/or making it open source?
               | 
               | You can do that just as well once the APIs are public.
               | 
               | > Or if you create a product that finds an unforeseen
               | application to these new APIs? Your feedback is valuable
               | too.
               | 
               | It's possible that there is some unforeseen feedback from
               | a random person that is valuable, but given that most
               | people have no incentive to give good feedback, most of
               | the feedback will likely be garbage.
               | 
               | This is why they partner with people who have proven
               | experience.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-11 23:02 UTC)