Hacker News Reader

Comment by untog | Hacker News Reader

Presumably such services won't implement Sign In With Apple in the first place. People will accept it because they want the sheer quantity of users Apple provides.

The useful thing about Apple is that they can force people to do things they don't particularly want to do, like accept anonymous e-mail addresses or stop using Flash. (unfortunately this is also the bad thing about Apple)

View on HN

"[Sign In with Apple] will be required as an option for users in apps that support third-party sign-in when it is commercially available later this year." https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=06032019j

Sign in, but not sign up? I guess some apps will not allow accounts to be created through the iOS app. Much like netflix stopped allowing sign up on iOS [https://gadgets.ndtv.com/entertainment/news/netflix-ios-app-...]

There by, when apple passes a XXXXXXX@privaterelay.appleid.com address back, it won't match the existing account's email address = Sorry, matching account not found ?

One other thing that seems powerful is that users that use Sign In With Apple have some guarantee of quality; with Apple using FaceId to authenticate, there's some amount of guarantee that you're not a bot.

I think this is something that people are missing when they suggest services will just block the Apple relay address.

Of course they wont. They still want the business and as you've pointed out, these accounts will be in a different customer engagement category. They are almost certainly real people and they a lot of value to marketers, even is you don't have all of their other personal details.

Since when do Apple IDs require 3-D cameras to log in to? Mine only needs a password. I don't think my MacBook even does 3D face recognition.

Or they already rely on FB login and are now _obligated_ by Apple to implement this feature. I work for a company that has allowed people to create accounts with FB login (meaning we don’t have an internal password associated with them). This change would ostensibly require us to also allow Apple Sign In _even if we don’t want to_ just to continue to service existing users.

There really isn’t much choice here for us. Leave Apple / iOS? Abandon FB login and piss off thousands of people? Implement Apple Sign In regardless of its tech stack / requirements?

As someone who also run a service where the only login option is using Facebook, I'm curious about how you regard the negative press regarding Facebook, the recommendations to leave Facebook, and the many users who is sceptic to or has already left Facebook.

Do you have any plans to adopt any other login provider? I would really like to, but other than email/password, I'm not really sure what would be a good alternative, and I'd really like not having any personal information stored at all - email addresses included.

We let people create a username/password but can also use FB if they prefer. Turns out having their email is nice; we need to send them notices and reminders from time-to-time.

I’m not a FB fan. I post on social media maybe twice a year. As an advertiser I don’t trust the numbers they report. None of my criticisms of Apple in this decision should be interpreted as pro-FB. I just have a very strong distaste for Apple deciding that they get to decide how we run our apps.

They have to mandate usage because it’s the only way devs will do it. And it seems like a fine enough product for Apple-only hardware. But when you get to supporting multiple connected devices it falls apart. Are they going to support this for PCs? What about on the Roku? How will anyone who uses Apple Sign In on the iPhone log in anywhere else?

Thank you for the reply! I think I've landed on implementing a local login strategy as well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com