How about a no/limited internet setting? So many apps spy on you and they don’t need network at all to function.
But it's only available in China.
https://tinyapps.org/blog/202209100700_ios_disable_wifi_per_...
I used that when submitting parental leave at work. I didn't want to provide full access to all my photos and files for work, so all they got was a folder with a pic of a birth certificate.
There's also the fact hardware remote attestation is creeping into the Android ecosystem. There's absolutely no way to daily drive something like GrapheneOS if essential services such as banks and messaging services start discriminating against you on the basis of it. Aw shucks looks like your phone has been tampered with so we're just gonna deny you access to your account, try again later on a corporation owned phone.
GrapheneOS is amazing from a security and privacy perspective but it doesn't matter. The corporations will not tolerate it because it works against their interests. They will ban you from their services for using it. Unlike Google and Apple, they have no leverage with which to force the corporations to accept terms unfavorable to them.
Apple is also pushing developers toward using native picker components. That way, you don't need to request consent at all, as you only get access to the specific object that the user has picked using a secure system component.
This is an interesting contrast with the earlier philosophy of phone OSes that the file system is confusing to users and they should never be allowed to see it.
From an user perspective, photos aren't files. Music isn't files. Contacts aren't files. Apps aren't files. App data isn't files.
The only things that "walk like a file and quack like a file" are documents, downloads, contents of external storage, network drives and cloud drives, and some Airdrop transfers.
Yes, it's technically possible to use the files app to store photos, music etc, but if you do that, "you're holding it wrong."
It's kind of weird that Apple introduced this big fat tracking consent popup, but they don't really do anything to actually prevent cross-app tracking...
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
This wording is actually a lot weaker than I remember it back when I wrote iOS apps. The developer also was not allowed to exit the app or close it against the user’s intent, however I can’t find that rule anymore.
> For example, if a user declines to share Location, offer the ability to manually enter an address.
This is a reasonable ability, but I think that the operating system should handle it anyways. When it asks for permission for your location, in addition to "allow" and "deny", you can select "manually enter location" and "custom" (the "custom" option would allow the user to specify their own program for handling access to that specific permission (or to simulate error conditions such as no signal); possibly the setting menu can have an option for "show advanced options" before "custom" will be displayed, if you think it would otherwise make it too complicated).
> that include the ability to post photos to a social network must not also require microphone access before allowing the user to upload photos
This is reasonable, that apps should not be allowed to require microphone access for such a thing.
However, sometimes a warning message makes sense but then to allow it anyways even if permission is not granted; e.g. for a video recording program, it might display a message about "Warning: microphone permission is not allowed for this app; if you proceed without enabling the microphone permission, the audio will not be recorded." Something similar would also apply if you denied camera permission but allowed microphone permission; in that case, only audio will be recorded. It might refuse to work if both permissions are denied, though.
I'm always wondering why these idiots force the creation of an account with their direct competitor. It's the only app I have that does this. But anyway I don't use their app for that reason, only use them a bit through API.