

New iPhone Dev Agreement Bans the Use of Third-Party Analytics and Services - erickerr
http://erickerr.com/iphone-agreement-thirdparty

======
iamcalledrob
This is just not fair to developers.

Apple is changing the rules half way through the game, to the benefit of
nobody.

I can't think of a developer OR end user who will be better off as a result of
this decision. It's an innovation stifler and I can't understand why they are
doing it.

This kills location aware 3rd party advertising.

As the article also says, looks like this will wipe out SimpleGeo. A sad day.

~~~
Zev
Yet this is completely fair to _consumers_ who buy the application. Some
welcome protection for them against unscrupulous developers or ad agencies.

This change of the rules makes a ton of sense; with location-aware
backgrounding (applications waking up and getting a notice when you change
locations), it would be _very_ easy for an agency to track where you're going
and in turn sell it to someone else to make a quick buck.

~~~
luchak
But, somehow, as a consumer, I don't get any protection against Apple.

Hmm.

~~~
Zev
With something like $30 billion in cash in the bank, Apple's one of the
companies that I'm not worried about selling information in order to make a
quick buck. After all, aren't people always saying that Microsoft should use
the privacy angle against Google? Why not Apple as well?

~~~
smallblacksun
Generally companies don't get $30 billion in cash by turning down
opportunities to make money.

~~~
Counter
Umm, did you bother reading Apple's financials before tossing out that piece
of FUD? The vast bulk of Apple's financials, and that $30 billion in cash,
comes from hardware sales. Call me crazy, but i think it makes sense to
protect a profit source from unsavory types building who-knows-what from data
collected in the background.

~~~
jasonlotito
Hardware with their software on top of it, and their experience all around.
Remove the software on top of it, and you have hardware that is priced much
higher than it should be.

~~~
kiiski
Naturally. If you remove half of a product while keeping the same price, it's
bound to be overpriced. Software isn't free (unless it is free...).

~~~
jasonlotito
Keep in mind what I'm replying to. The argument is that 'bulk' of the money
Apple makes is from hardware sales. Remove the hardware sales, and Apple
doesn't make much money. My argument is that if you removed the software, they
wouldn't be making the hardware sales. People aren't buying Apple for the
hardware. They are buying it for the complete package.

Even you admit as much by suggesting they are removing half the product.

------
jws
Good for the first one: I don't want joe's random app sending tracking data on
me to ned's random service provider to sell to anyone with 50 cents.

The second one doesn't prevent analytics. _Device Data_ is a keyword in the
contract…

 _"Device Data" means data or information regarding the characteristics or
usage of a particular device, including but not limited to UDID, crash logs,
OS version, carrier name, hardware model, installed applications and
application usage data._

… so you can't provide a vector for a third party, not bound by your agreement
to respect the user's privacy, to loot the device of useful information. Good!
You are allowed to collect and use this data, you just have to respect
applicable privacy laws and handle notice and consent according to the
contract.

The key is, you can't bind some random analytics firm. If you include code
that dumps that out to a third party firm they are free to do whatever they
want.

So create a UUID the first time you run, send only that to the analytics firm.
Leave the _Device Data_ alone. I suspect this would pass, though it is
possible it would fail under the "application usage data" section.

One could imagine some extreme interpretation where Apple is trying to prevent
any information about which apps are installed being divulged to anyone, but
there are so many unaddressed vectors (e.g. loading an ad from an ad server)
that it seems unlikely.

------
joshwa
I was (if not sympathetic, at least) understanding until this.

At what point do all these restrictions start becoming truly anti-competitive?
Locking out 3rd party tools and services in favor of in-house products, and
this one now including the actual revenue-generating ones.

If you start to view the App Store as a collection of _markets_ (e.g. for
development tools, application niches, ancillary services like ads, analytics,
web services, etc), rather than just a vendor-specific platform, where Apple's
own products compete with other vendors', the analogies to Microsoft are
becoming clearer:

\- _iPhone OS/App Store = > Windows_

Markets analogous to Internet Explorer vs. Opera/Firefox:

\- iAd vs AdMob

\- iBooks vs Kindle (an example where they're actually allowing competition!)

\- Phone.app vs Google Voice

\- MobileSafari vs Opera/FF

\- ObjC runtime vs Flash runtime (this one stretches it a bit, but not that
far)

Whereas MS's anti-competitive actions involved threatening OEMs, Apple is
exercising actual contractual control over what Apps/services can participate
in the market, Period. That should certainly qualify as anti-competitive
behavior.

------
ryanhuff
I understand the angst that this is causing, considering the news from
yesterday, but really, who wants their location data sold to some 3rd party
for the purpose of ad targeting? Not me! I think this is a good move for
consumers, despite the negative impact it may have on some application
developers (ad networks).

~~~
cheald
The location data is a little iffy, but defensible. The real problem is the
third-party analytics clause.

Ad companies are, at their core, analytics companies. By understanding your
audience, you serve higher-potency ads, which means you can charge more for
their placement, and developers have a higher incentive to use them. Companies
like Google and AdMob are analytics companies. By understanding an audience,
they can serve relevant content (ads). If they can't understand the audience
because collection of metrics is prohibited, then their ability to act as an
effective ad provider is massively diminished. Ad revenues dive through the
floor and advertisers stop using the platform.

Enter iAd. We can provide you with detailed user analytics and possibly even
that coveted location data. Thanks to the new iPhone user agreement, we can
even tell you what size underwear a user wears, and how many eggs they had for
breakfast. We will give you returns on your ads that you have never before
dreamed of. Stop using those wimpy ad companies that can't give you an ROI on
their blind-targeted ads to save their life. Use iAd and make more money for
us.

It's very difficult to interpret this as anything but a move aimed to
invalidate other advertising platforms on the iPhone, in order to make room
for iAd as the only viable choice.

------
cheald
That's pretty unambiguous. The subtext there is "Thou shalt not use anything
except iAd" (since companies like AdMob are as much analytics as they are
ads). Gonna be really interesting to see how this shakes out.

------
Qz
What's funny here is that in many respects, Apple is treating App Developers
as if they are full on Apple employees, and yet without any of the actual
benefits of employment.

~~~
Terretta
Who writes the checks makes the rules, and ultimately, for apps, it's
consumers that write the checks and consumers that benefit from this change.

Consumers don't write Facebook's checks, companies like Offerpal do:
[http://www.businessinsider.com/offerpal-coincidentally-
repla...](http://www.businessinsider.com/offerpal-coincidentally-replaces-
ceo-2009-11)

So the differences between Apple's users' data policies and Facebook's become
clearer.

Meanwhile, to receive the money, obey the rules. It's simple.

------
tptacek
_Good_. The alternative is a managerie of different ad networks all collecting
sensitive data about me. I'm unambiguously in favor of Apple not allowing new
location-aware ad tracking networks.

~~~
swannodette
I agree. I find these clauses to be the exact opposite of 3.3.1, they are
ethical and they show a laudable concern for a user's data and privacy. A
welcome stance in this day and age.

~~~
nolanbrown23
That's not true, as a developer I'm well within my right to collect every
piece of data I can get my hands on. That being said, I personally never
would.

Apple is just banning the competition for analysis of said data so they can be
the only game in town and "control the user experience" as they like to call
it. I wouldn't be surprised if iAd included an analytics dashboard when it's
released to the public.

~~~
Counter
As a developer, you are well within your right to understand the rules. I
think Apple is doing a good job of protecting its users from money-hungry
developers -- Facebook is a good example of what can go wrong.

------
jazzychad
So, does this mean that I can't use something like MixPanel to track
activities users make in my apps? I'm not so fluent in legalese... What if I
don't track any "user-specific" data... just tracking aggregate events like
"how many people clicked this button in this part of the app today"?

------
orangecat
This just keeps getting better. Although it's worth noting that none of these
policy changes actually make a practical difference; Apple has always reserved
the right to reject your app for any or no reason. They're now just making it
obvious that they intend to do so for blatantly anticompetitive purposes, as
opposed to purposes that could plausibly be defended as benefitting users.

------
sonpo
Is Apple just trying to regain control over every possible facet of the app
store? Banning all third-party analytics from apps sounds huge, so if I am
missing something then please enlighten me. I thought the location-based data
verbiage was just one example of something not allowed.

This would affect far more than just ad companies, right? I understand that's
probably a motivating factor, but wouldn't this incorporate an even larger
subset of third party analytics companies (like Flurry / Pinch Media for
example)? The purpose of those companies is not the same purpose as the app
itself which rules them out. It could depend on the definition of "User Data"
and "Device Data" in the agreement, I suppose.

Third party gaming tools would seem to be safe at least.

~~~
gyardley
"User Data" means personal information, user location data, user content
(e.g., address book contacts, SMS messages, photos and calendar events) and/or
Device Data obtained by You or Your Application from a user of Your
Application or from such user's iPhone OS Product.

"Device Data" means data or information regarding the characteristics or usage
of a particular device, including but not limited to UDID, crash logs, OS
version, carrier name, hardware model, installed applications and application
usage data.

\---

Many third-party gaming tools do collect UDID (or a hash derived from the
UDID) since this is the only common identifier available across applications,
due to sandboxing.

Interpreted liberally, this affects anything that makes an HTTP request to a
third-party, since the application name ('application usage data') and the IP
address ('user location data') is in the headers.

------
joecode
_the use of third party software in Your Application to collect and send
Device Data to a third party for processing or analysis is expressly
prohibited_

I guess this is the Admob killer clause? Goes along nicely with the Adobe
Flash killer clause...

------
s3graham
"You think you're going to buy AdMob, eh? Well, I've got good news and bad
news."

------
davidcann
It sounds like someone should create a self-hosted iPhone analytics software
package. Perhaps one of the existing companies will release their software as
open source.

------
noelchurchill
I think Jobs is one paranoid mofo. If analytics is stored on 3rd party servers
then Google might decide to buy that company and their data and gain some
insight into the Apple app ecosystem. Launching Apple's own ad network and I
hope their own analytics system keeps all the data in their walled gardens. I
don't really care as long as I have some kind of app analytics.

------
twobar
Wouldn't this also ban OpenFeint as the leading competitor to apple's new Game
Center?

------
itjitj
Oh, Apple, your transformation is complete.

How long until Apple disbands the senate and declares martial law?

~~~
smackfu
Watch out for Supreme Chancellor Palpatine.

------
jzting
hm, so this might be why apple hasn't approved my flurry analytics app yet...

