Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Google could do this now across their suite of apps by using iOS's keychain APIs.

Yup. Instead of being an Apple problem, it's a Google one. I wonder if users would even notice that they didn't have to log in multiple times, and more worrisome, if that would bother them that they didn't.

Right, exactly. Google could do this, if they shared a TeamID UUID. What they couldn't do is replace the built in Apple apps (Safari, Mail, Messages), which is a shame. Apple should document the data/API ins and outs of these apps so replacements could work in the same way. Power users should be able to replace Safari with Chrome, etc.

Forgive me fo veering off topic, but "power users" is such a horrible notion. It just makes me think of douchey know-it-alls with massively over inflated entitlement glands - especially those that consider themselves to be "power users". Again, apologies, I just really dislike the expression "power user" and I'm seeing it way too much on here lately.

I don't think it is douchey at all. 99% of people using these devices don't give a flying monkey fuck about replacing default apps. There is a very small segment of the population that uses all of the features of a device. Also, "Power User" is not a new term by a long shot.

I don't think that's true at all. I've talked to a lot of people who wonder when Google will come out with Chrome for iOS. Now that it's out, it's marked 17+ (because it escapes Apple's filter), can't be set as "default browser" and I imagine that it doesn't use v8 (used to be against the developer agreement; possible doesn't even use Nitro).

Apple has technical limitations in place to prevent alternatives from being as good as the default. A simple example is setting the default browser/email application. I'm not sure if this is still true, but Apple had a policy preventing 3rd party browsers from being anything more than a skin over Safari.

Since Apple is in complete control of the App Store and there aren't any 3rd party app stores, Apple has no incentive to allow alternatives to it's default applications.

What would apple gain from allowing that. I have a lot of family members that have iDevices and some of them can barely use the the basic featureset that is available on the phones. I also think the bar for a power user is pretty low as I would consider anyone who knows what a browser is and what it does, let alone have the thought "Hmm, I wish I could replace the default browser with Chrome" as a power user. Apple wouldn't have incentive to allow third party replacements anyway, because it would allow users to change the experience of using the device. Letting users do that, while giving expert users a lot of power, raises the complexity of the base device to a level apple doesn’t approve of.

I never said it was a new term, and I've always has a dislike for it, especially as it's use has evolved. It's gone from meaning sub-administrator to self-asserted expert user. The issue I have with the expression is more with those who consider themselves "power users", as in my experience it goes hand in hand with condescension and arrogance, an "I know best" attitude if you will.

yup, came here to say this and also - wonder - why haven't they done this already?

Great point. I wonder why they don't. I'm sure it's coming...

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact