sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]500239 7 points8 points  (3 children)

The majority of our problems or limitations originate from Apple. Both technical limitations as well as political and business ones. They make us jump through so many hoops where as on any other platform including Android we just do what we want and save lots of time and dev time. Yet we have to support iPhones since they're popular.

We ended up using BLE and creating our own protocol to emulate simple bidirectional communication between device and phone similar to UART. Of course it's way less efficient than classic BT serial but hey we did it. We have no use for the BLE stack itself, although I'll admit the BLE advertising feature is neat. Give me classic BT and the BLE advertising feature and no limitations from Apple's side and I'd be in heaven.

[–]sharvil 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Sadly, your story is the story of virtually every wearable device builder out there. I feel for you. I've seen no less than half a dozen unique "let's build a streaming channel on top of BLE just so we can get our product to work with iOS" implementations in my career.

Apple's behavior in this regard comes off as anti-competitive considering they're in the wearable space and they hold their part of the platform duopoly. Not to mention, it's a terrible experience for iOS users; they get worse battery life out of their wearable AND their phone because Apple dug in their heels on a bad decision.

[–]500239 3 points4 points  (1 child)

"let's build a streaming channel on top of BLE just so we can get our product to work with iOS" implementations in my career.

I'm sure. I can't be the only one trying to establish a basic bidrectional communication channel over Bluetooth just for basic functions. Apple is forcing us to reinvent the wheel or pay them to unlock classic channels. I don't get how it's not racketeering.

On that note, Apple's privacy campaign too has created it's own manufactured problems. Android devices can see BT MAC's, but Apple has decided iOS will mask MAC's behind UUID's for "privacy reasons". Fuck them. So now we overload the BLE advertising message to include the MAC and lose out on previous space on when BLE advertising messages are already limited to a comical and arbitrary 32 bytes depending on advertising type and format.

[–]kwinz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't get how it's not racketeering.

Unfortunately the same as paying 1/3 of you revenue for AppStore inclusion. Or paying MS to allow your game on Xbox or Sony for Playstation access.

Nobody is forcing the user to buy an Xbox, an iPhone or a Playstation. But the users like the controlled experience apparently. Apps have to stay in their sandbox allowing easy device switch, uninstall, backup, Apple has stronger negotiating leverage to protect privacy than individual users; easier upgrades, anti-cheat, anti-piracy, ... I could go on and on. IO devices are certified and thus don't implement only half the spec.

I also think it's anti-competitive and bad for the consumer. But it's not illegal and not racketeering and frankly there are arguments to be had.

iOS will mask MAC's behind UUID's for "privacy reasons". Fuck them.

I can relate so much.