Apple Inc will ask developers to position a new “Sign on with Apple” button in iPhone and iPad apps above rival buttons from Alphabet Inc’s Google and Facebook Inc, according to design guidelines released this week.
The move to give Apple prime placement is significant because users often select the default or top option on apps. And Apple will require apps to offer its button if they want to offer options to login with Facebook or Google…
Many consumers choose to sign in to independent apps using their accounts from Google or Facebook because it saves the trouble of having to create and remember separate user names and passwords for dozens of different apps.
But the login buttons can send some data back to their makers about the user’s app habits. Apple’s software chief Craig Federighi said during a keynote address on Monday that Apple was seeking to give users a more private option and developers a way to offer a fast one-step login without sending their user’s data to another company…
Apple’s button also works on websites. Its use will not be required because Apple does not hold review power over websites the way it does apps on its own store, but Apple’s guidelines still ask it to be given top placement if it is used.
MacDailyNews Take: Good.
It’s past time for people to have a privacy-centric sign-in option. With Apple Apple generating random, one-time use email addresses and handling credentials management, users can finally protect their personal data when using mobile apps and online services. Sign In with Apple is “Apple ID for everyone” which will hopefully cut the data streams to the privacy-trampling Google and Facebook deeply.
We look forward to the hoi polloi finally waking up to privacy concerns, realizing that Only Apple offers the level of privacy protection that everyone should value and enjoy, and stop pissing it away to the likes of Google and Facebook.
More info about Sign In with Apple here.
I was personally hoping this would be in the guidelines. It will mean I don’t have to look past other options to get to the one I want.
The fact is they have to go in some order and this is the most logical as Apple is the platform provider. It shouldn’t be seen as anti-competitive as you can still very clearly see all of the other options. What would be anti-competitive is Apple hiding these other options or not allowing them altogether. Users still get a clear choice, in fact they get more choice and more control than ever.
I also have to wonder about the true motives of any developer that complains about Apple adding this new feature. Unless they need to leverage some additional feature from a social network (which they should make clear) there really shouldn’t be an issue with this.
Totally support Apple here with top placement. They just have to make sure to match anything any other option offers as compensation for placement or risk possible repercussions later.
is apple going to pay them for adding these buttons? in the same way google/facebook does via ad revenue?
this is a lofty idea, its good, but how many developers actually care.
Surprisingly many developers do care, having worked for a digital agency we found more people used a service when we did provide these options.
These account authorisation options make it a lot easier for users to sign up to new services without having to enter all their data again and it means one less place to manage their data.
For developers it’s important as it reduces the friction that can come with getting users to sign up to new services which is so important. It also means the user is to some extent authenticated already which further helps the developer. They also don’t have to create and manage accounts to such an extent.
I don’t think Apple needs to pay anyone to get this feature adopted and on their own platforms it’s now part of the App guidelines so you are going to see them anywhere where you see the social network sign-on button.
A remote possibility here, but if both Facebook and Google pay devs to place those authorization buttons and Apple ‘forces’ placement of their button w/o similar compensation via their guidelines, it may give fuel to the current anti-trust investigation.
If iPodOS and iOS are being split… Does that mean I’ll have to buy two version of apps?
Depending on how different the ‘forks’ are I suspect you will still only have one App version. The file size however may increase to support both efficiently.