Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Extent of iOS Restrictions on Third‑Party Watches

  • Many commenters say non‑Apple watches on iOS are “hobbled”: no replying to texts, limited notification actions, weaker background sync, and less integration than Apple Watch.
  • The same hardware paired to Android reportedly has far richer features, reinforcing the view that Apple is intentionally limiting iOS APIs for competitors.
  • A minority disputes the article’s absolutes, noting Bluetooth notification APIs (ANCS, MAP) do exist and can support dismissing notifications, media control, etc., but concede that true parity (e.g., full messaging) is blocked.

Garmin/Other Watch Experiences vs Apple Watch

  • Multiple Garmin users report stark differences: on Android they can reply to texts, filter which app notifications hit the watch, and enjoy reliable background sync; on iOS they often can only view and dismiss.
  • Some say their Garmin on iOS works “well enough,” but almost everyone agrees Apple Watch has significantly deeper system integration.
  • Meta’s Ray‑Ban glasses are cited as a possible counterexample (voice‑driven messaging), though others think they rely on app‑specific backends (e.g., WhatsApp) rather than OS‑level SMS/iMessage.

Security vs Competition Debate

  • Defenders argue Apple’s tight control and lack of open IPC/ble message APIs are necessary for iMessage security, anti‑spam, and “grandma‑proof” UX.
  • Critics respond that:
    • Apple already exposes similar power to its own apps and Macs (e.g., AppleScript control of Messages).
    • Secure, permissioned APIs or certification schemes could exist; “security” is being used as a pretext to protect Apple Watch.
    • iMessage spam already exists, so blocking Pebble/others doesn’t solve that problem.

Antitrust, Market Power and Regulation

  • Large subthread compares this to Microsoft’s 90s behavior: private APIs for first‑party apps, bundling, and tying.
  • Disagreement over whether Apple is a “monopoly”: some point to iOS as its own market (apps, accessories, messaging) where Apple is sole gatekeeper; others note its overall smartphone share is well below classic monopoly thresholds.
  • EU’s DMA and US DOJ lawsuit against Apple are highlighted as mechanisms that may eventually force interoperability for connected devices like watches.

App Store Control and “Sherlocking”

  • Longstanding pattern discussed: Apple copies popular third‑party ideas (flashlight apps, f.lux‑style color shifting, third‑party keyboards, watch keyboards) and then restricts competitors via guidelines, private APIs, or entitlements.
  • Example battles: Floatplane’s struggle over in‑app payments, f.lux being blocked while Night Shift shipped, and cases where special capabilities are reportedly only granted to large players (Meta, Google) via private entitlements.

User Reactions and Ecosystem Lock‑in

  • Some users say these restrictions won’t move them off iOS; they value Apple’s integration, “curation,” battery life, and support, and will simply buy an Apple Watch.
  • Others say this is exactly the problem: the real‑world choice set is “Apple phone + Apple watch” vs “switch entire ecosystem,” which suppresses viable competition in the iOS watch market.
  • Lock‑in factors cited: purchased apps and media, iCloud, iMessage social pressure (“blue bubbles”), and hardware resale value.

Technical Nuances (Bluetooth, APIs, Workarounds)

  • Commenters dig into ANCS and MAP: they allow reading notifications and limited actions, but Apple’s docs explicitly forbid full messaging UIs for accessories.
  • Some note that any device can masquerade as a BT headset and trigger Siri, but that still doesn’t allow proper text replies or deep integration.
  • Sideloading in the EU is described as heavily constrained (notarization, no private APIs), so it likely doesn’t help Pebble achieve Apple‑level integration.