See innovation

>see innovation
>ban innovation
>call it innovation
We're happy to introduce a never-before-seen feature among the Apple ecosystem, and we think you're going to love it.

businessinsider.com/apple-pulls-find-my-airpods-app-from-app-store-2017-1
theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372932/apple-airpods-lost-find-my-iphone-app-support-ios-10-3

Other urls found in this thread:

theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372932/apple-airpods-lost-find-my-iphone-app-support-ios-10-3
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

wtf i hate apple now

>Apple quality wireless earphones
>$229 USD
mfw

Apple actually hates competition.
They probably planned to have this feature all along but like everything to do with the airpods it was behind schedule and so a third party beat them to the punch.

Not wanting their awesome feature to be ignored they banned the store app.

>theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372932/apple-airpods-lost-find-my-iphone-app-support-ios-10-3

does it ping any airpod
so then if so it could help you find airpods to thieve?

From the looks it'd have to be connected to your phone via Bluetooth

I don't see how it's a bad thing.
Now it's a built-in feature rather than some ad-ridden crap.

congrats, you don't have to pay $3 for an app to find your airpods now

apple probably removed the app because they were working on that feature anyways. obviously they can't say what they're working on though

So is writing software for Apple devices even worth it?

Bluetooth doesn't work like that.

It uses triangulation by signal strength to basically give you hot/cold clues to how close you are to the other Airpod your phone is paired with.

>implying apple didn't had that idea since the beginning

They didn't finish the Find My Airpods feature on time, but it's coming on the next iOS update or that's what I heard

They removed the dude's app to avoid confusion (yes, most iPhone users are that dumb).

>some cunt makes a simple app and demands 4 bucks for it
>Apple removes the shit and add free functionality for their update doing the same
>idiots bitch about it

>They removed the dude's app to avoid confusion
I love this though.
You spend time thinking about and developing an application, you start making monetary return on that time and then they pull your app because "we don't want our customers to get confused between your app and the feature we want to implement in a few months".

That should really be illegal.

It's suboptimal for the developer but better for users. It doesn't even really benefit Apple directly since they would make money for % of this guys sales.

>t. iToddler

It's still anti competitive.

Their store, their rules. If anything, their attitude to "controversial" or sexual content is much more questionable. This case seems clear cut.

By ensuring that there is no confusion for the users and some guy selling basic functionality for 4 bucks (basically scamming the users), they maintain higher quality of the store, which ensures better user satisfaction with it, which in turn leads to users actually trusting the store and spending money there, which in turn benefits devs and Apple.

Despite noticeable fewer downloads, there is 70% more revenue from apps on Apples store, so it clearly works for all sides.

They make far more money by selling more AirPods, which they can do by having that feature built-in.

>Their store, their rules.
To a degree, the rules still have to follow country commerce rules they are dealing in.
And the application actually has to be against the rules somehow. You can't just remove an app from the store because you plan to include that functionality in a future iOS update because it isn't in the terms of service.

You don't see all the flashlight apps taken off iTunes because you can turn on the LED in iOS. If the functionality of the inbuilt Airpod finder is better than the app then it will get used more and preferred.

Also,
>some guy selling basic functionality for 4 bucks (basically scamming the users)
Basic functionality which wasn't (and still isn't because it's still to come) in iOS.

optional func centralManager(_ central: CBCentralManager,
didDiscover peripheral: CBPeripheral,
advertisementData: [String : Any],
rssi RSSI: NSNumber)


Here you go, literally spend 5 minutes writing an app that does this same, simple as fuck thing rather than paying $4 for it.

This and this 100% Disgusting from Apple.

That's nice, but it doesn't include the UI design and testing which would have been a few hours of work at minimum.

It's all well and good to say "oh this is simple you can code it up in 5 minutes" but I would like to see you actually do that and shit out a robust application, which you wouldn't.

It's delayed, because they made a nice chunk of change off of idiots who ran out and bought a 7 right away, and waited a while for said idiots to lose their dumb-ass airbuds and repurchase them before putting out their software so that they look like they're innovative and fixed a problem.

None of the retards that bought the damn thing know how to do this:
and it's a status symbol / fashion accessory that isn't really marketed towards anybody who would know how to write something on their own (as simple as it actually fucking is).
Apple shut that guy down because they can, because they were already planning on putting out software for that, because people are going to still lose the stupid fucking things anyway from dropping them, and because apple profits off of people who either have, or want to appear to have, disposable income.

Of COURSE the company that pioneered the use of a glass fucking phone (but muh gorilla glass! haha) would do shit like this. Apple products are expensive and disposable - they exist to generate more revenue and to get idiots to keep buying their shit, again and again.

Yes, OSX is decent. Yes, MBPs were pretty great for doing whatever blub language bullshit that hipster developers wanted them for. Meanwhile. try to compile Chromium on a MBP that's more than 2 years old and watch the CPU temp go straight up to 100 degrees and stay there no matter how many ice packs you throw under the bastard.

What, are you afraid of the command line or something? And the fuck do you need testing for, you can't parse 4 lines of code?

proxLabel.text = "\(rssi)"
here u go bro i just implemented ur interface, would u like to do some user acceptance testing on it

>And the fuck do you need testing for, you can't parse 4 lines of code?
>proxLabel.text = "\(rssi)"
>here u go bro i just implemented ur interface, would u like to do some user acceptance testing on it

And here we can see people who have never tried to make an application for other people.

What does your application do if it is only connected to one of the airpods?

>For other people
The point is you can make it for yourself.

Presumably they're 2 separate peripherals.
I'll upgrade ur code for u my friend
func centralManager(_ central: CBCentralManager,
didDiscover peripheral: CBPeripheral,
advertisementData: [String : Any],
rssi RSSI: NSNumber) {
if peripheral.name == .AirpodOne {
label1.text = "pod one \(rssi)"
} else if peripheral.name == .AirpodTwo {
label1.text = "pod two \(rssi)"
}
}


that'll be 15 rupees

Congratulations, you have just had to revision your code which means you would have done testing to discover the behavior and correct against unexpected behavior.

>mfw you think these two posts are samefag
>i'm the guy on the top btw. as per us
>mfw you probably use at least one library that i've contributed to

keep projecting, brainlet. i hate tripcodes but i guess it (sorta) clears shit up when some retard is arguing with two different people.

these were my posts ITT btw. i like that you went after the code that the other user posted, like that somehow invalidated anything i just said. if you play that fast and loose with logic, maybe you should be using visual studio, if you actually code at all.

and yes, i know using a trip doesn't prove i'm a separate user, and there's no way i can really prove that. but whatever, fuck you, i don't have shit to prove to you if you're gonna dodge my points. assuming you're arguing with just one person on an imageboard is solipsistic, and it's just funny to me that you quoted one of my posts (where i called you a bitch for not thinking that the command line is enough of a UI), completely ignored the other one, and then went off on some other dude's code that i quoted because it actually made sense. fuck you, brainlet.

i don't fuck with tripcodes but if i'm gonna have to do that shit for this board, i might as well throw on a dBASE reference and make it look like "assmaster"

>>mfw you think these two posts are samefag
I said people, not person, so clearly you are retarded.
And I severely doubt I have ever used any libraries you have contributed to because I rarely use community libraries, so you're making another leap that is retarded.

I can use tripcodes to.

>To a degree, the rules still have to follow country commerce rules they are dealing in.
To a very, very rough degree not relevant for this case. You can't force a store to sell shit they don't want to sell, generally speaking of course.

>And the application actually has to be against the rules somehow.
Not necessary, it could be against quality standards too. Or Apple could go full anal and mention the copyright.

>because it isn't in the terms of service
Come on, that shit basically gives Apple the right to your firstborn.

>You don't see all the flashlight apps taken off iTunes because you can turn on the LED in iOS
Never tried them but from what I remember on Android, there were usually different settings and options, not really comparable with standard function.

>If the functionality of the inbuilt Airpod finder is better than the app then it will get used more and preferred.
Which is unlikely but even if it were the case, I guess we'll never know. That's the downside of restricted App stores. Just this case seems shitty to make a point

THE SHILL IS REAL