• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Apple: We like that app so much we're going to BAN it and then copy it as a feature.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
YoungGun21 said:
How exactly is this any different than what I am saying? When the remap feature was added, the app got banned and it is my understanding that the app still does not have that feature. Yes it was against TOS, but who now is adding that feature in and using it as a selling point? Apple.

And I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all. Unless you call unethical business practices a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Or, camera+ violated apple's rules for apps, apple saw that it was a good idea, redefined the button with new software updates and now camera+ will be able to re-add the feature and everyone is happy.

Or, apple got super frustrated by one small company and feared that there system might be taken over and bitch slapped camera+ into submission and then added the amazing feature and claimed it as there own invention.

Or, camera+ violated apples's rules, apple was already working on implementing that feature into the new software, they told camera+ to remove that feature as it broke the rules and anyways apple was going to add that feature in 6 months as part of a software update.

Or, apple is as evil as google is as evil as microsoft is as evil as exxon/mobile is as evil as nike is as evil as warner brothers, none of them should be trusted. But, no laws were broken, camera+ is still popular, no one is really hurt and this is all just one big ridiculous over dramatized pissing contest between fanboys and antifanboys who are both just as obnoxious as one another.
 
Last edited:
Stealing seems pretty illegal to me. Isn't that what Apple sues everyone else for? Stealing ideas?

I know M$ has gotten sued plenty of times for it, probably only a fraction as many times as they should have, too.
 
YoungGun21 said:
Stealing seems pretty illegal to me. Isn't that what Apple sues everyone else for? Stealing ideas?

I know M$ has gotten sued plenty of times for it, probably only a fraction as many times as they should have, too.
Click to expand...

Stealing an idea, in and of itself, is not illegal. Especially when said "idea" isn't new at all. Example is the many Angry Birds clones out there now. Sure, they don't use birds but they're the same time of canon launcher game.

What Apple sues people on is patents. Some of them are questionable and flimsy but every company has a few of those. And it's not just Apple that uses questionable patents as clubs to beat the competition down.
 
Do you guys not get it regarding Camera+?

ONLY APPLE can define what the hardware button does. You cannot reprogram it. Sure Apple added a Camera+ feature, but I wouldnt see this as irony or hypocritical how other companies cannot remap hardware buttons but only Apple can. After all Apple makes the phone. They obviously have the ability to define what the home or power button does. They can just as easily redefine it.

Bottom line is Camera+ is not allowed to access hardware buttons.

What proof do you have that Apple stole it from Camera+? As I said before there's only 4 buttons on the iPhone. 2 of them obviously CANNOT be used for shutter. Well it wouldn't make sense to use the home or power button.
 
akugami said:
Stealing an idea, in and of itself, is not illegal. Especially when said "idea" isn't new at all. Example is the many Angry Birds clones out there now. Sure, they don't use birds but they're the same time of canon launcher game.

What Apple sues people on is patents. Some of them are questionable and flimsy but every company has a few of those. And it's not just Apple that uses questionable patents as clubs to beat the competition down.
Click to expand...

Angry Birds was a clone itself, not an original.

Whether this is illegal or not is ultimately up to the courts. No, they didn't have it patented, but they could probably argue that there was lost revenue because the feature had to be removed.

What there is no question about is that it was unethical.
 
everyone in corporate america steals.. it's not big news... but the best thing about it is the price of admission... Thank you to the developers of camera +, otherwise, we wouldn't get such an awesome, FREE app!
 
YoungGun21 said:
Angry Birds was a clone itself, not an original.

Whether this is illegal or not is ultimately up to the courts. No, they didn't have it patented, but they could probably argue that there was lost revenue because the feature had to be removed.

What there is no question about is that it was unethical.
Click to expand...

correct, because the Camera+ devs blatently broke the TOS rules agreed to when you become a developer and publish apps on the marketplace. they tried to slide one by apple's review process by making it an easter egg, then got busted for it.
 
Where is SunnyD? I want him to defend the topic of this thread. It is a blatant lie. He probably knows it, that's why he has decided to stay out of it.
 
YoungGun21 said:
Angry Birds was a clone itself, not an original.

Whether this is illegal or not is ultimately up to the courts. No, they didn't have it patented, but they could probably argue that there was lost revenue because the feature had to be removed.

What there is no question about is that it was unethical.
Click to expand...

You just simply dont understand. The feature was removed because it WAS NOT ALLOWED. They did it specifically against the rules set up by Apple for their own app store. What they did themselves was illegal and against the rules. That is why it was banned. Any revenue that camera+ got while the feature was in the program should be cream on the top. They should be happy they got that revenue, since they blatantly ignored the rules set up in the ecosystem that they were making money off of.

Can a drug dealer sue the government for lost revenue while they were in jail? This is basically what you are saying camera+ should do.
 
MotionMan said:
So you will not or cannot defend your position.

So noted.

MotionMan
Click to expand...

His position has been thoroughly dismantled, he just wont admit it.

He basically thinks drug dealers should be able to sue the government during the time they were banned from selling the drugs and were in jail.

Oh wait, you only have that view when it comes to apple? Hypocrisy duly noted.
 
cheezy321 said:
His position has been thoroughly dismantled, he just wont admit it.

He basically thinks drug dealers should be able to sue the government during the time they were banned from selling the drugs and were in jail.

Oh wait, you only have that view when it comes to apple? Hypocrisy duly noted.
Click to expand...

I don't recall ever talking about drug dealers.

You try to paint all these pictures about me, but you've been wrong every time. To you I must be a drug dealer, truther, conspiracy field agent...starting to sound like you've got some conspiracies of your own.

Also, MotionMan, I've posted in this thread 13 times now. My position and defense of my position is included in every single post. It is absolutely clear where I stand. I don't get why you want me to repeat everything two or more times.
 
YoungGun21 said:
I don't recall ever talking about drug dealers.

You try to paint all these pictures about me, but you've been wrong every time. To you I must be a drug dealer, truther, conspiracy field agent...starting to sound like you've got some conspiracies of your own.

Also, MotionMan, I've posted in this thread 13 times now. My position and defense of my position is included in every single post. It is absolutely clear where I stand. I don't get why you want me to repeat everything two or more times.
Click to expand...

So then why do you think camera+ should be able to sue apple? For the profits they made doing something apple explicitly said not to do?

Do you not see the connection I am making? It is the exact same thing
 
YoungGun21 said:
Also, MotionMan, I've posted in this thread 13 times now. My position and defense of my position is included in every single post. It is absolutely clear where I stand. I don't get why you want me to repeat everything two or more times.
Click to expand...

Maybe you'll get it right with more practice?

😉

Never mind. Never let the facts get in the way of your arguments.

MotionMan
 
The connection you are making is a bit of a stretch. You can easy relate anything to violent crime (and Hitler).

Not the exact same thing.
 
You can't just break the TOS agreement and think Apple will roll over.

They sued Samsung because the phone looked similar to the iPhone, they take this shit seriously.
 
badb0y said:
You can't just break the TOS agreement and think Apple will roll over.

They sued Samsung because the phone looked similar to the iPhone, they take this shit seriously.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't so much call it "taking it seriously" as much as trying to screw over the competition as much as possible.
 
YoungGun21 said:
I have seen many solid facts from you that got in my way.

All you tried to do was relate M$ to Apple and succeeded.
Click to expand...

Fixed. If you cannot see that by now then please quit posting.

In reality, all I have done is shown that the things people in this thread are trying the skewer Apple about is nothing new and is exactly how the industry works (including, in no small part, MS).

MotionMan
 
YoungGun21 said:
I wouldn't so much call it "taking it seriously" as much as trying to screw over the competition as much as possible.
Click to expand...

If, instead of assigning a negative connotation to Apple's actions you assigned a neutral one, you might be able to see what really happened.

MotionMan
 
MotionMan said:
It was about a thing APPLE. You just wanted to preach to the choir and avoid being put in your place by the people who like Apple products.



Yeah, so why the venom against Apple if others have done similar things, and did them BEFORE Apple did?



No, it isn't, since that was not the point of my post. The point was that Apple is no different than any other such company (as you pointed out re: Google and MS), so this hardly warrants a thread about it.

MotionMan
Click to expand...
How about he didn't want to listen to a bunch of apple fanbois ry to defend Apple practices all the while bitching and moaning about other companies doing similar things?
Steve Jobs could kill all the remaining California Condors and throw them on a BBQ grill and Apple fanatics would try and defend his actions. There is nothing wrong with liking Apple products, but to be so blinded by some false sense of Apple superiority is foolish.
What I find more amusing is how shifty and shady Apple is and how they use "slave labor" in China and make huge profits on high profit margin devices, yet a large percentage of their customer base claims captialism is bad, and we should do what we can to reduce our carbon foot print, but they keep buying the newest Apple product regardless of if they actually need it.
 
JeffreyLebowski said:
How about he didn't want to listen to a bunch of apple fanbois ry to defend Apple practices all the while bitching and moaning about other companies doing similar things?
Steve Jobs could kill all the remaining California Condors and throw them on a BBQ grill and Apple fanatics would try and defend his actions. There is nothing wrong with liking Apple products, but to be so blinded by some false sense of Apple superiority is foolish.
What I find more amusing is how shifty and shady Apple is and how they use "slave labor" in China and make huge profits on high profit margin devices, yet a large percentage of their customer base claims captialism is bad, and we should do what we can to reduce our carbon foot print, but they keep buying the newest Apple product regardless of if they actually need it.
Click to expand...

Wow, it's not like any other companies use that "slave labor".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top