4 ms·
An anti user private API violation retraction in an update. They missed the feature in the original approval, then took something away from people who already
by gte910h 17y ago
An anti user private API violation retraction in an update.
They missed the feature in the original approval, then took something away from people who already bought the app. They should be required to offer refunds when they force antifeatures on users such as this.
Surely not everyone would take them, but some will
- Shamiq 17y agoIsn't Stanza a free app?
- Lazlo_Nibble 17y agoYes. It'll be interesting to see how the "duplicate functionality" rules of the App Store play out once Apple's ebook reader is available. They'll have to pry Eucalyptus from my cold, dead hands.
- gte910h 17y agoStanza is, several apps which have had the same thing happen to them are not however.
- GHFigs 17y agoDo you think it would be preferable if the application broke (or broke another application) unexpectedly at a later date due to an otherwise innocuous system software update?
- gte910h 17y agoYes. That would be preferable. Then there is a real change that necessitates this change.
- ellyagg 17y agoUnintended consequences. Such a policy would cause Apple to be even stricter and slower with App Store bureaucracy.