4 ms·
How is allowing the app to exist a lousy experience for their customers? There is no harm in allowing competing versions of the same feature, especially if the
by MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
How is allowing the app to exist a lousy experience for their customers? There is no harm in allowing competing versions of the same feature, especially if the other version was there first and people were using it.
I can see rejecting new apps that duplicate existing functionality, but proactively un-approving and pulling apps that implement a feature that might exist later?
- thought_alarm 14y agoYou purchase this app, then the next day Apple announces the same feature built in to the OS. You don't feel ripped off?
- MiguelHudnandez 14y agoNope, I thought it was worth $1 the day before and I would still think it is a nice feature. I'd blame Apple for that for being so opaque or for not including it in the first place. The developer is not the problem in my eyes -- they just made an awesome feature for my phone. Perhaps most customers have a different stance than I do, though.
- thought_alarm 14y agoWell, Apple's saving you the dollar. You can be angry at them for that or not, but it's easy for me to see why they're doing it.
- angryasian 14y agowhy are you assuming only apple can deliver a premium experience.
- jodrellblank 14y agoYears of experience using computers lends a lot of weight to that suggestion.
- mikeash 14y agoYou purchase this app, then the next day somebody else announces the same feature as a third-party app for free. It's not Apple's concern whether people feel ripped off over third-party apps. They'll let you do all kinds of crazy things, like keep old versions on the store and still charge for them even after a new version comes out, or totally nerf a new version while allowing no way for people to downgrade.