Apple's settlement over in-app purchasing inches closer to approval, may include 23M refunds - Page 3

Lol. Dumbest thing said so far from anyone.

A-"I drove a car before- its basically the same thing as piloting a submarine"

B-"Have you ever piloted a submarine"

A-"Well, no... But I know what it'd be like..."

Apple ][- you're always great for a laugh.
Edited by Andysol - 3/3/13 at 8:37am

Pow! Dude- awesome post. This made my day (in Hawaii- it's 6:30am- and it'll still be the best thing Ill see today). Seeing the hammer laid down on people trying to call others out is very very entertaining.
Edited by Andysol - 3/3/13 at 9:05am

 

Actually, SolipsimX was not talking about the snakes, but was only defending the common user, who dasanman69 suggested was dumb for not knowing all the settings and details of what they use.

 

 

I think he just misread them.  Sometimes it's easy to do.  No need to bring up the T word.

Considering my name was pulled without any context or quoting a comment I've made which then claimed the was opposite of what I've stated in this thread I think my suspicion is warranted.

 

I think it just shows how easy it is for someone to get the wrong impression if they start reading in the middle of a thread.

 

Seriously, you're always so suspicious.  Not everyone is out to get you.

 

Well, okay.  Sometimes I am.  

 

mwuuuhahaha!   :)

I don't understand how simply ignoring a check box makes something unnecessarily complex. People are encouraged to use long obscure passwords and entering them on a touch screen keyboard is what is complex which is why they created the 15 minute feature to begin with.

I think either would be fine. Immediate as default or the check box. No different than a checkbox when you're on a website (like this one) and it says "remember password".

As far as games go there should be a in app purchasing cap. $99 is absolutely ridiculous. Some of these games make it so hard to get 'tokens/coins' that the player almost has to buy them in order to get power ups and such. Nothing wrong with a walled garden but Apple allows the snakes in because it benefits them.

 

Charlituna made a good point in a similar thread about this: then just don't play the game.

Voice your disapproval by refusing to pay or play.

 

Not "range", exactly $250, not roughly, around, almost, exactly.

No the manual is online, not a hard copy, u like others.
You despise Apple so much, did Steve Jobs not get back to you on your job application?
Why the hate? Why post on AI? I don't get you trolls,

What a silly bugger, posted to myself and twice.
Anyway the post is to our resident troll KDarling.

 

As far as an iTunes account goes, you can delink your credit card and replace it with an iTunes voucher of the denomination you wish to entrust to a child.

 

Basic common sense.

 

It's also available for free via iBooks and the web version is included in the bookmarks of the default version of Safari..

 

People want to use them, just like the slots in Las Vegas.

Don't you know by now that very few people have basic common sense?

Exactly.

If I lost my brain and purchased a samsung phone or tablet, I would be lumbered with a hard copy user's manual, as its MANDATORY to read and understand  before you even turn on one of their wonderful devices.

On the other hand, people who know ziltch about computers and like to keep it that way, just get the iDevice with maybe a few pages of colourful glossy information and away they go, no need for a manual.

The android/samsung/google trolls on this forum try and spin it another way. They always do, its in their blood. KDarling are you reading ?

 

Samsungs and most other Android handsets don't come with physical manuals either, there is usually a PDF help file installed on them somewhere.

 

When setting up Android phones Google asks for a credit card to link to Play.

I didn't know that. So both Google and Apple require a credit card to activate their smartphones? Thanks!

 

No, you don't need a credit card to activate.  From my experience...

 

• On iOS you need an iTunes account.
• On Android, you need a Google account (however, many/most current devices let you bypass this part and do it later if you wish).

 

Both of those can be set up without a credit card at first, on the phone itself if need be.

 

It's only when you try to buy something from their stores, that you need a way to pay for it.

Not only would I agree I'd go further than shaming them, I'd say they should be held legally accountable for deliberate manipulation of minors and suffer the maximum consequences. It is terrible they were allowed in the store by Apple with this set up in the first place ... unless they jacked up the prices after they were accepted, I don't know i have never read the threads on this topic before nor have I read about it else where till now.

Another thing I don't get is why it takes so long to receive a email receipt from Apple? I always get it the next day whereas with Google or Amazon I get the receipt immediately.

That's true when I think about it. Often a movie rental doesn't get a receipt for a week.

I am pretty sure he never means a thing he says and just bates everyone with the most obnoxious comments imaginable even if funny at times.

I think they do it so they can aggregate multiple items. I quite like getting a receipt with many items at once for the week instead of one for each app I buy, which includes free apps. I think you can log into your iTunes Store account and see the info right away.

If you buy an item in their B&M stores they will send you a receipt right away.

Good point. I can't understand why the receipt isn't generated immediately.

I think many of these unauthorized purchases could've been prevented had the account owner gotten immediate notification.

Of course he knows what it's like.

Surely some but I don't think the answer is to spam an inbox with emails for every App Store purchase regardless if it's a free app or not. Perhaps if that happened with just in-app purchases I would be more agreeable but I think a better, overall solution is to have in-app purchases not be on the same cycle as standard App Store purchases.

Let's look at the big picture. The goal is to make the UX better, not worse, and flooding your inbox with every free, 99¢, etc. app purchase does not help that to correct this very rare albeit significant issue with parents not understanding the technology they give their children. Not to mention that if you buy an app for a child and they make the in-app purchases how will you know about the emails if your child has your device, or if you a normal person that doesn't check their email constantly. On top of that, Apple's solution is to send a message via iTunes so it's not a quick fix or phone call and it would only let you know after the in-app purchase was made which doesn't solve the initial problem.

I read it was due to card processing fees. Grouping X items into one payment means Apple save on the CC charges. 

"Developers who put things costing $100 in a kid's app should be ashamed of themselves."

Absolutely. It's a business model that - on some level - was designed to induce mistaken or fraudulent purchases. And I'm sure Apple liked getting their 30%.

While the situation has improved with new controls (and password requirements) for in-app purchases, that didn't happen until people spoke up. Apple should never have allowed games like this into their ecosystem.

My wife and (then 3-year-old) son were playing a game called "Fishies", and clicked a pop-up asking if they wanted to buy a "fancy shell" or some such for "100 purple gems". They apparently clicked "yes", and we were charged $100 to my AppleID. No password required - and no mention that they would be spending actual money.

Apple agreed with our assessment, and refunded the money.

There is no legitimate reason that ANYONE should be able to spend $100 with one click in a children's game. Especially with no verification or password required.

When the iPhone was first released, there was an app called "I Am Rich" which cost $100 and did absolutely nothing. Apple took it down from the store, because it served no purpose. How is it any different when developers charge $100 for "Smurfberries"?

 

Neither of them "need" them, both ask for them.

All those responses and not one "I was completely wrong and got proven so". Even conveniently left out the quotes where you got taken to school.
Oh well- fun to read nonetheless

 

Could have sworn it was $999.99…

 

I had the "Am I Rich?" version, which was identical except it was free and jailbreak-only. 

Here is a novel idea. If parents do not want their kids to buy stuff through iTunes, make it clear (to the kids) that if they do, the money will be taken out of their allowance. Such an approach reinforces good parenting practices and teaches kids about financial responsibility and the consequences of financial irresponsibility.

 

That would require parenting. That's nonsense. Apple should be made to pay for everything and the child should not be punished in any way. 

 

Also, welcome.

People that give their kids allowances don't watch their own kids the nanny does.

 

I would venture to guess that many of the kids who are using these games, were too young to be getting allowances.... heck, a lot were too young to understand the difference between real and game money.

 

Even if they did, some of these games intentionally blurred the distinction.

 

There's just no way to defend getting kids to buy hundreds of dollars of addons.

A little earlier today I received a presser from Canalys on just how important these freemium apps are. Some here will probably be surprised at just how pervasiveness .

 

 

"A study of the top apps in Apple’s App Store in the United States in January 2013 reveals the extent to which the freemium model has now become an established feature of app market dynamics. Over the 31 days of January, the top 300 free iPhone apps included, on average, 38% that were monetized solely or in part through in-app purchases. Of the top 300 grossing iPhone apps, 58% on average were freemium apps, while a further 13% were paid-for apps offering additional in-app purchases.

 

A similar picture can be seen with iPad apps. 41% of the top 300 free apps, on average, make use of the freemium model, along with 59% of the top 300 grossing iPad apps. 12% more were paid apps with in-app purchases on offer.

Notably, these proportions tend to grow in the upper echelons of the top grossing lists, while remaining fairly static in the top free app list. 64% of the top 100 grossing iPhone apps, and 85% of the top 10, are monetized via the freemium model. Among iPad apps, on average, 68% of the top 100 and 85% of the top 10 grossing titles were freemium. Evidently, there are plenty of freemium apps – almost half - among the most popular downloaded titles, and, what is more, freemium apps are some of the highest revenue-generating apps in the US App Store."

Edited by Gatorguy - 3/6/13 at 8:23am

 

I have to applaud the construction of this sentence in context. It's subtle.

Ha! That's unnecessarily (and illogically) sweeping.