If one chooses to accept that insane list of app permissions then they will get the album. The tracks get downloaded into their music folder, it's not just a streaming app.
Ah. The article implied otherwise: " even though all it really does is play back the album. It does not add the songs to a user's music library."
So a popup saying what the app has permission to access your gps does not count as a request for your permission. If you have to choose to accept
In Android:
It is not asking permission to access GPS, it's just telling you that it will access GPS. Your agreement is not needed.
In iOS:
The application will ask GPS access, in which you can give or deny the access. Even if you agreed in the first place, you can deny its access later from privacy setting.
How is it "sneaky" when it clearly says what the app wants access to? Unless you're illiterate it's pretty straight forward.
It doesn't say what it WANTS to access it says what it MAY access and once you install it then you will never know or be asked for specific permission. Essentially it is holding stupid and lazy people hostage ie if you want "free" "music" then press this button and don't worry about it
Funny how it's everywhere on torrents literally within an hour after it was available. That's what you get for trusting your music to Android users.
It will be interesting to see how it does on iTunes when it releases soon. If iTunes racks up record sales then it will be a PR disaster for Samsung/Google/JayZ to see the competition being responsible for making you the most money. In fact, given how little Google Play sells vs iTunes (1/6th) it's guaranteed iTunes sales of this album will dwarf Google Play sales.
Even funnier would be if online digital sales tanked because of all the people who were able to get it free by torrenting it.
i didn't even pay attention at first to who wrote the article. when i read this line, i thought "ded". went back to have a look, and sure enough ...
what a tremendous surprise.
I just look at the structure... The words mean a bit, but the paragraphs, the section headings, and how it begins and ends are dead giveaways for the DED meter. DED/PrinceMcLean have a certain iambus in story and structure...
Is every other article on Apple Insider about Samsung these days?
Used to be Microsoft.... then Adobe, then RIMM, then Nokia, then Google... now Samsung... To be blunt, tech writers like protagonists/antagonists... otherwise they end up just writing advertising copy. This way, there are winners and losers, the victorious and the vanquished, women beating their breasts, men performing seppuku, children parentless in the streets in the wake of warring factions churning over the tech landscape.
Funny how it's everywhere on torrents literally within an hour after it was available. That's what you get for trusting your music to Android users.
It will be interesting to see how it does on iTunes when it releases soon. If iTunes racks up record sales then it will be a PR disaster for Samsung/Google/JayZ to see the competition being responsible for making you the most money. In fact, given how little Google Play sells vs iTunes (1/6th) it's guaranteed iTunes sales of this album will dwarf Google Play sales.
Even funnier would be if online digital sales tanked because of all the people who were able to get it free by torrenting it.
Of course, this is an app, whereas on iTunes it's non-DRM music track. So it's almost just a teaser. I'm sure anyone who actually likes this album (I take it there'll be a lot of em), could buy it.
Yeah, all of the above about pirate sites are exactly why credit card companies (Visa, MC) are denying payments to VPN providers. The establishment not only wants you to want the music, but to prevent you from trying before buying.
It doesn't say what it WANTS to access it says what it MAY access and once you install it then you will never know or be asked for specific permission.
You're absolutely right: If after being presented with the permissions the app is requesting and you decide to install it, you have the freedom to never again look at the app's settings to see that same list presented there.
As a side note, ever notice that OS X doesn't provide a list of app permissions at all?
I understand Daniel's point of view here, because the Android permissions screen is a lot like the license agreements you're supposed to read before installing software. That means it's easily ignored. Apple's system of asking permission the first time the GPS is used is a lot more clear in telling people what's going on.
Imagine the difference between the permissions screen you see above and:
"This app wants to access your phone call records. [ OK ] [ Cancel ] "
Most people won't notice that permission in the screen above but will hit "Cancel" for the prompt.
By the way, I don't think Apple offers any kind of permission letting apps use phone call records. At all.
I picked 3 apps at random and took a screenshot of the full permission screens that are presented before installing. These are nothing like an EULA that you're presented when installing a program on a desktop computer.
Apple's system of asking permission the first time the GPS is used is a lot more clear in telling people what's going on.
And Apple's iOS Terms and Conditions screen is so short, simple, clear, and easy to understand that people typically read it very thoroughly and completely before they accept the terms.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
If one chooses to accept that insane list of app permissions then they will get the album. The tracks get downloaded into their music folder, it's not just a streaming app.
Ah. The article implied otherwise: " even though all it really does is play back the album. It does not add the songs to a user's music library."
If this was Apple it would be the #1 story on CNN's Tech website and all over... but oh, Samsung - ehhh... the mass-media doesn't care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
So a popup saying what the app has permission to access your gps does not count as a request for your permission. If you have to choose to accept
In Android:
It is not asking permission to access GPS, it's just telling you that it will access GPS. Your agreement is not needed.
In iOS:
The application will ask GPS access, in which you can give or deny the access. Even if you agreed in the first place, you can deny its access later from privacy setting.
It doesn't say what it WANTS to access it says what it MAY access and once you install it then you will never know or be asked for specific permission. Essentially it is holding stupid and lazy people hostage ie if you want "free" "music" then press this button and don't worry about it
Funny how it's everywhere on torrents literally within an hour after it was available. That's what you get for trusting your music to Android users.
It will be interesting to see how it does on iTunes when it releases soon. If iTunes racks up record sales then it will be a PR disaster for Samsung/Google/JayZ to see the competition being responsible for making you the most money. In fact, given how little Google Play sells vs iTunes (1/6th) it's guaranteed iTunes sales of this album will dwarf Google Play sales.
Even funnier would be if online digital sales tanked because of all the people who were able to get it free by torrenting it.
i didn't even pay attention at first to who wrote the article. when i read this line, i thought "ded". went back to have a look, and sure enough ...
what a tremendous surprise.
iOS is an app platform, not an ad platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch
i didn't even pay attention at first to who wrote the article. when i read this line, i thought "ded". went back to have a look, and sure enough ...
what a tremendous surprise.
so what? it's true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
If you're not paying for it; you're the product.
Remember Sony... Even if you did pay for it, you were rooted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooch
i didn't even pay attention at first to who wrote the article. when i read this line, i thought "ded". went back to have a look, and sure enough ...
what a tremendous surprise.
I just look at the structure... The words mean a bit, but the paragraphs, the section headings, and how it begins and ends are dead giveaways for the DED meter. DED/PrinceMcLean have a certain iambus in story and structure...
Quote:
Originally Posted by t0ny
Is every other article on Apple Insider about Samsung these days?
Used to be Microsoft.... then Adobe, then RIMM, then Nokia, then Google... now Samsung... To be blunt, tech writers like protagonists/antagonists... otherwise they end up just writing advertising copy. This way, there are winners and losers, the victorious and the vanquished, women beating their breasts, men performing seppuku, children parentless in the streets in the wake of warring factions churning over the tech landscape.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman
If this was Apple it would be the #1 story on CNN's Tech website and all over... but oh, Samsung - ehhh... the mass-media doesn't care.
CNN has low viewership among samsung stockholders/product owners, especially in the offices in Atlanta.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
Funny how it's everywhere on torrents literally within an hour after it was available. That's what you get for trusting your music to Android users.
It will be interesting to see how it does on iTunes when it releases soon. If iTunes racks up record sales then it will be a PR disaster for Samsung/Google/JayZ to see the competition being responsible for making you the most money. In fact, given how little Google Play sells vs iTunes (1/6th) it's guaranteed iTunes sales of this album will dwarf Google Play sales.
Even funnier would be if online digital sales tanked because of all the people who were able to get it free by torrenting it.
Of course, this is an app, whereas on iTunes it's non-DRM music track. So it's almost just a teaser. I'm sure anyone who actually likes this album (I take it there'll be a lot of em), could buy it.
Yeah, all of the above about pirate sites are exactly why credit card companies (Visa, MC) are denying payments to VPN providers. The establishment not only wants you to want the music, but to prevent you from trying before buying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack
It doesn't say what it WANTS to access it says what it MAY access and once you install it then you will never know or be asked for specific permission.
You're absolutely right: If after being presented with the permissions the app is requesting and you decide to install it, you have the freedom to never again look at the app's settings to see that same list presented there.
As a side note, ever notice that OS X doesn't provide a list of app permissions at all?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
and no, Apple does nothing like this. your apps still work even when you decline granting any location or other permissions. how lame.
So how do you limit the data to which Siri has access (contacts, etc.) without totally disabling Siri?
Imagine the difference between the permissions screen you see above and:
"This app wants to access your phone call records. [ OK ] [ Cancel ] "
Most people won't notice that permission in the screen above but will hit "Cancel" for the prompt.
By the way, I don't think Apple offers any kind of permission letting apps use phone call records. At all.
D
I picked 3 apps at random and took a screenshot of the full permission screens that are presented before installing. These are nothing like an EULA that you're presented when installing a program on a desktop computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dennis
Apple's system of asking permission the first time the GPS is used is a lot more clear in telling people what's going on.
And Apple's iOS Terms and Conditions screen is so short, simple, clear, and easy to understand that people typically read it very thoroughly and completely before they accept the terms.