Apple pulls app for finding lost AirPods from App Store

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    It was because it was able to find any Airpods, not just your own, making this app an easy way to steal peoples airpods in the gym, school, work...
    cornchipwatto_cobraequality72521
  • Reply 22 of 41
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,725member
    Several more plausible reasons have already been posed on this very thread, and you can't imagine one? The notion that Apple is twisting its mustache and hoping you lose your Airpods is paranoid dreck. IOW, bullshit, yes. There is no line item in Apple's projected profits for "suckers losing their AirPods muhhaha"...the profits will flow even if not a single person lost one. 



    Actually, there are only 2 other explanations posited (development as a future app and patent issues,) neither of which fits with Apple's past history or the information in the article as I described in my post. I completely agree that the $69 argument is cynical, but perhaps you have a better one?
    peerbz said:
    Except for the fact that the AirPods have to be inserted into the ears to play any sounds…
    Yeah, that would bugger that up. It would be nice if there was a 'find my AirPod' mode that would play a loud locator tone, kind of like the find my iPhone app does (perhaps with increasing volume so it wouldn't blast your ears if you actually had them in.) Of course, that wouldn't let them make $69, either, so they'd never do that, right? 
    spacerays
  • Reply 23 of 41
    irelandireland Posts: 17,684member
    cali said:
    This is likely being integrated into Find My iPhone, a name I hope changes soon. 
    Find My Device
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 41
    dmdevdmdev Posts: 31member
    I remember App Store rules about using copyrighted images (of Apple products) within apps and app screenshots. I'm surprised this was released in the first place..
    watto_cobraStrangeDays
  • Reply 25 of 41
    larryalarrya Posts: 552member
    Niz said:
    As someone who bought both the AirPods and the app, I can tell you that the app was garbage. It would just direct you to the closest piece electronic equipment. (Apple Watch, iPads, Computers,
    extension cords, computer monitors etc). I'm glad they pulled it.
    I tested it several times with my AirPod sitting plainly on a table, the floor, a couch etc, it obviously doesn't work. Unless it's in the middle of a roadway, with nothing around it, and you are standing directly over it, it's useless. Now I just need to figure out how to get my money back.

    If that is the case, then perhaps a plausible explanation might be that it could be used to steal someone else's AirPod, though the article made it sound as though it could only search for one that matches your un-lost one.
  • Reply 26 of 41
    elijahg said:
    They'd rather people paid $69 for a replacement AirPod. 
    The entire app is a stupid idea, and serves only the push the narrative that you'll lose (one of) your AirPods because they are "badly designed."
    watto_cobraStrangeDays
  • Reply 27 of 41
    tshapi said:
    There is a simple explanation why this app was yanked. This company doesn't have the rights to sell this app. They haven't veen granted permission to associate themselves with the product.  In some ways it can be seen as copyright infringement

    Yes, I think having "AirPods" in the name is a concern, but I don't like the fact that Apple first allowed the app, and then changed course. That looks bad on them.
    There's 4 reasons in my mind why they would pull this app:
    1. Potential revenue loss of replacement AirPods (not likely)
    2. The app promotes the perception that AirPods are easily lost (likely)
    3. Copyright infringement on using the AirPods name and/or images in the app (possible but not stated)
    4. Apple has an app in development but it's not ready (somewhat likely)

    Whatever the reason, the developer deserves a valid explanation otherwise it would be a black mark on Apple's relationship with the development community. My personal opinion is they don't want the public perception that AirPods are easily lost and they are not saying that's the reason because it would sound so utterly lame. My second choice is they have an app in development which would be another black mark with the development community. If this is the case, the development community should be concerned because all your hard work on developing an app could simply be rejected because you beat Apple to the punch. A darker thought is they think your app is so great during the review process that they want to develop their own so they reject it on that basis.
    edited January 2017 ewtheckman
  • Reply 28 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,292member
    MplsP said:
    Several more plausible reasons have already been posed on this very thread, and you can't imagine one? The notion that Apple is twisting its mustache and hoping you lose your Airpods is paranoid dreck. IOW, bullshit, yes. There is no line item in Apple's projected profits for "suckers losing their AirPods muhhaha"...the profits will flow even if not a single person lost one. 



    Actually, there are only 2 other explanations posited (development as a future app and patent issues,) neither of which fits with Apple's past history or the information in the article as I described in my post. I completely agree that the $69 argument is cynical, but perhaps you have a better one?
    peerbz said:
    Except for the fact that the AirPods have to be inserted into the ears to play any sounds…
    Yeah, that would bugger that up. It would be nice if there was a 'find my AirPod' mode that would play a loud locator tone, kind of like the find my iPhone app does (perhaps with increasing volume so it wouldn't blast your ears if you actually had them in.) Of course, that wouldn't let them make $69, either, so they'd never do that, right? 
    It might seem a bit cheesy but if I ask my phone where it is (and it can hear me) it will loudly say 'I'm here', turn the screen on with a smiley face and flash the LED. Perfect for those moments when you know it's near you but just can't find it.

    Perhaps a mechanism to make them beep to a similar voice command without needing to touch them might be viable.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    Niz said:
    As someone who bought both the AirPods and the app, I can tell you that the app was garbage. It would just direct you to the closest piece electronic equipment. (Apple Watch, iPads, Computers,
    extension cords, computer monitors etc). I'm glad they pulled it.
    I tested it several times with my AirPod sitting plainly on a table, the floor, a couch etc, it obviously doesn't work. Unless it's in the middle of a roadway, with nothing around it, and you are standing directly over it, it's useless. Now I just need to figure out how to get my money back.

    Thank you so much. You state your opinion and actually have had experiences with the app itself. 
    Instead of all naysayers contributing BS without having used the app at all. 

    stanthemanequality72521StrangeDays
  • Reply 30 of 41
    macxpress said:
    I bet they don't want it on the App Store because they have plans to make their own and build it into macOS and iOS during future updates. Even if they worked with the developer in the end I think they thought this was a good idea. I know this sucks for the developers but I wouldn't doubt this is exactly the case.
    Considering they use icloud already to pass on pairing information it's a no brainer. 
  • Reply 31 of 41
    This is a fake news story until Apple offers its own explanation. Apple did NOT tell the developer what Reddit reported -- namely, that Apple doesn't like the concept of people finding lost AirPods. Apple makes the Find My iPhone app, so it obviously assists customers find their lost devices.
    <br><br>
    AirPods are capable of transmitting and "hearing" sound.  So eco-location between iPhone, AirPods and the user's ears seems a better solution to locating lost AirPods than searching for a low-energy Bluetooth signal that gets blocked by solid objects.   Sound could even be magnified by those same objects. 
    <br><br>
    My AirPod detector uses a magnet.
    edited January 2017 StrangeDays
  • Reply 32 of 41
    xbitxbit Posts: 244member
    I doubt the app worked very well. The Bluetooth signal strength is averaged over time. The lag in updating the signal strength would make it impossible to provide useful information in tracking down the AirPod.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 33 of 41
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,000member
    tcc_acc said:
    It was because it was able to find any Airpods, not just your own, making this app an easy way to steal peoples airpods in the gym, school, work...
    If this is true as well then Apple is well within their right to drop this from the store. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 34 of 41
    lkrupp said:
    elijahg said:
    They'd rather people paid $69 for a replacement AirPod. 
    Why the bullshit snark?
    Pray tell us lkrupp, how is this 'bullshit snark' in your opinion?
  • Reply 35 of 41
    MplsP said:
    peerbz said:
    Except for the fact that the AirPods have to be inserted into the ears to play any sounds…
    Yeah, that would bugger that up. It would be nice if there was a 'find my AirPod' mode that would play a loud locator tone, kind of like the find my iPhone app does (perhaps with increasing volume so it wouldn't blast your ears if you actually had them in.) Of course, that wouldn't let them make $69, either, so they'd never do that, right? 
    i have a couple of Plantronics Voyager Edge mono headsets. 
    Plantronics have an app called the PLT Hub, with a Find MyHeadset feature.
    You can set the volume before playing a distinct, loud beep on repeat. Helps find the headset in seconds, even in my decently large apartment.



    So yeah, if Apple doesn't have/add a similar feature, or doesn't allow anyone to do something similar instead, they are being dicks. 
    Can anyone of the weak Apple apologists in this thread please stand up with any defense now? Regards.

    p.s. Just because Apple does a lot of things right doesn't mean they can't handle some rightful criticism for the things they don't do right. 
    We pay them for their products, and for all the marketing and perfectionism they drum up, they surely can do a better job in their weak areas. 
    Apparently, as per the bio, Steve Jobs would have been happy to ask every product to be fixed in their top 3 weak points. 
    So asking the same is pretty much a consumer right, by the way.

    Feels weird to be having to justify a basic consumer right to less informed pseudo-snarks.
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 36 of 41
    MplsP said:
    Several more plausible reasons have already been posed on this very thread, and you can't imagine one? The notion that Apple is twisting its mustache and hoping you lose your Airpods is paranoid dreck. IOW, bullshit, yes. There is no line item in Apple's projected profits for "suckers losing their AirPods muhhaha"...the profits will flow even if not a single person lost one. 

    Actually, there are only 2 other explanations posited (development as a future app and patent issues,) neither of which fits with Apple's past history or the information in the article as I described in my post. I completely agree that the $69 argument is cynical, but perhaps you have a better one?
    So you're going to argue that "several" and "two" aren't the same in the context of this thread? Talk about splitting hairs. The point remains that you're suggesting there can only be a nefarious explanation while others have suggested alternatives, and you've been asked to imagine others, but you can't or won't.

    I don't know what "past history" you're referring to, please be more specific.


  • Reply 37 of 41

    tshapi said:
    There is a simple explanation why this app was yanked. This company doesn't have the rights to sell this app. They haven't veen granted permission to associate themselves with the product.  In some ways it can be seen as copyright infringement

    Yes, I think having "AirPods" in the name is a concern, but I don't like the fact that Apple first allowed the app, and then changed course. That looks bad on them.
    There's 4 reasons in my mind why they would pull this app:
    1. Potential revenue loss of replacement AirPods (not likely)
    2. The app promotes the perception that AirPods are easily lost (likely)
    3. Copyright infringement on using the AirPods name and/or images in the app (possible but not stated)
    4. Apple has an app in development but it's not ready (somewhat likely)

    Whatever the reason, the developer deserves a valid explanation otherwise it would be a black mark on Apple's relationship with the development community. My personal opinion is they don't want the public perception that AirPods are easily lost and they are not saying that's the reason because it would sound so utterly lame. My second choice is they have an app in development which would be another black mark with the development community. If this is the case, the development community should be concerned because all your hard work on developing an app could simply be rejected because you beat Apple to the punch. A darker thought is they think your app is so great during the review process that they want to develop their own so they reject it on that basis.
    Paranoia. I guarantee you Apple didn't see this app and go "ZOMG why didn't we think of this for an app!" and then steal it. 

    My money is on 1) using copyrighted Apple imagery in a non-Apple app. 2) Not working very well.
  • Reply 38 of 41
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,725member
    So you're going to argue that "several" and "two" aren't the same in the context of this thread? Talk about splitting hairs. The point remains that you're suggesting there can only be a nefarious explanation while others have suggested alternatives, and you've been asked to imagine others, but you can't or won't.


    I don't know what "past history" you're referring to, please be more specific.



    Well, most people would consider two to be 'a couple,' not several, but that wasn't my point. I was merely responding to your statement that there were other explanations and pointing out why I don't feel they were valid.

    By past history, I mean just that - there have been other apps that have duplicated Apple's apps (Map apps, e-mail apps, browser apps, etc) as well as apps that had functionality that Apple was planning on introducing (i.e. flashlight apps.) In none of these cases did Apple prevent release or pull the apps, even after the features were added to iOS, so why would they do so now?

    Regarding potential patent issues, there are other apps with ‘iphone’ in the title that apparently don’t cause patent issues. If patents or trademarks were an issue, that would be a clear and straightforward reason for denial, but Apple did not raise this as an issue during the initial approval or it’s revocation, so I find it hard to believe that’s the issue. Perhaps the image was the issue, but again, that's a very clear, cut and dry reason that they would come right out and state. Instead we're told they 'didn't like the concept.' 

    Ditto for it not working very well, according to the developer, Apple said 'there wasn't anything functionally wrong.' Besides, how many other crap apps are on the App Store that Apple hasn't taken down? As for it promoting the image that they could be lost, what about the 'Find iPhone' app? 

    I'm not suggesting that the only explanation is the nefarious one, but most/all of the other explanations I've seen have significant flaws in them that don't fit with the information in the article or Apple's actions in the past.
    spacerays
  • Reply 39 of 41
    Oh hell no. Apple is the DEVIL. Sayten <--(haha) incarnate, the spawn of. Total evil twisted crap. Cheapass chicken shiiiiiiit.

    Ok no, seriously. Apple simply doesn't have the "clout" anymore to "get away" with this stuff. I mean obviously they are for now, but they are and have been slowly alienating, and driving their customer and developer base away. Ask any Apple App developer... say the word "provisioning hell" and they will know exactly what you mean. Oh and btw: Apple has long been stealing, oh I mean "borrowing" app developer ideas and implementing it to their OS. Examples? Night shift, window snapping, air drop, many many of the menulettes, cloud drive. Some of them they did the right thing and brought in or bought the dev or idea. Examples: the Dock, iTunes. Etc.  
  • Reply 40 of 41
    digitol said:
    Oh hell no. Apple is the DEVIL. Sayten <--(haha) incarnate, the spawn of. Total evil twisted crap. Cheapass chicken shiiiiiiit.

    Ok no, seriously. Apple simply doesn't have the "clout" anymore to "get away" with this stuff. I mean obviously they are for now, but they are and have been slowly alienating, and driving their customer and developer base away. Ask any Apple App developer... say the word "provisioning hell" and they will know exactly what you mean. Oh and btw: Apple has long been stealing, oh I mean "borrowing" app developer ideas and implementing it to their OS. Examples? Night shift, window snapping, air drop, many many of the menulettes, cloud drive. Some of them they did the right thing and brought in or bought the dev or idea. Examples: the Dock, iTunes. Etc.  
    iOS Developer for 4 years here. Yup, Apple has been getting worse in some aspects for the devs, but also better in others. How much of what, is up for a statistical analysis.

    Provisioning hell has got a lot less hellish since Xcode 7. Xcode 8 has made hell much better, often leading us to forget what kind of torture we had endured over the last couple of years.
Sign In or Register to comment.