These features didn't get into the app by accident. AccuWeather got caught and now they are trying to save face.
Agreed. The million dollar question now is - why is Apple NOT taking action against them immediately? Just pull down the App from App store and then let them go through extensive review process after remediating the code and resubmission. That would send out a strong message to others who do something similar, isn't it? Is that too much to ask for?
Isn't that the expectation from users? Surprised to see none of that has happened yet!!!
Right, I spoke without really understanding what they'd done.
iOS will stop the app posting location data, but they weren't using location services, by the looks of it. They used their app to interrogate the router. Because the location info wasn't coming from your actual phone (it is coming from the router you're connecting to) they think they were okay to do that.
To me, that's bollox. People who opt out of location services mean that they don't want their location accessed by YOUR APP, regardless of where the app is picking up and deriving the information. This is a betrayal of trust.
I also did not understand what they had done. Thanks for the info. Why is Apple not taking it down from App store? Is it already remediated?
I've run across a few apps that don't off the option of using Location Services 'While app is in use' or whatever Apple wording is used— just always or never. I avoid those while possible.
I'm not to concerned of someone aggregating location data to reveal my location in spite of being in Witness Protection. I dislike the fact that using Location Services taxes the battery. I have an iPad that stays in the house and has Location Services turned off. It's 'standby' time is about two weeks before it gets to 50%. That's my arbitrary minimum charge level.
Another iPad (and my phone) that have LS turned on barely last a couple of days before hitting 50%. So while security (and integrity of the Devs) is an issue for some, my greater concern is battery life.
Routinely culling the list of apps in LS I'm sometimes surprised to find an app with it turned on, and having no recollection of giving it permission. I tend to automatically deny permission on most apps.
The Apple Weather app serves me well though I've been fascinated with various weather apps for awhile. There are at least a couple which don't function quite as expected if you don't enable LS and instead opt to just put in a zip code. They seem to be directing you to enable LS instead of entering static information. I don't know why that is but I don't trust the practice. I don't remember which apps they were.
I also shy away from any app that shouldn't need LS but wants it anyway, even if you can control access to LS satisfactorily.
I've found it best to check through your cellular usage, location, background activity, backup status, etc. every now and then, especially after iOS updates. I've noticed settings flipped on a number of occasions where I'm pretty sure I didn't do it.
Another thing to watch for, is that it appears one app can pass off permission to another app. For example, if I have cellular data enabled for Safari, but not YouTube... if you click a YouTube video in Safari, it fires up the YouTube app and will use cell data.
And... then there's stuff like this where it ignores the settings.
I missed your post first time around. As mentioned I've found the same things about apps and Location Services.
Thinking it may be time to give up my grandfathered ATT 'unlimited' plan, I've been keeping an eye on my cellular data usage. Though YT does get much of my time, I had no idea of it's app's relationship with Safari. Thanks for that info. I'll be watching for similar interaction among my apps, now.
I've never used AccuWeather -- but I have been using 'The Weather Channel' app and liking it. But, I had been wondering why my cell data was so high and blaming it on my use of Apple Music.
Then, this week I did some research and found that The Weather Channel app was eating my cell data plan alive! It chewed through nearly 2/3's Gb in a single day! While it's true that the app offers videos that can chew up cell data, I have never used them much and certainly not anywhere near that much.
So, what data could this app have been sending or receiving? There's no way for me to know that... ... At the moment I have cell data turned off for the app and am contemplating removing it completely. ....... I am wondering if this thing could be transmitting a lot more than weather data?????
I believe the reason this is happening, is that people with "unlimited" plans, are simply plugging their phones in, and using their phones as a home hotspot, and streaming Netflix, Hulu and everything else at home - thus burning up the data at rates that the normal person would never touch. So, throttling to 480p just seems reasonable.
Deleted this app years ago. So many fine weather apps out there, and I just wasn't using it. Fave is Dark Sky.
Thumbs up for Dark Sky, the micro-point forecast is something I really, really find fascinating. By using the individual barometers in each iPhone that is running the app, it allows for pin-point forecasting of fronts in YOUR area, giving you a minute-by-minute countdown until the rain hits. And, in my experience, it seems to work.
The API they are using isn't private and shouldnt be banned from the app store as plenty of useful admin and network tools use it. Probably the user should be warned that it is being used ( although being a very low level C API it cant, at the moment, show that alert as far as I know).
Surprised that nobody has recommended Carrot Weather yet. It's got customizable amounts of snark and allows you to choose between Forecast.io (the engine behind Dark Sky) or Wunderground as your data source, which an awesome Apple Watch complication if you have a watch.
Abusive marketing continues to ruin ad-sponsored "freeware" for everyone...
Abusive marketing has already caused ad-blocker products to come along (self-inflicted injuries that advertisers cry and whine about). Let's watch ad-supported apps do the same to themselves.
Abusive marketing continues to ruin ad-sponsored "freeware" for everyone...
I think we're going to have to start being willing to pay, at least small amounts, for services that fund themselves in better ways. If it's free, WE'RE the product. But, with huge numbers of people, the costs could be quite low and it's still a great business model. I think this is even the case for news outlets, as CPM models are now even struggling. It's because simple 'ad-sponsored' isn't working... at least not the simplistic low-value display-ad.
The problem in regards to the App store, though, is that they need a better 'demo' mode or well thought out in app purchase strategy. If you're looking for a certain kind of app and there are a bunch that cost $1-$5, most people will try the free ones first because they don't know if the $1-$5 ones are any good. And, even though it's relatively cheap, you still don't want to spend the money to get the same thing that's free, and might still be selling you. If the app is good, we have a way of knowing it's good, and it's clear they don't do any of this baloney, I'm sure most of us would happily pay a few dollars for it.
Comments
Agreed. The million dollar question now is - why is Apple NOT taking action against them immediately? Just pull down the App from App store and then let them go through extensive review process after remediating the code and resubmission. That would send out a strong message to others who do something similar, isn't it? Is that too much to ask for?
I'm not to concerned of someone aggregating location data to reveal my location in spite of being in Witness Protection. I dislike the fact that using Location Services taxes the battery. I have an iPad that stays in the house and has Location Services turned off. It's 'standby' time is about two weeks before it gets to 50%. That's my arbitrary minimum charge level.
Another iPad (and my phone) that have LS turned on barely last a couple of days before hitting 50%. So while security (and integrity of the Devs) is an issue for some, my greater concern is battery life.
Routinely culling the list of apps in LS I'm sometimes surprised to find an app with it turned on, and having no recollection of giving it permission. I tend to automatically deny permission on most apps.
The Apple Weather app serves me well though I've been fascinated with various weather apps for awhile. There are at least a couple which don't function quite as expected if you don't enable LS and instead opt to just put in a zip code. They seem to be directing you to enable LS instead of entering static information. I don't know why that is but I don't trust the practice. I don't remember which apps they were.
I also shy away from any app that shouldn't need LS but wants it anyway, even if you can control access to LS satisfactorily.
Thinking it may be time to give up my grandfathered ATT 'unlimited' plan, I've been keeping an eye on my cellular data usage. Though YT does get much of my time, I had no idea of it's app's relationship with Safari. Thanks for that info. I'll be watching for similar interaction among my apps, now.
Then, this week I did some research and found that The Weather Channel app was eating my cell data plan alive! It chewed through nearly 2/3's Gb in a single day! While it's true that the app offers videos that can chew up cell data, I have never used them much and certainly not anywhere near that much.
So, what data could this app have been sending or receiving? There's no way for me to know that...
... At the moment I have cell data turned off for the app and am contemplating removing it completely.
....... I am wondering if this thing could be transmitting a lot more than weather data?????
I'm finding plenty of alternatives.
Abusive marketing has already caused ad-blocker products to come along (self-inflicted injuries that advertisers cry and whine about). Let's watch ad-supported apps do the same to themselves.
The problem in regards to the App store, though, is that they need a better 'demo' mode or well thought out in app purchase strategy. If you're looking for a certain kind of app and there are a bunch that cost $1-$5, most people will try the free ones first because they don't know if the $1-$5 ones are any good. And, even though it's relatively cheap, you still don't want to spend the money to get the same thing that's free, and might still be selling you. If the app is good, we have a way of knowing it's good, and it's clear they don't do any of this baloney, I'm sure most of us would happily pay a few dollars for it.