airnerd

pbone15 said:

What they really should restrict is devs using the exact same release notes for every single update. 

YES!  It's annoying to always see "We update monthly to provide the best experience" or the dreaded and generic "bug fixes".  let me know what you are fixing, because it may have been affecting me and I might take the update as opposed to just delete your broken junk. 

I will start off by saying I haven't been a user of Apple News since I played with it when it first came out and saw it appeared to just be another "magazine stand" where if I had a subscription I could use that app to read it digitally.  I buried the app and never touched it.  The exact reason is this quote from the article:

"The traffic itself isn't necessarily generating revenue, but publishers are learning how to convert readership into paid subscriptions"

They are "learning" how to convert by the one thing I hate more than anything, but have no solution myself.  And that is reading the headline and a few sentences and then a screen pops up "subscribe with us for just $1.99 a month (and we will bill your CC into eternity unless you jump through 8 million hoops to speak to the one person in the world that can unsubscribe you and stop billing you)".  And I can't do that for a dozen different sites.

I have no problem at all supporting media that can get me hard hitting news or investigative pieces.  I do have an issue with needing two-dozen subscriptions just to sit down and get through a cup of coffee and be up to speed.  No thanks.  If Apple could get a solution where I pay $4.99 a month and get a whole host of popular news sites articles, I'm in.  I really hope that doesn't exist already and I look like a doofus.

rotateleftbyte said:

Not so secret any longer. I wonder if Apple will beef up security now that the 'cat is out of the bag'. If there is possibly something unique about their work then that alone will attract interest from competitors.

I always assumed that before an article like this goes out that a company like Apple either knows about it through the grapevine or was contacted directly by the author.  if I was researching this I'd at least reach out and see if there is anything they would like to add, or possibly any reason I really shouldn't publish it at this time.

GG1 said:

I don't upgrade my iPhones too often, but when I do, I either sell or give away my old ones to people new to iPhones (there is one less Android owner and one less Blackberry owner out there).

Apple may disappoint analysts with very slightly less sales volume year-on-year (negligible, IMO), but the pool of perfectly usable second-hand iPhones in-use must be growing substantially, posing a big threat to new Android sales. This article is spot-on.

If Apple would only allow me to buy actual Apple hardware for my phones I could keep them going even longer.  I don't have the time or desire to make the 45 minute trek to the Southlake TX store only to stand in line to hand over my phone for them to spend however long it takes.  That can take up an entire Saturday.  Whereas I could replace my own screen with a legit one or pay a local authorized dealer (none in my town) for a quicker service.  So instead I bought an aftermarket that is polarized wrong and scratches if the sun hits it wrong.  I would feel bad even giving this one away when it is time to upgrade because the screen fits so poorly and looks so bad.  

entropys said:

Seeing as android makers regularly discount, why get a refurb?

IMO, because the refurbished Apple phone will still be supported and will work for many years to come.  Android may decide to just stop supporting that device.