jSnively

rcfa said:

When I read “loud” and “booming” I’m disheartened, might as well describe it as Ghettoblaster.

What I was hoping to read is detailed imaging, powerful, effortless, clean, well controlled sound with depth and proper imaging.

There is notably nothing written about combining two or more into a stereo or surround setup, neither anything about using the built-in Bluetooth to hook up computers, phones, video projectors, etc. which are capable of using BT speakers or hands free devices.

Disappointing, not just that these capabilities are lacking, but also that similarly lacking is a roadmap of features to be added by future software updates.

So here's my takeaway so far. Please be advised I've had mine for about an hour.

It sounds alright for its size. VERY heavy on the highs, and the crossover frequency for woofer seems problematic as well. Bass is good for a 4" woofer, but will sound shallow to people who are used to more robust offerings. This feels like it was EQ'd by Beats. Mids get completely drowned when there's a lot going on. Listening to one of the fuller parts of Zero 7 - Home i literally winced because it sounded so bad. I'm not doing the review for this, but i figure i'd let you guys know what i think so far.

I think it's the sound king of the smart speakers, but that's not exactly a prestigious title.

randominternetperson said:

jSnively said:

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

That's not my experience.  I had an app rejected once and the reason given was specific, but in my opinion incorrect.  I made an official complaint/escalation and within a few days the app was approved.  I'm the smallest of the small fish and didn't make any sort of public appeal.  I am certain that the mistaken rejection of the latest AI app update would have readily and quickly corrected by following the normal channels.  I'm not buying the "if it weren't for our bully pulpit, Apple would have done us wrong" angle.  I'm sure the publicity didn't hurt you, but it might not have actually helped, and I certainly don't think it was required.

Given our position as a publication, and how many developers we talk to about this exact sort of thing ... do you think it's maybe possible that we have a little more of a solid idea of the realities on this one? You're entitled to your opinion, but maybe consider your sample size.

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

GrumpiGramp said:

Yep, as usual, rush it out the door then start fixing it.  Sad..

... it's a beta.

dannybrook said:

Geez, just resubmit. 
1) Show the rejection notice.
2) Why are you so late with the update request?
3) Seek clarification.
4) Accept even Apple can’t always get it right. The comparison is silly and immature, as is the public whining st this stag. 
5) Perhaps it is a convenient excuse for being so late?
6) Why don’t you have someone on staff with real world knowledge and experience to write a your own simple app if you are going to editorialize about such things.

Obviously we did, but Apple should be held accountable for this stuff. It stays in the dark because everyone is too afraid to talk about it for fear of repercussions. I actually advised them not to run this article in the first place, because I had no idea what would happen to the app if we did. Apple could've kept it in limbo forever.

1) We did in the comments.
2) Internal business reasons.
3) Obviously, we did. It was confirmed it was because we ran a story about jailbreaking.
4) Duh. This isn't the first time we've had problems with the process. The point was to illustrate, alongside the recent faux Cuphead fiasco, that the processes is still flawed and probably could use looking into. Other app devs here can attest to that. We wouldn't have run a story if it was a one-off event.
5) It's not.
6) We work closely with our contract iOS app developer. We don't have the budget -- or need -- to employ a full-time iOS developer. We're not some monolithic entity. We're a privately owned independent company that takes no external funding, and has, at any point in time, about 8-10 people working. Most of whom are editors.