Thread

Apple has added persistent 'ads' to iOS, and it's driving users crazy

822 points · 601 comments · MC995

AnonC · 1790088825 · focus · HN ↗
I doubt John Ternus will change direction anytime soon, since it will look like he’s reversing the plethora of eyesore ads that Tim Cook added over his tenure.
But the Apple with ads is not the Apple that had some taste and discernment in the past. For a long time I’ve visited the App Store’s app update page directly (tap and hold on App Store icon to see the context menu option). Anytime I inadvertently go to the App Store home page or the few times I search, it’s an ad filled disaster!
From this article
> repeatedly attempting to prod customers towards even more of the company’s products might seem cheap, even distasteful.
From a recent post by John Gruber:
> Steve Jobs in 2011: 'We Build Products That We Want for Ourselves, Too, and We Just Don't Want Ads' [1]
Looks like Tim Cook, John Ternus and Eddy Cue really enjoy being swamped with ads in their products. Will there soon be a time when Apple executives start carrying some other brand’s devices with them to avoid having a rotten experience?
[1]: We don’t want ads <a href="https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/07/28/jobs-we-dont-want-ads" rel="nofollow">https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/07/28/jobs-we-dont-wa...
1. api · 1790088911 · focus · HN ↗
  Ad revenue is bad revenue if you're going for the high end of the market. If it has ads, it's crap.
  Apple has all but conquered the high end of the market, but that ad revenue... it's so tempting... soooo tempting... just one hit...
  1. malfist · 1790089693 · focus · HN ↗
    What are you going to do? Switch to android which has even more ads?
    What we need is antitrust enforcement so there are other options and more competition. The free market can't fix anything if the market is just a race to the bottom between two companies
    graemep · 1790090287 · focus · HN ↗
    I do not see a lot of ads on Android but i think that might be my particular (light and limited) usage.
    You are right though. A duopoly is rarely a competitive market, especially for complex products (it can be for commodities)
    rootusrootus · 1790091216 · focus · HN ↗
    > that might be my particular (light and limited) usage
    Probably. There aren't many ads on iOS either aside from when you buy another Apple product and add it to your collection. If you just have the phone you won't see most of the ads mentioned in the article.
    kyriakos · 1790090576 · focus · HN ↗
    I am either blind to ads or i see no ads in android (samsung). of course many apps have ads, at least not in the actual OS.
    microtonal · 1790101612 · focus · HN ↗
    They also try to sell Samsung Care+ through the settings app.
    TheDong · 1790090784 · focus · HN ↗
    > Switch to android which has even more ads?
    Android has more ads if you buy it through a carrier, but you can easily make it have far fewer ads by installing LineageOS, and then installing Firefox with the real uBlock origin (not ublock origin lite).
    iOS does not allow you to install alternative browsers, nor can you customize the OS to the level of lineageOS, so iOS simply cannot match the best that you can do on android.
    Android has more of a free market because on my pixel phone, I can choose either Google's android distribution, or LineageOS, or Graphene, or build my own ROM. I can use F-Droid or the google play store.
    What we need is laws requiring that all iDevices apple makes are open hardware which support installing android, iOS, or a custom OS you build yourself, all hardware-essential drivers are free, and so on. That would let people compete on the software side of thing while Apple's hardware team iterates on that. If iOS really is better on its merits, people would install it even with the option to pick other OSs.
    eldaisfish · 1790091515 · focus · HN ↗
    I invite you, respectfully, to take a moment and consider how many average people would even begin to comprehend anything that you suggested.
    Android's "free" market comes with the freedom to be bombarded by ads. As much as i used to like that, i now recommend only apple phone and computers to normal people. The average person has no idea what lineageOS is, forget about knowing how to install it.
    mitxela · 1790107012 · focus · HN ↗
    And AT&T shouldn't allow you go connect other phones, or modems at all. You should only be able to get a phone by renting it monthly from AT&T - everything else should be illegal.
    Dylan16807 · 1790110796 · focus · HN ↗
    Personally I did none of that on my android (except set up firefox with ublock), and I get very few ads and they're easily stopped.
    palata · 1790112849 · focus · HN ↗
    > The average person has no idea what lineageOS is
    The beauty of it is that the average person can buy a LineageOS-enabled system without having to know it's not "normal Android". Look at /e/OS for instance, and hopefully soon GrapheneOS will come preinstalled on some Motorolas.
    brewdad · 1790124908 · focus · HN ↗
    And they will quickly return it when they realize their banking app doesn’t work and they can’t stream that sports package they subscribed to.
    duskdozer · 1790156236 · focus · HN ↗
    Why don't they work? Google lock-in.
    palata · 1790182093 · focus · HN ↗
    Well actually they don't work because those apps suck. Typically the banks are responsible for preventing their own apps from working there. Because they don't care or because they follow some bullshit security-theatre policies, or because they just don't understand security, I don't know.
    It's not Google that adds the code that makes your banking app fail: it's the goddamn bank itself.
    Izkata · 1790091768 · focus · HN ↗
    > Android has more ads if you buy it through a carrier
    Or just none? I'm not doing anything special and the only ads I ever see are from some games.
    HeWhoLurksLate · 1790107400 · focus · HN ↗
    I get texts from my carrier that are treated specially and I didn't buy my phone through them
    hsuduebc2 · 1790134051 · focus · HN ↗
    Same here. I do not see any ad's, not counting occasional push notification from apps which are there mostly due to my laziness.
    armadyl · 1790096354 · focus · HN ↗
    > What we need is laws requiring that all iDevices apple makes are open hardware which support installing android, iOS, or a custom OS you build yourself, all hardware-essential drivers are free, and so on.
    I strongly disagree with this sentiment, Apple shouldn’t be forced by the government to allow other OSes on their products. There is a solution to this, it’s simply to stop buying Apple products if that’s a concern.
    AnthonyMouse · 1790100199 · focus · HN ↗
    > There is a solution to this, it’s simply to stop buying Apple products if that’s a concern.
    Your proposal is that the way to address market consolidation is to buy a different product. You can see the problem with that, right? Products with a network effect need a critical mass of users to be viable, e.g. to be targeted by third party developers and hardware OEMs. The way they achieve that is by starting off with compatibility with existing apps and devices. If the incumbents can lock them out of doing that then new challengers are doomed.
    Moreover, it stops being "Apple's product" when they sell it to the customer.
    armadyl · 1790100929 · focus · HN ↗
    > Your proposal is that the way to address market consolidation is to buy a different product. You can see the problem with that, right? Products with a network effect need a critical mass of users to be viable, e.g. to be targeted by third party developers and hardware OEMs.
    Almost every company, tech or otherwise, even expanding into things like sports have faced this. It’s nothing new. If Android or Linux OEMs want to convince people to move to their ecosystem they should just produce better products that the majority of a population would actually want. Not run to the government to hinder another company because they can’t or won’t compete technologically or brand wise.
    There is nothing Apple is doing to lock competitors out of the market. iMessage, Facetime? Convince customers that your option is better.
    And also Apple customers buy the hardware knowing it runs macOS/iOS. Apple has never once advertised the OS is changeable or the ecosystem is “open” unlike Google who started that way and is trying to claw things back. You don’t go to a BBQ place and get mad that it serves meat and demand they start serving vegetarian food.
    lostlogin · 1790101482 · focus · HN ↗
    > You don’t go to a BBQ place and get mad that it serves meat and demand they start serving vegetarian food.
    You might if there were only two restaurants and both were really meaty.
    Yes, there are more than 2 phone OS options but nearly the whole of the market is those 2.
    armadyl · 1790101635 · focus · HN ↗
    Then if there’s a good enough product for it, it’ll gain market share. People act like Apple was just miraculously granted market share over Blackberry and that they didn’t create a competitive product to earn that spot.
    Terr_ · 1790105145 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    AnthonyMouse · 1790106018 · focus · HN ↗
    > Almost every company, tech or otherwise, even expanding into things like sports have faced this. It’s nothing new.
    "Bad thing has occurred previously, therefore nothing should be done about it"?
    > If Android or Linux OEMs want to convince people to move to their ecosystem they should just produce better products that the majority of a population would actually want.
    That's what they're trying to do. "OS that people would actually want" is the one that runs their existing apps on their existing hardware. That's the thing the incumbents are blocking them from doing.
    "If you want to make a new OS you must first reproduce the entire hardware supply chain and replace the entire installed base of user devices with a new system that has no existing users" is basically saying that you're not allowed to do it.
    > There is nothing Apple is doing to lock competitors out of the market. iMessage, Facetime? Convince customers that your option is better.
    If I create a messaging app which is exactly as good as iMessage, but Apple preinstalls theirs and not mine on the majority of US phones and messaging apps have a network effect, what happens?
    > Apple has never once advertised the OS is changeable or the ecosystem is “open”
    Ma Bell never once advertised that you can use your own phone on their phone network.
    armadyl · 1790113886 · focus · HN ↗
    > "Bad thing has occurred previously, therefore nothing should be done about it"?
    The solution isn’t degrading another company’s product or forcing them to do x when there’s already existing competition.
    > That's what they're trying to do. "OS that people would actually want" is the one that runs their existing apps on their existing hardware. That's the thing the incumbents are blocking them from doing. "If you want to make a new OS you must first reproduce the entire hardware supply chain and replace the entire installed base of user devices with a new system that has no existing users" is basically saying that you're not allowed to do it.
    I mean I just disagree here, I don’t know what else to say. People were fully aware of what Apple was when they bought the products, Apple didn’t trick anyone, or anything. They also are not the sole phone OEM and they don’t have a monopoly.
    Other companies can step up and provide actual competitive hardware. There’s nothing stopping Samsung or (especially) Google from putting more effort into their lineups to match the performance, fit and finish that Apple users like. They’ve just settled for mediocrity in some aspects (i.e. Google holding onto their Tensor chips, or not improving the UX/UI of Android, or even improving its brand perception).
    > If I create a messaging app…
    Not the same thing at all as far as other OSes go, this is more applicable to something like allowing Chromium on iOS. The appropriate comparison would be if another OEMs OS had a messaging feature baked into their OS. Google attempted it (or still does?) and their branding and advertising are just so incredibly bad they do nothing to sway the average population.
    I think like a lot of the HN users here, the Android and Linux OEMs and even companies like Framework are disconnected from the average consumer and can’t comprehend why people choose Apple and don’t care about all the technical stuff like an unlockable bootloader, installing apks, etc.
    > Ma Bell never once advertised that you can use your own phone on their phone network.
    Again, not the same thing as Apple holds nothing near a monopoly in the US or worldwide.
    AnthonyMouse · 1790136661 · focus · HN ↗
    > The solution isn’t degrading another company’s product or forcing them to do x when there’s already existing competition.
    How does it in any way "degrade" their product to allow the customer to do something with it that the customer is not required to do?
    > People were fully aware of what Apple was when they bought the products, Apple didn’t trick anyone, or anything.
    We can disagree about this one too. Consider what happens if a company simultaneously has no ads and prohibits ad blockers. People aren't really going to object to the prohibition on ad blockers in that case, right?
    Then they introduce ads and suddenly the prohibition on ad blockers becomes relevant, but your reply is that ad blockers have always been banned. Okay, but now there are ads.
    If your claim is that you can't object if something doesn't change, does that imply you do get to object every something does change?
    > They also are not the sole phone OEM and they don’t have a monopoly.
    They have more than 50% market share in the US. The trope that anyone who has less than 100.0% market share can't violate antitrust laws is invalid.
    Moreover, "two companies together have >99% of the market" is an oligopoly the likes of which is exactly what is meant to be broken up, regardless of what the split between them is. A duopoly is not a competitive market.
    > There’s nothing stopping Samsung or (especially) Google from putting more effort into their lineups to match the performance, fit and finish that Apple users like.
    We're talking about competition for operating systems. The GrapheneOS Foundation isn't Samsung -- and Samsung locks their bootloaders, so they can't even use Samsung.
    > The appropriate comparison would be if another OEMs OS had a messaging feature baked into their OS
    Only in the sense that then they would both be engaged in anti-competitive behavior.
    mitxela · 1790107210 · focus · HN ↗
    They do. People won't buy good products if they have green bubbles. Guess who controls the bubble color.
    Capitalism is the art of making your customers act like this.
    armadyl · 1790113986 · focus · HN ↗
    This isn’t permanent. We see the rise and fall of plenty of brands overtime (Nike, Mitsubishi, etc).
    If your branding and product is good enough you can overcome this. I mean just look at social media networks too that constantly come in and out of the picture.
    AnthonyMouse · 1790137811 · focus · HN ↗
    > I mean just look at social media networks too that constantly come in and out of the picture.
    Have a look here:
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_social_platforms" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_social_pl...
    Can you find a US or EU-based social media platform launched in the last 15 years that isn't now a subsidiary of one of the incumbents?
    The closest you can come is things like Signal or Discord that are more like messaging apps than social media, and even then both of those are more than 10 years old and both of them put together have less than 10% of Facebook's user base.
    Network effects are wicked when incumbents are allowed to purposely impede interoperability.
    mitxela · 1790300854 · focus · HN ↗
    We can do adversarial interoperability if we want, but we don't want.
    brookst · 1790117145 · focus · HN ↗
    I really dislike the sheeple argument.
    II2II · 1790124123 · focus · HN ↗
    I thought about this in a different context many years back. A friend lent me a GP2X, a Linux based handheld game console. I already had a Nintendo DS, with one of those homebrew cartridges (which I used for the officially advertised purposes, rather than the wink-wink-nudge-nudge purposes). That got me to thinking whether locked down platforms were okay, that they may actually provide opportunities for developers of open systems.
    The problem is that history has proven time and time again that it doesn't. While the homebrew scene for the DS was vibrant, even with the barriers, it was lacklustre on the GP2X, even without the barriers. There were likely a lot of reasons for that, but they all pretty much add up to the idea that not buying locked down products will not help.
    account42 · 1790155122 · focus · HN ↗
    > on their products
    It's no longer theirs once they sell it.
    UqWBcuFx6NV4r · 1790122791 · focus · HN ↗
    lol. what an android user comment. “Simply install LineageOS! All you have to do is extract this tarball…”
    A solution that’s just for computer nerds is close to no solution at all. It’s certainly not one I care to talk about. I may do it myself, but I don’t for a second consider it in any legitimate discussion about how any non-negligible portion of the market behaves.
    coldpie · 1790091385 · focus · HN ↗
    I had an iPhone 13 Mini. I found it to be much worse about ads.
    Every time I opened the system settings, it would insert an ad for an Apple TV Trial after a 2 second delay, causing all the items to shift down, forcing me to either wait every time I opened Settings or else mis-click when it finished loading the ad.
    Android doesn't do this, it just shows me the system settings. I was so glad to go back to Android.
    curt15 · 1790091490 · focus · HN ↗
    At least Android allows truly alternative web browsers with ad blockers that aren't handicapped by Manifestv3 limitations.
    Teever · 1790092686 · focus · HN ↗
    I use the Orion browser on my iPhone and it doesn’t have ads.
    I also don’t install the YouTube app so I use the browser to visit the YouTube site and have an ad free experience and can even have audio playing on it while the screen is off or I’m in another app so it’s an objectively better experience than using an android device with the YouTube app that is automatically installed on it.
    microtonal · 1790101753 · focus · HN ↗
    it’s an objectively better experience than using an android device with the YouTube app that is automatically installed on it
    It's not better than YouTube after Morphe. Morphe is an app that can patch other apps. It makes the official YouTube app nice by removing ads, skipping over sponsored segments, remove tracking from links, improves the player, etc.
    Would be extremely hard to do something similar on iOS.
    animuchan · 1790092984 · focus · HN ↗
    Android user here, switched from iOS (not because of ads, a different gripe).
    Not going to lie, it's a holistically bad experience, very similar to iOS in this regard. But Android doesn't show ads. The closest thing would be the Google Photos pestering to back up to cloud, things like that. It's per app, and usually there are better apps to replace the offending ones. (And vendor garbage can even be uninstalled, although it's very deliberately inconvenient to do.)
    Bonus points for having Brave browser with built-in adblock, for the free YouTube Premium-ish ad-free experience.
    petre · 1790099795 · focus · HN ↗
    I guess you can disable or uninstall Photos but I don't know anything better so I'm currently ignoring the nags.
    I was horrified about how many ads my wufe has on her iPhone. I mean web ads in Safari. It's unsusable.
    lostlogin · 1790101691 · focus · HN ↗
    > I mean web ads in Safari.
    That’s just the internet isn’t it?
    Not sure we can blame Apple for that, but I’m sure they could cook up a decent blocker if they wanted.
    jwitthuhn · 1790126338 · focus · HN ↗
    Apple also forces users onto a web browser that effectively has the same limitations as recent versions of chrome with respect to ad blocking.
    They could easily resolve that by allowing alternate browsers, but choose not to.
    microtonal · 1790101934 · focus · HN ↗
    Install Wipr on her phone. Problem solved.
    About Photos: why not disable notifications for the Google Photos app?
    petre · 1790109153 · focus · HN ↗
    They're disabled, I get the nags in the app.
    VibrantClarity · 1790100017 · focus · HN ↗
    It's worse than that. Google Photos sends push notifications telling you to buy photo books and prints unless you opt out. Play Books also sends push notifications telling you to buy particular books; it's also opt out. I'm semi-certain other built-in apps like YouTube and the Play Store do the same. However, once you turn all that junk off, the Pixel experience is pretty good.
    microtonal · 1790101882 · focus · HN ↗
    Why would you even enable notifications on these apps?
    I'm on GrapheneOS, so they are not enabled by default, but I think on Google certified Android you can also switch them off. Also, besides that, if apps implement notifications nicely, they are nicer on Android, because you can turn on/off notifications per category/channel. Of course, some apps just put everything together.
    wredcoll · 1790094870 · focus · HN ↗
    What ads does android have? I see ads when I'm inside specific apps, youtube, chrome, etc, but not when I'm using apps that don't have ads?
    pfg_ · 1790112011 · focus · HN ↗
    When I first switched to Android, I was shocked to see Google's Photos app send me an ad for buying printed printed framed photos. After turning that off, I haven't noticed many ads.
    wredcoll · 1790115906 · focus · HN ↗
    Huh, I wonder if there's some I've just grown so used to they're a blindspot. I don't use google photos though...
    netsharc · 1790115812 · focus · HN ↗
    Google Photos is always trying to upsell storage beyond 15GB: "(you're going to lose your pictures), turn on backup?". Even pressing the "Search" button got me that prompt once, with some blah blah that AI-assisted search only works when the photos are on the cloud...
    amennox · 1790835292 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
    tjpnz · 1790157495 · focus · HN ↗
    The Play Store landing page is packed full of them - mostly scams.
    cyberax · 1790098846 · focus · HN ↗
    My stock Pixel phone has zero ads. It prompts you to enable things like Wallet and all the AI stuff, but I just turned that off, and it's not bothering me anymore. There are no persitent ads.
    adrian_b · 1790099197 · focus · HN ↗
    Android by itself does not have any ads.
    I have had until now 4 Android smartphones, which did not have any ads whatsoever.
    Like other posters have said, if you do not buy the phone directly, but subsidized by some carrier, then it might come with crap installed on it.
    Of course, currently Google appears to make efforts to make Android worse, so it would not be surprising if ads would appear.
    microtonal · 1790101549 · focus · HN ↗
    Which Android though? AOSP doesn't have ads. But Samsung phones are full of ads for their own and other's services (McAfee VPN, McAfee security scan, OneDrive, etc.). I heard that Chinese phones are similar. Even Pixel pushes Google One in places.
    The primary exceptions are GrapheneOS and Lineage, but it's not like people can buy a phone with them in the store (yet).
    BizarroLand · 1790108324 · focus · HN ↗
    Moto phones are relatively ad free. There's a few (removable/disableable) apps on it at stock that have ads, the rest is all good.
    kbelder · 1790109609 · focus · HN ↗
    I've been very happy with the low-end moto phones I've bought, and plan to continue with them until they inevitably get worse.
    BizarroLand · 1790120376 · focus · HN ↗
    I've heard their flagships will start coming with LineageOS next year. Should be a step in the right direction.
    happymellon · 1790111913 · focus · HN ↗
    > I heard that Chinese phones are similar.
    My Xiaomi has no adverts.
    But then the Samsung S22 I had before didn't have adverts. Certainly didn't come with McAfee.
    realusername · 1790113170 · focus · HN ↗
    > But Samsung phones are full of ads for their own and other's services
    I have a Samsung and I've never seen such ads.
    The kind of ads they are talking there in the article would be in cheap Chinese phones in the Android world I think.
    adrian_b · 1790151248 · focus · HN ↗
    I have used several models of Sony Compact phones, then ASUS phones.
    No ads, and moreover I never had and still do not have any Google account.
    The only problem that I had for not having a Google account was that one of the banks with which I was working terminated their on-line banking and replaced it with a smartphone app. That would not have been a problem, except that they refused to provide the app directly for download, but only from the Google store, which cannot be used without a Google account.
    [deleted] · 1790102926 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    worik · 1790105288 · focus · HN ↗
    > Switch to android which has even more ads?
    I use Android
    No ads.
    I feel left out, thank Dog for that!
    PontifexMinimus · 1790111747 · focus · HN ↗
    > Switch to android which has even more ads?
    I never see ads on my android phone
    palata · 1790112915 · focus · HN ↗
    > Switch to android which has even more ads?
    I am on Android, I have no ads.
    godelski · 1790124102 · focus · HN ↗
    > What are you going to do? Switch to android which has even more ads?
    We're on HN. If you're on Android and seeing ads then you're doing something wrong.
    I don't disagree with your main point, but the H is important context here
    BTW, in iPhone I tend to get lots of ads because Safari doesn't have ad block, I can't repackage APKs, can't edit DNS, not to mention all the spam calls/texts (especially from icloud emails...). Thank God the ublock folks got an iPhone app. I mean it isn't a fair comparison, a rooted Android vs stock iPhone, but it's trivial to root a pixel and on an iPhone I can't even access my photos from a terminal emulator... so there's no fair comparison that can be made
    ajyotirmay · 1790137693 · focus · HN ↗
    I'm on S24, and the way my device has been setup, there are no ads
    Gibbon1 · 1790147415 · focus · HN ↗
    What we need is to change the rules so any company that sells ads gets taxed on revenue in addition to profit. Not just ad revenue, all revenue.
  2. ChickadeeBandit · 1790090530 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
  3. dpoloncsak · 1790106131 · focus · HN ↗
    Throwing it out there, YouTube is top-of-their-class and ran mostly from ads
    mitxela · 1790106244 · focus · HN ↗
    YouTube's market is still shit though. High end of that market is those billionaires who pay for actual cinemas in their mansions.
2. rapind · 1790089281 · focus · HN ↗
  Imagine spending $2k on a phone only to be presented with ads. Quick way to lose your luxury and loyal customers IMO.
  On the flip side, imagine having another product made for people who can afford $2k phones... Well you'd probably pay a lot to advertise to that market.
  I think trying to balance between these 2 is going to be tough, and your luxury market could evaporate if a significant competitor came along. And by competitor, we're probably just talking about AI in your pocket or on your face that replaces the traditional phone interface. I also think it's a real slippery slope to short term profits once you start taking ad revenue.
  1. cousinbryce · 1790089721 · focus · HN ↗
    Where would the luxury market go? Asking for a friend
    rapind · 1790090404 · focus · HN ↗
    In general, no where yet. I do think the smart phone interface (iOS) could become at least somewhat obsolete soon. As we move more towards a primarily inference interface it will open up the field to more competitors (less moat). That's just my opinion though. Be interesting, as usual, to see what comes out of China in the next few years.
    [deleted] · 1790090814 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    Cider9986 · 1790092059 · focus · HN ↗
    GrapheneOS with FOSS apps is a premium experience but not where non - technical users will go currently because of the setup. Once setup it's very premium.
    Motorola really seems to be going for a luxury look [1] and there will be Motorola devices with GrapheneOS installed out of the box.
    [1] <a href="https://nitter.miningtcup.me/Moto/status/2102040650606891119#m" rel="nofollow">https://nitter.miningtcup.me/Moto/status/2102040650606891119...
    <a href="https://nitter.miningtcup.me/Moto/status/2100933254249627806#m" rel="nofollow">https://nitter.miningtcup.me/Moto/status/2100933254249627806...
    Pantone and some sound partnership.
    readthenotes1 · 1790093419 · focus · HN ↗
    Just about everybody with money uses contactless payment and it doesn't look like that works with graphene so I'm not sure I would call it premium except for privacy.
    Likewise, no Android Auto
    Cider9986 · 1790093601 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    klardotsh · 1790093895 · focus · HN ↗
    Funny enough, the only part of Apple Pay I use with any frequency is the browser/app integration part, basically as a much more convenient alternative to PayPal sometimes.
    IRL I do use it on occasion but everything I use it for, I could just fall back to the contactless chips in my physical plastic CCs - just like I did for all those years on a deGoogled Android phone with no Google Wallet support. The unique value add of Apple Pay in the physical world is nearly zero to me, other than acting as a market force that made US point of sale systems finally catch up to Canada years late and offer tap to pay.
    4chandaily · 1790095340 · focus · HN ↗
    No android auto? What are you basing this on? I ask because I am responding from grapheneos while connected to android auto, and I am concerned I am in the wrong universe again.
    readthenotes1 · 1790205095 · focus · HN ↗
    I guess I shouldn't believe what I read. I and when certainly wouldn't buy phone that doesn't do Android auto... Glad to hear it works!
    4chandaily · 1790254823 · focus · HN ↗
    It does. You do have to install it (GrapheneOS provides a Play Store Sandbox to install google apps to) intentionally, it is not installed by default. Perhaps that tripped up the author of the misinformation you came across?
    In any case, it is a fantastic OS with many of the annoyances of Android removed. (Scoped file permissions are fantastic, for example) If you are on the fence, I'd suggest giving it a shot. Replacing a phone OS might seem scary, but it is really pretty similar to use.
    drnick1 · 1790095495 · focus · HN ↗
    > Just about everybody with money uses contactless payment
    Cash is much better for privacy. The government, banking system, and countless intermediaries should not know how I spend my money.
    So the lack of contactless payment on GrapheneOS may be inconvenient, but is it consistent with a privacy stance.
    Cider9986 · 1790096699 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    al_borland · 1790095460 · focus · HN ↗
    From what I've seen of GrapheneOS, it's not a luxury product, it's a product for tinkerers, who don't mind finicky granular configs. If I'm paying a premium, I expect sensible, privacy respecting, defaults that I can use out of the box. Not constant fumbles until everything is "setup".
    Cider9986 · 1790096802 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    microtonal · 1790102288 · focus · HN ↗
    I think you have a wrong idea about GrapheneOS. You install the sandboxed Play Store/Services through their app store and then it's pretty much the same as any other Android phone. Except that it doesn't get in your face with preinstalled crap (Google, Apple, or Samsung). On the GrapheneOS forums there are a lot of non-technical people that install GrapheneOS and don't have many issues. The primary annoyance is Google's abuse of their monopoly with Play Integrity.
    I would say it often feels more like a luxury product than an iPhone or Google-certified Android phone because it's not full of cheesy stuff.
    armadyl · 1790095960 · focus · HN ↗
    As someone who has daily driven both side by side as much as I love GOS, AOSP / Android absolutely does not feel premium compared to iOS. Both the UI and UX are rough compared to the polish of iOS. And the FOSS apps on Android are extremely subpar in terms of feel compared to iOS (off the top of my head look at how bad the Fossify Contacts app is compared to Google Contacts) but that’s the trade-off.
    I also don’t think there will be Motorola devices with GOS out of the box, they’re just meeting the requirements to be able install it.
    Cider9986 · 1790096883 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    armadyl · 1790097397 · focus · HN ↗
    Oh damn nice. Guess we’ll also see later today too since the Signature should be revealed at the snapdragon summit
    Cider9986 · 1790125578 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    cyberax · 1790097345 · focus · HN ↗
    iOS? "Polish"?
    Even AOSP is head-and-shoulders better than iOS.
    armadyl · 1790097444 · focus · HN ↗
    It is subjective, to me AOSP just feels extremely rough and undercooked in a lot of places
    cyberax · 1790101622 · focus · HN ↗
    Try disabling animations in AOSP and see how it feels. You won't be able to go to the painfully slow iOS afterwards.
    Melatonic · 1790117287 · focus · HN ↗
    Seriously - first thing I do in any Android device in developer options
    cyberax · 1790122303 · focus · HN ↗
    You don't even need developer settings for that, there's an official option in the accessibility settings.
    duskdozer · 1790158015 · focus · HN ↗
    When I see "polish" they're usually referring to the opposite of things like this. They seem to like sluggish UI as long as it's "smooth" (not "fast") and has flashy animations.
    microtonal · 1790102682 · focus · HN ↗
    Both the UI and UX are rough compared to the polish of iOS.
    Sorry, but no.
    I also have an iPhone for $REASONS. Both my prior iPhone Air and my new iPhone 18 Pro still frequently stutters. Even scrolling some settings screens (which are very simple), I can often see frames getting dropped. Apple apps like the App Store are one huge frame-dropfest (even if you let it preload all assets).
    My P10P with GrapheneOS, which only has a midrange SoC by modern standards (don't believe what Google tells you) and it is buttery smooth.
    iOS got even more terrible with Liquid Glass, so many things are badly readable, even with the slider set to completely opaque in iOS 27.
    iOS used to be premium compared to Android. But Apple enshittified iOS over the last few years. Even most Apple pundits agree.
  2. TheDong · 1790090519 · focus · HN ↗
    They could do what Amazon did for the kindles: pay extra to remove the ads (for the Kindle it was $20 one-time).
    For iOS, they could simply charge an extra $600/mo as a "iCloud ad-free premium" fee to remove the ads, and I think that would make everyone happy.
    rapind · 1790090745 · focus · HN ↗
    Maybe. How are the seat heater subscription services going for BMW? I thought the market had clearly rejected it, but maybe they powered through and people have begrudgingly accepted it now?
    I don't think people want to pay a large sticker price and then an additional monthly fee on top of it to enable features or disable ads... but I honestly don't know. I just know I sure af won't lol.
    TheDong · 1790091340 · focus · HN ↗
    I think the more comparable thing would be youtube premium (paying to not have as many ads there), and I certainly pay for that.
    I have no clue how popular it is though overall, presumably not super popular.
    I also don't think the $300-$2000/mo "ad-free iOS subscription" would be super popular if it existed, but idk, I know at least a few people that would go for it.
    rapind · 1790091631 · focus · HN ↗
    > I think the more comparable thing would be youtube premium (paying to not have as many ads there), and I certainly pay for that.
    This isn't comparable, because the base product is free. We're talking about paying an upfront fee for a premium product (like $2k for a phone) and then being shown ads. Youtube would be a vastly different product if everyone had to pay a one time $2k to use it (and then purchase premium to unlock ad-free). It's also noticeable that a lot of the "premium" media services go from being ad-free to ad-light... so we're back to cable... but that's a different discussion.
    gloosx · 1790093268 · focus · HN ↗
    >I have no clue how popular it is though overall, presumably not super popular.
    It's not very popular because you can remove ALL ads from youtube using a free browser extension
    SoftTalker · 1790094407 · focus · HN ↗
    That doesn't help you if you use the YouTube app on your phone, which I'm guessing is what a huge fraction of the viewership does.
    gloosx · 1790096328 · focus · HN ↗
    But you can just use the browser with an adblocker for Youtube on the phone, which also allows you to play audio in the background for free e.g. for playing music, what's the point in using the app at all?
    SoftTalker · 1790096976 · focus · HN ↗
    I'm speculating about what most mobile YouTube viewers actually do, not what makes the most sense.
    delta_p_delta_x · 1790092638 · focus · HN ↗
    > seat heater subscription services going for BMW?
    Own a recent-ish BMW. Haven't had to pay for heated seats; I have a button on my climate control to switch it on/off/change the heat levels.
    autoexec · 1790094154 · focus · HN ↗
    > They could do what Amazon did for the kindles: pay extra to remove the ads (
    It's a bad idea to pay someone to remove a problem they created for you. That's literally racketeering. They make you pay them to solve a problem that only exists because they put it there to make you pay them to solve it. They can increase the amount of ads at any time to punish holdouts and can increase how much "protection money" they extract from you whenever they want as well. "Nice $2,000 phone you just got buddy, it'd sure be a shame if it was filled with ads wouldn't it?"
    rapind · 1790174774 · focus · HN ↗
    > t's a bad idea to pay someone to remove a problem they created for you.
    Worth noting that this is what most of the live service gaming industry is doing.
  3. bix6 · 1790091503 · focus · HN ↗
    Is BMW still doing the $20/mo for heated seats or whatever? All these companies man… not everything needs to be recurring revenue ffs.
    daveidol · 1790091639 · focus · HN ↗
    That one gets a worse rep than I think it deserves.
    You could always pay the one time fee for heated seats like in the past. It was just an option if you don’t want to pay upfront.
    genxy · 1790092146 · focus · HN ↗
    It is already built into the damn car. Everyone already paid for it.
    techdmn · 1790092316 · focus · HN ↗
    It's bad because you already paid for the hardware, any additional charge is just a money grab.
    tavavex · 1790105224 · focus · HN ↗
    Soon enough they'll be asking you to pay for Storage Space Pro (lets you open the trunk) and Intelligent Manual Media Control (which lets you slightly lower the volume of ads that automatically blast out of all the speakers when the car is on)
    bix6 · 1790094031 · focus · HN ↗
    Really? You think a luxury brand charging a subscription for heated seats, a basic add on, is inline (haha rip inline 6).
    Lio · 1790145490 · focus · HN ↗
    A one time fee to use something you’ve already payed for?
    They’ve really MBA’d the crap out of that brand and it serves them right now it’s going down the tube.
  4. alentred · 1790092726 · focus · HN ↗
    > On the flip side
    Pun intended?
    dmux · 1790093184 · focus · HN ↗
    Your callout just gave me a great idea: the iPhone Duo has three screens. Depending on orientation, the front screen could be used to show ads to others!
    alentred · 1790096186 · focus · HN ↗
    Don't give 'em more ideas! :)
  5. akudha · 1790093031 · focus · HN ↗
    Why is it tough to balance? There are ridiculously cheap ad ridden phones sold in Asia - it makes sense because ads subsidize those phones. How does it make sense to show ads in a $2000 phone, especially from a company that prides themselves for "taste", "courage" and a bunch of other buzzwords? And a company that is already far, far ahead of its competitors when it comes to profit margins in the smartphone business? I don't understand.
    autoexec · 1790093524 · focus · HN ↗
    > it makes sense because ads subsidize those phones.
    It's not about the cost of the phone. If it were they'd stop pushing ads the moment they'd earned back the full cost of the discounted phone you bought. It's purely about greed. Companies push ads so they can stuff more cash in their pockets over and over again for years, if not decades, after the money they got from your initial purchase. It doesn't matter if the phone was $100 or $2000 because ads increase their profits in either case, and money is literally the only thing they care about.
    MichaelZuo · 1790094096 · focus · HN ↗
    The real question is why is the median Apple decision maker circa 2026 vastly more short term greedy than the median Apple decision maker circa 2012?
    GolfPopper · 1790094985 · focus · HN ↗
    While I don't know, my suspicion is that the market is saturated, but the company is still hungry for "numbers go up".
    "We have a large, loyal consumer base and can count on a steady return for many years," is no longer sufficient. So corporations cannabalize, turning long-term strengths into short term profits.
    It's what we're doing to our entire civilization. Why should Apple do anything different?
    kleene_op · 1790095096 · focus · HN ↗
    I think it's not just Apple. Everyone and every company seem to become greedier and greedier. Economically, the world is not in a great place, apart from a minority which just gets richer and richer.
    autoexec · 1790095240 · focus · HN ↗
    I think some of it just that different people have different levels of greed. Some of what protected Apple was vanity. I think Steven Jobs cared about how people saw him and his products. He wanted to be the guy who made a premium product. The longer time went on, the less Apple execs cared about what he would have wanted and started caring more about what they wanted. I also think that they're counting on people to have been conditioned to accept ads everywhere. Microsoft has been infesting their OS with ads for over a decade which, like it or not, has normalized that practice.
    Apple is counting on the fact that apple users aren't going to switch to andriod devices just because the company starts pushing ads in their face. In addition to all the customers who don't stop buying apple products because they are filled with ads, a percentage of them will start paying for more Apple products and services because of the ads. The obvious next step from here is to increase the amount of ads until that's no longer the case. Get used to seeing ads iphone users. It's only going to get worse.
    TheOtherHobbes · 1790097719 · focus · HN ↗
    I think the Apple Effect was largely a result of personal narcissism.
    Jobs had to be the smartest and most tasteful person in the room, even when he pretended otherwise. He was desperate for adulation from customers who loved him for his taste, inventiveness, risk-taking, and style.
    The motivation was questionable and arguably toxic, but the results were spectacular.
    Cook was more of a nickel and dime guy. So far Ternus is looking disappointingly similar.
    The share price is all. Customers are the farm animals who Make Number Go Up, and Make Number Go Up is Rule Number One.
    The kind of customer focus that drove Jobs is fading into background noise.
    lostlogin · 1790101931 · focus · HN ↗
    What happened to Apple University, or whatever they called Job’s attempt to document their key to success?
    Some MBA poisoned it?
    CyberDildonics · 1790121998 · focus · HN ↗
    Steven Jobs definitely cared about the polish as a reflection of himself. He wanted people to associate the name Steven Jobs with apple. When people thought of apple they thought of Steven Jobs. He didn't want to put the name of his company on anything unpolished or tasteless because people would associate that with Steven Jobs, since everyone knew Steven Jobs had the final say.
    asdff · 1790095630 · focus · HN ↗
    No more Jobs being tastemaker at the helm. Cook is pure business.
    theendisney · 1790209542 · focus · HN ↗
    Everyone is slowly moving the line. Cant move to far ahead, cant stay to far behind.
    The more we can isolate consumers the less they will care about others and the less of a point complaining.
    serial_dev · 1790093688 · focus · HN ↗
    I guess advertising to people who pay 2000 for a phone are a more valuably audience than those buying phones for 80 bucks.
    But I agree, I wish more leaders in the product development space would just stand up and say: "it's garbage, it's hostile towards our users, so we won't do it, because it compromises our values for a quick buck"
    kakacik · 1790096890 · focus · HN ↗
    apple crowd is highly uncritical, I struggle to use word objective towards their approach to their beloved brand. So corporation is testing how much more they can milk customers before they stand up and go to competition. Their ad business has been growing steadily in past years, its not coming from nowhere and it has been discussed here (with strong disdain) ad nausea.
    Wait, you thought apple, unlike every other company, is not out there for maximal profit for owners but some sort of higher mission? Or where does the misunderstanding comes from? The era of respectful companies having long term utmost moral standing and behavior thinking decades ahead is thing of the past. At least for big boys thats pretty clear.
    theendisney · 1790209250 · focus · HN ↗
    There exists a good answer to that question but they apparently dont know it.
  6. someguyiguess · 1790093092 · focus · HN ↗
    You mean like when I clicked this article? What an ad filled mess of a website.
    qwerpy · 1790093244 · focus · HN ↗
    At least with this website, ad blockers will hide most/all of the ads. The ads built into iOS cannot be blocked or even dismissed. The future is going to be apps- and OS-level ads.
  7. leftnode · 1790094165 · focus · HN ↗
    > Quick way to lose your luxury and loyal customers IMO.
    Unfortunately, not true. Very, very, very few people are going to abandon the years of work they've put into using iOS and macOS because of a few pesky ads. Sure, they'll complain about it, but they won't actually switch.
    merlindru · 1790094353 · focus · HN ↗
    it'll still be a net loss. how many customers sign up to icloud+ because of these ads -vs- how much do these ads tarnish the brand apple has spent so much money building?
    if it could wver be quantified, i bet it's a net $ loss. and apples esteemed image is ostensibly very important to them. why the hell do apple execs think different?
    GolfPopper · 1790094746 · focus · HN ↗
    It's a thermocline of trust issue. Apple can abuse their customers for profit for a while, but eventually all the little insults add up and they'll lose them in bulk. And when it happens, Apple won't understand why.
    lotsofpulp · 1790096299 · focus · HN ↗
    That applies to businesses with small moats.
    Designing and producing a new smartphone with an equivalent feature set and performance and power efficiency is about as big of a moat as you can get.
    disqard · 1790101339 · focus · HN ↗
    > thermocline of trust
    Great reference! Agree, it's a "last straw" situation -- you can foist all these indignities upon your "captive" user base, right up until you can't.
    thewebguyd · 1790107243 · focus · HN ↗
    Only if there's a competitor for Apple's locked-in customers to go to. Android OEMs aren't trying very hard to court Apple's customers, none of them yet offer anything equivalent to advanced data protection for iCloud & photos, and there's no full "ecosystem" outside of phone + ear buds, and if you buy through a carrier you get ads and bloatware shoved down your throat anyway.
    I do agree that Apple is ripe for disruption, but it certainly isn't going to come from any of the existing players, nor is it likely to come from the AI labsp laying fast and loose with your data (and who will also be serving ads).
    phforms · 1790095373 · focus · HN ↗
    Maybe. But at least some (like me) will become more hesitant to buy newer products or update to the latest system (I am still on Sequoia because of all this crap lately). And we will also become more hesitant to recommend Apple products. If this is hurting them enough to stop is another question…
  8. merlindru · 1790094271 · focus · HN ↗
    > Well you'd probably pay a lot to advertise to that market.
    and yet you have to restrain yourself from ever capitalizing on that, because not advertising to that market is what got you that market in the first place
  9. JumpCrisscross · 1790094889 · focus · HN ↗
    > lose your luxury and loyal customers IMO
    You lose customers to those products. I’ve switched to CoMaps. Some of my friends went back to Google Maps—the differentiator for Apple was privacy and that seems to have been lost in kind even if not yet in magnitude.
    al_borland · 1790095277 · focus · HN ↗
    Going to Google Maps in response to Apple adding ads to Maps doesn't make a lot of sense. Google has been putting ads in Google Maps for many years. Is the view that they're both the same now, in terms of having ads, so they might as well use the one with the better POI data?
    JumpCrisscross · 1790100087 · focus · HN ↗
    > they're both the same now, in terms of having ads, so they might as well use the one with the better POI data?
    Yup. If the main differentiator is gone, you move to the next marginal thing that matters, which in this case is working as a map.
    Lio · 1790143924 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes it is for me. Google Maps has much better and more up to date information.
    A number of times I’ve been set to the wrong place by Apple Maps.
    If you’re going to be served ads either way you might as well pick the more reliable tool.
    For maps Apple has a lower quality product, that lets me down when I really need it, and has no privacy advantage.
  10. al_borland · 1790095023 · focus · HN ↗
    > imagine having another product made for people who can afford $2k phones... Well you'd probably pay a lot to advertise to that market.
    I've been hearing this kind of thing a lot, but if a customer is paying for a luxury product, and part of that luxury is not having ads (or being an ad)... advertising to them because of it breaches the trust, erases the luxury, and alienates that valuable customer.
    At some point, customers price themselves out of advertising. We see this in fashion. Designer brands have their consumer level lines with logos all over them, then they usually have a luxury line where those logos go away. With Ralph Lauren, for example, Polo gets you a logo on almost everything[0], while Purple is nearly logo free[1].
    [0] <a href="https://www.ralphlauren.com/men-clothing-button-down-shirts/r/polo-ralph-lauren" rel="nofollow">https://www.ralphlauren.com/men-clothing-button-down-shirts/...
    [1] <a href="https://www.ralphlauren.com/men-clothing-button-down-shirts/r/purple-label" rel="nofollow">https://www.ralphlauren.com/men-clothing-button-down-shirts/...
    deathanatos · 1790095448 · focus · HN ↗
    Customers who are "only" willing to pay $130 for a shirt should get ads, it's fine, because if they didn't want ads, they should pay up for that shirt, to the tune of $500¹?
    Do you understand how incredibly privileged you have to be to afford a $500 shirt? (Most people would say that about the $130 shirt!) Then that principle, applied across my entire set of life expenses, just to get a company to not take advantage of me?
    ¹… and that's tossing the $3,000 shirt on that page, too…
    al_borland · 1790096367 · focus · HN ↗
    The point was that the highest level of luxury does not advertise itself. If Apple wants to be seen as a luxury brand, which is something they spent decades building, they should not be pushing these ads so hard. Building that image took a long time, but it can all go away very quickly.
    Apple was a company that allowed fairly normal people to have a luxury experience without the 10x price tag, and they're ruining it. People still make "Apple tax" comments, but when looking at their competitors, they really aren't outlandish, like these shirts are.
    robocat · 1790105340 · focus · HN ↗
    > Do you understand how incredibly privileged you have to be to afford a $500 shirt
    Seems like a virtuously elitist argument against other elites.
    Should we apologize for buying any luxury item?
    If we only did the necessities of life, how do you think our world would look? What motivates you?
    It is demeaning to others to feel apologetically bad about having luxuries that others don't. It is rude to judge others as privileged. The problem with the word is that it indirectly puts down the unprivileged. Everyone alive is privileged and lots of dead people are too. Be grateful for luxuries, sure. Denial and abstention can be just another form of being an arsehole.
    Hipocrisy is hard to escape eh.
    rrr_oh_man · 1790149277 · focus · HN ↗
    I've never understood this.
    You can get shirts tailored (bespoke, not MTM!) for well under $100 in Istanbul, around $150 in Hongkong, and about $200 in Mexico City.
    So why pay to be a walking advertisement for some European brand conglomerate?
    threetonesun · 1790098656 · focus · HN ↗
    Fashion is a weird analogy because I can get stuff even from well known designers from places like Uniqlo with no logos on them. A better example is cars, where people are often happy to show off their status symbol logos, and will buy other things that go along with their car.
    al_borland · 1790099978 · focus · HN ↗
    The car analogy doesn’t land for me. I was trying to show an example where people paid to opt out of advertising. The car example, is the exact thing the person I was replying to was talking about… a brand sells the customer something expensive, then keeps advertising to them in hopes that they will keep buying more nonsense to go with it… selling to the captive audience. This is exactly what I don’t want.
  11. 2OEH8eoCRo0 · 1790095078 · focus · HN ↗
    > Quick way to lose your luxury and loyal customers IMO.
    No way- look at the users on this site simping for every Apple product. If we don't stand up to it then why would the normies?
  12. unrented7977 · 1790095503 · focus · HN ↗
    > Quick way to lose your luxury and loyal customers IMO.
    And where are those customers going to go? The only other option is Android, which is even more bloated and ad infested. Even if Apple is worse now than they were before, there still isn't a better option available.
    You can't lose customers if there's no alternative. In the modern era, the average person can't simply not have a phone. It's a necessity, and when a product is necessary for daily life, you lose your options.
    No, nothing will come of this. People will be mad and hate Apple more, but consequence is not possible here.
    jjordan · 1790096351 · focus · HN ↗
    We need an open phone platform badly.
    skupig · 1790100962 · focus · HN ↗
    >which is even more bloated and ad infested.
    Since when? I never see any ads at all on my Android phone. I can use uBlock Origin in my browser and I can install 3rd party ad-free clients for apps like YouTube and Twitch.
    microtonal · 1790102014 · focus · HN ↗
    Even better, Morphe can rip ads out of the native YouTube client :).
  13. asdff · 1790095531 · focus · HN ↗
    Where would they go? Android? That's even more spammy and ad ridden. They sure aren't installing grapheneOS.
  14. [deleted] · 1790099090 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
3. GuinansEyebrows · 1790089791 · focus · HN ↗
  > Looks like Tim Cook, John Ternus and Eddy Cue really enjoy being swamped with ads in their products. Will there soon be a time when Apple executives start carrying some other brand’s devices with them to avoid having a rotten experience?
  There's no chance these guys don't already have the full suite of Apple services (whether or not they use them) tied to their iCloud accounts. They've probably never even seen the nagware.
  1. benoau · 1790090116 · focus · HN ↗
    I would also guess they practically never use the App Store. In fact I would guess there's virtually no dogfooding of it at all internally, because they have 100k+ employees but need blogs to tell them when a sanctioned Russian bank's stealth submission is topping the free charts.
    cyberax · 1790098724 · focus · HN ↗
    Who _is_ using the App Store these days? It's such a mess.
    lotsofpulp · 1790101455 · focus · HN ↗
    Does anyone use the App Store other than to search for an already known app name? I probably have not in over a decade, and I can't see a reason I ever would.
    eptcyka · 1790102674 · focus · HN ↗
    Best part of searching the App Store for something you know is that even though the hamming distance between the search term and the thing you want is 0, the thing you want will not be at the top of results anyway.
    PhageGenerator · 1790113207 · focus · HN ↗
    This causes me so many issues. Rolling out multi-factor authentication and having some no-name random app show up as the first result for "microsoft authenticator" is downright malicious behavior on the part of the app store.
    colejohnson66 · 1790104519 · focus · HN ↗
    I used to. In the "golden days" of "there's an app for that", I would peruse the App Store looking for new games. I spend hundreds of dollars on games doing that. Now, the only games you see really are shovelware or subscription garbage.
  2. alt227 · 1790090220 · focus · HN ↗
    Ive often wondered if there is some magic internally Appleid setting which turns an account into an ad free one for internal execs.
    lostlogin · 1790101253 · focus · HN ↗
    If you could buy into an account like this, with the cost being just over the ad profit from my account, I’d be interested.
    mat_b · 1790103796 · focus · HN ↗
    This would only move the needle further in the direction of a terrible user experience. This is exactly what we don't want.
    [deleted] · 1790104577 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
4. mentalgear · 1790089882 · focus · HN ↗
  Exactly, the enshitificaton of Apple proves that Greed can never be satisfied: even a trillion dollar company, with a fanatic consumer base (that is ironically paying premium $ for the best USER experience) and THE tightest ecosystem grip that yields huge App-Store tax revenues, even such a company is not 'satisfied' and still can't escape capitalist logic and the stock-market's "perpetual share value growth" force and has to cannibalize user experience until at some point it will either implode or somehow manages to balance the 'just shitty/good enough' tightrope over their walled-garden (hello Microsoft).
  In any case, user experience and the original ethos the company was build around has been lost for a long time, and enshitification by greed seems the ultimate outcome for every company that is traded publicly or equity funded.
  1. vjvjvjvjghv · 1790119362 · focus · HN ↗
    " even a trillion dollar company, "
    Exactly, not "even", these huge companies have to squeeze money out of everything. To keep their growth rates up, they have to make bigger and bigger swings.
  2. inatreecrown2 · 1790120672 · focus · HN ↗
    It really is a shame what's happening to Apple, but I think Apple customers are waking up and are looking increasingly for exits.
    grugagag · 1790136617 · focus · HN ↗
    Exits to where? I personally I dialed down my phone use to a minimum. I still use Iphone just because I see no better alternative for my sporadic use. I use few apps minimally and install almost nothing, i can't remember when I last visited the app store.
    inatreecrown2 · 1790144743 · focus · HN ↗
    Well you took the exit to "using my phone less", which is good for you, bad for Apple (less service revenue, probably less frequent hardware sales from you)
5. latexr · 1790090744 · focus · HN ↗
  > Looks like Tim Cook, John Ternus and Eddy Cue really enjoy being swamped with ads in their products.
  I bet they don’t see any ads, because their accounts will have the highest tier (or even a special one above that) of everything.
  1. alentred · 1790092915 · focus · HN ↗
    That’s bad hardening. You are not supposed to use your root account for everyday work.
    gmueckl · 1790094783 · focus · HN ↗
    No, hardening has nothing to do with it. They have a feature flag system deeply embedded in their software. And such systems can totally distribute different flags to different people. And that's how you could easily create VIP accounts with different behaviors than the rest of the world, like all ad festures turned off.
    xdavidliu · 1790097645 · focus · HN ↗
    reminds of me of an instance where the opposite happened:
    > internal email from Bill Gates complaining about the usability of some Windows features. It’s old — from 2003
    <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/2008/06/25/you-thought-you-hated-windows-check-out-what-bill-gates-had-to-say/" rel="nofollow">https://www.techdirt.com/2008/06/25/you-thought-you-hated-wi...
    gabrielhidasy · 1790098997 · focus · HN ↗
    I'm 99% sure the hardening part was a joke
    alentred · 1790192513 · focus · HN ↗
    Thank you, sir.
    I am still not sure if the joke was bad or if everyone takes everything too seriously nowadays.
    gmueckl · 1790235895 · focus · HN ↗
    I guess it was simply too close to reality. That's why I didn't register that as humor. Text also doesn't carry tone of voice well, which makes confusion more likely
    al_borland · 1790095622 · focus · HN ↗
    It's not a root account issue, it's that they have already bought all the services there are to buy. One would assume that once you buy a service, they would stop prompting you to buy it.
    Though, in my experience, that isn't true with Apple. Even when I tried Apple One, I still saw bugs in the experience that led to ads for things I already subscribed to... particularly in News+ and AppleTV+.
6. avazhi · 1790092669 · focus · HN ↗
  Jobs would truly lose his shit if he saw what Apple has become.
  Source - worked at Apple ~2010.
  1. someguyiguess · 1790093049 · focus · HN ↗
    I haven’t worked for Apple but you’re definitely correct. Just compare what Jobs said about using a stylus with how happy the company was to announce that you could use Apple Pencil with the iPhone duo. It is self-evident. It’s far from the company Jobs once ran.
    sandcat_ · 1790093967 · focus · HN ↗
    You’re misunderstanding that quote. “If you saw a stylus they blew it!” referred to requiring a stylus to interact with the touch display. Having one optional, mainly for drawing, isn’t quite the same thing.
    That said I doubt he’d be happy at the current Pencil lineup. It’s a mess.
    debo_ · 1790097167 · focus · HN ↗
    Literal pencil-pushers are ruining the product!
    mcculley · 1790104259 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes, and it makes sense to add the stylus/pencil after app developers had to learn how to deal with finger taps only. Apple did the same thing with the original Mac. There were no arrow keys on the first model, so that developers were forced to accommodate the mouse.
    SirHackalot · 1790101191 · focus · HN ↗
    I like being able to use Procreate or other image editing software on my iPad, and the only reason I’d consider a foldable in the first place is because I’d like to use it like I use my iPad. What’s so bad about having the option to use a stylus? Who cares what a dead tech oligarch once thought of styluses? Especially when the state of the technology wasn’t where it’s at now. If you could ask Jobs now, maybe he would have changed his mind.
    kalleboo · 1790169761 · focus · HN ↗
    Steve Jobs also repeatedly dissed the idea of an iPod that played video as late as one year before they started selling the iPod Video. I wouldn't take any of his stated opinions as gospel.
  2. jimt1234 · 1790093343 · focus · HN ↗
    Jobs has long been vocal about protecting the user experience. Not 100% sure if it's true, but I heard Jobs was originally opposed to custom apps running on the iPhone (the App Store), because he 'didn't want to turn iPhone in Windows'.
    asdff · 1790095839 · focus · HN ↗
    Jobs was right. Apps are so shitty now I don't even bother. Everything has a subscription now and there's so much noise its hard to actually find signal on the appstore.
    qzw · 1790097862 · focus · HN ↗
    Imagine if he had stuck to his guns on native apps. iPhone would’ve either died or we’d all be living in a web apps paradise right now.
    benoau · 1790098268 · focus · HN ↗
    It wouldn't have died - most apps are still just a thin UI over a corresponding online service, and most of the data and services proprietary APIs provide ended up achievable in a browser too. It is really just the internet that makes apps and smartphones useful.
    All apps really offered was a way to gatekeep payments in games that groom impulsive spending habits, they just happened to start making very serious money on Facebook right about the moment Jobs changed his mind.
    asdff · 1790099682 · focus · HN ↗
    Early on it was different with a lot more stuff actually running locally vs cloud service era. App store predated that for a little bit actually. There weren't microtransactions initially either. What you'd call a AAA game for that platform back then would actually be $9.99 one time payment.
    mahboi · 1790137096 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah, there were a lot of really good early iPhone games
    idiotsecant · 1790104043 · focus · HN ↗
    OK...but basically everyone uses custom apps because they are tremendously useful. You'd just ban all of them?
    [deleted] · 1790137117 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    vor_ · 1790115606 · focus · HN ↗
    Of course he wasn't right. Apps instantly became a signature part of the iPhone experience and a huge success story for the platform.
    mahboi · 1790137020 · focus · HN ↗
    Or the app is fine, but I don't want to bother downloading it for some random thing that should just be a website.
    [deleted] · 1790099341 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
    vor_ · 1790115548 · focus · HN ↗
    Jobs wasn't always correct about things. There are a large number of examples where he wasn't.
  3. anon7000 · 1790097036 · focus · HN ↗
    Didn’t Jobs frequently lose his shit when he did work at Apple?
    onemoresoop · 1790101035 · focus · HN ↗
    Indeed. That’s what resulted in Apple beingn different than competition. Too bad Apple engineers were reprimanded and publicly humiliated, sometimes with no fault. But Jobs had a vision that’s been long gone from Apple and it really shows. Sometimes I wonder if Jobs himself would be corrupted by Apple’s success but I’ll never know the answer to that…
  4. grishka · 1790101629 · focus · HN ↗
    That's not a given. Visionary people sometimes go mildly insane over time. Source: worked at VKontakte and Telegram and watched it slowly happen to Durov.
    flemhans · 1790105487 · focus · HN ↗
    How did it affect Durov?
    grishka · 1790110739 · focus · HN ↗
    Questionable features like being able to delete anything in the conversation on both sides. Tacky UI choices like liquid glass on Android or the excessive use of Lottie animations every-damn-where. All while being completely deaf to feedback, both from within the team (any criticism makes you "toxic") and from the public. The way he treats his employees isn't exactly good either.
    ivm · 1790134356 · focus · HN ↗
    The first one is excellent though, I wish all messengers had it.
    grishka · 1790136041 · focus · HN ↗
    But you can no longer trust Telegram that things you had in your chat will still be there tomorrow. This feature feels like someone has hacked into your device and deleted files they didn't like.
    ivm · 1790137830 · focus · HN ↗
    "Your" chat consists of other people's messages too and they own those. You can also delete your messages on Discord or Slack – it's quite normal as a feature.
    grishka · 1790169878 · focus · HN ↗
    Firstly, I'm talking about PMs, not group chats.
    Of course, I have nothing against being able to delete your own messages for both. A time limit within which you can do that is nice but I can live without one. But Telegram lets you delete every message in any PM conversation, including incoming ones, for both people. Or even the entire conversation, and make it disappear from the other person's list without a trace.
7. ozim · 1790095760 · focus · HN ↗
  Don’t mix apples with oranges Steve was The Apple those guys are CE—replaceable-O-ranges. If board and shareholders want ads there is no one to tell them get lost anymore.
  1. ajyotirmay · 1790137630 · focus · HN ↗
    > Steve was The Apple iAds conveniently forgotten
    ozim · 1790142057 · focus · HN ↗
    The service was not as successful as expected, partly due to high pricing and Apple's strict control over data.
    No wonder ad platforms that stay afloat till this day can have up to 30% of income from scam ads.
8. nekusar · 1790095916 · focus · HN ↗
  Wow, I read it as "John Temu", which seems to be what Apple is being turned into.
  This whole saga is straight up the standard enshittification playbook by Cory Doctorow. And with no real ownership of the "purchased" hardware is why you all are in this mess.
  Glad I'm a Linux user and admin.
9. bluepeter · 1790096924 · focus · HN ↗
  Worth remembering that Steve Jobs championed "iAds"... <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2011/12/13/steve-jobs-last-big-failure-iads/" rel="nofollow">https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2011/12/13/steve-jobs...
  1. SllX · 1790097034 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah & they veered so hard into tying to make them tasteful & not suck that it failed. Turns out the real money is in spyware.
    bitpush · 1790114956 · focus · HN ↗
    How so? This smells like Apple Distortion Field. "Yeah our ads are better. Its the other guys' ads that are bad".
    The problem with Apple is they make statements that they walk back gleefully at a moments notice.
    - Nobody wants a bigger phone - iPhone Pro Maxes
    - Nobody wants foldables - iPhone Duo
    - We've simplified the product portfolio .. ahem.
    - AI is bad - Ours is called Apple Intelligence. Totally different thing.
    Think Different indeed.
    UqWBcuFx6NV4r · 1790122531 · focus · HN ↗
    What a bad-faith comment. You just wanted to launch into an anti-Apple lecture and it doesn’t sound like you have the slightest clue about this specific topic. Have you watched the iAds presentation? They’re not like any other advertisements I’ve seen before. CERTAINLY not at the time. You can see exactly why advertisers didn’t bite.
    bitpush · 1790136774 · focus · HN ↗
    Honest question. If iAds were so good, why didnt it succeed?
    When something is successful its all Apple. When something fails, its just that others dont get it.
    Do you afford the same benefit to other people/companies? Why is Apple so special?
    sirwhinesalot · 1790150264 · focus · HN ↗
    Because they were good for the customer rather than the advertiser, and the money to Apple came from the advertiser in this case.
    bitpush · 1790151904 · focus · HN ↗
    Ads in Apple Maps. How is it user friendly?
    kalleboo · 1790168083 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    wolvoleo · 1790168346 · focus · HN ↗
    It's probably the single one time where I would actually want ads.
    For example roaming the city at 4am on a Saturday and trying to find some place with hot food. Google failed miserably at this. Eventually I found something but just because I knew it was often open at night. It was also marked open on Google Maps but never came up in searches there. Probably other places paid Google more for a listing despite being closed at that time.
    Not sure how Apple does with this as I don't have any Apple anymore except a work iPad. It's too limited for me in terms of what I can install. But there's certainly some room for improvement in mapping.
    theendisney · 1790208717 · focus · HN ↗
    Hah, that Google experience clicking though closed closed closed... Okay fine, i will accept my stupidity for even considering this approach. Wont happen again.
    maest · 1790216588 · focus · HN ↗
    There's an "open only" button?
    wolvoleo · 1790249399 · focus · HN ↗
    Oh I didn't find it, I have to say I don't use google maps very much. I normally use OSMAnd only. But most businesses don't bother updating their opening hours on openstreetmap.
    theendisney · 1791077557 · focus · HN ↗
    If you dont fill out openings hours or if you dont even claim your business google maps lists it as open.
    sirwhinesalot · 1790184831 · focus · HN ↗
    Not iAd. Different ads
    godelski · 1790123843 · focus · HN ↗
    > Think Different indeed - Make the phone thinner - Make the laptop thinner - Make the iPad thinner
    Extreme innovation
    coldtea · 1790125444 · focus · HN ↗
    Well, and dozens of other innovations every other company copied, conveniently ignored.
    From shipping a fully certified UNIX with a modern UI, to getting all the music player market and influencing how any music player would be from then on, to seamlessly moving between Motorola and Intel and Apple Silicon with the ability to run the older software from a different architecture with Rosetta, to the first modern touch smartphone, 1 full year before Android came out (and which made Android change its beta design to copy the way iOS worked), to getting wireless earpods (and pairing) right, to designing their own fucking integrated CPU, and even their own broadband chip. Even simple things, like making the best touchpad in the market.
    Modern "services+ads" Apple sucks to the point that I'm moving away, but to say they didn't innovate is laughable.
    gertop · 1790130879 · focus · HN ↗
    A lot of the things you mention aren't things that have been "conveniently forgotten", they're simply things that mean nothing to most people to begin with...
    > From shipping a fully certified UNIX with a modern UI
    Ignored because nobody cares or wanted it.
    > to getting all the music player market and influencing how any music player would be from then on
    Anybody born after millennials have only ever known Spotify, they don't know about iTunes and 99c songs. That's like saying Napster has been conveniently forgotten.
    > to seamlessly moving between Motorola and Intel and Apple Silicon with the ability to run the older software from a different architecture with Rosetta
    That's a remarkable engineering achievement but that's an implementation detail. Backwards compatibility on the desktop was and still is tablesakes.
    > to the first modern touch smartphone
    Nobody forgot, there's always one of you to remind the class that Apple was first (by your own definition of modern touch smartphone)
    > to getting wireless earpods (and pairing) right
    They were clearly the first to demonstrate that people did indeed want fully wireless despite HN's objections at the time.
    > to designing their own fucking integrated CPU, and even their own broadband chip
    That would be impressive if they were a startup. Every trillion dollar tech companies design their own CPUs.
    > Even simple things, like making the best touchpad in the market.
    I don't know anyone who claims otherwise, and for the longest time they didn't make their own touchpads. So much for being conveniently forgotten.
    coldtea · 1790156337 · focus · HN ↗
    >A lot of the things you mention aren't things that have been "conveniently forgotten", they're simply things that mean nothing to most people to begin with... / Anybody born after millennials have only ever known Spotify, they don't know about iTunes and 99c songs. That's like saying Napster has been conveniently forgotten.
    That explains why someone younger might not see the innovation. But that's on them, the innovation doesn't get erased as an innovation because people take it for granted. If the question is "did Apple innovate", then it includes all those cases, whether some moody Gen A cares for them or not.
    Besides, that's not an argument. Apple still has many recent innovations. And we're talking as techies, devs, and products people here, and of various ages. Not just as "people who only ever known Spotify" and never bothered to learn the history of their field. Those wont know what Rosetta or a 5G chip is either anyway.
    >That would be impressive if they were a startup. Every trillion dollar tech companies design their own CPUs.
    A, yes, all those classic Google, Facebook, and MS designed CPUs, that put a fire under Intel/AMD and set the benchmark for future laptop CPUs.
    godelski · 1790136806 · focus · HN ↗
    I don't want to really downplay Apple but there's much better innovation examples that what you listed. One of Apple's great advantages is that it owns the hardware, unlike Linux or Windows. Those have to work in highly heterogeneous environments. I mean Linux runs on everything from a literal potato to a super computer and everything in between.
    To highlight Apple's innovation maybe mention things like the iPhone or iPod. They weren't the first devices of their kind but Apple's magic was always the mixture of the two Steves. Technical but stylish. But modern Apple isn't the same. The magic is gone
    SllX · 1790125140 · focus · HN ↗
    When iAd launched, it was a $1 million minimum spend just to get onto the platform, they wanted large corporate “lifestyle” brands, Apple exerted creative control over how ads were designed so they could enforce a bunch of user experience guardrails & marketers had no means of independently verifying campaign performance themselves. Their only source was whatever Apple told them. It did not do well. A few years later they tried to salvage it by dropping the minimum spend to $50, removing themselves from the process & making it closer to Google’s AdMob—or approximately as much as Apple was able to early last decade—but it was too little too late. They dropped it by 2016.
    When it comes to mobile advertising, Google & Facebook won, & Apple was never even really a player. If it’s unclear to you, I wasn’t complimenting Apple for this endeavor either. Mobile ads suck, & nothing they did with iAd did anything to meaningfully improve them.
10. troupo · 1790100856 · focus · HN ↗
  > I doubt John Ternus will change direction anytime soon, since it will look like he’s reversing the plethora of eyesore ads that Tim Cook added over his tenure.
  Ternus was one of the main people driving these eyesores. He wasn't a nobody.
  1. jjtheblunt · 1790104230 · focus · HN ↗
    why do you say a hardware VP would be driving adware? totally different part of the apple world, at least when i was there for years.
    troupo · 1790106268 · focus · HN ↗
    Sorry. For some reason got him mixed up with Steve Lemay lol.
    But still.
    Everyone keeps blaming just one guy for enshittifying Apple, be it Alan Dye or Tim Cook. As if literally no other executive or senior manager has any say in anything that happens.
    Even here.
    Joh Termus was just picked up randomly out of a box. He never knew what was happening at the company, is entirely new to Apple, and never weighed in on any decision besides hardware. That is why he was picked to checks notes lead all of Apple.
    jjtheblunt · 1790106864 · focus · HN ↗
    > is entirely new to Apple
    where did that come from? he's been at Apple since 2001.
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ternus" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ternus
    troupo · 1790107072 · focus · HN ↗
    Read the original comment: "I doubt John Ternus will change direction anytime soon, since it will look like he’s reversing the plethora of eyesore ads that Tim Cook added over his tenure.".
    I mean. John Ternus and other execs and senior management had nothing to do anything with it. They were all new, picked up randomly out of the box and only obligingly did the bidding of Tim Cook (or Alan Dye, or both).
11. dyauspitr · 1790101940 · focus · HN ↗
  What are these plethora of eyesore ads because the one that they’re mentioning in this article is the only one I have come across.
12. buredoranna · 1790104476 · focus · HN ↗
  omg, thank you for this
  > tap and hold on App Store icon to see the context menu option
  1. rednb · 1790104974 · focus · HN ↗
    It is because of things like that that i'm using Android. I feel like one of those boomers having no clue about tech whenever i am handed an iphone: everything feels like a trick, a set of secret gestures and recipes that everybody has mastered but me.
    Not criticizing because i can see that many people love Apple products precisely for this reason. Apparently this makes the UX friendly and intuitive. But it didn't click for me.
    mitxela · 1790106156 · focus · HN ↗
    Android is just as bad. But it has one huge advantage: you can install apps on it.
    teekert · 1790106584 · focus · HN ↗
    I got a Pixel 10, installed GrapheneOS. Then Google Play (which is sandboxed). I have 99,9% of all apps and a barebones launcher and some barebones fossify apps. Its pretty good, ugly if you let it but not bad
    Timon3 · 1790111287 · focus · HN ↗
    Can't say I agree - I honestly tried using an iPhone for a few weeks, and I still couldn't reliably get where I wanted, because there's a good chance some input on the way would suddenly result in a totally different effect.
    It feels like 80% of the UI has non-obvious overloads. I must have either skipped the tutorial or been too blind to find it, because otherwise these things are anything but intuitive. I've never struggled as much with any Android device, even with exotic manufacturer UIs.
    mitxela · 1790160599 · focus · HN ↗
    It's true of android too, you're just used to it. Even Graphene eliminated the back button, and makes you swipe left from the right side instead, and the app switcher and home buttons, and makes you swipe up-right from the bottom.
    Timon3 · 1790171213 · focus · HN ↗
    No, I genuinely have not encountered the same reliability issues on any Android devices, even on my very first one.
    I'm not a big fan of such gestures (mostly due to discoverability), but the few times I've used an Android without the navbar the gestures still felt reliable, even if I had trouble remembering them.
    sandblast · 1790110552 · focus · HN ↗
    Android apps also have the icon-tap-and-hold actions…
13. bluedevilzn · 1790106266 · focus · HN ↗
  “iAd offers advertisers the emotion of TV with the interactivity of the web, and offers users a new way to explore ads without being hijacked out of their favorite apps,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “iAds will reach millions of iPhone and iPod touch users—a highly desirable demographic for advertisers—and provide developers a new way to earn money so they can continue developing free and low cost applications.”
  [1] <a href="https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2010/06/07Apple-to-Debut-iAds-on-July-1/" rel="nofollow">https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2010/06/07Apple-to-Debut-iAds...
14. everforward · 1790113222 · focus · HN ↗
  Search on the app store sucks too. I haven't been able to find either a way to search for only apps that charge for downloads (I don't want to watch an ad for features, or nickel and dimed on IAP), or some kind of "minimum price" slider I can use.
  That feels like a bog-standard search feature on a marketplace. I can only assume the omission is intentional.
  1. Obscurity4340 · 1790116909 · focus · HN ↗
    Use AppRaven, its better for discovery and actual discussion of app stuf
    TalkingCodeMonk · 1790123495 · focus · HN ↗
    You should specify appraven.net, as a scammer just slopped together an AI site based on your (or others) recommendation, charging $50 a month.
    "Apps worth copying, already making money." – <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20260923001345/https://appraven.app/" rel="nofollow">https://web.archive.org/web/20260923001345/https://appraven....
    "Stop guessing. AppRaven(.app) shows you what people really search for on the App Store, what they complain about in the apps that already exist, and hands you a plan you can start coding today."
    Obscurity4340 · 1790162514 · focus · HN ↗
    Thats wild, wow. Thanks for clarifying that
15. godelski · 1790123704 · focus · HN ↗
  I knew we were cooked when Costco started upselling its cookies at the self-checkout food court.
  I think it really speaks to the situation we've gotten ourselves into. Capitalism requires us to constantly grow but I think the problem is we're myopic and believe we need to grow faster and faster. With the high concentration of power these companies have the easiest lever to pull is by making a service worse and having users pay for a better experience. That's a very different strategy than offering new products and/or features.
  I call this myopic because it really only works when there's little to no competition but using it too much causes more backlash and causes people to get pissed enough to become the competition (and not sell out). I think Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy comes into play here. People aren't aligned with the goals of the organization. To be honest, it's hard to think of any company where it's clear the leaders, let alone employees, are dedicated to the goals of the company[0].
  It's really sad too, since all these big companies seem to just be a shell of what they used to be. They used to be inspiring and it was exciting to see all the change and innovation. But it just seems to be more and more disappointment lately. Small changes so people can push their small org's status. No one taking any risks to really push things forward. These companies cornered the markets, have trillion dollar evaluations, yet act like they're poor. That boy ain't right...
  [0] don't give me that nonsense of "the goal is to make money". The comment is about myopia. If this is your first reaction, you're being myopic and missing my point. You're welcome to disagree, but don't strawman
16. pjmlp · 1790148209 · focus · HN ↗
  I love the "Apple that had some taste and discernment in the past" description, for those of us that remember the Apple that almost went bankrupt.
  There are enough examples until the NeXT reverse acquisition, bringing Jobs back, that prove it wasn't always like that.
17. fnoff · 1790152044 · focus · HN ↗
  > I’ve visited the App Store’s app update page directly (tap and hold on App Store icon to see the context menu option)
  I had no idea this was possible and was looking for the list of apps with updates available. This is why I always go to the comments first!
18. 21asdffdsa12 · 1790154867 · focus · HN ↗
  I bet you there is a CEO and friends version that is absolutely add-free.
  The problem is the shareholders getting value from add adds now, while reducing the value of apple shares in the long run, by allowing a new premium producer to emerge.
  1. [deleted] · 1790156579 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
19. JKCalhoun · 1790165564 · focus · HN ↗
  Hmmm… I'll be happy when Eddy Cue steps down.
20. Mikhail_Edoshin · 1790173436 · focus · HN ↗
  The Steve Jobs' phrase itself is a very well-done ad.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.