261–270 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had the same problem and contacted my state representative and my congressperson. This has since been fixed by regulation in California, and by having to follow California's laws, most companies' subscription services have been fixed for everybody.
How has it been fixed? Are you able to easily cancel online, now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never said that they were actively doing it for everybody, only that they can do it, and there is nothing in their privacy policy that prevents them from doing it. Your claim that I said otherwise is the lie. Your claim that sneak had been repeatedly told he was wrong is also a lie. You have repeatedly called me and sneak liars even though we have provided proof that you have simply not read. Will you apologize to…
You said sneak’s statement was correct. Sneak said that they were recording people’s travel history, which is a lie. You haven’t provided any such proof. All you have done is equate logging ip addresses with recording people’s travel history, which is false.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to emphasize your point, 30% take is relatively small in the retail world. A store like Amazon or Walmart or Target or Best Buy generally wants a cut of 40-50%, if not more. And that doesn’t include the cut many distributors want to take for being the middle person. (Source: I’ve been on the executive team at startups with products sold in retail stores)
> Just to emphasize your point, 30% take is relatively small in the retail world. The internet already provides a nearly free distribution medium for software application - so even paying a 5% markup to an unnecessary middleman is just outrageous. The app store only exists so that Apple (and others) can gauge even more money from developers, who ultimately pass on the cost to us customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you feel the same way about anything sold on Amazon? Or in supermarkets? Or is that in some way different?
It's not even a valid comparison and disingenuous because software products now don't need to be sold through any retail outlet, and can be sold directly to the customer through the internet. There is absolutely no need of any app store as a middle man here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this sentence change the meaning? The OP did not say they wanted Apple. They said they didn't want to be forced into Android. Of course, without Apple, in the absence of any other alternatives, you are forced into Android.
Yes it does. Clearly the OP wanted Apple, since otherwise they wouldn’t have made reference to ‘stopping Apple’ affecting them. If they didn’t want Apple, they wouldn’t care if Apple was stopped.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it does. Clearly the OP wanted Apple, since otherwise they wouldn’t have made reference to ‘stopping Apple’ affecting them. If they didn’t want Apple, they wouldn’t care if Apple was stopped.
No, it doesn't. The OP never said they wanted Apple. But without Apple you are forced into Android (because there's no other obvious choice) and this seems to be the problem.
Why would they care about Apple being stopped if they didn’t want Apple?
For your explanation to make sense you need to account for the meaning of both sentences of the paragraph the OP wrote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it doesn't. The OP never said they wanted Apple. But without Apple you are forced into Android (because there's no other obvious choice) and this seems to be the problem.
In this explanation, you have neglected the meaning of the statement: “Please don’t stop them”. Why would they care about Apple being stopped if they didn’t want Apple ? For your explanation to make sense you need to account for the meaning of both sentences of the paragraph the OP wrote.
Because without Apple you only have Android.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this explanation, you have neglected the meaning of the statement: “Please don’t stop them”. Why would they care about Apple being stopped if they didn’t want Apple ? For your explanation to make sense you need to account for the meaning of both sentences of the paragraph the OP wrote.
> Why would they care about Apple being stopped if they didn’t want Apple? Because without Apple you only have Android.
If you don’t want Apple, you only have Android regardless of whether Apple is stopped or not.
That sentence is relevant to the meaning of the paragraph, and implies that they do want Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would they care about Apple being stopped if they didn’t want Apple? Because without Apple you only have Android.
Sure, but if they didn’t want Apple this would be irrelevant. If you don’t want Apple, you only have Android regardless of whether Apple is stopped or not. That sentence is relevant to the meaning of the paragraph, and implies that they do want Apple.
No, there are also GNU/Linux phones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but if they didn’t want Apple this would be irrelevant. If you don’t want Apple, you only have Android regardless of whether Apple is stopped or not. That sentence is relevant to the meaning of the paragraph, and implies that they do want Apple.
> If you don’t want Apple, you only have Android regardless of whether Apple is stopped or not. No, there are also GNU/Linux phones.