Flappy Bird no longer available on iTunes or on CarPlay.
However you can still enjoy Flying Pigs and Flappy Buns.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces 'CarPlay' iOS Vehicle Integration Feature
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Flappy Bird no longer available on iTunes or on CarPlay.
However you can still enjoy Flying Pigs and Flappy Buns.
Oh god, not this crap again. This has been argued about 15,000 times now, but I'll say this before bailing completely because it's a complete waste of time that has absolutely no basis in reality...
...if Schmidt did use his position to steal trade secrets from Apple, why didn't Jobs and co. sue the everliving hell out of Google? They would've had a pretty clear cut case. Hell, it's pretty well documented that Schmidt excused himself from the room when the iPhone came up, because everyone knew Google was working on a mobile platform.
And the whole "Android is a stolen product" thing? That was over multitouch implementation, not the platform as a whole. And hell, it's not like Apple dreamed up multitouch themselves anyway.
Seriously. I can't believe people believe this crap. Not when it takes all of 3 seconds to go on the internet and look up the actual honest to god truth.
But that would destroy peoples talking points and they would have nothing to stir the pot with.
...that's true. It does work pretty good for baiting people. I mean I went for it and all.
Right a guy on the board of directors didn't know anything about the iPhone. :roll eyes:
The "android is a stole product" thing actually is about "Sam[e]sung ... infringing on three utility patents (United States Patent Nos. 7,469,381, 7,844,915, and 7,864,163) and four design patents (United States Patent Nos. D504,889, D593,087, D618,677, and D604,305)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co.,_Ltd.
Oh, I'm sure he knew about it. He just didn't know much. He came onto the Apple board of directors in 2006, shortly before the iPhone was unveiled to the public at large. Once that came about, there was no reason for Google to have a man on the inside, stealing information. Not when they could go to the store to pick one up themselves.
But Schmidt did excuse himself from any meetings that came up due to a potential for conflict of interest. It's one of the major reasons why he eventually resigned. As Apple became more and more centered on the iPhone, he could attend less and less meetings. By that point, he and everyone else there probably realized there was no reason for him to be around, since he was building up the company to be a direct competitor.
http://techcrunch.com/2008/01/13/go...about-the-iphone-at-apple-board-meetings-wtf/
http://www.siliconrepublic.com/business/item/13538-google-ceo-eric-schmidt-qui
So there's your conspiracy theory. I mean comeon. Think about it. If Google had insider information on the direct inner workings of the iPhone and iOS, why did it take them 3 years to make a competiting product? Why did it take them nearly 5 years before it became decent enough to be truly competitive?
My Toyota Prius has a navigation system and Entune which works in conjunction with an app on my iPhone 5s. Entune is more trouble than it is worth. Is the intent to replace Entune with Carplay?
Last edited:
Does this mean that in a few years when Apple replaces the Lightning connecter with Lightning 2 I'll have to buy a new Ferrari?
(Think about it for a moment - why tie a major purchase to a proprietary interface from a company known for sudden obsolescence of interfaces?)
(Think about it for a moment - why tie a major purchase to a proprietary interface from a company known for sudden obsolescence of interfaces?)
Most likely, the CarPlay will be an "optional" multimedia feature for many cars. For example, the way it works now, if I were to buy a new Toyota Lexus, a base model would include the basic iPod/iTunes/USB/MP3 integration, but not much else.
But I have the option to buy one of the add-on packages, the Premium Navigation and Audio Package, which bundles the iTunes tagging and HD Audio, Lightning cable connector charging, blah blah blah.
In a way I hope this is how many car manufacturers do it for CarPlay, as an OPTIONAL package (depending on models).
Sudden obsolescence of interfaces? How long was the 30-pin connector around and how many years ago did practically everyone call for Apple to change it already and have been expecting it ever since? Yeah, completely sudden there.
I believe you are not quite understanding. Apple is not locking anyone into anything. Or taking over the head unit. This feature is simply an option for folks who have these cars and CHOOSE to own an iPhone that their iPhone will transmit its display to the display in the car. That's all. You dont have to use it and if you dont own an Apple device you will not even know its there as the built in nav will continue to function as before CarPlay was added as an additional option. Again ONLY transmitting the display of the iPhone to the dash of the car. Thats it. All functions are being handled by the iPhone
Why, because it demonstrates a company with lack of focus.
And quite frankly it's a moronic solution to a problem no one asked qnx to solve, but what can you expect from a blackberry subsidiary.
Here is a solution to the problem:
LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE CROSSING THE ROAD!!
I asked you repeatedly to provide examples of how exactly apple is copying the competitors with carplay like you claimed, I guess you don't know, classic.
It is something new, why does that bother you so much,
Yes, good lord my sync works 100% totally fine! But I'm sure you also believe iOS7 has NO problems too right?
Hmm:
FACTS would state otherwise of your COMPLETE ARROGANCE on this topic, you are displaying an incredible cavalier attitude to road safety here, look both way's, tell you what, graphical representation, go and stand over the body's of those who get run over daily and shout those very same words to them, see how you feel, because with any luck it'll make you feel as much of an idiot as you are to make that comment, what are you? Ten years old?
Oh and the US government for one has asked for electric cars to make noise for road safety...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_warning_sounds
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-07/electric-cars-must-make-noises-can-hear-under-u-s-rule.html
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/01/government-requires-quiet-hybrids-to-add-more-vroom/
Oh and using your line of discussion then I must conclude Apple shows NO DIRECTION either when it designs a gear knob for Jaguar.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2007/09/the-apple-izati/
But no doubt you will attempt to defend that one eh, pass it off as some sort of design icon, yet you slander an electronics company for trying to save lives.. jeeesss
You haven't asked for any proof actually. And I don't need to provide you ANY proof of how smartphones are already integrated into car systems, go and google it yourself, it's not hard. Apple hasn't come up with anything new, despite your repeated desperate attempts to state otherwise.
Nothing new bothers me, as I already said and as it was proved today, Apple will NOT be allowed to bring a walled garden into cars. It will utilise other existing systems. Those exact same ones you seem to think Apple isn't copying
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/03/04/carplay-qnx-integration/
Last edited:
I am pretty sure that Apple and the car manufacturers have thought of this and have come up with a solution...
When someone can't grasp the difference between an operating system and 3 patents infringed by a 3rd party development it is clear that don't know much about what is talking.
Last edited:
Might want to go back and see what I was referring to. If that is what you are saying how is multi touch android? ... Smh
Multitouch is NOT Android or is not iOS, it is just a little part so no, still not "is a an stolen OS"
And, by the way, exactly what copied Android with multi touch? Can you show what patent infringes?
As I said, someone that doesn't know the difference between third party software and OS is someone that doesn't know much about what he is talking about
Once again you obviously didn't go back and see what I was referring to. Someone else brought up multi touch, not me.
If you cross the road without looking both ways you are either suicidal or an idiot. It's not a gamble between a 2 to 4 ton machine and a person. ELECTRIC VEHICLE OR NOT.
You want to save lives ban electric cars or put a couple of bells in the bonnet.
Qnx had the lead in the connected automotive space and blackberry squandered it.
Look at you grasping for straws, frankly it's pathetic and beyond pitiful.
Haven't I? Perhaps you have a reading comprehension (or just a comprehension) problem which would explain volumes, by the way.
You don't "need to provide" because you don't know what you are talking about sport, this is the moment to ****, politely.
Nothing new bothers me, as I already said and as it wasprovedPROVEN today, Apple will NOT be allowed to bring a walled garden into cars. It will utilise other existing systems. Those exact same ones you seem to think Apple isn't copying
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/03/04/carplay-qnx-integration/
You must be really stupid because Ferrari Volvo and Mercedes just allowed apple's walled garden into thier cars and qnx has nothing to do with it, everything is done on the iPhone, the display is similar to a dumb terminal with a touchscreen qnx is superseded. Furthermore, Volvo implementation of carplay utilizes android not qnx.
I had a demonstration
Unless you want to spread some more FUD claiming the iPhone runs qnx underneath iOS 7.
You really need to SDSTFU.
I'm done with this moron.