Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No, you're only assumption is that website owners are incapable of adapting to changed conditions. You must not think very highly of them. There are other ways to run websites.


I'd rather not. It's not a take it or leave it proposition with internet traffic you know. I request a website, the server responds to my request and sends me some data. I can filter the data I don't like out, and keep the data I do like.

Do you also propose I disconnect my house from the town water supply because I insist on running it through a Brita filter first? Either drink the water with the impurities or don't drink it at all?


No one needs to know how Google works to decide that ads are annoying. It's Google's business to figure out how to make money, it's not the users' job to ensure Google makes money.
If a site isn't making money then it will not be there or won't be providing the same services or will be charging actual money from the users. I wonder how many internet users would be happy about any of those possibilities vs simply dealing with ads.
 
If a site isn't making money then it will not be there or won't be providing the same services or will be charging actual money from the users. I wonder how many internet users would be happy about any of those possibilities vs simply dealing with ads.

On the flip side, without ads, the click-bait SEO nonsense would go away and search engine results might actually become good again.
 
Is the battery drains issue on beta 1 already fixed?

I won't say completely, but its improved a lot.
on beta 1, it took my iPhone 5s 11hrs to go from 100 to 0 (a little bit of e-mailfetching and safari/fb)
since 2 i'm still 70% after 12 hrs, more use.
 
On the flip side, without ads, the click-bait SEO nonsense would go away and search engine results might actually become good again.
I think most people find results that work well for them without much trouble. And even if there would be improvements it still seems that they would be outweighed by the more likely and more widespread downsides mentioned before.
 
No, you're only assumption is that website owners are incapable of adapting to changed conditions. You must not think very highly of them. There are other ways to run websites.


I'd rather not. It's not a take it or leave it proposition with internet traffic you know. I request a website, the server responds to my request and sends me some data. I can filter the data I don't like out, and keep the data I do like.

Do you also propose I disconnect my house from the town water supply because I insist on running it through a Brita filter first? Either drink the water with the impurities or don't drink it at all?


No one needs to know how Google works to decide that ads are annoying. It's Google's business to figure out how to make money, it's not the users' job to ensure Google makes money.

A) No, my assumption is that websites don't pay for themselves. The only way I can see a large number of websites not collapsing from a lack of funding is direct payment or "native ads". Neither are good ideas.

B) It kind of should be. And your example is a bad one. The city doesn't rely on you having unfiltered water to continue functioning. Sites rely on ads to get revenue to stay online. That's a huge difference.

C) If you keep throwing around "my privacy is being sold", you should have some idea how Google works.
 
Add to "Play Next"
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    253.5 KB · Views: 166
Last edited:
I don't know if this is new/already discovered but when you add a song to a "Play Next" position on a playlist, a logo now pops up to confirm.
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    309.7 KB · Views: 144
A) No, my assumption is that websites don't pay for themselves. The only way I can see a large number of websites not collapsing from a lack of funding is direct payment or "native ads". Neither are good ideas.
There it is again, you're narrow assumption. Is it so impossible to imagine a business model that doesn't involve ads or direct payment? I'm not saying I have all the answer, but history has shown time and time again for thousands of years that necessity breeds creativity. Those that don't adapt will go under, and they should.

B) It kind of should be. And your example is a bad one. The city doesn't rely on you having unfiltered water to continue functioning. Sites rely on ads to get revenue to stay online. That's a huge difference.
You're right my example was a non sequitur, because my water company is not like a website. However, I think the metaphor of water to broadband works on the level that it's mine once it enters my zone. Once it's in my house, in my wires, in my pipes, or within my control, I can do with it whatever I please (so long as it's for personal use, yada yada). Of course that freedom is against someone's pecuniary interests, it always is. Recording the radio for personal use does harm to record labels, fast forwarding commercials on my DVR does harm to TV stations, using energy-efficient appliances does harm to my electric company, modifying Ikea furniture harms Ikea, blocking unwanted content harms websites. None of that is my concern though.

Do you also think parents shouldn't be able to block explicit content on kids' computers? Should public libraries be allowed to block porn on their computers? Should the profits of porn websites also outweigh those?

C) If you keep throwing around "my privacy is being sold", you should have some idea how Google works.
First, I haven't said that. I have said in the past on this forum that I appreciate that at least Google is upfront with their quid-pro-quo (email client, document editing, search, and other services for the cost of mining my data). However, it does irk me that there it is for all practical purposes no way to opt-out of or avoid Google tracking on the internet. There is no warning before you enter a site. The only way is to either block all cookies, or block just some ad cookies. either way, it's content-based blocking.

Second, while I know how Google works, it's not necessary for an average person to understand this issue. Just like I don't care how Walmart works, I just want to pay the lowest available price for Cheetos. It's Walmart's job to figure out how to make a profit while selling me Cheetos for less than every other store in the area. Similarly, I don't care how how Google works, I just want the least friction between my URL bar and content I want to see. It's Google's job to figure out how to make a profit of being that intermediary.
 
There it is again, you're narrow assumption. Is it so impossible to imagine a business model that doesn't involve ads or direct payment? I'm not saying I have all the answer, but history has shown time and time again for thousands of years that necessity breeds creativity. Those that don't adapt will go under, and they should.


You're right my example was a non sequitur, because my water company is not like a website. However, I think the metaphor of water to broadband works on the level that it's mine once it enters my zone. Once it's in my house, in my wires, in my pipes, or within my control, I can do with it whatever I please (so long as it's for personal use, yada yada). Of course that freedom is against someone's pecuniary interests, it always is. Recording the radio for personal use does harm to record labels, fast forwarding commercials on my DVR does harm to TV stations, using energy-efficient appliances does harm to my electric company, modifying Ikea furniture harms Ikea, blocking unwanted content harms websites. None of that is my concern though.

Do you also think parents shouldn't be able to block explicit content on kids' computers? Should public libraries be allowed to block porn on their computers? Should the profits of porn websites also outweigh those?



First, I haven't said that. I have said in the past on this forum that I appreciate that at least Google is upfront with their quid-pro-quo (email client, document editing, search, and other services for the cost of mining my data). However, it does irk me that there it is for all practical purposes no way to opt-out of or avoid Google tracking on the internet. There is no warning before you enter a site. The only way is to either block all cookies, or block just some ad cookies. either way, it's content-based blocking.

Second, while I know how Google works, it's not necessary for an average person to understand this issue. Just like I don't care how Walmart works, I just want to pay the lowest available price for Cheetos. It's Walmart's job to figure out how to make a profit while selling me Cheetos for less than every other store in the area. Similarly, I don't care how how Google works, I just want the least friction between my URL bar and content I want to see. It's Google's job to figure out how to make a profit of being that intermediary.

Except you're paying for the broadband and the water. You're not paying for the websites. As for whether or not somebody should be able to block porn on a computer, that's also unrelated. When a site is blocked, it's not taking anything from the site. Their revenue comes from people who view the site. Otherwise we're going to talk about how billions of people who don't buy Macs are costing Apple money. :)

Also, it was a generalized "you". The person I responded to, which then you took, was all "they're selling my privacy". Anyone who is going to make a statement like that should probably have some idea what they're talking about. Most people on here do not.
 
Yes! Mine crashes without opening. Incoming calls work but can't make outbound calls or retrieve voicemail.
Restored back to 8.3 tested and worked. Updated to beta one, tested and worked updated over the air and did not work. Tried multiple times and still can't get it to work
 
Looks like the health app now groups data points by day when looking at the "show all data" panel for a metric, instead of showing each entry from the motion chip.

About time - the way it broke things into tiny amounts was really odd, and of no use at all.

Maybe I hadn't noticed before, but have they added a whole load of new, and better, artist images to the Music app, and made a lot of the artist listings something other than white like they do in iTunes? I may just have been unobservant, because I've mostly been using Spotify a lot lately. But looking at it today it looks a lot better than it used to.

Although those squares they have for the featured radio stations look terrible - hopefully just placeholders before it launches. Because they are really ugly.
 
Anyone else notice in beta 1 you could stream videos directly from the iCloud Drive app but in beta 2 you're forced to download the video before playing.
 
Last edited:
Got stuck on the lock rotation feature instead of mute on the mute switch after updating to beta 2. Can't access mute even on assistivetouch.
 
Got stuck on the lock rotation feature instead of mute on the mute switch after updating to beta 2. Can't access mute even on assistivetouch.
You may need a setting reset. Or, for worst possibility, you may need to update back to beta 1, or even iOS 8.4, when they comes out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nedisonn
Silly question...Somebody mentioned Apple Pay is disabled on the ios9 betas. Is that true?
 
Yes! Mine crashes without opening. Incoming calls work but can't make outbound calls or retrieve voicemail.
Seems like the issue is with my favorites. I got a voicemail and I retrieved it from notifications. One in I can see my recents, contacts, and voicemail. If I select the favorites tab it crashes. The only way to get back in is to get a voicemail and retrieve it from notifications.
 
If you are not really a developer...do us a favor. Stop downloading Betas. They are not early public releases. THERER WILL BE BUGS..I promise you that. Don't whine when your battery dies early or you loose your game data. These should not be used on production devices. If you can't deal with the bugs, wait till the GM comes out and do us all a favor.
 
Look at the keyboard (if for some reason you can't tell the difference in color when it comes to the shift key) as the keys themselves change their case and you'd know exactly what case you are in.

The Shift key is not fixed, they changed all other keys. Reasing a lower case letter is harder BTW
 
The Shift key is not fixed, they changed all other keys. Reasing a lower case letter is harder BTW
The shift key wasn't broken, but they improved things by actually changing the case of the letters on the keyboard to be even more obvious (which is controllable by an option).
 
The shift key wasn't broken, but they improved things by actually changing the case of the letters on the keyboard to be even more obvious (which is controllable by an option).

"The shift key wasn't broken" ooops, just google a little bit about shift and ios7. You may get surprised by your denial.
 
"The shift key wasn't broken" ooops, just google a little bit about shift and ios7. You may get surprised by your denial.
No surprises. Some people didn't like the change of colors, as various people don't like all kinds of different things, but that doesn't mean that anything was actually broken or wrong. The denial appears to be elsewhere.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.