What if you owned an iPod touch 4th gen...?
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.
Lawsuit Alleges Apple Broke FaceTime on iOS 6 to Force iOS 7 Upgrades, Save Money
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you can properly explain to me how on earth an iPad mini cant hold more than 2 tabs in memory or even track my touch input I will concede its not a conspiracy
No hyperbole. No conspiracy. Reread the article. Reread the direct quotation. Apple inserted a bug, code, also known as malware, a virus to render a main iOS function useless forcing users to update or upgrade. Just because Apple created the bug, code doesn't mean its effect is anything less than malware or a virus. The code killed key functions that Apple could have continued to support.
Bottom line is Apple could have left things untouched. And that's what they should have done. But they didn't. The benefits for Apple here in creating and inserting the bugged code was saving $50 million, forcing users into iOS 7, forcing users to update installed software for iOS 7, or forcing users to purchase new devices. The losses for customers included losing a key advertised functionality ie FaceTime if they stayed on iOS 6, or upgrading to iOS 7 and either being forced to update or replace their installed software, or being forced to purchase new devices because iOS 7 usability was unacceptably slow and jittery on older devices rendering them useless. Once iOS 7 was installed downgrading is impossible because Apple stops signing older versions.
The benefits to Apple in creating the bug were of great benefit. Conversely, customers on iOS 6 lost greatly.
Your replies need to be more impartial and look at the facts of the matter Apple forcing users to update iOS 6 to iOS 7 with zero ability to downgrade. Please lose the "Apple is always right" skew, it makes for bizarre reading.
No, they're not; that's the whole point. Two quotes, out of context, with no comment from the other side. That's all there is right now.
Of the two quotes mentioned in the article, only one of them refers to Apple intentionally breaking iOS. On that, notice how the word Apple isn't included in the quote of "broke iOS 6"--and the part about upgrading to fix FaceTime isn't a quote, either. You're seeing what you want to see and jumping to conclusions--you've decided that "broke iOS 6" means Apple purposely did this in order to force people on to iOS 7 for no other reason than profits.
Now, could this have been done purposefully as you and others argue? Sure. Is there reason to assume that right now? No, not at all; maybe the full quote is "Because we were found to have infringed the patent, we inadvertently broke iOS 6".
One three-word quote is not enough to decide that something definitely did or did not happen.
[doublepost=1486306085][/doublepost]
Ok, let's do that:
That sure cleared things up! How unambiguous, damning, and proving direct actions taken by Apple
Last edited:
All of that is to be proven, when verdict is rendered. You never know how these things are going to end. And as far as "apple is right", on the balance there is "apple is always wrong".
Except I didn't say it's not an alleged conspiracy. In fact I said the opposite (although in relation to a slightly different aspect of it as it relates to a potential conspiracy). It's interesting to see how the bias of some makes it hard for them to see what others are actually saying.
[doublepost=1486309248][/doublepost]
And my replies have been saying that there's certainly something that isn't right that is alleged here and isn't good at all if it holds up. How that translates to "Apple is always right" is anyone's guess. Talk about bizarre reading and complete lack of impartiality when others with a bias seem to not even pay attention to what is said and essentially blindly and incorrectly, not to mention unnecessarily, try to imply that the opposite is being argued.
Last edited:
Interesting how Apple hasn't responded to this. Quite telling.No, they're not; that's the whole point. Two quotes, out of context, with no comment from the other side. That's all there is right now.
Of the two quotes mentioned in the article, only one of them refers to Apple intentionally breaking iOS. On that, notice how the word Apple isn't included in the quote of "broke iOS 6"--and the part about upgrading to fix FaceTime isn't a quote, either. You're seeing what you want to see and jumping to conclusions--you've decided that "broke iOS 6" means Apple purposely did this in order to force people on to iOS 7 for no other reason than profits.
Now, could this have been done purposefully as you and others argue? Sure. Is there reason to assume that right now? No, not at all; maybe the full quote is "Because we were found to have infringed the patent, we inadvertently broke iOS 6".
One three-word quote is not enough to decide that something definitely did or did not happen.
[doublepost=1486306085][/doublepost]
Ok, let's do that:
That sure cleared things up! How unambiguous, damning, and proving direct actions taken by Apple
Here's the title of the email:
The class-action lawsuit, pointing to an internal email titled "Ways to Reduce Relay Usage," alleges that the growing fees were beginning to bother Apple executives.
I think you get it, what the intention was.
To court we go to see this played out and get some justice for all those affected iOS 6, iOS 7, iPad, iPod touch and iPhone users forced to update, upgrade, or live with a cripple operating system.
You didn't respond to my post immediately--that's quite telling, isn't it. You didn't address "read the direct quotation", that's quite telling. Should I continue?
If we're going by subject line I do get it: people were brainstorming ideas to reduce relay usage. That doesn't support the conspiracy theories put forth by you and others.
It bears repeating: the direct quote you're using as your foundation is "broke iOS 6".
No, instead, your comments have been in part playing this down and portraying it as a non issue in my view. I'm keeping it real. There were millions of high paying customers affected by Apple killing FaceTime on iOS 6. That can not be disputed.
Let's now watch it play in the courts.
No public/media response from a company or anyone to a legal action is actually not telling of anything one way or another, as pretty much anyone knows. Implying otherwise is just putting a spin on something.
And, yes, the alleged intention appears to be that they wanted to reduce the relay usage so that they wouldn't have to pay more money for something that doesn't really need to be used given that they have their own solution for it that doesn't require any more extra money being spent on it.
[doublepost=1486310249][/doublepost]
They haven't been playing it down or portraying it as non-issue. They have been actually keeping it real rather than spinning a much more sinister and intricate conspiracy.
Millions of Apple customers agree Apple broke FaceTime on iOS 6 forcing upgrades. Simple.You didn't respond to my post immediately--that's quite telling, isn't it. You didn't address "read the direct quotation", that's quite telling. Should I continue?
If we're going by subject line I do get it: people were brainstorming ideas to reduce relay usage. That doesn't support the conspiracy theories put forth by you and others.
It bears repeating: the direct quote you're using as your foundation is "broke iOS 6".
[doublepost=1486310429][/doublepost]
And the reason for killing FaceTime on iOS6????? All will be revealed.
Uh, no. You're seeing what you want to see. You're looking at two email quotations and a subject line, none of which say anything damning. Would you be ok with people pulling out three words from any random post of yours and judging you by them?
Again, it may be accurate that Apple did exactly what you're saying, but the information in this article does not support that conclusion.
"Apple inserted a bug, code, known as malware, a virus". No, they revoked a certificate, something certificate authorities do many times a daily basis. Sure, "No hyperbole", indeed.
I don't disagree that this is crummy behavior on Apple's part, but the path to restoration of Facetime was pretty clear in that you needed to use IOS 7. And what if you disagree with that? Here's a relevant part of the IOS 6 licensing, page 7:
"Apple and its licensors reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to any Services at any time without notice. In no event will Apple be liable for the removal of or disabling of access to any such Services. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain Services, in any case and without notice or liability. "
Good luck with that lawsuit given that nothing was taken away if they upgraded, and even if they decided not to upgrade, the EULA permitted Apple to do this (regardless of how crummy it may be) and, it isn't like there are not other video conferencing services out there. Of course, that is contingent upon those other services not stopping support for IOS6 as well, which I am confident they have long ago. They going to add Skype as a defendant too?
As someone who has to deal with the fallout of DDoS attacks on a regular interval, I'm getting kind of tired of people publicly refusing to keep the firmware of their stuff up to date, including their freaking phones. While IOS is among the last things I expect to see launching DDoS attacks, failure to keep up on security updates makes that more of a possibility. Wanting to run a long deprecated four year old IOS version is silly, and taking someone to court over having to upgrade when the use of IOS6 implicitly marked their acceptance to the licensing terms is beyond a waste of time and money.
Yeah, would have been nice if Apple would have fixed it, but they didn't. Update the damned OS and move along.
It doesn't matter what Apple's Terms and Conditions says. That T&C is phrased by lawyers to discharge Apple from any responsibility or wrongdoing. There are laws that can supercede it.
Btw, this has nothing to do with security bug. This simply has to do with Apple not wanting to pay $50M to another company in licensing or certification fee. I am fine with Apple not wanting to pay the fee BUT NOT at the expense of consumer experience.
"The path to restoration of FaceTime..." Nonsense. Nice try. No one reads EULA, they aren't enforcable and don't supersede consumer rights. This also wasn't a security bug. Apple was attempting to save cash while crippling iOS 6 devices, while updating to iOS 7 killed usability forcing customers to upgrade devices.
See #230 https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ades-save-money.2030813/page-10#post-24272294
You use sarcasm and say its a fun conspiracy and reality is something difference and then backtrack saying its a conspiracy? Look, the fact remains that iPad Mini on iOS 8 and forward became unusable. iPhone 6 on iOS 9 was borderline unusable and somehow all devices conveniently lose performance the moment they are upgraded to the next iOS version. The topic of this thread is just one of many of Apple's tricks to force users to upgrade the device. Just like how a bug was introduced to increase Apple's profits; similar bugs are introduced to limit performance
There have been tons of lawsuits on this. I am surprised people even find this arguable
- One of the companies suing Apple over this has been involved in patent troll lawsuits in the past.
- The fix that Apple provided was free. "Breaking" IOS 6 to force upgrades to IOS 7 provided no money to Apple, except when a device could not be upgraded because of its age/model. If this suit has merit because of that then every electrical device that can or could be upgraded in the last 25 years by every hardware and software company are just as or more guilty and should be included in the suit.
- You were nagged, but not forced, to upgrade. And it's fairly common knowledge that once you upgrade you have a very short time to downgrade before you can't reinstall that old version.
- Apple had been sued (successfully) over code used by FaceTime in IOS 6, and had to keep paying as long as that version of FaceTime was being used. Are you people saying that Apple had some moral OR legal obligation to keep paying that company after removing the code in question? Companies are sued all the time for patent infringement, and when they lose they usually try to replace the hardware or software in question as soon as they can, unless it is too expensive or development would take too long.Apple, Microsoft, Samsung, iBM, and every other software/hardware company have been sued and have removed the code or item in question.
- If you answered "yes they do" to point 4 then is MS also legally responsible for how they implemented Windows 10 upgrades? They were a LOT more forced than IOS upgrades. So far, courts have ruled no.
You seem to conveniently ignore what's actually written just picking out a few phrases here and there and spinning something of your own as to what was said on top of the usual hyperbole and deflections. What was said is not what you have been implying.
This what the user said
This what you said
I am saying smacrumon is correct and this conspiracy does happen
There is proof of this. In fact, the courts will decide the validity of this entire thing. That will be the "proof".
The fact that such cases are even being filed in large numbers says it all