just what i was thinking. there's been a few apps that i downloaded and wondered why the company spent all that time making an app that doesn't do much at all...
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.
Vaporizer Manufacturer PAX Calls on Apple to Rethink Vaping-Related App Ban
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
just what i was thinking. there's been a few apps that i downloaded and wondered why the company spent all that time making an app that doesn't do much at all...
Being able to control the temperature beyond one of the three presets is a nice feature. It takes some experience to appreciate fine tuning the temp, as I hear flavor and intensity can change drastically, and wouldn't be doable without a companion app. Also nice is being able to lock the device so that it can't be used (by children or anyone else) until it is unlocked.
wouldn't a dial on the device give you the same function?
children are getting better and better at hacking these days)
Has anyone considered the Health angle? Apple is very focused on health data and initiatives. Regardless of how harmful vaping is, I think most would agree that it's not generally a healthy behavior. Many have pointed out the healthy benefits of using vaping to quit smoking. But perhaps Apple wants to just stay away from the whole vaping issue altogether in support of broader health. Their choice. And I think most will agree and want to do what's best for their personal health.
Not really defending Apple here, and you may be right about "health crisis" being a questionable (and hypocritical) excuse, but I suspect Apple probably have a more pragmatic "good reason" from their point of view, probably because one of their lawyers have informed them of a potential liability.
For example... (my emphasis):
Just speculating, but one problem could be the technical entanglement of the iPhone with the operation of the device that makes the iPhone an integral part of the paraphernalia of vaping. If someone's 12 year old uses an iPhone to 'unlock' dad's vaper and/or someone makes themselves ill with illegal cartridges that the iPhone said were authentic or burns down a house after adjusting the vaporizer temperature with their iPhone... all using an app that Apple had approved then that's a bit more direct than "pub crawl App forced me to become an alcoholic". Apple are probably a far juicier target for ambulance-chasers than PAX.
That's just one possibility, but I'm sure Apple has a committee somewhere doing legally-informed "risk assessment" on various App categories, and that really shouldn't be confused with "ethics".
Not saying that banning PAX "because public health crisis" while still approving apps that award badges based on your beer consumption (yeah, there's an app for that*) isn't arguably hypocritical - just that there's probably a valid (if less virtuous) reason somewhere beneath the spin.
(* OK, its based on variety rather than quantity, but the people I know who use it are not prone to "swill and spit" - on the other hand I seriously doubt that those people would otherwise be supping nice cups of tea... Meanwhile, I've definitely seen 'quit' smokers being tempted back by vapers...)
The original quote that the devices don't need the app and that it's mostly a gimmick is entirely false. For example, the PAX 3 has 4 heat settings. Four settings isn't nearly enough since their lowest temperature does not go low enough. To get the low temperature, you have to use the app. Because you can only set specific temperatures with the app. This is a critical feature. It's not some gimmick. Same goes for the Firefly. You can choose one of the 5 or 6 presets. If you want to set a specific temp, you're out of luck unless you have the app.
[automerge]1574280510[/automerge]
That's the problem. There are no dials on some of these devices.They left that up to the app.
I don't think being able to smoke your weed at 382 degrees instead of 350 is a critical feature.
I have certainly seen vaporizers from 5+ years ago (I'm sure you're aware this isn't a sudden new thing) that did have an on screen display where the temperature can be set with a couple of buttons. But Pax really went out of their way to make themselves the 'Apple' of vaporizers, from the design of the device down to the packaging. There is no on/off button, no dial, not even a need to turn it on because there is lip sensing tech to heat up when your mouth goes to it. A very 'it just works' approach.
Of course, you can still buy models or brands that have no app, meaning a 'dumb' vaporizer, if you will. But come on, I'm on Mac Rumors, I love tech stuff and am often an early adopter, so of course I'm going to want the one with the rechargeable usb battery and companion app, lol.
There are probably a variety of industries where a companion app is at least very helpful, if not completely necessary. Besides Apple banning an app, the company itself could also suddenly stop updating their app or supporting it all together when a new iOS has new requirements. There's always some risk. But this blanket of a ban just seems too quick of a judgment, especially when this affects vaporizers that only can use flower, not any of the oil pods in question.
🤦♂️
That makes so much more sense than what I was thinking, which was more along the lines of screen time...
There are people who will french press or whatever-the-heck their coffee at a very precise temperature, where a few degrees off is a big deal to them. And I'm sure there are many other types of examples where this type of precision may not be 'critical', but it doesn't make it wrong. Some have the experience to tell the difference, or at least believe that they can, which is enough. So let's let people enjoy things how they want.
Well their barrier of entry to the world of high-end marijuana temperature control smokery is now "buy a $40 android tablet" - they'll manage.There are people who will french press or whatever-the-heck their coffee at a very precise temperature, where a few degrees off is a big deal to them. And I'm sure there are many other types of examples where this type of precision may not be 'critical', but it doesn't make it wrong. Some have the experience to tell the difference, or at least believe that they can, which is enough. So let's let people enjoy things how they want.
Not saying Apple is right here at all, but the other poster was claiming that the feature was essential.
Marijuana is legal here in Canada and the Pax app still got pulled here, so I'd say no.
The things he complained about was very much "old man shakes a fist at cloud". As someone who owns the first and the 3rd Pax, the old one was worse and was susceptible to a breakdown of the on/off mechanism (it would get gummed up and needed to be taken apart to properly clean). You can use the 1st and 3rd Pax in the identical way (fill the oven, click the top to activate, series of clicks to adjust the temp from low/low-med/med-high/high, shake for battery life).
What the App provided above that for the 3rd Pax was exact temp control (say, precisely 205°C), and smoking profiles, like settings for Stealth (low temp, low LED brightness, great for concerts) or flavour (high heat, quick cool down, more aromatic). There are 5-6 different choices, however, everything you could do with the first one, you could do with the newest one, but in a less faulty design.
funny, this makes me think of my nespresso machine. there is an app for it now. i can brew coffee from my phone. but i have to load the capsule first. and i can't make a cappuccino - the milk frother isn't controlled by the app, and who keeps milk sitting in there anyway? so do i ever use this app? but was i very excited that there was an app at first? yes, that i was...
Then you've never vaped before. There is a vast difference in flavor and effect at those two temperatures. Higher temperatures have a much more sedating effect. And the flavor isn't nearly as good. You might as well smoke it.
[automerge]1574292135[/automerge]
There are people who will french press or whatever-the-heck their coffee at a very precise temperature, where a few degrees off is a big deal to them. And I'm sure there are many other types of examples where this type of precision may not be 'critical', but it doesn't make it wrong. Some have the experience to tell the difference, or at least believe that they can, which is enough. So let's let people enjoy things how they want.
LOL. I'm one of "those people". I spent an extra $200 on my espresso machine because it has a PID that does a better job of regulating the temperature of the water.
The people who are claiming that minor changes in temp don't matter don't know what they're talking about. It makes a huge difference.
[automerge]1574292479[/automerge]
which is kinda lame, especially given this news
I think you may be joking, but in the event that you aren't, in this case the devices were made long before Apple made these changes. Existing apps should be grandfathered in.
[automerge]1574292568[/automerge]
Further to my previous posts about temp, here's a good article on why precise temperature control is so important. Hopefully it won't get censored out.
https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis-101/how-to-customize-a-cannabis-high-with-temperature
Last edited:
What are you all on about with this “private company” talk? Apple is the most visible public company in the world... 🤷♂️
It's only a matter of time before Sugar Rush is removed. I mean, sugar is far more responsible for health-related issues than smoking.
A case could easily be made that Facebook is more detrimental to our health than sugar and smoking combined.
Where does it stop?
We're embarrassingly petty. What we spend time, effort and money on regulating vs. what despicable behavior goes unchecked is just so telling.
A case could easily be made that Facebook is more detrimental to our health than sugar and smoking combined.
Where does it stop?
We're embarrassingly petty. What we spend time, effort and money on regulating vs. what despicable behavior goes unchecked is just so telling.
Last edited:
Yeh... Was more rhetorical.I don't think it does.
It doesn’t stop.
Just... Keeps... Rolin’...
Last edited:
Okay, but what about weed vaping apps? They literally put the flower into the device. Should we also ban essential oil vaporizers too?
You're putting words in my mouth. To be clear, I am not saying we should pass a law to unrestrict platforms, I just said an unrestricted platform is a losing strategy without that law. There's no good solution to that problem.
The First Amendment should already enable companies to allow unrestricted speech on their platforms, but it doesn't really because the federal and especially local governments will still go after them for it. If any law needs to be passed, it's something more formally protecting the right in this context.
Last edited:
I don't disagree Apple particularly has a substantial power in the mobile device market, certainly with ultimate control over the App Store. That said, it's one thing not to endorse a company based on competitive reasons. It's another to do so based on ethical concerns- smoking/vaping is a pretty justifiable reason. When massive retailers decide to stop selling tobacco products no one accused them of anti-trust violations.
Well, Juul's decision to sell out to Phillip Morris has pretty much ensured the survival of their company. This history of Juul's business decisions is actually quite fascinating. Very smart of Phillip Morris too... if e-cigs fail (which they won't), they'll get an increase in cigarette sales. If e-cigs continue to boom, they're safe then too.
Personally, I can't stand the smell of vaporizer vapor (smoke)... it immediately gives me a headache. For me the headache is worse than the gross smell of cigarette smoke. Perhaps you should move to state where smoking in public venues is banned?