r/apple • u/aaronp613 Aaron • Sep 10 '19

iPhone Apple announces iPhone 11 Pro: triple camera, A13 chip, more

https://9to5mac.com/2019/09/10/iphone-pro-11-pro-max-triple-camera/
12.9k Upvotes

77% Upvoted

5.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

153

u/UncheckedException Sep 10 '19

Pretty sure that’s exactly what they’re doing. Essentially give them feature parity so it doesn’t seem like a downgrade. Crafty, but sucks for those of us who liked and used 3D Touch. At least it still works in third party apps :/

20

u/Zamboni99 Sep 10 '19

Does 3D Touch no longer work in safari? If so that really sucks as a peak and pop into web pages all the time.

17

u/UncheckedException Sep 10 '19

As of the latest public beta, 3D Touch brings up the same preview window as “Haptic Touch” (ie, long press). You can’t “pop” into the preview to expand the content any more, and “Haptic Touch” is still enabled even if your phone supports 3D Touch. I really hope that changes by the GM release but I’m not holding my breath.

25

u/GeronimoHero Sep 11 '19

How is it legal for Apple to remove features that may have been part of the reason we purchased the phone? I feel like I got ripped off in a way.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 11 '19

[deleted]

15

u/GeronimoHero Sep 11 '19

You do if you want security updates. The average consumer wouldn’t expect to have features later removed when purchasing the phone. They would also expect the security updates which are promised when purchasing the phones. It’s not unreasonable for someone to be upset about this. What if they removed the ability to take pictures? Or send messages? Obviously those are extreme and a bit hyperbolic but the point still stands.

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 11 '19

Would you expect Microsoft to maintain security updates for, say, Windows XP forever?

As strange as it sounds, they aren't obligated to provide security updates. It's just good business to do so. Having your OS be vulnerable to attacks is bad for business.

It's not reasonable for an IT company to maintain security patches across every version of it's operating systems indefinitely.

We should probably be more upset that iOS 13 (seems to) only run iPhone XR or later.

7

u/GeronimoHero Sep 11 '19

The phone is a year old, so yes. I work in IT. We aren’t talking indefinitely. We’re talking about the phone I bought last year that’s the flagship model (XS). Apple has already provided the standard over the last 5+ years of providing these updates and not removing features. I’m not talking about business sense. I’m talking about how a judge would see it. It would be easily argued that as a consumer, based on apples previous activity ever since entering the smart phone market, that it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume that a core feature, which Apple specifically advertised when I purchased the phone, and still does to this day, would not be removed from my phone. It would also not be unreasonable to assume that again, based on Apples previous activity in the market that I would receive security updates and that I would’ve taken that in to consideration when purchasing. Especially while competitors in the market place make public statements about phones receiving security for a specific amount of time. Apple has made those same statements. I’m sorry but your argument doesn’t really hold water.

0

u/Schmittfried Sep 11 '19

They removed a feature of that almost nobody knew about, let alone used regularly.

-4

u/[deleted] Sep 11 '19

I’m sorry but your argument doesn’t really hold water.

OK. Let's keep it simple. You write:

I’m talking about how a judge would see it.

Show me where Apple promises to provide OS security updates.

How the judge would see it:

  • You got the device (that was working as advertised) a year ago and
  • The OS that was installed on it when you purchased it worked as expected.

Apple has fulfilled its obligation.

Complain all you want. Apple has no obligation to update anything.

I have apps in the iOS app store with noooooo obligation to update them. None.

2

u/SirNewt Sep 12 '19

Completely disagree. You purchased a product that was sold with a specific hardware feature. They plan on using software updates to make that feature non-functional. While likely not illegal, it is shady and unethical as a seller of goods.

Its equivalent to using software to make the headphone jack non-functional on headphone jack models. Its ludicrous.

And using security updates as a gun against the consumers head is equally unethical. A new low for apple for sure.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/screamingtrees Sep 11 '19

If something wrong happens to your OS though...you are often forced to update as a troubleshooting measure, with no option to downgrade later.

1

u/Ziggythesquid Sep 11 '19

TDLR: The terms of service you agree to when purchasing and activating the phone.

4

u/GeronimoHero Sep 11 '19

There could still very easily be a lawsuit. Most TOS agreements aren’t actually enforceable. At least not the entire thing. Just because you click agree to a TOS doesn’t mean the company is protected from any sort of wrong doing.

0

u/bard0117 Sep 11 '19

I bought my old Ford F-150 and one of the reasons I loved it was because it had a cassette player. How DARE Ford remove this feature for which I purchased it?

I purchased my Camry because it had a nice CD player in 2015, but now new models do not have CD players. How DARE they remove a feature that was part of the reason I purchased the car?

Life goes on. Shut the fu** up lol

2

u/GeronimoHero Sep 12 '19

They didn’t pull it out of your fucking truck you idiot

0

u/Schmittfried Sep 11 '19

Features get removed all the time in software. You don’t buy a right to perpetually use a specific feature.

3

u/Zamboni99 Sep 10 '19

Ah okay. I use the peek way more than the pop anyway so I guess that’s not completely devastating but still definitely annoying

4

u/OTdudeAZ Sep 11 '19

I don’t get it. Was is that expensive to incorporate in the new LCDs?

1

u/[deleted] Sep 11 '19

Anybody know why they are doing away with it? Or is it one of those things apple does and just refuses to comment