Comment by dylangs1030 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dylangs1030 | Hacker News Reader

It really bothers me that Apple banned an app like this. Just allow people to be idiotic. There's even a disclaimer after all...

As for the app itself, cool! I'm glad somebody had the audacity to ship something as outrageous as this. I don't think it will get much of a following, but I suppose if you really don't care about your phone or you're really confident in catching this could be a cool, reckless waste of 10 minutes.

EDIT: For clarification, I don't really side with or against Apple in general on things, so this isn't meant to be a "Apple's always a walled garden, BAH" post, etc...I just really feel any company should let users feel free to destroy hardware. But I understand that might not be the best philosophy to run a multinational company.

EDIT2: Just thought of a way to game this after reading another comment - slap on a Lifeproof case, go in a big pool shallow enough to stand, throw it really high. Eliminates the need to catch it (within...reason...).

They sell phone warranties for damaged phones so it's a fairly direct conflict of interest.

Also "13.1 Apps that encourage users to use an Apple Device in a way that may cause damage to the device will be rejected"

Perhaps it is worth more to Apple that a user can download apps and continue the "iPhone lifestyle" than worry about how to fix their device. I personally think that it is not a conflict of interest.

Perhaps I didn't explain myself - I'm not saying the rule isn't transparent, I understand very well there's an actual rule. My complaint is that it's there at all.

Although, what you said about warranties makes sense...however honestly that hasn't kept friends of mine from deliberately breaking their phones just to get new ones.

...then your friends are dishonest, and their dishonesty raises the price I have to pay when I buy a product from Apple.

Did you criticize them when you found out they did that?

Sure. Not that it helped any. Interestingly, it's more my "untechnical" friends - exclusively those, actually. The technical ones are somewhat invested in technology news and wouldn't do that because they understand a lot more of the process. On the other hand, those that are dishonest in this way, in my experience, know nothing about the tech of Apple except that it's, well, new and shiny.

As for myself, my iPhone 4 is half-broken and I'm still eeking out whatever life I can get from it before I get the iPhone 6 in the Fall.

Apple should ban this app. The amount of support it is going to eat up not to mention the headlines the tech press is going to write are not worth it. Selling an app that is basically designed to break the phone is just a really bad idea.

Bad idea, perhaps. But why should Apple get to determine what is or isn't a bad idea for one to do with their own phone? (Although I would suspect part of the reason they banned it is to avoid claims of "Apple's so greedy that while they ban so many legitimately useful apps they allowed this one, just because it can break phones resulting in added profits for them from people buying replacement phones".)

Because, Apple is warranty liable for selling an app that basically get you to break your phone either via current replacement plans or the expected lawsuit. This is a money loser and a problem for parents.

Apple rejected the app. Did you read the article?

Yes, I read the article and knew they banned the app before leaving my comment. I agree with their position and further added why. Should is often used as an agreement with an already taken position.

Maybe because Apple might need to fix the phones? Or their carriers insurance providers would?

When friends ask which smartphone to get, I often recommend the iPhone, despite being a long time Android user and fan.

The reason is that Apple has a very generous straight replacement policy (at a fraction of the retail new price) even if you don't subscribe to any of their care plans. This is a world different from makers like HTC and Samsung who fully intend to double dip if you have an issue with your device, where a replacement of a broken device costs 100% of its original price (meaning you are paying again for marketing, R&D, profit, markup, etc). I have faced exactly this twice (both with Samsung), once where they claimed nebulous, unproven corrosion damage on a device that had never touched water, and had all clear water sensors. As a user there is nothing I can do to contest this, their warranty being effectively useless through no negligence of mine. They nicely offered to fix it for just over a thousand dollars.

Samsung and HTC and others want you to bust your device. Apple doesn't, because they have a stake in it as well, making no profit from your own misadventure.

My other half dropped her phone recently and was utterly distraught. Neither of us realised just how insanely favourable the like for like replacement deal was, and were unsurprisingly hugely complimentary about Apple afterwards.

I cannot overstate how helpful and efficient the staff were and the process was just so quick and simple. If (mildly idiotic) apps like this being banned are the price of that piece of mind? I pay it gladly.

Agreed. The screen my girlfriends iPad broke edge to edge, so I decided to bite the bullet and go pay to have it replaced. Took it to the Apple store, he looks at it for a second and runs into the back. Hands me a new one(refurb?) and (after verifying that I backed up already) says "You're all set! Have a good day". I was pleasantly surprised, and looked like an awesome boyfriend.

I know someone who broke an iPad the day after buying it and the Apple store people refused to do anything for free.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com