Apple Just Uploaded a U2 Album to Your iPhone and iPad – And Seriously, WTF | Hacker News Reader

Apple Just Uploaded a U2 Album to Your iPhone and iPad – And Seriously, WTF

techcrunch.com

57 pointsbane90 comments

I think people object to this not because they hate U2, but because this is a reminder that you don't really control your device, or even the content on it. Apple controls it, and will add or remove content as they see fit.

It reminds me of the incident where Amazon remotely deleted copies of a certain book about a future technological dystopia from kindles.

This.

I don't dislike U2.

I do dislike someone deciding whether or not I may or may not like U2 and adding it to my device/playlists.

I recently canned all of my Apple kit and went back to Windows after a number of issues over the years with controlling my devices[2]. It's the only viable platform for me[1] that is improving its reputation and putting the users first.

[1] I can't use *nix platforms for everything I do otherwise I would be using FreeBSD...

[2] Buying and selling iOS devices is a PITA due to the activation lock and getting data in and out of them is troublesome too.

It's only added to your device if you had "automatically download new purchases" selected.

It's not added to your playlists.

Do you also complain about the socks from your parents for Christmas?

Typically you get some say in what you purchase.

a) that's a major feature of iTunes' sync capability. Why wouldn't I have that ticked?

b) I shuffle the entire device so yes it is as I only buy and put music I want on it.

c) Hell yes. Sheldon moment: I have 10 pairs of socks exactly the same and and everyone knows I don't want socks for Christmas. Apple should know I don't want smelly U2 socks for Christmas seeing as my entire device is full of electronic and industrial music.

> It's only added to your device if you had "automatically download new purchases" selected.

Except I didnt purchase that music.It isnt a new purchase,it's just stuffing phones with promotional content.

And if you equate Apple forcing promotional content down to users with parents giving christmas gifts you are insulting (at least my) parents.

The album appeared in your iTunes account as a new purchase. There was not "forced down to users" about it.

It's only added to your device if you had "automatically download new purchases" selected.

Who purchased this album?

Do you also complain about the socks from your parents for Christmas?

The vast majority of people can talk to their parents and ask for no socks, or tell them after the fact.

The vast majority of people have no real way to talk to anyone at Apple who can control this.

THis. Yep, this.

I think the vast majority of the users will not even realize this and will think 'oh wow, free music, thanks Apple.'.

Actually most people I know will say exactly these words to every member of their family "who the fuck put this on my phone? I don't want it".

I think it's even illegal in some countries. But it all depends on the definition of 'software'.

With a bit of a stretch, you can probably call it unauthorized tranmission of data to a device and make a comparison to attempts at password brute-forcing on a website (which I believe is illegal in many countries).

It would only have downloaded to the phone if you'd previously authorised that behaviour.

> you don't really control your device, or even the content on it

You do, you can always remove those songs if you don't want them.

What you do then when they remove something instead?

Then don't purchase anything, and go hide in a cave, so nobody bothers you.

Because the choices are: 1) buy Apple, or 2) hide in a cave.

There's also 3) Go with godawful, over-saturated, epilepsy inducing Samsung and think that a company, that actually double crossed Apple as their strategic partner won't double cross you.

There are an infinite number of things that you can do that are not buying Apple.

Like, for example, roller-skating.

Exactly. Roller skating is fun.

Or use a decade old Nokia.

Better battery life too. Even at 10 years old...

Yeah, I wonder why that might be. Isn't it horrible how for the past 10 years, phones have only been getting worse and worse? I wish we were still living in those times, when phone manufacturers were making _real_ phones, instead of these pathetic excuses for mobile communication devices.

That reminds me, anyone else notice how cars today use way too much gas? My horse carriage uses no gas at all, even at 100 years old…

I'm perfectly happy with my 'just a phone' phone. I already have a ton of distractions in my life and I have yet to see what I could possibly gain from another source of interruptions. I've tried a smartphone for a week, twice in fact and have moved back quickly to the trusty and reliable golden oldie.

Horses and carriages are no substitute for cars in terms of speed, convenience and range.

Range = battery life, convenience = reliability, size, speed -> I can't talk any faster.

Can you?

Sadly you cannot totally purge the songs from your iTunes account. You can only hide the songs from the local iTunes account, but they will continue to live for all of eternity on your iCloud.

So?

So, it seems you can't.

No, many people definitely hate U2 and would never want it on their device. I am one of them.

Yep, don't care that Apple can do this, but I definitely don't want this bloody album on my devices.

http://usvsth3m.com/post/97128521413/how-to-dismantle-an-app...

but I definitely don't want this bloody album on my devices

Then you do care that Apple can do this.

I hate those sample music files from windows media player, how dare they include it with every purchase of windows!

Which can can be deleted in 2 seconds...

Do you really not know how to delete music from your device? Swipe-left, delete.

And what if you have iTunes Match?

How can you hate the weezer buddy holly clip which came with windows 95? It was by far the best file on the windows 95 cd.

WMP didn't download those samples surreptitiously from the internet. Many media players come with a sample track or album, that's not really a big deal.

And that is why when last week I went shopping for an e-reader in Bahrain and found out that the only thing here is the Kindle, I turned around and went home. That was absolutely terrifying behavior from Amazon.

I know I sound like a broken record saying this.

But Stallman was right.

The idea that users don't own and control, what they perceive to own and control scares them on a very primordial level.

This is why I try and explain over and over again that there is no such thing as strong security on a mobile when Apple and Google can remotely modify your phone.

If you're running any sort of password manager on a phone, how hard do you think it would be for Apple+Google to take a copy of the encrypted file along with your captured password. Imagine the complete access the US government has on foreign nationals who are high up in the echelons of their own governments.

Stallman was more than right. He was a god damn prophet.

It's probably not wise for Apple to show how little control users have over iCloud stuff, considering the celebrity photo leaks of late.

Most of their users seem to be heavily invested, both financially and emotionally. And if you're not willing to walk away, they can do whatever they want. They have all the leverage.

brand erosion

Or: How Apple played favorites with a band that needed no promotion whatsoever.

I remember when Windows came with a copy of Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians 'good times'. That was at least a discovery of a nice song by someone I never heard of.

U2 is past it's 'best before' date anyway.

> Apple played favorites

I don't see that as the point of this article. I see the point of this article as that if you buy from this vendor then you have, in the final analysis, no control over the device you paid for, over your own property.

That's another angle, and it is at least as bad. But when you're in the business of playing middle man to a whole industry I really don't understand why you would play favourites at this level.

The fact that you have no control over your device is something that I wrote about the other day so I'm well aware of that. (And I had not even taken into account the eco system owners, just carriers versus public).

I don't see it on either my MacBook or my iPhone. Both of which do automatic downloads. The album is on my "purchased" list so I can download it if I want to, but it wasn't pushed to my phone/Mac. This seems fine to me.

Actually Apple has just accomplished what privacy advocates around the world couldn't have done: Getting people concerned about the issue (by hitting them where it actually hurts: music taste). I think it's a great and mostly innocent example (the music is really, really shitty though) of the problems that 'the cloud' poses.

I think it's a great and mostly innocent example (the music is really, really shitty though) of the problems that 'the cloud' poses.

The naked-photos-of-celebrities the other day is a very non innocent way to show people the problems with the cloud.

"Bono, you've sold millions of albums, you should be happy. It's not like you can force your albums into the libraries of people who don't want them."

Bono slowly gets an evil grin, like the Grinch. "Get Tim Cook on the phone!"

Well, I hope at least ,with that money he can reopen "the Kitchen" in Dublin,it was a nice place.

Three million copies! I thought it was well established in court that copying equates lost revenue!

Who's going to pay for this? U2 must have lost billions!

(Unless the music industry have come on this around lately. Surely they haven't?)

Apple paid for it. They said so during the iPhone launch presentation.

Oh. The joke is on me then.

I suppose this looks like a great idea on the face of it. U2 is suddenly on millions of devices. However, wouldn't this mean that they've essentially made it impossible to make it onto the music charts which are based off sales?

I don't think U2 gives an awful lot about music charts (any more).

Personally I always liked U2 (grew up in the 80's, so...) but I also think this is an awkward move and maybe more importantly, unnecessary. It just feels out of place.

Having never liked U2, I now have this thing in my music list I either have to figure out how to either or scroll around forever. It may only be an inconvenience, but so was junkware that carriers would preload up. Bono is apparently the carrier that Apple can't resist.

> I don't think U2 gives an awful lot about music charts (any more).

Well, in 2009 U2 complained a lot about the disappointing placement of "No Line On the Horizon" in the selling charts.

> "[We didn't] pull off the pop songs," Bono admitted. Bassist Adam Clayton agreed. "The commercial challenges have to be confronted," he said,

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2009/oct/26/u2-bono-disappo...

there are many retailers who the publisher has to make amends to for this stunt. Some have rules where they will not sell physical copies for albums released digitally first.

so I have read there will be exclusive tracks to make up for it. As for it being on phones and such, not mine or those devices I gave my parents.

It was presented to me in iTunes on my iMac but the interface was so horrid it really came off bad. Use the cover flow mechanism that shows artists and such I saw the U2 banner and it being free, when clicking on that the normal purchase button was there but inoperative. Instead you had to click else where in iTunes to get the music, I think it was on your previously purchased items page which is not clear! The should have adopted the purchase button to take you there automatically, instead it was a work flow CF

While watching the keynote, I thought to myself, "I wonder how many people will complain about the free album?"

And here they are, not only looking the gift horse in the mouth, but questioning its pedigree, complaining that it's a clydesdale when they wanted an arabian, and complaining that their stable which is designed to accept new horses automatically, accepted a new horse automatically.

If you tick the box "automatically download new purchases" you've already "lost control of your phone" because you're accepting Apple's assistance in getting any new media that appears in your account onto your phone.

Do people complain like this about Kobo and Kindle readers automatically downloading new books?

> Do people complain like this about Kobo and Kindle readers automatically downloading new books?

Kobo doesn't do anything like that, at least not mine. For one, I deactivated wifi to have better battery life. But also before, no books I didn't buy were pushed onto it, maybe apart from an example book I don't remember anymore.

Kobo and Kindle both sync promotional copies (typically a few sample chapters) of books you might be interested in.

Ok, then that it is a valid comparison. Did they even change it so that is part of the Library? I vaguely remember a feature like this (still using my kobo, just not updating regularly) , but it was separated.

My kindle only does that if I request a sample chapter. It's a nifty feature, but I need to explicitly choose that.

Irrelevant of that setting, I don't think that this is a brightest move, few days after that whole iCloud thing.

I mean, you are aware how it works, I am - but a random Jane Doe only heard that celebrities had their naked photos leaked and now something strange had happened with unknown music appearing on the phone: https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=iphone%20u2%20wtf

> Do people complain like this about Kobo and Kindle readers automatically downloading new books?

Yes. Partly because all an ereader really needs to do is to display books, and Kobo's fucking awful software makes it nearly impossible[1] to do so unless you have a working internet connection on the host computer, and the Kobo, and you upgrade the Kobo before using it, and you download and install software on the host computer, and you set up an account. Walled gardens are bad, but they're even worse when I have to spend so much time laying the bricks.

And the Kobo is one of the better devices - everything on an SD card so you can back it up and tinker away.

[1] you can use a bit of SQL to persuade the Kobo to not need all the online stuff. How many Kobo readers know what SQL is?

So if I randomize my entire library now I'm getting songs I don't necessarily want?

Correct.

This advice from usvsth3m might help - http://usvsth3m.com/post/97128521413/how-to-dismantle-an-app...

No they didn't.

Apple added an album to your "purchased" list, and if you happen to have the setting for automatically downloaded and syncing your purchases checked, then the service automatically downloaded and synced your purchase for you, AS YOU REQUESTED.

I'm not trying to pretend that they don't have control over my device, but let's not manufacture outrage over something that actually ISN'T an example of them using it.

Except you didn't purchase it. So it's not one of your purchases that should be synced to your devices.

Additionally, given how little space most of my iFriends have on their phones, that's also a part of the issue.

So it's a semantics argument about the difference between "purchased" and "own".

I guess they could have implemented a whole new category of item in their service (owned, but not purchased) or they could just set the effective price to 0.00, or they could add it to everyone's purchased list.

Net result is basically the same, except that they made a big deal about the whole "getting it in 5 seconds" thing as part of the keynote. I imagine it might have been a bit (more) underwhelming if the "one more thing" announcement was that they were making an album available for free for a bit when their wider point was supposed to be simultaneously demonstrating their delivery capability, reach, and - appreciated or not - largesse.

A brazilian judge forbid the app Secret to be downloaded in brazilian app stores and also that the app stores should remove the app from the phones that had already dowloaded it.

This last part was dismissed a lot as a "take this picture out of internet" impossible decision by a judge who doesn't understand how internet works. Now I think it is more clear that things like that is impossible.

Slightly off topic: but why didn't Tim release it by tapping his watch? Or better yet, have Bono reveal he was wearing a watch and do it himself?

Seemed like the biggest slam dunk in history when I was watching it live. Couldn't believe it when they did the finger touch.

Giving people the option to download/claim their U2 album would probably have been a better option though.

I haven't checked yet but what I know is that if the album was pushed onto my ipad, my bluetooth speaker will autoplay it everytime I turn it on. Anticipating edit : I know there might be parameters to avoid that wether on the ipad or on the speaker but keeping a clean itunes was the minimum hassle solution I adopted.

Welcome to the audio equivalent of spam.

The bigest bomb on Apple iOS security is here. My friend bypass the iCloud activation screen lock whit the hack tool from this page http://bypassicloudactivationlock.blogspot.com/

Despite all the hate running around (and ethics aside), I actually had a listen to it and was pleasantly surprised. It's a pretty solid album. I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand anyway.

Related: "Apple just increased my iCloud storage, issued a prorated refund for what I'd previously paid, and put money back into my bank account - And Seriously, WTF?"

I am not a fan - at all - of the snooty, sophomoric and holier-than-thou phrase "first world problems", but I have to say that it does have a certain appeal when considering the vehemence with which a great many have protested how Apple has foisted this album off on them.

I think most of the vehemence came from the realization of 'lack of control', but at the same time I think that's mostly limited to the tech crowd. The rest won't even notice that a line was crossed.

If someone hasn't noticed, in the past 30 years, that Apple is all about control, then I'm not sure what to say.

Sure. But just like there is a moment when the frog suddenly realizes that the water really is getting hotter I suspect a lot of tech types see this as that moment.

Why they didn't notice before is a mystery to me too, it seemed pretty obvious. But the tone is definitely one of 'wow, I didn't see that one coming'.

Can you manually remove the songs from your iTunes and phone?

I guess Google could never do such a thing if they wanted...

Yeah right

I guess Google could never do such a thing if they wanted...

How does that make it any better? I don't care about a pissing match between people that have emotional attachments to their devices that pretend to be criticism of the products. I care about the products and services.

They do something similar. And they're both wrong. Why bring Google into this?

I'm extremely mad, iTunes has no right to just download random music on my phone and I really dislike U2 there nothing I want on my music how do I get it to go away?????

Reply on news.ycombinator.com