|
|
Post by ¡Twist Of Cinnamon! on Sept 15, 2014 3:08:26 GMT -5
i'm pretty surprised that people didn't get more angry about the album just showing up on their phones, i find it offensively invasive.Thats taking it a bit far. Anyone that makes that argument is the type of person that goes outside looking for something to be offended by. |
|
|
|
Post by Mox on Sept 15, 2014 3:25:30 GMT -5
i'm pretty surprised that people didn't get more angry about the album just showing up on their phones, i find it offensively invasive. I could not agree with you more. Spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. PerpetuaLynch Motion on Sept 15, 2014 4:00:28 GMT -5
i'm pretty surprised that people didn't get more angry about the album just showing up on their phones, i find it offensively invasive.Thats taking it a bit far. Anyone that makes that argument is the type of person that goes outside looking for something to be offended by. In the interest of fairness it's basically the very definition of a virus since a virus is unwanted software that when executed can replicate itself and inserts a copy on another device, then that's what this is. A virus. It's really quite invasive. Although since I don't have an iPhone or an iPod touch it just sits in my iCloud, insultingly telling me I "purchased" it. |
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Sept 15, 2014 8:37:21 GMT -5
This is pure nonsense on Apple's part. U2 absolutely sucks. If I wanted the free album I would actively go and get it. It doesn't look like it was added to my library on either my computer or phone but I do see it in my purchase history. There are very few things I hate more in this world than U2, and it's not that hard to ask people if they want free music. This is 100% invasive marketing. But hey, I guess we just saw a bunch of hot naked celebrities so it's give and take with this whole privacy thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Sept 15, 2014 11:34:10 GMT -5
i'm pretty surprised that people didn't get more angry about the album just showing up on their phones, i find it offensively invasive.Thats taking it a bit far. Anyone that makes that argument is the type of person that goes outside looking for something to be offended by. ummm, not at all. you'll find the two posters following you agree with me as well. at most, they should have simply advertised it being free on iTunes for iphone users for the time, not directly put the album on your phone and leave you to have to deal with it. it's completely forced marketing, you have no choice but to acknowledge the existence of u2's album rather you wanted to or not. they're literally trying to force you to listen to certain music that they benefit from selling rather you want to or not. EDIT: pitchfork.com/news/56713-apple-launches-site-to-help-you-remove-the-u2-album-from-your-itunes/ it's a fail. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 4:46:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2014 17:54:16 GMT -5
I would be extremely annoyed if I had an iphone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boy Wonder on Sept 15, 2014 20:00:37 GMT -5
No ones forcing anyone to listen to anything. It's in the background, sure, doesn't mean you need to listen to it.
I guess Apple didn't realize how many of their customers fall into the Insane Clown Posse/Limp Bizkit fanbase.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scotty on Sept 15, 2014 20:04:23 GMT -5
#AndroidProblems
|
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Sept 16, 2014 1:42:36 GMT -5
No ones forcing anyone to listen to anything. It's in the background, sure, doesn't mean you need to listen to it. I guess Apple didn't realize how many of their customers fall into the Insane Clown Posse/Limp Bizkit fanbase. huh? how did insane clown posse or limp bizkit come into this? |
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Sept 16, 2014 7:19:21 GMT -5
No ones forcing anyone to listen to anything. It's in the background, sure, doesn't mean you need to listen to it. I guess Apple didn't realize how many of their customers fall into the Insane Clown Posse/Limp Bizkit fanbase. huh? how did insane clown posse or limp bizkit come into this? Apparently if you don't like U2's lame music, you're obviously a fan of these bands that have set records at times, and we're exceptionally famous at given times, but you know, bands that hipsters think suck. I'm not an Apple fan at all, so I don't have this problem, thank God. I'd be pissed if it did happen. Gifting a U2 album, in such an invasive manner, would be like coming into my house, crapping, and not even flushing. |
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Sept 16, 2014 7:24:44 GMT -5
Yeah I think this is going to backfire more than they thought really. My wife still has an iPhone and was irritated. We both like to listen to our libraries on random, and random U2 songs you don't like coming up isn't fun. You shouldn't have to look up how to get rid music you don't want and didn't ask for. I say this as someone who was a big fan of U2 in the 80's and 90's. Though I can't say I have really liked anything by them since.
Sure it isn't the worst thing in the world, but annoying a large percentage of your user base is dumb. And I am pretty confident that a large % of their user base doesn't want the new U2 album.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Sept 16, 2014 8:58:06 GMT -5
Luckily for them, they can afford to drop 100 mil to U2, and not sweat it a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by CM Poor on Sept 16, 2014 11:55:09 GMT -5
Luckily for them, they can afford to drop 100 mil to U2, and not sweat it a bit. It's certainly the only way U2 was going to turn 100 mil off this album. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago on Sept 16, 2014 12:43:23 GMT -5
huh? how did insane clown posse or limp bizkit come into this? Apparently if you don't like U2's lame music, you're obviously a fan of these bands that have set records at times, and we're exceptionally famous at given times, but you know, bands that hipsters think suck. I'm not an Apple fan at all, so I don't have this problem, thank God. I'd be pissed if it did happen. Gifting a U2 album, in such an invasive manner, would be like coming into my house, crapping, and not even flushing. Yes, but can it beat nine and a half Courics?!?  |
|
I dont know good luck 