This is a pretty blatant move to pull while your business practices are already being looking into (albeit on a different front). Despite Jobs's comments about the spat with Adobe from D8, Apple seems adamant about throwing any olive branch Adobe extends directly into the fire. This seems like another knee jerk reaction to Google moving further into Apple's markets (Google Music?).
Those issues aside, this part seems reasonable.
3.3.9 You and Your Applications may not collect, use, or disclose to any third party, user or device data without prior user consent, and then only under the following conditions: - The collection, use or disclosure is necessary in order to provide a service or function that is directly relevant to the use of the Application. For example, without Apple's prior written consent, You may not use third party analytics software in Your Application to collect and send device data to a third party for aggregation, processing, or analysis.
Android's market explicitly states which, if any, types of data may be accessed by the app, and which are shared. Perhaps Apple can take note there. Once you send data to a website however (click a mobile ad, search a term on Google, etc.), any expectancy of not having that data aggregated is pretty naive.
Apple revises iOS rules on outside advertisers, cuts out Google, Adobe by implication originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:52:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.PermalinkAppleInsider | AllThingsD |Email this|Comments
Link to Original Source
As has become the defacto standard way of doing business, let's pay some 'researchers' to publish the results that favor our intentions. "Remember, statistics don't lie, just the fuckers that use them."
When you answer a question, or show someone how to do something, and they are able to then complete the task, would it not be safe to assume you adequately answered their inquiry? Now, 2 hours, 1 week, or 7 minutes later they ask again, after they were completely in the clear on the answer/solution/method. Now repeat that indefinitely. Some people either don't have the attention span to remember simple instructions, or simply don't care.
I can't speak specific examples from the OP's life, but I can illustrate one from my own. I play and coach for the local rugby club in my city. There are players who don't have the understanding of what decisions to make or how to execute a particular play. I then explain how to perform the action, and why you would perform an action (explaining the 'why' I find helps people buy into it, they then understand that there is a reason behind the way of doing things, not just me barking orders). From there we execute drills to reinforce the action, after several iterations of which, people tend to get it. They are able to execute the actions properly and decisively. The problem is that the same few individuals routinely forget everything they learn every 4 days, no matter how many times we go through this cycle. They are able to execute it properly once it is explained to them, but how many times should one have to explain the same action?