<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rhapsody Objects To New Apple Subscriptions Requirements</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slashgear.com/rhapsody-objects-to-new-apple-subscriptions-requirements-15134043/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slashgear.com/rhapsody-objects-to-new-apple-subscriptions-requirements-15134043/</link>
	<description>Feeding Your Gadget and Tech Obsessions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:35:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Len Bennati</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/rhapsody-objects-to-new-apple-subscriptions-requirements-15134043/#comment-184104</link>
		<dc:creator>Len Bennati</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 03:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=134043#comment-184104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[APPLE SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>APPLE SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.slashgear.com/rhapsody-objects-to-new-apple-subscriptions-requirements-15134043/#comment-95369</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashgear.com/?p=134043#comment-95369</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[the simple solution would be for them to remove both subscription links.. keep the app to service your existing clients, but if you can afford the chance new subs might choose apple iTunes billing, then remove the choice to subscribe using the app.

however I think it&#039;s a little silly for these companies to think that apple should get nothing for searving up these &quot;free&quot; apps that generate new sales for these services, especially considering that they indirectly compete with apples iTunes downloads.

I&#039;m fairly sure they can still PROMOTE their paid service, just not direct link from
the app.. splitting hairs.. boils down to free ride is over.. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the simple solution would be for them to remove both subscription links.. keep the app to service your existing clients, but if you can afford the chance new subs might choose apple iTunes billing, then remove the choice to subscribe using the app.</p>
<p>however I think it&#8217;s a little silly for these companies to think that apple should get nothing for searving up these &#8220;free&#8221; apps that generate new sales for these services, especially considering that they indirectly compete with apples iTunes downloads.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m fairly sure they can still PROMOTE their paid service, just not direct link from<br />
the app.. splitting hairs.. boils down to free ride is over.. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
