Amazon Vehicles GoldBox Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Totes Amazon Cash Back Offer ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon ElvisandNixon  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Florida Georgia Line Shop Now
Profile for PRIMETIME > Reviews



Customer Reviews: 117
Top Reviewer Ranking: 108,701
Helpful Votes: 1621

Community Features
Review Discussion Boards
Top Reviewers

Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Your Profile.

Reviews Written by

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11-12
3 Pack Fenzer Black USB Data Sync Charge Cable for Samsung t839 Sidekick 4G t939 Behold II t959 Vibrant Galaxy S
3 Pack Fenzer Black USB Data Sync Charge Cable for Samsung t839 Sidekick 4G t939 Behold II t959 Vibrant Galaxy S
Offered by EZFindDeals
Price: $3.48

2.0 out of 5 stars One of the worst I have ordered, and I've ordered a lot., August 11, 2016
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
The only reason I gave this product two stars instead of one is because I only paid $3.88 for three cables, slightly over one dollar per cable. In this case, I did get what I paid for. As soon as I received them, I put one in, and just moving the cable around slightly, which was very stiff to begin with, started showing that the electrical charge to the device was going in and out, because I could hear the ding sound I normally hear when I plug in the phone charger, and I heard it going in and out repeatedly. Now that one of them was already pretty much dead on arrival, or close to it, the second one had the same problem about a week later. I then used the one remaining cord, and after several months, the housing around the end of the cord that goes into the phone just fell apart, which is very typical for this Fenzer brand. Then you are just left with all the exposed wires coming out of the cord and hoping it lasts long enough in the phone until you can get another cable. This time, I've had enough, and I won't be reordering from this brand or seller any longer because nothing is a bargain if you can't use it at all. I've been around long enough to know that most cables just plain stink, but this one stinks a lot more than others I have tried!

No Title Available

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Detected nothing outdoors over 5 feet away -- Indoors was great, April 7, 2016
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
If this was called an indoor monitor, it would be fine, but it's a "driveway alarm." I tried to put it in the shaded area under my porch overhang to point out into the street on both sides and it was extremely erratic even though there were no obvious sun or wind interference. This must be extremely super sensitive for it to act that way. On the trials, it took a person being 4 feet in front of it to go off. I pointed it at the driveway, and walked up, and it didn't register it as catching a human being until they were about 5-6 feet away. I then took it off and just sat it on the porch bench and pointed it at the street 25 feet away and it registered none of the cars going by at all. It was clear this was not going to be a reliable outdoor alert system for my property.

Indoors, however, it has no problem whatsoever detecting a person walking by, so I knew then the unit was not defective nor were the brand new batteries. Since it was relatively inexpensive, I decided to keep it anyway and put the receiver in one room and the transmitter on a shelf so that I can steathily know when any of the kids have left their rooms and have left their hallway to go to the other side of the house. I bought it to use outdoors to detect the mail truck coming up the road and pointed it at the mailbox using various locations and angles, but alas, it just didn't like anything that was going on around my house and found something everywhere to be an interference, even though everything was clear through and in sight with almost nothing around it. I don't know what the cause(s) were, but it didn't work ANYWHERE outdoors, so the use as an outdoor monitor was not possible for me.

Soft'N Style (30 oz. Lotion Dispense Bottle)
Soft'N Style (30 oz. Lotion Dispense Bottle)
Offered by BIGFLY
Price: $5.49
5 used & new from $1.29

2.0 out of 5 stars The short arm/spout causes problems for me, April 7, 2016
Although I like the body of the unit, which is light and flexible, screwing on the cap portion can take a few seconds to get it to begin catching on the threads. That being the minor issue, what is very noticable is the length of the spout/arm that protrudes from the top area that push down on is just a bit too short to be practical for such a large bottle. If you don't have your hand/other item immediately available underneath to catch the contents coming out, it drips down the front of the body of the bottle. The reason this is a problem for me is that I like to diulte what I put in it with water, and what comes out is not creamy or thick, so it splashes all over the front if I dont catch it all on a sponge or if someone wants to wash their hands with it. It would be nice if the arm were longer so that it can actually extend into the sink area so any drippings can go there and not all over the countertop or the unit. The short arm is what prevented me this week from purchasing another one as well as some smaller sizes, since I've had this one large one for a few weeks now. If the imrprovement was made, I would be purchasing quite a few more of these as they otherwise have everything I'm looking for.

Slam Dunk Basketball
Slam Dunk Basketball
Price: $0.99

26 of 36 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Missing permission USER_HOUSE_KEYS to complete mission of the app...., April 25, 2012
This review is from: Slam Dunk Basketball (App)
The developer's intentions for the data collected in this app (and their bubble game as well) are so obvious it's almost laughable that he took out a few in in an attempt to draw attention away from it. On Google,there are permissions in it that actually say after their explanation "never required by normal apps." The ability to turn your device on/off whenever they feel like it (to data mine at 3 a.m.)? Permission to change screen orientation on your device whenever they feel they want control over it? If I list them all and their associated explanations, it would take 2 hours.

This app is the poster child for data mining and developer arrogance. I don't recall ever seeing one that gets much worse than this. RUN -- DO NOT WALK -- AWAY FROM THIS APP.
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Nov 15, 2012 10:10 PM PST

Price: $1.00

3 of 5 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Internet access in an ad-free game is WRONG....but it could be a diamond in the rough...., April 23, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Kokabot (App)
I don't really care what "developer" reasons this developer has for leaving the same exact two permissions in THIS app as is in the FREE ad-supported version on Google Play. The Play version, however, has admob and adsense, but note that their FREE version (if you don't mind the ads) is a couple of months newer and contains another level. This game is REAL SHORT -- 20 levels. Once you DO get the hang of the bot, you'll go through this in NO time. If you like it, I can't imagine this would last into a second day of gameplay with no levels left to play.

The reason most people won't get through it in a half hour is because there are NO INSTRUCTIONS to this game, and they'll either be troopers and stick it out until they get it the LONG way, or just give up in frustration! I actually had to go to Youtube to see if they had a video on how this thing works, and the developer had one, fortunately, that was somewhat of a help (couldn't see their finger movements, only the computer arrow).

Once you DO get the hang of it (and I got it after about 10 minutes), it's going to be GAME OVER, though. That's probably why it's free on Google. But to charge $1.00 on Amazon for 20 levels that will be over in one day if you play it with gusto that day? If it's worth it to you to spend a buck for a day's enjoyment, okay, but don't expect it to be hanging around on your device for a long period of time.

It's almost as if they didn't want to charge the dollar, but decided to do that in order to get the FAOTD exposure they wouldn't have gotten as just another free, go-through-quickly, sub-par graphics game. I suspect most folks will mute the music and sound after about 10 minutes of listening to the repetitiveness of it.

As mentioned elsewhere, other than on Amazon: Why is there no paid version in Google Play? Developers have said before that they were unable to offer a paid version in Google Play because of restrictions in the store. In terms of ratings, the game is downrated because it is rather short (20 levels), lack of instructions, and questions on what he's using the internet access for when the ads are gone. (I can't accept the excuse about how innocent it is to collect anonymous data in the background from the users in order to gain specs which in turn might improve the app -- EVERY developer would LOVE that in EVERY app, but that's called SPYWARE when GOOGLE, et. al does it, and applies for developers TOO!) In addition, just a glance at the screenshots shows the game has sub-par graphics. I like the basic uncluttered look, but improvements can still be made without complicating it unnecessarily.

I can't imagine, with all those little negatives like, graphics and instructions, taking a hit at this app, why on earth the developer would plunge the final dagger of death into his own PAID app by leaving in the permissions from the FREE app designed to filter in ads! Was it REALLY THAT IMPORTANT to have the internet access STAY for some other subsidiary reason that most people regard as privacy invasion? I'm sure it IS taking SOMETHING off your device to help the developer out in SOME way, however minor it may be. (Or was he just not up to removing it, or short of time? What a shame if that's the reason!)

But is it WORTH it to have that data as compared to the number of DOWNLOADS he would have gotten WITHOUT them? Perhaps he knows the game needs more than 20 short levels, and that asking for money for the app wouldn't make him very much money at this point anyway, unless it included many more levels, and just wanted exposure as FAOTD. He added ONE level to the Google version, on a recent update, as if that extra minute of gameplay was a huge improvement and what people/reviewers there meant when they said "add more levels." It needs more than just one at a time added to justify PAYING for it -- or KEEPING it on their devices, for that matter.

I think if the game's graphics were improved a bit (keeping them basic, variety of background colors/wallpaper and differnt bot-target colors/sizes, but not COMPLICATING them like some sort of pinball machine), provided a considerable number of additional levels, and took out the permissions that are no longer needed for ADS in a PAID version, it would actually be a winner! I also think it needed to stay free ONLY, for awhile longer, while gaining exposure and pumping out the improvements that would one day justify charging for it.

I'll keep it in the cloud to see what happens to it, and plan to revisit it (and perhaps re-review it) should anything significant arise in the world of Kokabot.

Word Drop +
Word Drop +
Price: $0.00

10 of 15 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Too much going on here for this game to be worth being paid OR free, especially with better competitors out there...., April 21, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Word Drop + (App)
Update: Within seconds of my post here, this nervous developer FIRST went my prior reviews, opened one of the latest, and put his comment by accident on THAT review.. which came in as an email alert to me... then a second later he DELETED it and re-posted the comment correctly on THIS review. He must have forgotten he had my other review opened and got confused on just where he was commenting! In all fairness to him, he did state his Play/free version has ads of some sort. He has commented here on just what they are, if any customers care to read it. Therefore, my comment below on what the differences are between the two should include that, but the permissions in THIS version vs. Play are still nearly identical (as detailed below). I have removed that paragraph below, as he never stated on Play that it was ad-supported (or spyware), and I had no way of knowing that, but now we do. Onto the rest of the review....

The version on Play is FREE, and looks exactly the same, except for having two additional permissions: 1) market billing service and 2) access to the external SD storage. (NOTE: Developer states now it's for ads, as outlined in his comment here).

NONE of this developer's apps on Play are PAID apps (or others on Amazon, for that matter) -- they're all FREE, all four of them. To leave the excessive permissions inside the app and put only ONE on Amazon as a paid version is eyebrow raising. Is the reason for this that because in order to get exposure as the FAOTD, they HAD to charge a fee for SOMETHING to become a "paid" app? This developer didn't ask for cash money EVER from users, until THIS app came along on Amazon. (Or maybe we have something more valuable to him to get rewarded with?)

Over on Play, this developer is operating under the name "Fundu" apps (and it's even on the splash screen of today's app). Every single one of those apps have unbelievably ridiculous invasive permissions, some even with user location permissions, reading contact data (address book information), etc., that are totally unjustifiable for the gameplay. Here on Amazon, the developer is operating under K J Software for this app and a few others.

Well, okay, it's pretty obvious that the developer is a data miner, perhaps not charging for his apps to gain market exposure and multiple downloads before he starts charging, and may or may not continue data mining with future paid apps (after Amazon, of course). I'm not saying that's not FAIR in free apps, but I AM saying that to leave the invasive permissions in THIS app and CHARGE for it to get on FAOTD, and then have it FREE over on Play anyway, is just.... well, "not right," but entirely "legal."

This is really bothering me. Today, the developer posted this as a review of his own product:

"0 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars puzzle mode is amazing, March 4, 2012
By denny (foster city, US, Canada) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Word Drop + (App)
Addicting game Word Drop +. Puzzle mode, which I like a lot. The larger the word that you can make, the longer the game, and the higher your score. its every bit worth the money i spent. Good job."

Look, if a developer wants to say it's a great app, in disguise or not, it's just plain "tacky" to most folks. But THIS developer is just flat-out deceitful and LYING. It's "every bit worth the money" he "spent?" That, to me, is just an insult to the Amazon customers -- as if he's saying "they'll believe that, they're gullible. I can lie and they'll never know."

I don't go looking for these things like a detective. This guy actually exposed HIMSELF here by impulsively COMMENTING on another reviewer's review with the same name he reviewed with today! After March 3rd/4th, when the first three phony 5-star reviews were posted, the first REAL reviewer (a 1-star-posting customer) received this expedient comment from the developer:

"Initial post: Mar 25, 2012 9:37:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 27, 2012 5:54:29 PM PDT
denny says:
Hi NYNic,
We released a update to the game.The new update will fix this issue. please update your game to the latest version.

Okay, so why does all this matter? Because a developer that blantantly lies, in MY opinion, simply can't be trusted with your DATA that he may or may not claim he's not even TAKING from you for any other reason but for being necessary for gameplay -- and THAT MATTERS!

So now I'm faced with wondering whether these excessive permissions -- coupled with the even MORESO excessive permissions in all his other apps that are ALL FREE (hint, hint), the subtle occasionally pretty poor English, along with the proof that he is already deceitful and a liar -- actually MEANS anything like "he's an untrustworthy data miner, even with a paid app." And, unfortunately, it looks like a big "YES" to me. And I'm even willing to bet future updates of the app (there were many fixes!) would have tried to slip back in the other permissions he normally puts in his apps (SD card access, etc.), long after the FAOTD promotion is over.

Currently, the app contains AndEngine and Facebook developer's tools, as well as Scoreloop social gaming. It's up to you to decide whether you totally believe all the permissions in all his apps (contact data, SD card, internet, location, etc.) are needed to play this game OR whether they're needed to supply the spyware functions -- AND whether you also are willing to accept that "free app behavior" in today's "PAID" version of the app.

Gameplay? I've already noticed some reviewers complaining that it only accepts 10 letters or less (like "association" would be rejected as "wrong"), as well as it not keeping track of your high score if you exited the game, and some other quirks. The "exit button" is really just the same as your backspace key (you're only backing out of it). But there's a long history of "improvements" to this developer's apps, with many instances of "fixes" for them. I'm not thrilled with the font used in this game; it's too small and a little too chunky for a word game you're expected to look at for decent periods of time (especially that "s" and "a"). I just didn't care for the interface, and there are better/similar word games out there I prefer over this jiggly cartoony one. To each his own on that aspect, though.

As a word-game fan, I have to delete this one because I only keep the best of the best of them hanging around. There are so many that are similar to this (without the "issues") that they just leave this one in the dust. It's worth a download for a day of amusement, but other than that.... NAH.
Comment Comments (2) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Apr 21, 2012 2:29 PM PDT

Price: $1.99

29 of 33 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Decent FAOTD download....., April 20, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: DoubleTake (App)
Gameplay is good, responsive. Futuristic-type font could use a little work to make it more readable. Kudos for the backspace key that functions as an exit "button" that actually shuts the app down and doesn't keep it in the background. Music/sound can be turned on/off. Has a number of options to include an untimed mode (always a plus).

Minus a star, though, for leaving the Admob and Adsense in the app, as well as the Google Play licensing. Maybe it wasn't worth the trouble for the developer to take them out, since the only other versions of this game on both Amazon and Play are free and ad-supported, as well as needing the Google license added for Play. The problem with dual licensing in one version is that when you now go to Play to see a list of apps you (supposedly) downloaded from THAT market, you will see this app in your list of "purchased" apps, and also see the app listed on your Amazon list of puchased apps. However, you do NOT have a true "functioning" license on Play that could enable you to UPDATE it on Play, nor RATE the app on Play. I find that irritating to have apps I didn't PURCHASE on Play to be LISTED on Play just because the developer added the Google licensing protection in the app that really had no business being there if the AMAZON license was correctly in the app as required. It causes confusion when you go to Play, look at your long list of "purchased" apps, and not know which of those apps you could UPDATE there (or rate) until you click on each of them to see if the rating button is missing (which means you purchased it elsewhere, and good luck remembering where you purchased it).

Admob and Adsense are the reasons for the free versions' net access, network state (to see if the user is connected to the net), and external storage access (possibly to write error logs to the SD, if not other unscrupulous reasons to consider). But both of these are still inside the app, and can't function without the permissions the developer removed to create this PAID version.

Still, it's nice to know the developer created a zero-permissions app, but for a price of a couple of dollars, which is perfectly fair. If in the future, however, any internet, network, or storage permissions are added on an update (for other bells and whistles as the claim), I would say delete it (or don't update) because being PERMISSION FREE is the only reason folks would have paid $1.99 for this app in the first place.

Just watch out for future updates, but download and enjoy this app today while it's free of permissions and cost! It really IS a fun, more "adult" version of the classic match-it games usually designed for kids! (And you won't get caught playing some cartoon zoo-animal-type matching game at the airport!)

Price: $1.94

15 of 33 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars File size NOT 7.2 MB as stated..... it's 25.59 MB upon download!, April 19, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: NodeBeat (App)
Really, Amazon... Your quality control staff as of late is sleeping on the job. Whatever the reason for stating this app was 7.2 MB but having 25.59 MB downloaded upon the actual install even BEFORE opening it for the first launch is totally inexcusable. The last uploaded version of the app needs to be CHECKED against the product description you have already written. WAKE UP, AMAZON. This issue of product descriptions in MANY respects not matching what you're giving people to download is becoming CHRONIC and HIGHLY IRRITATING. It makes your customers question what ELSE is in the final versions of the apps they download that you didn't bother to check for. This app gets one star and won't be re-rated until you fix the inaccurate product description -- that is, IF you ever bother to check it in the future and fix it.
Comment Comments (16) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Aug 2, 2013 7:47 AM PDT

Bubble Birds (Ad-free)
Bubble Birds (Ad-free)

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Great game with no invasive permissions make this a WINNER!, April 11, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Bubble Birds (Ad-free) (App)
Simply said, it plays well, great graphics, no ads or interruptions, and no invasive permissions. THAT'S the way to get apps done! I hope the developer follows suit and cleans up any other apps they have for sale like they did for this one. If not, this will be a temporary one-hit wonder. If they DO, and for the sheer number of games they have for sale, they will be a HUGE success in their genre of games here on Amazon (and likely over on Play as well). This easily deserves 5 stars the way it is NOW!

Price: $0.99

1 of 5 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars App contains Anscamobile Spyware Corona SDK, Feint's Ugly Cousin....., March 31, 2012
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Brixter (App)
Back in December 2011, we had a FAOTD called "Tracing ABC" put out by this same developer. On that day, the developer "showed up as well", as they did today, and posted a comment to my review (which unbelievably was a short one), in which I questioned why in-app purchases were so easily accessible inside the game for the children and that I found the permissions excessive. This is what the developer had to say about it:

"Hi, I'm on the dev team of this game. Regarding the phone permissions: Our apps demand these permissions because we are using a framework to develop our games ([...]). This framework doesn't allow us to disable these permissions without hacking our own apks and that's the reason they appear. I can assure you we are not using/storing/sending this information anywhere, and in fact we do not even have any backend servers at all so we have no where to send it too.. Feel free to use any sniffer and see the traffic out of the application.
Thanks again for your feedback,
The Remarkable Team"

My response to that comment, from which I will do a bit of borrowing here and there, will help to explain why I find THIS APP TODAY unacceptable as well.

First, Remarkable Games apps use Ansca's Corona SDK Launchpad/Dashboard. Plain and simple, that is crapware and spyware. Although the developer claimed on that date that "THEY" don't data mine, it's the Ansca spyware gate that the DEVELOPER can't opt out of (as she alluded to in her comment above) that does the dirty work and reaps the benefits. Note the developer takes NO credit (or blame!) for enabling this breach of privacy that runs inside their OWN app, an action that doesn't even inform the user that their actions and usage will be logged! (At least its equally invasive cousin "FEINT" says, "Hey you wanna have fun or NOT??" even though either way, Yes or NO, it leaves a huge 2MB pile of dog crap behind on the phones it marked.) ANSCA, on the other hand, doesn't even have the decency that FEINT has to warn you at ALL that the unremovable crapware is being shoved into your device and to look out for that avalanche (can't believe I just put Feint on a pedestal, even though it's only about 2 inches off the ground....).

I also told the developer on that date that if they have Ansca's Corona SDK Launchpad/Dashboard doing the data mining FOR them, that's where the answer to the "Are they data mining me with the excessive permissions?" puzzle lies. THEY/DEVELOPER may not be sucking out the data for REMARKABLE GAMES' purposes, but ANSCA IS sucking it out for ANSCA'S purposes. Notice I was invited by the developer to "sniff" the developer's app, when all along they knew no such "sniffing" would lead a user to the workings of Anscamobile! ("No, Your Honor, I'm not guilty... *I* don't run numbers out the back room of my malt shoppe, I make not one thin dime... but I let organized crime organizations do that in return for some free protection and some small favors...")

Let's be clear that Remarkable Games surely knew about all this BEFORE they installed Ansca, because every developer has to sign the Ansca agreement saying they are OKAY with it or it won't let them even install the software on their machine in the first place. Couldn't they just have opted out of that simply by unchecking the box in the Preferences panel, or to disable, add a simple one-liner to the config.lua file, because the Ansca developers' site has instruction on how to do that under "content - configuring projects." Whether they could have opted out but chose not to is even pretty much irrelevant, because they chose to use Corona SDK in the first place, rejecting other options. They were certainly not forced at gunpoint to use SDK... it was a CHOICE.

The fact that the developer claimed the permissions in the "Tracing ABC" app (if you recall, that's the app with the ladybug icon that had the weird/incorrect way of tracing letters, according to many reviews) were "dead" permissions that THEY don't use is disturbing, because if they have Ansca working, the permissions don't "lay there" and do NOTHING -- ANSCA needs them! Ansca is SPYWARE for the user, calling home after it captures all the information it needs, using the developer's apps to do so, and without YOUR authorization. That's why they couldn't "easily remove it without hacking their own apps," as they said .... because that's the PURPOSE of ANSCA. Ansca gets to be a spyware company, and developer gets the privilege of using their free SDK Corona to develop their apps -- that's the deal. When the developer chose Ansca to use for their apps, they were forced BY Ansca's policies. But we, as potential users, don't have to be forced WITH the Ansca policies. To combat THAT, we just don't have to download the app.

As a side note, Google Play doesn't care WHAT a developer does, but I thought Amazon identified this Ansca as spyware with the unncessary permission of internet access awhile ago, and were rejecting apps based on that? Wonder what happened with that? How in the heck these Ansca apps now can come in under the radar, I don't know. Did Amazon lower its requirements or standards? Or did Ansca find a way to beat the system by redesigning it to pass Q/C inspection? One only has to Google "Ansca spyware" or something similar to check the validity of any of this information.

In any event, this app DOES include Feint, but it appears none of the files are actually initially downloaded to the device, even after multiple relaunches. I will continue to check this for any possible delay in the 2MB download. However, for the curious, I wouldn't click on the OpenFeint logo just to see what happens, because it's possible THAT may trigger the files to be downloaded, even though you hadn't signed up. On another post's comments, the developer claimed they "didn't know" if the Feint files are installed even if you hadn't selected it inside the app, so they probably don't know if or when they will be REINSTALLED in the future for any reason.

As far as gameplay, to me it's a "meh." It had a great view of outer space, so I thought it was going to "do something" to impress me, but it didn't. It's just a background photo onto which the bricks build as you connect like-colored squares to each other, energize them (glow), and then just "fling" them (sounds like a spinoff of yesterday's app).

It also would have been nice to have a visual exit button for the app, instead of having to back-backspace out of the game. The crazy part is, if the developer intended for us to exit this app using the backspace key, why do they prevent us from doing this WHILE THE GAME IS PLAYING? You have to BACKSPACE ONCE, then YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO HIT MENU to continue to path to exit! Once you click Menu, and you're there, you the only way out is to BACKSPACE AGAIN. Really, that's absurb programming! The Menu has other choices listed, but NO exit.

Don't even bother clicking "more" to look for options or anything that may be missing, like the exit... they don't reside there.... the More button only takes you to the Amazon Appstore where you can buy "more" of their other games.

Using the menu button ON YOUR PHONE does absolutely nothing at ALL TIMES. Very unusual. I thought it was defective until I realized this app, unlike most, doesn't give you SOME kind of choice(s) when you hit your own menu button! That might be a good starting place to put a ONE CLICK EXIT choice, seeing as how repeatedly clicking backspace on your device can't even get you out of this app in one fell swoop.

For those interested, this Brickster Full paid version has the following add-ons installed in the app, courtesy of Ansca: AdKnowledge, InMobi, and Inneractive for advertisements; Flurry Analytics; developer tools Corona, Facebook, and Zong (a one-click payment method that just touching a "buy" icon automatically bills your cellphone carrier for the purchase, great for the kiddies); and OpenFeint and Papaya Social gaming. These are things many developers complain about being shoved into their apps, and it's only because of the complaints they made about the huge size of the Feint file turning off their customers that Ansca eventually permitted Feint to be removed from the bundling, should the developer so desire.

Sorry, just not worth keeping. The developer is waving the No Feint Flag at us, hoping you'll attribute the permissions asked for in this app to the Feint functions that YOU can disable -- in other words, they're DEAD FUNCTIONS to YOU if you opted out of Feint. Nice distraction today! But it's just NOT TRUE. They're needed for Feint's Ugly Cousin Anscamobile Corona SDK to do its dirty work while the developer gets a medal for disabling Feint. (Thank you for not "sticking it" to me TWO differnet ways....) The developer's remark/review reminds me of the scenario where the thief throws a steak over the fence to a guard dog to divert his interest in something juicy, while his partner in crime is busy behind the dog cleaning out every scrap on the premises.
Comment Comments (8) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Apr 11, 2012 1:36 PM PDT

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11-12