Apple has a problem with animation. In the past, I’ve written about how OS X’s full-screen animations and transitions gave me motion-sickness, leaving dizziness and nausea in their wake. ReSpaceApp/TotalSpaces was a partial solution, but only overrides full-screen slide transitions, and not other OS-level animation. I wrote directly to Apple execs and accessibility@apple.com; having (unsurprisingly) had no response from anyone, I then penned an open letter about motion sickness triggers in OS X Mavericks and iOS 7.

Within the last of those, I was at the time concerned about iOS 7. My fears weren’t unfounded. I’ve now updated my devices and have the same feeling I got on using OS X Lion’s full-screen for the first time. Right now, the iPhone is bearable, but aspects of the iPad are unusable. The app switcher in particular has such aggressive animation and zooming that a single use is enough to trigger dizziness.

I’m not alone. I found vestibular support organisations were hugely concerned about iOS 7. I’ve had many people email and tweet me about these issues, in some cases practically begging for a solution. There isn’t one. I’ve been told about 50 times now to activate ‘Reduce Motion’ in iOS 7, but all that does is remove the home screen parallax—it doesn’t stop the zooming and sliding elsewhere. Obviously, it also doesn’t ‘fix’ OS X for me and others either.

Worse, there’s some major ignorance within the market regarding vestibular conditions. On Friday, I wrote a news piece for Stuff.tv on iOS 7 triggering vertigo and nausea symptoms. This was well received by those suffering, but not by others. I’ve been called a “bullshitter” and a “pansy”; some people helpfully argued that I should “just fuck off and use Android then”, while others said I was “just another idiot finding something else Apple’s done to complain about”.

As someone who’s regularly accused of being an Apple shill, it’s curious I’m now considered the opposite. Also, there appears to be a misunderstanding regarding what people like me actually want. We don’t want to destroy your precious operating systems. We don’t even want to remove those dynamic zooms and swipes you love so much. We merely want a setting that will optionally enable you to do so. That’s it.

I’d like nothing more from Apple than to be able to go to the accessibility settings in OS X Mavericks and iOS 7 and see ‘disable animation effects’. For most people, this option existing won’t affect them. But for many people currently suffering various motion symptoms through standard device use, it will offer a level of delight like no other Apple update. For them, devices will suddenly become truly magical.

Further reading: Why Is Apple Ignoring People with Vision and Balance Problems? (Kirk McElhearn)

By me, over at Stuff.TV:

Trained to expect Microsoft’s level of market dominance during the height of the Windows era, every company now seemingly has to lose for one to win. So it goes with the iPhone 5C, set to launch on 10 September. The budget iPhone apparently spells doom for Android (because if Apple has a cheap phone, everyone will of course buy it at the exclusion of everything else) or possibly for Apple (because it’ll be a massive failure).

I explore how Apple thinks, the red-herring of market-share, profits, what the iPad mini means for the iPhone line, and the inevitability of what will happen after Apple reveals its new device on the 10th.

Daring Fireball responds to Garrett Murray’s thoughts on the 2DS:

The biggest WTF aspect is the price — it’s only $40 cheaper than the regular 3DS.

Yeah, WTF? No other company would create very obvious upsell positioning for its products!

A pity Daring Fireball and various others seem to have decided balance is a bad thing regarding Nintendo, given Lukas Mathis’s Nintendo piece continuing to grow with more insight and facts. If you missed it, I also chimed in yesterday on why Nintendo should not start making iOS games—yet.

Update: For anyone arguing that the gap is bigger—the iPod touch upsell is $70, not $40—do bear in mind the iPod touch costs almost twice as much as Nintendo’s console.

I recently wrote about issues regarding Newsstand publication refunds in the event of a magazine being cancelled. When Tap! was cancelled by Future Publishing, I immediately requested a refund and got one; several other people informed me they weren’t so lucky. Apple’s responses varied from outright refusal (“every purchase is final”) through to (oddly) crediting someone for several free movie rentals.

Since I wrote the piece, I’ve helped several people out by sending them the discussion thread I had with Apple. In one case, that was enough for someone to get a refund. In another case, Apple wrote back to me, seemingly confusing the two accounts. I figured questions needed to be asked regarding Apple and Newsstand, because otherwise I’d have no confidence in ever taking out another Newsstand sub beyond one that renewed monthly.

Having done some investigating, it appears Apple is not blind to publication cancellations. I understand that when a publisher notifies Apple that a publication is cancelled, the remainder of the subscription should be refunded; additionally, AppleCare should refund subscriptions when contacted, once the service knows a publication has been cancelled. If AppleCare is not aware of a cancellation, ‘usual’ refund procedures will be followed.

It appears problems people have experienced with Tap! and other publications have been down to confusion in Apple not knowing a subscription has ended early, for whatever reason. This could mean any of the following:

• The publisher not correctly following procedure in letting Apple know a publication has ceased.
• Apple receiving information about a publication being cancelled but not correctly acting on it.
• People requesting refunds not being clear enough in their request.

On that basis, if you’re still wanting a refund from Apple for a Newsstand publication that’s been cancelled, and you don’t fancy pinning your hopes on an automatic refund, clarity is key. You must ensure AppleCare knows you’re asking for a refund for a Newsstand magazine that has ceased publication.

In my case, I reported a problem through the most recent subscription receipt (which you can do through your account in iTunes—see this Gizmodo piece for a visual walkthrough). My wording was to the point: “[Publisher] has stated [publication] magazine has ceased publication and no new issues are going to be released. I am therefore writing to get a refund for my outstanding subscription.”

That did the job for me, and it might work for you. Failing that, feel free to point AppleCare at this post and also to email me if you can’t get your money back for a magazine that’s ceased publication.

Apple’s often been praised for its packaging. A lot of thought goes into the boxes that house Macs and other Apple kit, ensuring your first experience with a product is a pleasurable one—before you’ve even turned it on.

I today set up a new AirPort Extreme after my old one abruptly died (and, no, I’m not looking forward to the Genius Bar appointment, trying to explain UK consumer law to someone saying “but it’s more than a year old, so there’s nothing we can do”). Like a lot of other Apple kit, it comes in a two-part card case. The base houses the unit, and you slide off a sturdy card sleeve, which is typically very snug indeed.

For the iPhone, which sits flat on a base, this works fine. But the AirPort Extreme is a narrow, tall unit, and the box is therefore tall and narrow. You’d think Apple would have made allowances for this in its box design, right? Nope.

On the left you can see the box’s base and on the right the unit itself. On pulling the card sleeve free, my unit unceremoniously went CLUNK on to the desk, fortunately only from a few centimetres. I’m grateful I wasn’t opening this box above our wooden floor, or I’d be down two AirPort Extremes for the week, not just one.

You might argue that it’s only a box, but this design showcases a lack of attention to detail and usability. The box still looks great, but it’s form over function—it works poorly in practice and also when taking into account expectations, namely that your new purchase won’t end up sailing through the air as you attempt to free it from its packaging.