Apple's feedback mechanism is broken
Not disagreeing, but observing Apple has a big scale problem: They sell millions, hundreds of millions of things. They are remarkably small in the clue department, so the clue density remains high (this is the MIT theory of clue: the more people you have the thinner the layer of clue has to spread until almost everyone is virtually clueless)<p>View it from their point of view: a spigot will deliver 20,000 important, believable problems to everyones desk like a mailman opening the letter-to-santa sack in December. Every desk: Which one(s) do you look at first? Note, all of them are from people of good intent, not fools. The fools are railing on bulletin boards.<p>BTW I have met Apple engineers who write things. Important things, like the TCP&#x2F;IP stack for the iPhone. There are two of them. They can&#x27;t write amazing code, and triage 20,000 bug&#x2F;improvement inputs at the same time. Sometimes, they&#x27;re at standards meeting handling fools like me.<p>Sure, there are ass-hats, but the vast bulk of the time Apple is drowning in good input, and has to triage. The example listed here probably affects 1,000 to 2,000 developers, and a critical bug probably has to affect 150,000 people to get traction.<p>or you can spend $99 and prioritize your problem.<p>I had this problem with Microsoft and X509 about 15-20 years ago, (selection of which client certificate to identify a user when there is a certificate subjectName collision) -There was precisely one expert able to fix it, I was ringfenced from them, talking to a consultant and I had the great joy of hearing how much it would cost him to even TRY to get their attention on this problem, which btw, affects the US Government, so its not like it doesn&#x27;t have &quot;scale&quot; behind it.<p>This is a problem you get, if you have hundreds of millions of customers.