We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 1.76 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.76, updated 2026-09-30.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Hard to cancel
Keeps glitching and I can’t cancel like it said — Please cancel free trial. I already have issues with the remote and I tried going into settings to see where to cancel there is no spot. I pressed an arrow and it confirmed apple would…
won’t let me cancel or report a problem — Do not download unless you want to have trouble reporting a problem and receiving a refund. It won’t even let me press report a problem on the settings. The button is there, but the button doesn’t…
Cannot connect and impossible to cancel — This app is terrible.
Trial converts to a charge
Issue With Free Trial Subscription Reminder — I only needed this app for two days. I requested that it send me a reminder a day before the free trial ended and no reminder was sent to me. I was charged $10 that I cannot get back.
FRAUD — I downloaded this app and set up for a 3 day free trial and was immediately charged 17.76. It even has it submitted with no receipt so I can’t dispute the charges. DONT DOWNLOAD OR USE THJS APP!!
DO NOT DOWNLOAD — They’re gonna make you pay for a subscription just to use the remote.. THEN, they’re gonna offer a free trial that isnt valid and charge you $31 either way. I’ve also contacted the developers abt this and still haven’t…
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.