Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

App Store Review Guidelines Updated to Forbid Time-Telling Apple Watch Apps

pdqgp said:
don't tell anyone at Rolex that my Androidwear is sporting their face then or that my Gear S is sporting Apples Watch face because both are :rolleyes:

will they sue me or the app developer that allows me the easily capability of doing both? good luck to both with that.....mind you they didn't sell either design but they give me the ability to plug in my photoshop creations and run with it.

In the end apple is on a power trip. they absolutely can allow a dev. to market an app so users can customize their watch face and not risk the chance of being sued. no different than Adobe isn't going to be sued for giving me the ability to pirate a photo or image and use it for personal use. Apple is purposely choosing to shut down that ability.

Ironically the most personal device they've made is not able to be personalized.
Click to expand...

Again what you added to your Android is perfectly fine... You can adding Mickey or any Disney character you choose on your own. but, its when dev's and companies are making money are or some other return based on someone else brand, then you run into a legal issue. I own two trademarks and personal i won't fuss if another website or app uses my brand logo in a non-profit making manner.

In all honesty if Apple didn't ban this, I would have ever sports team as a watch face and sell theme individually for .99 or are in app purchases 5.99 for all. I'd make a killing, is that right? Nope, i'd be profiting off of someones else brand. But, if I had the who gives a F@#k mindset (and if Apple allowed it) then why not.

I don't know how Google handles things, they just recently started reviewing app. But, Android has always been the we don't care / free for all Mobile OS.
 
acctman said:
Again what you added to your Android is perfectly fine... You can adding Mickey or any Disney character you choose on your own. but, its when dev's and companies are making money are or some other return based on someone else brand, then you run into a legal issue. I own two trademarks and personal i won't fuss if another website or app uses my brand logo in a non-profit making manner.

In all honesty if Apple didn't ban this, I would have ever sports team as a watch face and sell theme individually for .99 or are in app purchases 5.99 for all. I'd make a killing, is that right? Nope, i'd be profiting off of someones else brand. But, if I had the who gives a F@#k mindset (and if Apple allowed it) then why not.

I don't know how Google handles things, they just recently started reviewing app. But, Android has always been the we don't care / free for all Mobile OS.
Click to expand...

^^ okay, so you "get it" and I of course get your point, but it's laughable that Apple won't allow a user to replace their background or approve an app that allows me to customize my watch face. Really? If I want a sports team logo as my background and the hands of a player to tell time, the ability to create that should be allowed....but not according to Apple.

What I described has nothing to do with Apple fearing a lawsuit.
 
Treq said:
You keep saying apple Communism. Sounds more like capitalism to me.
Click to expand...

Communism implies CONTROL over your private life and every aspect of it. Capitalism has nothing to do with interference beyond market forces. Hence, my comparison has to do with Apple deciding what you can and cannot do/run on "your" watch.

ctdonath said:
Not force. You don't like the "walled garden" and the fact the caretaker is trying to keep weeds out of the new section? You are welcome to leave; try https://www.android.com/intl/en_us/wear/
Click to expand...

I simply will not buy one period. :p

Enjoy having someone tell you when you can pee and when you can get out of bed. ;)
 
MagnusVonMagnum said:
Communism implies CONTROL over your private life and every aspect of it. Capitalism has nothing to do with interference beyond market forces. Hence, my comparison has to do with Apple deciding what you can and cannot do/run on "your" watch.
Click to expand...

That's not communism. That's called totalitarianism.
 
acctman said:
Again what you added to your Android is perfectly fine... You can adding Mickey or any Disney character you choose on your own. but, its when dev's and companies are making money are or some other return based on someone else brand, then you run into a legal issue. I own two trademarks and personal i won't fuss if another website or app uses my brand logo in a non-profit making manner.

In all honesty if Apple didn't ban this, I would have ever sports team as a watch face and sell theme individually for .99 or are in app purchases 5.99 for all. I'd make a killing, is that right? Nope, i'd be profiting off of someones else brand. But, if I had the who gives a F@#k mindset (and if Apple allowed it) then why not.

I don't know how Google handles things, they just recently started reviewing app. But, Android has always been the we don't care / free for all Mobile OS.
Click to expand...

That's because of the walled garden and there is only one owner here unlike Android Wear!
 
pdqgp said:
^^ okay, so you "get it" and I of course get your point, but it's laughable that Apple won't allow a user to replace their background or approve an app that allows me to customize my watch face. Really? If I want a sports team logo as my background and the hands of a player to tell time, the ability to create that should be allowed....but not according to Apple.

What I described has nothing to do with Apple fearing a lawsuit.
Click to expand...

i agree users should be able to replace on there own, but dev's should not be able to create faces for the App Store. I think in the next update or at least 2.0 of Watch we'll be able to add photos to a face ourselves.
 
MagnusVonMagnum said:
Yeah, Communism never controlled anyone's life. ;)
Click to expand...

It's just a matter of terminology. A lot of people confuse the two for some reason. Some communist regimes have been totalitarian but it is not required of the ideology. If it were communist, the watch would be free to all who need it. I just hate when people interchange those terms when they mean totally different things.

Edit: in other words, it't not the communism that was controlling their lives but the totalitarianism of the system they were living in.
 
samcraig said:
You know he was being sarcastic? Funny. As in other threads people make poor analogies (albeit usually automotive in nature) it's almost impossible to distinguish sarcasm from not sometimes :)
Click to expand...

No it is actually really easy to spot it if you are familiar with the English language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back