Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This i think is a bad idea, all you people complain about apple being too tough on accepting pathetic apps like pull my finger, just wait till the whole store fills with complete junk and it becomes impossible to find and decent apps, then you'll all begin to complain about all the crap in there.

Totally agree. Not useful even for free, so what's the deal here!
 
pull my finger??

haha oh i cant wait to see this..

That's cool that they are allowing more apps into the store, it would be nice to have them categorized of some sort because i know there will be a few mothers and fathers out there that wont let there kids have these apps.

personally, Im glad apple has opened the door.

If you are a kid young enough to not be a good audience for these games, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE A FREAKING iPhone!!!!!!!!!!!
Giving kids (i.e. younger than 16) a cell phone is just plain stupid, not to mention an iPhone that they will inevitably break or lose or something.
Oh, and if anyone wants to attack me for being all old-fashioned and such, I am a 19 year old bitching about kids these days. Not an old fart bitching about kids these days.

On another note, good that they are allowing these apps. So long as the app does not contain a virus or malicious coding, we should have the right to have it whether Apple deems it "useful" or not.
 
If you are a kid young enough to not be a good audience for these games, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE A FREAKING iPhone!!!!!!!!!!! Giving kids (i.e. younger than 16) a cell phone is just plain stupid, not to mention an iPhone that they will inevitably break or lose or something. Oh, and if anyone wants to attack me for being all old-fashioned and such, I am a 19 year old bitching about kids these days. Not an old fart bitching about kids these days.

Remember there is an iPod Touch, and I think a lot of kids would like to have one of those to watch videos, listen to music, and play games.
 
This i think is a bad idea, all you people complain about apple being too tough on accepting pathetic apps like pull my finger, just wait till the whole store fills with complete junk and it becomes impossible to find and decent apps, then you'll all begin to complain about all the crap in there.
I almost never find useful stuff by browsing or searching any kind of store (digital or brick'n'mortar), except for some really well sorted boutiques. I figure out what I want to buy by other means, or at least come with a very clear definition of what I am looking for. I often buy books at Amazon, do they sell a lot of crap? Most likely, but how would I notice, I use the search box for the name of the item and that's it.
I also buy on a semi-regular basis songs in the iTMS, do I care how many million songs they have that I have no use for? No, I search for a song or artist, find it (or not), buy it, and go back home.

Like with all other kinds of stores, there is a use for boutique-like shops that pre-select for you and bring things down to manageable size. Staff-picks is one way to achieve this, user-ratings another. Third-party sites yet another. Where the boutique model has trouble with online stores is charging the customer for the work that has gone into the pre-selection (Internet-sites with payable access or commissions are one option here).
 
Wrong to open iTunes to it now.

With Macworld so close upon us, this definitely should have been saved for the "And just one more thing" portion of the keynote address. Steve Jobs with App in hand summons a random attendant to come up on stage. "Please sir/madam" the famous CEO would utter to the unsuspecting volunteer, "Pull my finger"!
The result would be millions of blogs, threads, discussions, and TV news panels. For free!! AAPL would probably make it up to 120.
 
Sigh... I will finally be able to sleep tonight.

But seriously, I find this a bit disappointing. Can't such stupid and pointless trash be a web app or something instead? It's hard enough to find good apps in the store as it is.
 
Separate section?

While I DEFINITELY don't think Apple should be censoring apps like "Pull My Finger," I also fear that it's inclusion will bring a bunch more useless apps to the store (and don't we already have enough?).

I appreciate the dumb humor found in "Pull My Finger," but man -- wouldn't more really USEFUL apps be even cooler? I pray developers don't suddenly make a ton of farting apps, and that the trend will somehow go towards more quality (hey - maybe even costing more than 99 cents!) apps.


I suppose the best way to solve this issue would be to make a separate section - "Less Useful Apps" to be politically correct or "Silly Apps," etc - and have its own Top 100 (which Apple just started doing anyway) and then **not allow its apps to show up in the overall statistics** so as not to water down actually useful apps.

Another idea (from a great article somewhere that I can't find the link to): simply make the "top" designation be based off of revenue instead of number sold. This way, useful apps that are priced at 9.99+ would have a chance of being noticed. Of course, this should probably have some sort of threshold - like you must sell 50+ to get in the top 10 - so that I Am Rich-type apps do not get noticed just for the sake of being expensive.

Finally, why not make the app store (or iTunes in general) more like Amazon, where you can do advanced search based on price, ratings, etc.
 
for real? it's bad enough that they let this app in but they're charging $0.99 for it? i pity the fool who wastes his money on such frivolities manque de substance.
 
Liberalization of the appStore is very welcome. Hopefully they'll relax the competitive apps too.
 
I swear, MacRumors's forums are bipoloar.

When it was first announced that Apple rejected apps based on their "usefulness" or whatnot everyone moaned about it saying we should decide what apps to choose from, not Apple. Now the general consensus so far in this thread is that Apple is foolish for easing up on what apps are allowed in the store.

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:
 
seriously

This might not be for everyone - but those of us approaching 40 going on 12.... this is a gold mine for Apple....

Please do not tell my wife. I'm asking Santa for an iTouch - this could ruin it all.... especially if she hears the $0.99 jingling in my pocket

Two thumbs up. Pull them.
 
999.99

I'm happy apple is letting more through now for me to deploy my super secret app :D

After paying a grand for a red jewel - I expect I should also be allowed to pay 0.99 for a woopee cushion.

PS - no I did not buy the $1000 app... but if I was super-mega-disgustingly-rich you bet I would have.
 
About time, I say!

Now we can proceed with our corporate iPhone deployment.
Management felt this app was necessary, before the move was cost-justifiable.

<grin>

not that I was holding out for this app or anything, but I hope this trend of apple easing off its "our way or the highway" policy is a trend that continues. I hope this opens the gate for a lot of developers who were scared to devote time and resources in fear of getting a rejection.
 
You think they'll let "I Am Rich" and "NetShare" back in the catagory of "limited-utility" ? :p
 
...and the new category is...

I take it the new category (genre) of these apps is titled "tasteless crap" ;-)

Actually I'm relieved that Apple is loosening the control strings a little. Although I hope they continue testing apps to ensure they are not malware and don't crash or damage the phone...
 
I am also wondering what the new category will be called. Novelty, Joke, Fun or Frivolous maybe.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.