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

Should Apple Implement the suggested 'Per-App Restriction'


  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

thedeejay

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 16, 2012
1,338
51
Toronto, Canada.
Definitely would love this for 1 I have two young children and they both need to go on the iPad or phone for educational apps reason. I had to jailbreak so I can just us me biotouch on the iPhone 5s which I believe apple should look at and applock on the iPad.
These days there are too much sensitive stuff and also vile stuff on the net bad I have to do my best not to expose them either indirectly not doing my parent duties and protect them going on these small computers

That's another example where it would work well for you. I think it's a great feature to have for those of us who need it. Plus if they throw in how it is currently (just on/off switches) then it wouldn't require much work to add that.
 

DiscoMcDisco

macrumors regular
Jul 31, 2013
166
40
London
I've wanted per app restrictions (just use my normal passcode) for a while as I too, like many people I'm sure, have a household which shares devices.

I've handled this so far by 'trust' and giving everyone folders with their names on for all the apps they like to use. There's a single page of apps that they all might use.

Profiles are not the way to do this, simply allowing me to passcode certain apps I never want people to have access to keeps my little workaround going perfectly fine.

Let's not forget that restrictions are in place, but they only really work for getting the content in the first place... stopping a 10 year old having access to Safari to go find porn is important, but I'd still like to find it myself occasionally ;)

I see this as something to allow people more flexibility. I actually see it as a selling point for those people who have a household that can't afford ~£300 per person on devices. Maybe 'household' is a new feature set that IS powerful and useful for people and not for everyone who goes "you buy apple, you have money, go get more apple" (which is a redundant argument).
 

thedeejay

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 16, 2012
1,338
51
Toronto, Canada.
I've wanted per app restrictions (just use my normal passcode) for a while as I too, like many people I'm sure, have a household which shares devices.

I've handled this so far by 'trust' and giving everyone folders with their names on for all the apps they like to use. There's a single page of apps that they all might use.

Profiles are not the way to do this, simply allowing me to passcode certain apps I never want people to have access to keeps my little workaround going perfectly fine.

Let's not forget that restrictions are in place, but they only really work for getting the content in the first place... stopping a 10 year old having access to Safari to go find porn is important, but I'd still like to find it myself occasionally ;)

I see this as something to allow people more flexibility. I actually see it as a selling point for those people who have a household that can't afford ~£300 per person on devices. Maybe 'household' is a new feature set that IS powerful and useful for people and not for everyone who goes "you buy apple, you have money, go get more apple" (which is a redundant argument).

I can see how pass coding multiple apps can get confusing (not for myself) but for the common (Laymans). Just a restriction method now would work fine.
 

LordQ

Suspended
Sep 22, 2012
3,582
5,653
Yes, please.

106a6988f7e90ea43f19bc4b71b23dc5.png
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.