Why is it caving? Because it is a different opinion than what you hold? I have kids, and while I will not tell you what to do with your life, I would ask that you refrain from certain behavior around them. I will do my best to ensure that you are free to live your life as you choose, and will be responsible to not take them to places where people are expressing themselves in ways inappropriate for their age level. Why do you think that because I am thinking of my kids that I want to control you? Its called living together and mutual respect. Sometimes you help me and sometimes I help you. And if you think that people like me think "no more sex", you are the STUPIDEST poster on this board. What are you thinking? Please, don't make weird assumptions about me.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Phil Schiller Acknowledges New App Store Sexual Content Ban and Exceptions
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why is it caving? Because it is a different opinion than what you hold? I have kids, and while I will not tell you what to do with your life, I would ask that you refrain from certain behavior around them. I will do my best to ensure that you are free to live your life as you choose, and will be responsible to not take them to places where people are expressing themselves in ways inappropriate for their age level. Why do you think that because I am thinking of my kids that I want to control you? Its called living together and mutual respect. Sometimes you help me and sometimes I help you. And if you think that people like me think "no more sex", you are the STUPIDEST poster on this board. What are you thinking? Please, don't make weird assumptions about me.
I agree that Apple should open up so that people can install whatever app they want. I don't feel so strongly about this that I will jailbreak my iPhone, nor go back to my old cell phone. And I sill think Apple has the freedom to sell or not sell whatever they want.
Then why do you seem to be for Apple removing these apps? Why can't Apple just make it so people can turn on Parental Controls to hide the human body from their children? If you don't want your children seeing the human body, why do you insist that no one else should be able to (from the App Store)? Why can't someone just properly monitor their children instead of having Apple do it for them?
You defeated your own analogy. Apple here did not enable you to be "responsible to not take them places where people are expressing themselves in ways innappropriate for their age level". Apple basically caved in to the people saying "Please make these people stop expressing themselves in ways innappropriate for our kid's age level".
You're proning exactly the opposite of what Apple just did. Live and let live means that Apple should've fixed their parental controls so that both sides could have what they want without interfering with one another. You filter out the smut, we get to enjoy the female body (or male body for some).
So essentially, you're agreeing with me, "the STUPIDEST poster on this board".
80% of the music that I have bought from the iTunes music store has an Explicit tag. How is this any different that and app with images of girls in bikinis? The apps are way milder than the music I buy. If these apps are offensive and pulled from the iTunes store, how long until the music and movies are pulled?
If Apple was worried about offensive stuff why do the allow curse word in the previews of the songs? The preview for Boom Boom Pow and Imma Be by the Black Eyed Peas has curse words in them, and they don't have the Explicit tag on it.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/boom-boom-pow/id318390146?i=318393150
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/imma-be/id318390146?i=318393740
If Apple was worried about offensive stuff why do the allow curse word in the previews of the songs? The preview for Boom Boom Pow and Imma Be by the Black Eyed Peas has curse words in them, and they don't have the Explicit tag on it.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/boom-boom-pow/id318390146?i=318393150
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/imma-be/id318390146?i=318393740
That fact alone should show people they did not do this lightly.
They had to think about this for a while.
I am in agreement that they have the right to do this, and for their business I think it makes most sense.
I don't have any apps at all that would fall under this category, so it impacts me not at all.
Maybe there are some great apps out there that got the boot, but so far I have not heard of any. Most of them sounded mediocre and sub-par at best and just trying to game the system.
So can't really say I care much.
Potentially they could open an adult section, but I still don't know how you ultimately control access to it online. Apple would not want to just meet the legal requirements, they would want to actually be sure kids were not getting to it, and I don't think that is possible in any reasonable way right now.
The songs, movies, and tv shows are not created using aapl's sdk. Aapl has a legitimate interest in not having apps it essentially had a hand in creating be offensive to a large segment of its market. Playboy has earned an exception through long term acceptance.
I have heard nothing about them removing apps from phones. In the past when they have removed apps, in most cases the people were able to keep them, so there would be no need for a refund.
So. You believe that aapl therefore is required to provide all developers with its sdk and put any apps they create on its app store??
You've got to be joking. Because they provide a API call to draw a toolbar on the screen they "have a hand in creating" it? How's that any different than providing itunesconnect for uploading offensive video?
Does microsoft "have a hand" in creating every piece of software that runs on windows?
Of all the weak arguments in this thread, this is the most ridiculous.
I assure you that the complaints were from a tiny minority, not a large segment of it's market.
I am getting a little tired of "you have choices" or "dont buy an iPhone if you dont like it". I ALREADY bought one! I ALREADY bought hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars of accesories. What line do I get in to get all of my money back...
You bought the iphone and thousands of dollars worth of accessories to use third rate porno apps?
Box of kleenex and a bottle of jergens is like $5.00.
You way over paid.
No. msft has an open system. aapl has a closed sytem with its native apps. Peddle your crap apps as web apps. And if you can't see the difference between an app and music/movie/tv content, my condolences.
1) I don't peddle crap apps
2) What is the difference, in terms of Apple's responsibility, in hosting/selling apps and hosting/selling music/movie/tv? I maintain there is no difference and unlike you, I have a reason why - in both cases Apple hosts the servers that store the content, provides the interface that royalty-recipients use to upload the material, takes responsibility for policing content including providing a ratings system, provides the interface used to buy the content, acts as the seller of the content, is the only entity with any information on the buyer, processes the payment, and has full responsibility for warranty, returns, etc.
You are actually saying I'm stupid for not understanding that the miniscule additional act of providing function calls (which, btw, Apple also does in mobile safari, which is your suggested work-around) somehow makes a material difference in Apple's culpability?
Perhaps instead of feeling sorry for me and my stupidity you could explain why providing UIKit to programmers suddenly makes Apple extra responsible for that type of content? You haven't addressed my question as to whether microsoft is responsible for every program that runs on Windows - if it's just "open system," how come the non-open music/videos sales are not subject to the same culpability.
Yeah Apple doesn't create the songs but the do pick the portion of the songs they post the previews. At least 3 songs from the Black Eyed Peas new album The E.N.D has curse words in the previews.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/the-e-n-d-the-energy-never-dies/id318390146
Electric City http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/electric-city/id318390146?i=318394458
Boom Boom Pow - http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/boom-boom-pow/id318390146?i=318393150
Imma Be - http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/imma-be/id318390146?i=318393740
I agree with you that Apple should have better controls and have already stated that in earlier posts. I also agree that the responsibility is with the parents. Honestly, I agree! I don't know why Apple decided to pull Apps instead of setting up an adult store, except that perhaps it is because they don't want to associate their brand with it. I am not insisting that no one else should be able to see the human body in the App store. Because look at al the movies and music videos available! I never petitioned Apple to remove the apps. Please at least acknowledge that this is not just about pictures of the human body, but about overtly sexual pictures/apps. I AM for Apple having the freedom to decide what they will sell and not sell. Even when they still decide to sell the Playboy app. Even if they are labeled as hypocritical, which I think they are. But, it is their store. If they decided that they will no longer sell financial management apps because they don't want to, then I would feel the same way. I don't think it is censorship. I think it is a business. As a consumer, I have the freedom to choose where I will spend my money. If Apple does not sell what I need, I go elsewhere. I guess that is what I don't understand, even with the iPhone being a closed system, why people feel that Apple has to do anything. Be it sell the apps or not sell the apps. If we don't like what they do, we can just walk away. Again, just my opinion.
The UIKit is used to create the app, which then is only available on the app store. I maintain that this creates an extra degree of involvement on aapl's part (or the perception by the public of an extra degree of involvement) which distinguishes it from the mere act of hosting/distributing media which was created without aapl's involvement. I maintain that this is the main reason from the beginning that app content was much "softer" than other available iTunes content. And no, msft is not responsible.
Ok, I guess we agree for the most part PJT.
I just answered that question. Yes. Unless they want to let people install apps that aren't from the app store.
Troll. Please explain to me how removing all apps that are remotely sexual except the Playboy and SI apps is not hypocrisy/double standards/whatever.
You seem to be suggesting two bases:
1) use of apple-provided tools in creation
So if I use Final Cut Pro to make a snuff film or kiddie porn, Apple is responsible?
How is Apple more "involved" in an app I write in my basement using xcode than they are in a movie I make using their video editing software?
2) exclusive sales through iTunes
So every "iTunes exclusive" music album is Apple's responsibility?
Okaaaaaaay. And the purpose of a preview is to do what? And why might it be important for a preview to give a taste of the content BEFORE someone (such as a parent for a child) downloads a song?
Apologies for the stupidest remark. I should have left that out. It was in reference to a leap in logic that I felt was really too big a leap. That I, or others, am saying no more sex. No fun, etc. That's not it.
I agree with you that Apple should make changes to parental controls, including for violence.
I don't agree with you about what Apple did. You stated Apple responded to, "Please make these people stop expressing themselves in ways innappropriate for our kid's age level". I believe they responded to, "Please provide an age-appropriate place for us to bring our kids." To clarify, I never petitioned Apple to do this. My support of the decision is not based on trying to repress freedom of expression. With the App Store being a closed environment, some will in turn interpret it as such. I do believe that the type of store Apple runs is up to Apple.
Yes, I know they are ridiculous. I also know they are absolutely no different than YOUR premise, and hence your premise is ridiculous. That's my point.
If you honestly think there is no difference between your examples of creating content using a manufacturers editing equipment, and creating an app using aapl's sdk and aapl selling that app on its app store, then it's no wonder you see no problem with the crap apps. That's my point.