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
Translation: their legal and marketing departments are as large as ours, so we don't mess with them.
If it's in the history then the kid will certainly click it. Although I cannot imagine at all that many ten year old kids are really using an iPhone anyway.
I still dont get it. Why dont they use Age Restrictions and Parental Controlls to hide this content? They could simply ship the iPods,iPads and iPhones with the age restrictions set in a way that all the boobies are hidden in the App Store. Only when the user sets it higher everything is shown. Prude women dont need to do this and kids cant do it because they dont have the password for it....
Whilst I never use these apps and it is their store to do what they like with, I'm just wondering once you start to draw a line it's very hard to place it. Are parents gonna complain about their kids playing violent games next such as Call Of Duty and so forth.
Having said that it is Apple's store and they can control whatever content goes into there. If they want to eradicate sleaze I fully agree with but I hope this doesn't start precedence for other things.
Having said that it is Apple's store and they can control whatever content goes into there. If they want to eradicate sleaze I fully agree with but I hope this doesn't start precedence for other things.
If Apple wants to ban apps because they say they are inappropriate and getting complaints about them it is totally within their right to do it. It doesn't mean I agree with it.
However to come out and pull apps because they claim they are inappropriate but then leave other app that have the same content is total BS.
I think they need to come out and tell the truth or just apply the rules equally across the store.
However to come out and pull apps because they claim they are inappropriate but then leave other app that have the same content is total BS.
I think they need to come out and tell the truth or just apply the rules equally across the store.
I'm pleased
if you want porn, the internet is full of it
there is no need for all these crapapps
if you want porn, the internet is full of it
there is no need for all these crapapps
Until Apple bans Safari, every word out of Phil's mouth was bull$%!T.
They can ban whatever they want as it's their store, but the FACT is that their own policy is broken by Apple itself.
They can ban whatever they want as it's their store, but the FACT is that their own policy is broken by Apple itself.
You see, that is exactly the problem: Once you've decided to purchase Apple HARDWARE, there are no alternatives to the Apple AppStore.
I wouldn't care at all what Apple does with their AppStore if there were any other sources of software for their hardware. But there aren't, so their policies are not acceptable.
I remember the days App Store was Lauched and Fanboys like yoursef everyone was hailing it for user friendliness and the way to limit "Malware". Of course some said that Censorship will make it's way there but this was dismissed.
Now they censor, you are still in Love with them, well...
Yep, and that is exactly what is going to happen, I was thorn between new iPhone or Pre / Android phone for my next unit due mid summer. Now iPhone is not on the list....
It is less the Adult apps, I never really installed one on my phone: if I want titties and co there is always good old NNTP but I do not allow any corporation to pre-filter for me what I can install on a device I BOUGHT and OWN.
I support this in general
I don't think this is a censorship issue, nor do I think it's preferential treatment. I expect to see these apps (or some of them, anyway) return in the future, corralled into their own place in the app store. As it was, you had one developer distributing almost 500 apps of separate girls in bikinis. This is development? I've worked with models. They will do bikini shoots on a time for prints basis, which means they work for free, as long as they get a copy of the prints for their portfolio. So I take some free pictures (at best, at worst I rip them off of usenet or a web site) drop them into the "app" it took me a day to write, change the name, and submit each one as a new app? I must say I'm no prude. I've seen my share of porn, and I am neither shocked nor offended by anything you can get at the local news stand, but I quickly grew tired of going through page after page of bikini apps. It was the app store equivalent of spam. Did this happen the first time a wobble app or bikini app appeared? No. It happened after at least one dev took advantage of the system, submitting roughly the same app almost 500 times, categorizing it in multiple categories, and rating it much lower than the age it was actually appropriate for (13+ IMHO).
Playboy and Sports Illustrated are long established outside of the app store and can reasonably be expected to play by the rules, so they get to stay. I would be upset if I was the dev of iWobble... I empathize. But something tells me most of the squeaking we are hearing is from the people that were classifying the "same" bikini app in the travel section, utilities section, game section, etc, and now they've had their "spam" shut down.
The app store in general polices itself... bad apps get bad reviews. In fact, I read the reviews of bad apps to see what apps people use in lieu of them. Add most males over the age of 13 to the mix however, and boobs will rule the day, regardless of whether they are "spam" or not.
Just my $.02 (ok, it was more like $1.50)
I don't think this is a censorship issue, nor do I think it's preferential treatment. I expect to see these apps (or some of them, anyway) return in the future, corralled into their own place in the app store. As it was, you had one developer distributing almost 500 apps of separate girls in bikinis. This is development? I've worked with models. They will do bikini shoots on a time for prints basis, which means they work for free, as long as they get a copy of the prints for their portfolio. So I take some free pictures (at best, at worst I rip them off of usenet or a web site) drop them into the "app" it took me a day to write, change the name, and submit each one as a new app? I must say I'm no prude. I've seen my share of porn, and I am neither shocked nor offended by anything you can get at the local news stand, but I quickly grew tired of going through page after page of bikini apps. It was the app store equivalent of spam. Did this happen the first time a wobble app or bikini app appeared? No. It happened after at least one dev took advantage of the system, submitting roughly the same app almost 500 times, categorizing it in multiple categories, and rating it much lower than the age it was actually appropriate for (13+ IMHO).
Playboy and Sports Illustrated are long established outside of the app store and can reasonably be expected to play by the rules, so they get to stay. I would be upset if I was the dev of iWobble... I empathize. But something tells me most of the squeaking we are hearing is from the people that were classifying the "same" bikini app in the travel section, utilities section, game section, etc, and now they've had their "spam" shut down.
The app store in general polices itself... bad apps get bad reviews. In fact, I read the reviews of bad apps to see what apps people use in lieu of them. Add most males over the age of 13 to the mix however, and boobs will rule the day, regardless of whether they are "spam" or not.
Just my $.02 (ok, it was more like $1.50)
Seriously, are you kidding me?? Sorry, I know this is a personal matter, but I really can't help asking if you have no trust in your 16 year old kid, whatsoever? Or at least some respect for his/her privacy? Damn. In some countries this would even be illegal (when your kid is past 16 years of age).
This is exactly the kind of over-protection that makes these kids go crazy once they turn 18 or 20 or 21 or whatever and discover all that's been hidden from them or not allowed. And all that stuff is especially fun doing when your parents don't like it
As per the app-store, just make an adult section with a password tied to your bank-account or something, so that the kids can't get to it even if faking.
Applause..
I applaude Apple's position on this thorny porn issue. It might be ineffective or at least have a limited effect, as others have pointed out, there is so much porn on the internet... This is true, but it doesn't exist on Apple's servers!
Apple are taking responsibility for what is on their servers. This is no 'Big Brother' control thing, but it is Apple saying we do not want any part of this, and we don't want to take a bite out of this Apple..
This also sends out a moral stance that others might wish to uphold and emulate!
Cool Apple!
I dinna ken (scots for I don't know), but Apple MacBooks are becoming the dominant laptop at New College school of divinity is edinburgh!
Ethical cool!
I applaude Apple's position on this thorny porn issue. It might be ineffective or at least have a limited effect, as others have pointed out, there is so much porn on the internet... This is true, but it doesn't exist on Apple's servers!
Apple are taking responsibility for what is on their servers. This is no 'Big Brother' control thing, but it is Apple saying we do not want any part of this, and we don't want to take a bite out of this Apple..
This also sends out a moral stance that others might wish to uphold and emulate!
Cool Apple!
I dinna ken (scots for I don't know), but Apple MacBooks are becoming the dominant laptop at New College school of divinity is edinburgh!
Ethical cool!
So they've banned them in the UK, nice going applying absurd censorship rules to other countries.
What he really means is the big labels that will give the most revenue to the app store are OK... The brands which can be easily identified by the consume, parents and the like....
But the dodgy and unglamorous quick buck boob wobblers are a no no.
The ones you don't actually buy for the articles...
But the dodgy and unglamorous quick buck boob wobblers are a no no.
The ones you don't actually buy for the articles...
You knew the deal when you bought the phone. You knew Apple controlled the store and what was in the store. You knew that there was no other way to get apps (except jail breaking, which is ridiculously easy). So if you really had a problem with Apple's Pre-Filter, then.....Why did you buy the phone?
Btw, I am a fanboy. And I'm a developer. But not of crap-ware. If you search for Bryan Gruver in the app store, you'll see.
They are not censoring. They are deciding what they want to sell in their store. As a developer, if Apple decided they no longer wanted my apps in the app store, I would take my skills elsewhere.
Well said. Honestly, many responses in the past few threads have been embarrassing and I can't believe the degree to which these mouth-breathers will have a sh*t fit. How many threads will it take for them to realize sex apps in the top 25 lists is solicitation?
I'm shocked anyone petty enough to hoot and holler over such trivial matters hasn't already jail-broken their phone.
The store IS an adult section.
Do we need a "horny teenager & lonely wanker" store?
"warning - contains immature content"
Bear in mind how many people will be flicking round your new ipad.
Want your sister in law or boss pressing a random app and see the last image you whacked off to?
Bear in mind Apple is going all out to sell this thing to a demographic that is 50% women.
Which is obviously a very cynical and bad call by the developer.
However: Apple have to approve every single app before it goes life. They actually check the app description before approving it. I personally had my insult generator "Insulting Monk" returned because it used the Japanese sign "kuso" which translates to "crap" in English. Now, I don't have a huge problem with Apple ridding the AppStore of boob-apps, the problem for us developers is the fact that they're changing the rules as they go along. And as long as they're OK with Playboy sanctioned boobs it doesn't make any sense at all...
Oh, and the developers do not get to set the ratings. We have to click a check-list of what the app contains and then based on Apple's software an appropriate rating is created.
Hasn't everyone always known and accepted (to a degree) that Apple control what goes in the App Store and that their acceptance criteria is organic?
Apple have customers' expectations of the App Store to manage, and like everything those expectations will not be shared by everyone, but Apple still needs to make a decision based on what they perceive is going to be best for Apple and its shareholders.
Don't think Apple decided "Yuk, we don't want this filth in the App Store especially where children might be able to see it", they thought "We don't want our customer base to associate us with this kind of material or it will impact on our brand reputation". As for the continued association with the "softer" material (Playboy, FHM), it's just the same as in newsagents (are they called that in the US?), where these are publications that people are used to seeing there and don't generally tarnish the name of the major newsagent chains that sell them, whereas if that newsagent suddenly started filling a good percentage of their shelves with "Big Jugs Monthly" then the public perception of that newsagent would likely change away from being a friendly family store.
So, it's a business decision, the result of which just happens to be the same as censorship. That doesn't mean it is censorship though. Sure, it's a decision that people will argue against but I think it's one of those "you can keep all of the people happy some of the time..." scenarios. Just look at the opposing postings in this thread and you can see that it was no easy decision.
Apple have customers' expectations of the App Store to manage, and like everything those expectations will not be shared by everyone, but Apple still needs to make a decision based on what they perceive is going to be best for Apple and its shareholders.
Don't think Apple decided "Yuk, we don't want this filth in the App Store especially where children might be able to see it", they thought "We don't want our customer base to associate us with this kind of material or it will impact on our brand reputation". As for the continued association with the "softer" material (Playboy, FHM), it's just the same as in newsagents (are they called that in the US?), where these are publications that people are used to seeing there and don't generally tarnish the name of the major newsagent chains that sell them, whereas if that newsagent suddenly started filling a good percentage of their shelves with "Big Jugs Monthly" then the public perception of that newsagent would likely change away from being a friendly family store.
So, it's a business decision, the result of which just happens to be the same as censorship. That doesn't mean it is censorship though. Sure, it's a decision that people will argue against but I think it's one of those "you can keep all of the people happy some of the time..." scenarios. Just look at the opposing postings in this thread and you can see that it was no easy decision.
Totally agree.
A few days ago there was a discussion here by people that consider the words iPad, MaxiPad, iTampon sexist. So, all people that mentions products that come into contact with genitals are considered sexist? Come on. You americans sometimes need to take a breath and focus on some real problems for society.
Delete the apps and I will look at a boob somewhere else..
What's the point?
Not that i go looking for that kind of app on my iphone, but that right there is bullsh*t. What he's telling us is that if you have enough money and clout, you have another set of rules. Or is it that any old raz mag or established brand can have a smutty app? Hustler app? bang bros app?
It's all or nothing, you can't pick and choose by the likelihood of sales and law suits.
