Headline FeedsMacNewsWorld Talkback
|
|
Re: Apple Needs a New App Store Category: Apps of Dubious Repute
Posted by: Chris Maxcer 2011-03-24 05:27:27
See Full Story
I don't want anyone deciding for me which information I can or cannot consume. And yet I very much like the idea of someone vetting applications in the Apple App Store so that I have less risk of downloading and using malware apps, which our free-livin' friends who use Android-based smartphones recently had to deal with. At the same time, I can't imagine any parent wanting a grade-school-aged child to stumble upon a Kama Sutra in the Apple App Store, nor can I imagine much of a need for a nine-year-old boy to play with a breast-jiggling app.
Hey melgross--
Thanks for extending the conversation. I used censor as one of those politically-laden words . . . that I've seen get associated with Apple. And in the accurate sense, Apple isn't censoring any of the content -- it's just deciding not to allow the apps that contain content that may be offensive to a large enough or vocal enough group. The rule of thumb seems to be almost something like this: Apple might approve an app with dubious content, but if enough people complain, sorry, and bye-bye.
So, if a tiny percentage of people throw a loud and public fit, an app gets tossed. As I continue to think about it for Apple, there's no real way to win with this issue at all: If the company allows a dubious app section, that's just ammunition for any extreme group to launch a salvo of negative marketing against Apple.
About the only way I can see is Safari-based web apps -- they would be outside of Apple's walled (albeit large) garden and not Apple's responsibility. Of course, there's no money in this, so from a business perspective, it's hard to see a priority there for Apple.
Oh well. I won't get truly irritated, though, until there's a dubious app that's rejected that I actually want!
Thanks for extending the conversation. I used censor as one of those politically-laden words . . . that I've seen get associated with Apple. And in the accurate sense, Apple isn't censoring any of the content -- it's just deciding not to allow the apps that contain content that may be offensive to a large enough or vocal enough group. The rule of thumb seems to be almost something like this: Apple might approve an app with dubious content, but if enough people complain, sorry, and bye-bye.
So, if a tiny percentage of people throw a loud and public fit, an app gets tossed. As I continue to think about it for Apple, there's no real way to win with this issue at all: If the company allows a dubious app section, that's just ammunition for any extreme group to launch a salvo of negative marketing against Apple.
About the only way I can see is Safari-based web apps -- they would be outside of Apple's walled (albeit large) garden and not Apple's responsibility. Of course, there's no money in this, so from a business perspective, it's hard to see a priority there for Apple.
Oh well. I won't get truly irritated, though, until there's a dubious app that's rejected that I actually want!
Oh, come on Chris. You know that censorship is a governmental function. All companies decide what they will manufacture, publish, or carry in their movie houses or stores. That's not censorship. In fact, we expect them do do this weeding out of whatever doesn't fit within their purview.
Apple does have a big problem, as does Disney, to which they're often compared. For better or worse, they're a family oriented company. It hard to see exactly how they got that way, but they did. We've spoken many times about them coming out with a mature, or adult section, in their app store, after all, they carry "R "rated music.
But with people going over all of their offerings with a fine toothed comb, and Christian groups so willing to boycott any company not toeing the line, as they've already done with Apple, it's going to be very difficult for Apple to figure out a way around this.
I've also not seen nudity in Playboy or Sports Illustrated. Have you? Apple doesn't remove apps with swimsuit models, and there are more than a few in the store. It's just nudity, in anything other than artwork. I think that's going a bit far, though a line must be drawn somewhere. But some fashion apps do have just a bit peeking out at times.
Apple does have a big problem, as does Disney, to which they're often compared. For better or worse, they're a family oriented company. It hard to see exactly how they got that way, but they did. We've spoken many times about them coming out with a mature, or adult section, in their app store, after all, they carry "R "rated music.
But with people going over all of their offerings with a fine toothed comb, and Christian groups so willing to boycott any company not toeing the line, as they've already done with Apple, it's going to be very difficult for Apple to figure out a way around this.
I've also not seen nudity in Playboy or Sports Illustrated. Have you? Apple doesn't remove apps with swimsuit models, and there are more than a few in the store. It's just nudity, in anything other than artwork. I think that's going a bit far, though a line must be drawn somewhere. But some fashion apps do have just a bit peeking out at times.
