PDA

View Full Version : No more sleazy App Store apps?



marc
20th February 2010, 12:07 PM
Apple may have just made a major change to the App Store that could render many developers’ applications worthless. We’ve just heard from Jon Atherton, the developer behind Wobble iBoobs, who says that he just received an Email from Apple indicating that his application was being removed from the App Store because of a new policy change: Apple has apparently decided “to remove any overtly sexual content from the App Store.”

Did Apple Just Ban Sexual Content From The App Store? (http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/18/did-apple-just-ban-sexual-content-from-the-app-store/)

Personally, I'm sick of seeing all these SEXY HOT LATINA BABES™ apps in the charts (one of the most common ways people find new apps). There's several developers releasing hundreds of them, flooding the "Recently added" section on the App Store. I find it really annoying as a user and a developer. I don't believe those developers are adding anything positive to the App Store ecosystem, so I'm glad they're gone. It's clearly just a grab for cash.

However, I don't like Apple being my moral barometer for apps and I generally don't think censorship is a good thing. So I'm in two minds about this decision.

It is their store though. Thoughts?

matthew858
20th February 2010, 12:15 PM
The App Store is supposed to be a family-friendly, 6-year-old-friendly place where kids can download games, and where people can download useful apps such as note taking apps and productivity. With this safety in mind, I think Apple had no choice but to remove these apps. With this family-friendly attitude that's been around since the start of the App Store, I'm surprised these apps made it into the store in the first place.

I personally am glad to see these apps gone, and I hope Apple removes any other apps like this over the coming days and weeks.

melbmac
20th February 2010, 12:24 PM
If people want to use those apps, fine. I don't, I can see why you might, but I don't think they should be on the top lists for the reasons mentioned.

Out of interest, I know you can block certain apps using parental controls, do they still appear in the store when they're blocked, or are they completely absent (too lazy to try it out :P )?

Lutze
20th February 2010, 12:35 PM
I think the smart thing to have done was to put a policy in place that meant they never got into the charts, and that you had to opt into the store section that sells them... kinda like going through the black door :)

I'm okay with what they have done though. I was getting fed up of the stupid apps flooding the system.

banjo
20th February 2010, 12:54 PM
It is their store though. Thoughts?

This is the crux of the matter. Would people staunchly demand that the local mom-and-pop newsagent stock Ralph, or one it's even less tasteful counterparts because "they have the right to choose", even when the owners don't want to?

Of course the difference is that people already own the iPhone, so many think they have the choice of viewing whatever they want on a device they already own.

Me, I think that the app store is part of the device, and the device itself has more open competitors, so people are free to choose those devices over the iPhone, if they really need their jiggly-tit fix.

dekco
20th February 2010, 12:56 PM
Im all for the app store cracking down on sleazy apps. But like marc said, i'm not exactly a fan of having someone else tell me what i can/cannot see/buy/use

feeze
20th February 2010, 01:13 PM
What's wrong with having an adults section in the app store?

Apple needs to offer a fine grained filtering system. Give people the choice on what type of content is presented to them in the app store.

EDIT: This filtering system can also be used for more than jut filtering adult content. As a user there are simply certain types of apps I'm not interested in. Why can't I simply filter these apps out and instead let me focus on the types of apps I am interested in.

marc
20th February 2010, 01:33 PM
Apple needs to offer a fine grained filtering system.

On a technical note, filtering would make their caching system a lot more complex and less effective. I don't know exactly how the iTunes caching works, but I assume there's a main server and several slave servers that follow changes made to the master. Akamai (http://www.akamai.com/) might also cache the iTunes store pages too.

This means every main page and every filtering variation of that page for every country might need to be cached. It'd also mean that the charts wouldn't be the same across filtering options... unless you wanted to the charts to skip numbers.

It's a pretty complex issue Apple face, assuming they're after a solution that's simple for users (adding lots of options = not simple).

Remy
20th February 2010, 01:39 PM
I think it's a good move, because there's no need to have porn apps on the App Store in the first place.

As far as I'm aware, everything these apps have to offer is easily replaceable by an iPhone optimised website that can be viewed in Mobile Safari.

Apple doesn't want porn apps cluttering up the App Store, because they give it a bad image. No-one likes seeing smut occupying the Top App charts, so Apple should get rid of them all.

As for the censorship argument, Apple isn't stopping you from looking at whatever you want to look at on your iPhone. That's what the internet is there for, and Mobile Safari is hands-down the best mobile browsing experience.

The App Store is Apple's creation, and they'll do what they want with it. The only issue that concerns me is Apple's "duplicate functionality" policy, but we'll wait and see how significant that becomes in the next few months/years.

micka
20th February 2010, 01:59 PM
The App Store is supposed to be a family-friendly, 6-year-old-friendly place where kids can download games, and where people can download useful apps such as note taking apps and productivity.

I know most don't read the T&Cs but, From iTunes T&C
2. Age requirements for use of the Service. This Service is available for individuals aged 13 years or older. If you are 13 or older but under the age of 18, you should review these terms and conditions with your parent or guardian to make sure that you and your parent or guardian understand these terms and conditions. Additional age restrictions apply for products containing objectionable material.

marc
20th February 2010, 02:02 PM
Another part of the argument: Some of these devs are submitting 20+ apps a day. The time it's taking Apple to review all that crap is holding up apps you might want.

jesse
20th February 2010, 02:32 PM
This is awesome news.

kyte
20th February 2010, 03:24 PM
Thoughts?

I'm not pressed to find an agreement with their decisions. I've actually stopped looking in the store randomly now, because often the front couple of pages are just full of this crap. To be honest, I am surprised these were even found acceptable in the first place. Family friendly? No.

If Apple decided that it was OK, they should have them in a separate section which requires a further login. Keep them out of the kids sight and away from mine too.

Boofhead
20th February 2010, 03:52 PM
They shouldnt ban anything for sexual content. There should be an adults only section that is not included in the charts. If its not illegal then it should be open season.

They already have parenting mechanisms for selling explicit language music dont they? Why is it not good enough for apps?

Where does it stop? Its sexual content today. Violent content tomorrow? There are people who will complain that little Johnny is playing a FPS shooter.

Im sick of my freedoms, choices and enjoyment being curtailed to make the world idiot proofed for morons. Seriously, its not just technology related. Its happening everywhere. We should just cover everything in nerf rubber. And mechanically restrict cars to 15kph.

Sorry for the somewhat irrational rant. I realise its just stupid boobies but it hit a nerve that Conroy already inflamed!

semaja2
20th February 2010, 06:23 PM
iWobble is a great app, great for laughs and I am appalled at apples choice. YES i agree agaisnt all the naked wallpaper apps etc but iWobble simply bounced things around, i used it many times on faces like googley eyes etc.

iWooble should stay Apple!!!

feeze
20th February 2010, 06:41 PM
iWobble is a great app, great for laughs and I am appalled at apples choice. YES i agree agaisnt all the naked wallpaper apps etc but iWobble simply bounced things around, i used it many times on faces like googley eyes etc.

iWooble should stay Apple!!!

Maybe it was the name 'Wobble iBoobs'

From what I have understood, Apple have said that if they remove sexual content, they can resubmit the app.

aafuss
20th February 2010, 07:24 PM
I believe it didn't come with any objectionable images-usrs would sipply their own images themselves.

rustyshelf
21st February 2010, 09:06 AM
There's no love loss between me and all those apps (har har). I had never downloaded any, but they all looked like someone had just grabbed some bikini photos, wrapped it in an app, then SEO'd the heck out of the name.

I think they should have been rejected by Apple simply for being stupid. But where do you stop with that logic, there's two apps at the moment in the top 100 here in Oz...and ALL they give you is tips on how to save your battery. They are named in a way to pretend that they actually help your battery life. It's that kind of stuff that gets my goat as well!

Personally I'd love a 'stupid' section of the store where all that idiotic cash grab rubbish apps go, but then I'm not stupid, I know that's not feasible. How sweeeeet would it be if it were though...

At the very least I think Apple needs to either create an adult section or remove all the bikini apps pronto. Funnily enough I had no problems with the wobble one, at least they went to some effort to get some novelty value...

ruegen
21st February 2010, 11:42 AM
I'm glad they are gone and are going, I hope they remove more.

Personally as a strait guy if I see a "hot chick" or "naked babe" I will look (that's just human instinct) but that doesn't make me agree with it all. I don't see a necessity for the apps and again I'm very glad they are gone.

TheKeddi
21st February 2010, 12:02 PM
I know people have the right to chose? But come on!

Everyone moaned at first when they wouldn't let this crap in, then they did, and look what happened!! The bloody App store is full of that shit now!

Take it out I say, it just makes the app store look like a piece of rubbish and you have to wade or ages through this rubbish to get to the real stuff.

MissionMan
21st February 2010, 01:42 PM
i agree. make a separate adults only itunes store with content and apps and keep this crap off the main system.

eaglesteve2
23rd February 2010, 06:17 PM
Apple doesn't think playboy is sleezy somehow.
Ban none or ban all. No double standard please.

cosmichobo
23rd February 2010, 06:57 PM
I don't recall how I ended up with it (pre internet days) but I remember having a Desk Accessory on my Mac Classic, that simply showed a naked woman doing a dance over and over and over...

Yes, I think these things shouldn't be in the "general" section of the AppStore, but also yes, surely they can set up an 18+ section for adult content...

BLINDER
23rd February 2010, 07:54 PM
I added my post in the news section but will sum it up here too.
"remove overtly sexual content" - fine. No problem with that.
But why on earth is sexual content or naked bodies so much worse than some stupid kill 'em all game?
If you're going to ban something to protect the innocent then go the whole hog. I'm sick of the double standards.
Naked bad - killing good. It just sounds like Animal Farm...

cosmichobo
23rd February 2010, 08:00 PM
But why on earth is sexual content or naked bodies so much worse than some stupid kill 'em all game?

My father in law is of this camp. He can't see why we (moreso Americans) censor the naked human body, whereas they're happy to show a million and one ways to kill someone.

Lutze
23rd February 2010, 11:13 PM
Apple doesn't think playboy is sleezy somehow.
Ban none or ban all. No double standard please.

I thought that Playboy was journalistic and art ;)

LithgowLights
24th February 2010, 09:34 AM
Take it out I say, it just makes the app :confuse store look like a piece of rubbish and you have to wade or ages through this rubbish to get to the real stuff.

Problem is one persons shit is anothers enjoyment. I don't like rap music or country music so let's remove them too. As for games i think fps games are shit so should they be removed?

I don't agree with the removal of the apps at all, so they should be restricted to adults in an appropriate part of the store

jesse
24th February 2010, 10:15 AM
I'd like to see a comprehensive list of all the apps Apple have removed because of this change in policy. In my opinion they've probably just removed a pile of shit apps that nobody normal would want anyway.

Nobody clever and innovative with a valuable, legitimately good iPhone app for sale on iTunes is getting their apps rejected or removed. If you're developing on the fringe of what's acceptable (by Apple), then be prepared for the consequences when they change their mind on something.

37 Signals posted this image which highlights my point

http://s3.amazonaws.com/37assets/svn/app-store-quality-control-d12cc4e2595e4d70f3a3042faecabdf0.png

Original Post: Photo: There's quality control for you. This is - (37signals) (http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2146-theres-quality-control-for-you-this-is)

ruegen
25th February 2010, 06:26 AM
Apple doesn't think playboy is sleezy somehow.
Ban none or ban all. No double standard please.

Get off your soapbox! It seems like this is an excuse not have them banned and that you don't want them banned yourself. Do you really care?

Same with the argument where people complain about access from safari. That's like saying the car is to blame when someone drives into town to buy something from an adult shop.

You don't see your local shoe shop, cafe or dentist sell adult items and no one bugs them about it. Let Apple decide what they want to sell.

It's a little harder to ban the more well-known companies as they aren't exactly owned by backyard developers and Apple probably just doesn't want to create waves and headaches. Plus parents will notice those app names immediately on the iPhone and know to get rid of them.

Like I said I hope they never bring those apps back and continue to remove more!

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 09:03 AM
Looks like these applications will be coming back under a new "explicit" category.

Japester
25th February 2010, 09:12 AM
Looks like these applications will be coming back under a new "explicit" category.

If this was their plan all along, think how much wailing would have been prevented if they'd said so at the time.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 09:12 AM
Get off your soapbox! It seems like this is an excuse not have them banned and that you don't want them banned yourself. Do you really care?

Same with the argument where people complain about access from safari. That's like saying the car is to blame when someone drives into town to buy something from an adult shop.

You don't see your local shoe shop, cafe or dentist sell adult items and no one bugs them about it. Let Apple decide what they want to sell.

It's a little harder to ban the more well-known companies as they aren't exactly owned by backyard developers and Apple probably just doesn't want to create waves and headaches. Plus parents will notice those app names immediately on the iPhone and know to get rid of them.

Like I said I hope they never bring those apps back and continue to remove more!

I really don't care if they allow such content, as I believe that it is up to the users to decide what to read and see. After all, such material could be found all over the internet with a standard web browser.

Having said that, it does bother me greatly to see double standard being applied. It bothers me that the smaller developers are treated differently from the big players like playboy. That's not fair go for the smaller developers.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 09:13 AM
If this was their plan all along, think how much wailing would have been prevented if they'd said so at the time.

I agree. Apple could have managed this better.

rustyshelf
25th February 2010, 09:26 AM
I think what it comes down to is that 99% of people don't want these cheap, pathetic sleazy apps in the Store. They all follow simple formula:
- developer finds nudie/bikini shots
- developer makes 500 apps with different SEO names with said nudie shots

It's the App Store equivalent of Spam. Sports Illustrated or Playboy on the other hand are well thought out (not that I have them, but I assume they are) and big brands that aren't going to spam the store. I think Apple should change from no sexual content to no 'spam' style apps. If your app is a pathetic attempt at SEO to just trying and squeeze out a few dollars, and you create hundreds of apps, they should just boot you out. Simple ;)

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 09:54 AM
I think what it comes down to is that 99% of people don't want these cheap, pathetic sleazy apps in the Store.

First, let me clarify that I'm not here to discuss or impose my view on pornographic content on anyone. That's a personal choice for every adult to exercise. I'm however, concerned with exposing such content to children.

According to reports that I read, such contents were actually the reason why VHS triumph over Beta Max, Blue Ray over the standard from Toshiba, and largely responsible for the adoption of internet worldwide. If such reports are to be believed, it would run contrary to the assumption that 99% of people don't want these applications.

As to your second points that they're merely finding the pictures from the net and selling it as brand new applications, I agree. However, the fact that they're not having creativity is not the reason for the ban- it is the sensual nature that is the subject of discussion. There're many other non-sexy applications that lack creativity that I can think of, and these could too be classified as spam if you will. On the other hand, are we making too much of a sweeping statement by saying that all sensual applications from smaller developers lack creativity? Although I'm not a developer myself, I feel that it is more important to see consistent yardstick being applied. I'm not defending the spam developers here, and hope you get my drift.

To address the issue of the same developers issuing 10 applications which are exactly the same but with just different content, Apple could simply look at the previous similar applications from the same developer and allow only one such applications, so that future contents are given out as updates only.

I think in order to shield children from such content, the firmware should have a built in parental control security to simply disallow the viewing and downloading of explicit materials. This could be a feature which only parent with the right password could activate or deactivate.

rustyshelf
25th February 2010, 10:05 AM
According to reports that I read, such contents were actually the reason why VHS triumph over Beta Max, Blue Ray over the standard from Toshiba, and largely responsible for the adoption of internet worldwide. If such reports are to be believed, it would run contrary to the assumption that 99% of people don't want these applications.

I think this is the worst analogy I've seen in a while. The app store is not going to win over other app stores because it has porn. These app's I wouldn't even consider porn, they are girls in bikini's. I'm sure if you open Safari (which is not blocked in anyway) you can find more porn than you can shake a stick at in two clickety-clacks.

My point is simple, Apple should just say 'NO SPAM' and enforce that. That way you'd leave apps like iWobble or whatever, which are actually funny and creative over all the spam apps :)

marc
25th February 2010, 10:07 AM
If your app is a pathetic attempt at SEO to just trying and squeeze out a few dollars, and you create hundreds of apps, they should just boot you out. Simple ;)

+1

Any company that's submitting several similar new apps a week should get a permanent ban by Apple.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 11:05 AM
I think this is the worst analogy I've seen in a while.

It is not an analogy. It is a fact. We may not be one of such users, but fact is porn is responsible for much of the growth of devices and gadgets. Some report says that what's going to drive the 3D HD Television industry is going to be porn too. In another article that I read, someone surmised that porn will also attract many people to buy iPad!

Like it or not, enough people want porn. If iPhone can't have porn, and all such applications turn up in the other platform, it may influence some buyer in choosing their phone.

I'm only stating what I see as plain facts. Therefore I think Apple finally do what makes sense (to me anyway) which is to create a new category for that. Let's hope they also implement a way to prevent children from accessing them.

rustyshelf
25th February 2010, 11:18 AM
It is not an analogy. It is a fact. We may not be one of such users, but fact is porn is responsible for much of the growth of devices and gadgets. Some report says that what's going to drive the 3D HD Television industry is going to be porn too. In another article that I read, someone surmised that porn will also attract many people to buy iPad!

Like it or not, enough people want porn. If iPhone can't have porn, and all such applications turn up in the other platform, it may influence some buyer in choosing their phone.

I'm only stating what I see as plain facts.

I could dispute that, but let's assume that it is a fact. Why can't you get porn on the iPhone? You have Safari. The App Store didn't have porn it had bikini ladies. Not naked ladies or anything racier than that. So all it had was spam from junk developers. So you're saying a platform without junk spam from developers can't succeed? It doesn't work as an analogy, that all I was trying to say :)

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 11:34 AM
Why can't you get porn on the iPhone? You have Safari. The App Store didn't have porn it had bikini ladies. Not naked ladies or anything racier than that. So all it had was spam from junk developers. So you're saying a platform without junk spam from developers can't succeed? It doesn't work as an analogy, that all I was trying to say :)

You're asking why would users buy such applications? Well, I suppose the answer is the same as why users need a dedicated facebook application, ebay applications, paypay application, playboy application. Users can also use those applications using Safari. Specialised applications just enhance the experience I suppose.

Will VHS have succeeded over Betamax if there was no porn content on VHS? It may, but it may not have. However, if there was porn only on Betamax and not VHS, I suspect that today's standard will be betamax, not VHS.

rustyshelf
25th February 2010, 11:40 AM
You're asking why would users buy such applications? Well, I suppose the answer is the same as why users need a dedicated facebook application, ebay applications, paypay application, playboy application. Users can also use those applications using Safari. Specialised applications just enhance the experience I suppose.

Facebook, ebay etc give you a better experience than the web, so it makes perfect sense to me that people would use them.

I don't want to turn this into a heated argument, but you've seen those sexy apps right? They don't give you a better experience than the web, they give you a much, much worse experience. They are just rubbish spam apps. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't be a question of porn or no porn. It should just be a matter of booting all the spam developers. One of these guys had 500 apps. Yes five freaking hundred. What's that if it's not spam?

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 11:50 AM
Facebook, ebay etc give you a better experience than the web, so it makes perfect sense to me that people would use them.

I don't want to turn this into a heated argument, but you've seen those sexy apps right? They don't give you a better experience than the web, they give you a much, much worse experience. They are just rubbish spam apps. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't be a question of porn or no porn. It should just be a matter of booting all the spam developers. One of these guys had 500 apps. Yes five freaking hundred. What's that if it's not spam?

Yes, I've tried out a couple of these applications out of curiosity. Sorry, I do think that at least some of them do enhance user experience. One such application allows users to upload their favourite pictures rate the picture, so those with the highest percentage of +ve rating surface to the top. Usually, the classy, artistic and pictures in good taste surface to the top. The too explicit and disgusting ones generally get bad ratings. You can never get that with Safari.

But I agree that many of such applications are just the same things which should have been considered updates. In fact they should be merely addition to the database. Like I said in one of my previous posts, apple should review these and prevent the subsequent applications (spams) are rejected. We're in agreement at least in this area.

marc
25th February 2010, 11:59 AM
Like it or not, enough people want porn.

That doesn't mean Apple need to sell it on their store for their device. Remember that all App Store apps are hosted on Apple's servers and Apple spends a lot of time reviewing and maintaining apps. So anything on the App Store is an investment and a partnership.

Do you think Apple wants to be a partner to these developers?

Also, the more sexy-hot-babes apps there are, the longer it'll take for your Tweetie 2, Pocket Weather or Consume update to be released.

This isn't about freedom, it's about a small minority of developers shitting on Apple's prized product, and profiting from it. They're making the platform worse for everyone. If you were Apple and someone was making you look bad AND being paid by you, would you allow it?


Let's hope they also implement a way to prevent children from accessing them.

The only failsafe way to do that is not allow the apps on the store in the first place.

There is another issue here, and that's Apple controlling what's available as a native app on every iPhone and iPad. It's not such a big deal now, but might be if the iPad ends up replacing most Macs. So while I'm all for Apple removing these apps now, I think their policy will have to be continually reworked.

forno
25th February 2010, 12:01 PM
Who cares if there is porn on the iPhone, I dont. Supposing you are an adult, dont buy the app if you dont want it. Let Apple control the quality of the apps(which they are doing, albeit in a confused way that appears to be controling content).

If you have a child, then you need to be more proactive about what your child sees and reads & how it affects them, rather than expecting a corporation to do it for you! Do you expect Dell, HP, Acer et all to restrict their platform so you cant load porn?
Even the most basic of phones can now have porn via screen saver

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 12:02 PM
The only failsafe way to do that is not allow the apps on the store in the first place.



The only failsafe way is for the rest of the world to completely ban such content from internet, like what China is doing.

Failing that, Apple should ban Safari.

Both of these are clearly not possible. There is no failsafe way.

marc
25th February 2010, 12:06 PM
The only failsafe way is for the rest of the world to completely ban such content from internet, like what China is doing.

Don't take that angle. We're talking about one avenue for content for three products (iPhone, iPod, iPad) from one company. It's not the same as an all encompassing filter that blocks all content from a country, like China.

There is competition. Android's Marketplace works differently and allows everything to be listed. Palm's App Catalog is in the middle somewhere (similar review process to Apple, but you can link to an unapproved app and users can download it before approval, I believe).

Edit: Right now the App Store is still a new thing. Apple seem to change the rules weekly. Sometimes they end up more strict, sometimes they open up. There's nothing like it that has existed before, so they need to learn as they progress. It's not an easy problem to solve.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 12:11 PM
We either believe that individuals have freedom to choose what to have or we don't. Just because we don't want it does not give us the right to impose our value to the rest. Or you take the other view that you know what's best for everyone else and remove things that you think are harmful to them. Pure and simple.

ruegen
25th February 2010, 12:54 PM
The Romans fed men to the lions etc in the coliseums because the people wanted it. They even did it for political and status reasons.

People dont do it anymore. You get to decide what to sell. Stop defending crap.

And that stupid Betamax vs VHS argument is BS. There are a whole lot of other reasons why it went the way it did and there are thousands of devices over the years that have failed so you can't really use that old argument to cover all new devices.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 01:11 PM
These articles (which shows the power of porn on devices and gadget's success) might interest you guys.

Porn Industry May Be Decider in Blu-ray, HD-DVD Battle - PCWorld (http://www.pcworld.com/article/125618/porn_industry_may_be_decider_in_bluray_hddvd_battl e.html)

Adobe Plays the Porn Card in Flash Campaign Against iPad | Gadget Lab | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/adobe-porn-flash/)

iPad's Dirty Little Secret to Success: Porn (SFW) | Technomix | Fast Company (http://www.fastcompany.com/1559009/porn-the-secret-reason-apples-ipad-will-rock?partner=rss)

Adobe uses porn in anti-iPad campaign (http://www.intomobile.com/2010/01/30/adobe-uses-porn-in-anti-ipad-campaign.html)


There are other similar articles if you google for it.

Do we really believe that porn plays no role in the success of mobile devices? Ask the TV program producers, magazine sellers, books sellers. I think you will know the answer.

Ruegen, if you want to have a civilised discussion, you could refrain from using some of your more colorful language on anyone not disagreeing with you. We might live a little longer by keeping our cool.;)

marc
25th February 2010, 02:08 PM
We either believe that individuals have freedom to choose what to have or we don't.

If you were running a shop, would you be able to choose what's sold on your shelves?

Apple aren'y blocking sites in Safari, they're choosing to not partner with some developers for their platform. There's a difference.

eaglesteve2
25th February 2010, 02:42 PM
Seems to me like Apple is trying to find the balance as it goes along, taking into account user opinions on both sides of the divides. The act of removing it and reintroducing it ad another category shows this dilemma and struggle for balance.

ruegen
25th February 2010, 05:34 PM
These articles (which shows the power of porn on devices and gadget's success) might interest you guys.

Porn Industry May Be Decider in Blu-ray, HD-DVD Battle - PCWorld (http://www.pcworld.com/article/125618/porn_industry_may_be_decider_in_bluray_hddvd_battl e.html)

Adobe Plays the Porn Card in Flash Campaign Against iPad | Gadget Lab | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/adobe-porn-flash/)

iPad's Dirty Little Secret to Success: Porn (SFW) | Technomix | Fast Company (http://www.fastcompany.com/1559009/porn-the-secret-reason-apples-ipad-will-rock?partner=rss)

Adobe uses porn in anti-iPad campaign (http://www.intomobile.com/2010/01/30/adobe-uses-porn-in-anti-ipad-campaign.html)


There are other similar articles if you google for it.

Do we really believe that porn plays no role in the success of mobile devices? Ask the TV program producers, magazine sellers, books sellers. I think you will know the answer.

Ruegen, if you want to have a civilised discussion, you could refrain from using some of your more colorful language on anyone not disagreeing with you. We might live a little longer by keeping our cool.;)

Sex image sells but TV studios still adhere to society standards (and when they don't they get flamed, great way for them to get bad publicity)

P0rn doesn't really play a role in selling tech. There are hundreds of failed devices that delivered that content and still failed so p0rn really isn't the "saviour" of any digital device or standard. Take the iPod for the best example, it has none and has sold REALLY well. When you really think hard about it all the examples you gave are poor points and probably funded by the p0rn industries themselves! :p

On regards to a civilised discussion eaglesteve2, don't worry I know how to manage my points - I don't intend you attack YOU personally but rather the concept and opinion. I use mild swearing etc to create strong emphasis to an argument. The English language is incredibly flexible has a lot more "civilised" words but don't create the same level of strength to get the point across because they are far too placid. I will censor high level words like f**k and let your imagination do the rest. I'm no politician or public figure so I can get away with it. In short unless it annoys the moderators who probably use the same language in forums at the same level themselves I will continue to use them. If you need reassurance let me know what you need said or I can make you a nice cup of cocoa. But otherwise please read the points and don't take it personally. Hell I even abbreviated one word to BS for you in advance. If you met me in person you would find I don't use those words very often at all. I choose very carefully what I want to use.

marc
26th February 2010, 10:07 AM
As usual, good commentary from Monsieur Gruber.

Daring Fireball: Tits and Apps (http://daringfireball.net/2010/02/tits_and_apps)

eaglesteve2
26th February 2010, 01:33 PM
As usual, good commentary from Monsieur Gruber.

Daring Fireball: Tits and Apps (http://daringfireball.net/2010/02/tits_and_apps)

+1. I read that earlier on my google reader and was just about to link it here. You beat me to it.:D

Very sensible commentary.

eaglesteve2
26th February 2010, 09:10 PM
One potential side effect of Apple's action I foresee is that some of these sexy applications will find their way into the Cydia store, providing even more incentive for lovers of these applications to jailbreak if they were not previously jailbreaking yet. This may not be what Apple want.

AS1
21st January 2011, 12:14 PM
I think this is a great move by apple. Its nice to see they have some kind of sense of social and moral responsibilty... Not eveyone wants filth thrown in their faces. Its there for those who wish to seek it, but for the rest of us it is simply not fair to be bombarded by it. Hope this ban lasts.

kyte
26th January 2011, 09:01 PM
I was looking for an audiobook tonight, and just looked at the newest ones... at first glance (and I didnt look closer) it looks like erotica has moved in.