Slashdot Mirror
Apple May Loosen Restrictions With iPhone 3.0
mr100percent writes "Apple rejected the iPhone aggregator app Newspapers because of a topless photo in one of the app's subscribed-to papers. In the rejection message, Apple noted that Parental Controls have been announced for iPhone OS 3.0, adding that it 'would be appropriate to resubmit your application for review once this feature is available.' Rumor sites are speculating that Apple will relax their content restrictions once the 3.0 update puts parental controls in place. This may mean that apps like NIN will be allowed in the future."
I think the problem in this case is more of an objection to Apple censoring everyone's phone until they implement the parental controls being a valid stopgap measure.
one of the UK tabloids posted topless photos
If by 'one of' you mean 'all of, every issue'. It's called Page 3 and it's a national institution. The German papers are worse.
All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
That's the English Standard Version (ESV).
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I know Apple-hating always wins an applause around here, but your description of how things stand is a substantial (and deliberate) distortion. Apple acknowledged that approving Baby Shaker was a mistake, and quickly removed it from the store; Pocket God is only racist according to the most paranoid leftist point of view; shoot 'em ups are subject to the same rules of decency as any other app, and none of those available in the store seriously qualify as adult material. Third-party mail clients are banned for the very clear reason that Apple don't want programs in the app store that reproduce the iPhone's basic functions--you may not agree with the rule, but it isn't ambiguous or inconsistent as you describe.
Apple have made some well-publicised errors in their approvals process, but any company starting a new service and processing that volume of material would have made mistakes. I suspect you simply object in principle to Apple supervising the content on the iPhone, which I know is a commonly held view; but it is an entirely reasonable policy for Apple to take, to avoid genuinely wanton or malicious programs being available on their device. For people who want an unregulated system, there are other phones and platforms available.