Slashdot Mirror
Apple Bans Sexy Apps, Developers Upset
An anonymous reader writes "Apple is now removing many risque applications from its App Store so as not to 'scare off potential customers.' The removed applications, including SlideHer and Dirty Fingers, allowed people to see scantily clad women. Although they were once approved by Apple, even reaching the 'most downloaded' lists, Apple removed them after getting complaints that they were degrading to women. That said, the Sports Illustrated application is still available for those who want scantily clad women on their iPhone, and developers are up in arms over the perceived inconsistency. It's sure a good thing for those worried parents that they don't have any kind of web browser on there. On the internet, you're never more than one click away from something horrible."
Some are speculating that this is a ploy from Apple to drum up interest in the iPad from educators.
Apple makes some of the dumbest moves in regards to the lifeline of their app store - the developers! Boy are they good at pissing people off! I'm a very happy shareholder (picked it up at 27 back when...!) but every day there's some new twist that they've pulled and alienated this group or that. I think parental controls and allowing any app that doesn't do harm to the phone itself would be their best stance - how many sales are they missing because of these China-like rules?
Do or do not. There is no try. --Yoda
Look at me crying for these devs who supported this fucked up anticonsumer family of products.
And I'm laughing on the inside looking at their wittle tears.
I find it laughable that slashdot labels so many stories as evil censorship or somehow violating "your rights online" when it is nothing of the sort.
The fact is, a consumer retailer like Apple can stock and sell whatever products to choose to its customers. What they don't stock is really none of your business, and if you don't like, take your products and have someone else carry it.
This is just another non-issue. The problem with Apple is that they are too successful, they need to keep out the riff raff.
Well, don't submit it to the 'Education' store. Oh, wait. There isn't one... Well, why the hell not?
I cannot for a minute believe that the 'histrionic control freaks' at Apple can not come up with separate Adult and Education sections (Dumb and Dumber?) for the iPad. Or even an iPad only part of the store.
Nope, too damned hard. Might take all of a week.
Any more weird ideas, guys?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I guess axing ~5,000 applications is easier than building a more effective and granular per-device rating setting system...
Lazier, though, a lot lazier.
I'm pretty sure Apple could drum up an altruistic-sounding or business-smart reason to ban just about any app from their store.
-No competing browsers? They duplicate existing functionality. Certainly wouldn't want that.
-No scantily clad women? They objectify women. But pay no heed to the Sports Illustrated app or the entirety of the internet at your very literal fingertips.
-No Google voice? Also duplicates existing functionality. But be sure to ignore the allowance of Skype.
Yep, Apple's got a good reason for everything that it does, and its reason is placing consumers and developers first!
"I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
They were hardly real apps. "Big Boobs," "Large Boobs," "Young Boobs," et cetera, et cetera. Recipe: Make an image display app, throw some pictures into it, make another version with different pictures, repeat indefinitely.
They probably really only deleted five or ten real distinct apps.
Not that I am a big fan of getting rid of a bunch of content because of seemingly arbitrary rules, but from the sounds of it many of this 'apps' are nothing more then a image (or a few images) of a girl/boy/goat in a bikini. It seems like a bit of a stretch to refer to those who create such content as developers.
Why not just allow people to download off websites without jailbreaking, like every computer out there instead of jumping through all those hoops? Oh, that 30% cut and control.
This space for rent.
. It's sure a good thing for those worried parents that they don't have any kind of web browser on there. On the internet, you're never more than one click away from something horrible."
Well, yeah. That's kind of the point. The things they can't control, they're making no attempt to control. However, they *can* control the contents of the store - and so they do, in order to appeal to their largest customer base. Time will tell if it's the right move; but you can't cry censorship when you agree to purchase a device whose sole gateway to applications is what is officially sanctioned by that device's creator. You sign away the right to control your user experience when you agree that they have control via the appstore. If you don't like it, don't buy the device until they change it; or buy it and jailbreak it (but be aware of the consequences as well).
Apple is fully within their rights to decide they want the appstore to sell ONLY applications designed for people age 8 and under. You know it when you buy the device (and if you don't, isn't that your responsibility too? being educated about your purchases?). App developers agree to it when they obtain the license that allow them to develop for the devices. You always have the choice to go with a different product. (Such as blackberry... no restrictions on what you can install, tens of thousands of compatible j2me apps. They have an appworld that's growing daily, but you're not required to use it to install software. I believe Android fits this bill too? )
A company that is exercising the rights that its customers and developers willingly cede to it is not censorship.
Commence downmodding.
Censorship is when a third party prevents you from reading or viewing or watching content that you want to. In this case, Apple is the arbiter of their own app store for their own devices, and you know when you buy it that they get to choose what you do and do not have access to in the app store. It may be stupid and petty and lazy and a general sign of their incompetence, but that's not the same thing as censorship.
If Apple prevented you from viewing sexy items on the internet in general, then that would be censorship. This is more akin to a quickie mart that stops carrying Hustler. There are still other places to get Hustler.
(Side note: this is a good and valid argument for markets and competition. Where Apple fails, you can choose another vendor. In the market for tablet devices, the worst outcome is that you were swindled out of several hundred dollars. You just need slight regulation to make sure they don't catch fire or hand out your bank information out of the box.)
Apple isn't known for letting the market decide. They are control freaks. Their behavior in regard to the App Store is totally unreasonable, and it is going to kill the App Store. They need to learn to "Think Different". Assholes.
They are inconsistent is that an approved app should stay approved until the app itself changes to make a reevaluation of its status necessary.
It's like if your local authority decided to revoke your driver's license while you're driving the car, and then fines you for driving without a license.
The only people up in arms are sleazy dudes out to make a quick buck off of someone else's boobies.
They've had their day and nothing of value has been lost.
Apple allows Big Content to put up porn apps, just not little publishers, so your explanation doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
and it is going to kill the App Store.
You know, people keep saying that, and yet, they hit 1 billion+ downloads so far in nine months (if their numbers are to be trusted). So, in a way, I'm finding it harder and harder to agree that their formula isn't viable. It seems to be doing fine. Is that because ($JOE_END_USER.cares() == false)? Yeah probably. But I'm not worried for their success. It seems unavoidable.
Reply to That ||
If "China like rules" means banning political things, the P is right.
If it means throwing people into jail, the GP is right.
Let's define things like mud^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hclearly.
Twelve-and-three-quarter inches. Unyielding. This wand belonged to Bellatrix Lestrange.
America is full of prudes. Compare with a well know Finnish company.
http://store.ovi.com/content/17993
Deleted
As an Apple app store consumer I will say that these boobie apps (along with all the "points" apps for all the mafia wars clones) are basically unwanted spam to me. They make the app store less appealing to use since they clutter the place up.
Perhaps if the "devs" were less spammy about their 99c collections of images Apple wouldn't have brought the hammer down.
Well, it's an Apple product; I expect it to be hostile to heterosexual male sexuality.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
All men masturbate. Some just lie about it. But playing the moral superiority, 'real men don't fantasize' card is such nineteenth century, Victorian ere crap. All the studies I've read show fantasy and masturbation as normal, healthy aspects of human sexuality.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
So you're not "married/dating/interestedindating" and you think that masterbation is unhealthy. So either you're a woman, your balls are locked away somewhere, or you're engaging in some rather unhealthy sexual activities yourself. Whichever it is, good luck with all that!
Without all those porn apps, even Apple hardware isn't that sexy. :P
Hey, if I had mod points I'd mod this flamebait, and I'm taking it. I'm a woman and I DON'T THINK masturbation is unhealthy. Watch what you say.
There's one point I concur with the controversial post here. I have the feeling that youngsters actually search for porn more actively than adults, since adults have access to it easily (I'm not going to say 'boys' cause girls do it too [you don't believe me?]). Now, I'm not a parent, but I'm kind of sure I wouldn't freak out if my teenager watched porn. As long as he doesn't start treating (wo)men like they do in porn. If anything, teach kids fantasy from reality. That solves a lot of problems.
Oh, well if YOU don't want the app then clearly no one ever would and Apple is right to remove it.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
I actually am confused about this, when they added parental controls they should had been able to just flag these as "not opt for minors" and prevent them from downloading on iPhones with parental controls enabled...
The first thing they could do is not file a Creationism app under Education: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/answers-in-genesis/id353046149?mt=8
Because Apple is all about end-user choice?
You are in a very small minority, and most women who label themselves as feminist would disagree with you. It doesn't matter that you are right and they are wrong. They have co-opted your label, and have twisted it to mean something very different than what you want it to mean. Much like a strange group of meat eaters have co-opted the term vegetarian, and have twisted it's meaning to something very different than what it once meant. Actual vegetarians had to come up with a new term, Vegan, to describe themselves, and even that term is currently losing it's meaning as the fake vegetarians try to co-opt vegan also. Actual feminists must do the same, or live with the fact that they are unintentionally telling people they are man hating female chauvinist pigs.
So, it isn't that the previous poster has been listening to the craziest people who shout the loudest. It is just that he may have never met a woman that thinks women should be treated as people, no less (or more) than a man. He has very likely met huge numbers of women, that call themselves feminists, and think that feminist means women should be treated as more than men.