Slashdot Mirror
Apple Just Says Yes To iPhone Smoking Game
ZosX sends along a puff piece from Wired's Brian X. Chen: "Apple on Monday approved Puff Puff Pass, a $2 game whose objective is to pass a cigarette or pipe around and puff it as many times as you can within a set duration. So much for taking the high road, Apple. The game allows you to choose between smoking a cigarette, a cigar, and a pipe. Then you select the number of people you'd like to light up with (up to five), the amount of time, and a place to smoke (outdoors or indoors). And you're ready to get right on puffing."
The app was approved but with an Adult rating: Apple rates Puff Puff Pass 17+ for “Frequent/Intense Alcohol, Tobacco, or Drug Use or References.”
Their approval rules aren't 'wildly inconsistent'. They are consistent within context of the app, meaning if the app in question goes down one of the questionable paths like mature content, duplicates core functionality, or questionable content, then it is possible it will be banned. They aren't just randomly selecting apps outside of those areas. The only 'vague' one is the 'questionable content', and there you're stuck with Apple's definition of questionable, rather than your own, but that's a risk you take and it's laid out clearly in the agreement the types of apps that would be at risk.
About the only real oddball judgment I can recall is when they started removing 'pointless' apps like the fart apps. One could argue that those fall under the 'questionable content' rule. Basically, if a notable number of people might find your app objectionable due to content, it is removed. Mark Fiore's iPhone app was removed because it "ridicules public figures".
Per the Developer Agreement: "Apple’s reasonable judgement may be found objectionable, for example, materials that may be considered obscene, pornographic, or defamatory."
These aren't 'wildly inconsistent' or anything of the sort. The rejected apps fit within the criteria and are judged on a per app basis. Go there, and risk being rejected.
You don't cut your car's brake line, and then complain when your breaks don't stop as expected.
I admit, I'm an Apple Fanboy and enjoy reading stories about Apple but I just do not give a flying fuck about "this" app being approved and "that" app being rejected. I really, really, really just do not care.
Here's a secret - a _LOT_ of apps are approved/rejected on a regular basis. Like, really, a lot. I'd wager a fuckton would be an accurate measure of the quantity. This really is not news. Really, really not news.
And I don't care if it paints Apple in a bad light or a good light - I just don't give a fuck. Why streamline the "story" to read "Apple conducts business just like it did yesterday." Much simpler that way.
Ok. Rant done.
Then go Android and be treated like an adult. If you want to think for yourself, you're not in Apple's demo anyhow.
Just on a side note. Realistically, if everyone wanted to truly think for themselves, society would collapse ;).
I've noticed an interesting dissonance in Slashdot's culture. When a non-expert refuses to do what his resident geek is telling him is best, that's described as a bad user, akin to a patient not listening to the sound advice of his doctor.
At the same time, when a non-expert purchases a non-expert gadget, then he's described as being treated like a child, for having a limited set of options before him, and he can't even recompile his mobile OS kernel!
If you want to understand why Apple does what they do, don't put yourself in the end-user's shoes. Try putting yourself in Apple's shoes. End-users need to be taken care of to limit "accidents" and poor experience. That's a fact of life when geeks deal with end-users.
Of course, Apple could do many things to improve the life of developers. But the problem is, again, Apple doesn't exist to serve developers, and so they do only what is needed to maintain the end-user experience.