arstechnica.com— Apple seems to be of two minds when it comes to policing the App Store, but in the end is it really worth it for Apple or iPhone users?
Jan 20, 2009View in Crawl 4
I dugg this one for Mr.BabyMan.Stop f**king whining about whose news get's the front page.It's like some local news guy bitching because more people watched the story when Rather or Brokaw reported the same thing.Digg is not YOUR ticket to fame, it's MY source for news.
Where did people get the delusion that they have any privilege to freedom on the App Store? It's an closed ecosystem controlled entirely by a corporation. They can do whatever the f**k they want on it. The only "privilege" that people have is to go play in someone else's playground if they don't like the rules.
Censorship of the App Store by Apple is not even possible because Apple OWNS the App Store. Censorship can only be done by a 3rd party. For instance, if Obama told Apple they could no longer offer the Constitution app. THAT is an attempt at censorship. Apple can do whatever it wants to do. You, the consumer, have no say in the matter. You can speak up by not using the App Store. Otherwise, STFU. No one forced you to buy an iPhone and no one is forcing you to use the App Store.Seriously, is there actually anyone with understanding of the real world on digg?
It would be best for the consumer (and more profitiable for Apple) is to incorporate a content rating system into iTunes and approve any submitted App, as long as it is rated accordingly, not malicious, and meets some form of stability benchmark. Not only would consumers be given a content rating before downloading an app, but users (or parents) would be able to regulate what content appears in the App Store via a filter in iTunes.As an Apple customer, I find it really frustrating the way Apple insists on big-brothering the use of their hadrware and software. If Microsoft or Google did business the way Apple does, they'd be staring at another anti-trust case.
So according to you a phone purchase should include a research with a paralegal?Apple apologist are amazing. To them apple can do no wrong. You would not take this kind of crap from Scientology. I guess Apple is better at brainwashing than a deadly cult.
Well, clearly the jailbreak code authors drew their line in the wrong place - since their users invalidated their iPhone warranty AND made themselves vulnerable to several worms that steal private data and in some cases money as well.Apple says most developers are happy with the process. In most cases, apps get returned to the author so that technical errors can be fixed and they can try again. <a class="user" href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Phil-Schiller-Defends-App-Store-Approval-Process-127713.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://news.softpedia.com/news/Phil-Schiller-Defen ...</a>Apple has also added some transparency to the approval process for developers too.Some of the recent complainers wrote code that was essentially a ticking bomb, and would blow up when Apple made minor internal changes to the software. Apple's improved automated checking caught these problems and developers should be grateful for sparing them notoriety and blame for promulgating bad wares.One developer who loudly decried Apple's interference went a step further and not only distributed the bad code in his app, but created a library of the bad code and gave it to other developers. It is not possible to imagine a savvy developer would do this and not realize the implication that this would cause future misery for some other developers, their customers, and many iPhone owners.I think the source of complaints needs to be considered. So does whether complaints have merit or not. And dismissing things like stability, safety, reliability, and outright programming errors is a disservice to readers, users, developers, and owners.
The Windows Mobile app store has approved less than 300 applications.If you just download applications blindly from the Internet, then you are subject to the same viruses & worms that you get doing that with Windows or jailbreak.
rattelerJan 20, 2009
I dugg this one for Mr.BabyMan.Stop f**king whining about whose news get's the front page.It's like some local news guy bitching because more people watched the story when Rather or Brokaw reported the same thing.Digg is not YOUR ticket to fame, it's MY source for news.
kent1146Jan 21, 2009
Where did people get the delusion that they have any privilege to freedom on the App Store? It's an closed ecosystem controlled entirely by a corporation. They can do whatever the f**k they want on it. The only "privilege" that people have is to go play in someone else's playground if they don't like the rules.
moracityJan 21, 2009
Censorship of the App Store by Apple is not even possible because Apple OWNS the App Store. Censorship can only be done by a 3rd party. For instance, if Obama told Apple they could no longer offer the Constitution app. THAT is an attempt at censorship. Apple can do whatever it wants to do. You, the consumer, have no say in the matter. You can speak up by not using the App Store. Otherwise, STFU. No one forced you to buy an iPhone and no one is forcing you to use the App Store.Seriously, is there actually anyone with understanding of the real world on digg?
jimineypoopJan 21, 2009
The review for that app is the best thing I've seen in a long time:<a class="user" href="http://macenstein.com/default/archives/1947">http://macenstein.com/default/archives/1947</a>
websyndicateJan 22, 2009
Seriously people complain about censorship in the store now we complain about not censoring. WTF
Closed AccountJan 22, 2009
It would be best for the consumer (and more profitiable for Apple) is to incorporate a content rating system into iTunes and approve any submitted App, as long as it is rated accordingly, not malicious, and meets some form of stability benchmark. Not only would consumers be given a content rating before downloading an app, but users (or parents) would be able to regulate what content appears in the App Store via a filter in iTunes.As an Apple customer, I find it really frustrating the way Apple insists on big-brothering the use of their hadrware and software. If Microsoft or Google did business the way Apple does, they'd be staring at another anti-trust case.
Closed AccountJan 22, 2009
So according to you a phone purchase should include a research with a paralegal?Apple apologist are amazing. To them apple can do no wrong. You would not take this kind of crap from Scientology. I guess Apple is better at brainwashing than a deadly cult.
ilgazJan 22, 2009
Look at Symbian land and try to find a "iFart" like application. You won't. Free market already kills them.
thirdprizeJan 22, 2009
No offence, but the developers are giving the people what they want. Fart apps.
johnnysoftwareNov 27, 2009
Well, clearly the jailbreak code authors drew their line in the wrong place - since their users invalidated their iPhone warranty AND made themselves vulnerable to several worms that steal private data and in some cases money as well.Apple says most developers are happy with the process. In most cases, apps get returned to the author so that technical errors can be fixed and they can try again. <a class="user" href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Phil-Schiller-Defends-App-Store-Approval-Process-127713.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://news.softpedia.com/news/Phil-Schiller-Defen ...</a>Apple has also added some transparency to the approval process for developers too.Some of the recent complainers wrote code that was essentially a ticking bomb, and would blow up when Apple made minor internal changes to the software. Apple's improved automated checking caught these problems and developers should be grateful for sparing them notoriety and blame for promulgating bad wares.One developer who loudly decried Apple's interference went a step further and not only distributed the bad code in his app, but created a library of the bad code and gave it to other developers. It is not possible to imagine a savvy developer would do this and not realize the implication that this would cause future misery for some other developers, their customers, and many iPhone owners.I think the source of complaints needs to be considered. So does whether complaints have merit or not. And dismissing things like stability, safety, reliability, and outright programming errors is a disservice to readers, users, developers, and owners.
johnnysoftwareNov 27, 2009
Actually, Apple stock is publicly traded and they are considered a public company - like Microsoft, Amazon, Motorola, GM, etc.
johnnysoftwareNov 27, 2009
The Windows Mobile app store has approved less than 300 applications.If you just download applications blindly from the Internet, then you are subject to the same viruses & worms that you get doing that with Windows or jailbreak.