Slashdot Log In
Apple May Loosen Restrictions With iPhone 3.0
Posted by
kdawson
on Wed May 06, 2009 12:36 AM
from the minimallly-invasive dept.
from the minimallly-invasive dept.
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."
Related Stories
[+]
Apple: Apple Rejects Nine Inch Nails iPhone App 397 comments
jarrettwold2002 writes "Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails announced via his Twitter account today, 'Apple rejects the NIN iPhone update because it contains objectionable content. The objectionable content referenced is "The Downward Spiral."' The initial NIN Access iPhone app garnered much fanfare (Wired article, Guardian article) and was approved by Apple. The update has been rejected due to an album reference. If Nine Inch Nails is having problems with censorship and approval what kind of problems are you having with the iPhone app approval process?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Right. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll be over here using my blackberry to browse porn and run whatever the hell I want. Shame I can't make the copy/paste joke anymore though.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, the application approval process Apple is using is totally fucked up. They seem to have a group of people doing it, most of whom are reasonable, but there are a couple of them with suspenders attached to their thongs, rejecting apps for all kinds of stupid reasons.
But this whole 'objectionable content' thing is total crap, because the way Apple seems to be applying it, they should be rejecting all the 3rd party browsing applications (which just wrap WebKit in different ways), because they all permit
'Mature Content' Label? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:'Mature Content' Label? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apparently according to TFA one of the UK tabloids posted topless photos, which in America would be "Mature content" and hidden in newsstands next to porn.
Oh, America, land of the free puritans and perverts [economist.com].
Parent
Re:'Mature Content' Label? (Score:5, Informative)
one of the UK tabloids posted topless photos
If by 'one of' you mean 'all of, every issue'. It's called Page 3 [wikipedia.org] and it's a national institution. The German papers [wikipedia.org] are worse.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a controversy for us Americans.
We're prudes, and are sure you should be too.
still fairly ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if those changes are forthcoming, it's still ridiculous that an expensive piece of technology used primarily by adults has such puritanical restrictions on it. I realize it does reflect poorly on Apple to have apps that are in very poor taste (e.g. the one where you shake the baby...), but it's pretty obvious that mainstream bands like NIN are an acceptable part of American culture.
I work in technology (but not a tech-only office) and this fiasco is definitely getting noticed and is clearly reflecting badly on Apple.
I'm not sure whether the concept of a parental-controls setting was the product of a deliberate leak to address this issue or if it was just part of the plan all along, but I seriously doubt that a significant portion of the iPhone userbase is comprised of children who might have not been given the phone if the app store weren't policed. It seems pretty clear to me that Apple is more than happy to piss off their users and snub even Trent (who is considered rather avant-garde in the music biz) if there's any risk to their image.
Re:still fairly ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
The iPhone is a nice technology demonstrator, but it's things like this that make it useless. Complete control over content, no tethering, no background apps, no user space that mounts as a USB thumbdrive, severely restricted syncing options (you can only sync to one computer, so if you want to load some stuff from your laptop on to your iphone while on the road, you have to erase everything you put on it with your desktop, for example.) No apps allowed that 'duplicate existing functionality' on the iPhone - meaning you have to wait for apple to fix the ongoing bugs in the mail client and Safari - namely that the mail client doesn't properly download POP3 messages even when you ask it to ("0 bytes remaining" and never displays the message unless it connects to Wifi) and Safari still has that dumb bug where it re-loads pages when you switch between windows. Painful when you're not on 3G.
There's a lot you can do with a hacked phone, but then you're missing out on everything else. It's kind of a lose-lose situation. It works well within its very limited scope, and if you're happy with that scope, it's a great product. If you want it to be more useful, it's deeply frustrating.
Parent
Re:still fairly ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
Usless to who? Most people, including my mother, don't need those for their iPhone. The average user does not have those complaints. My sister's biggest complaint with the iPhone is that you can't use the keyboard in landscape mode for texting the way other touchscreen phones can (and that's why she eagerly wants the 3.0 update)
Those features would all be nice, and I think 3.0 will fix many of those complaints like tethering and background notifications.
Parent
Not really accurate (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPhone is a nice technology demonstrator, but it's things like this that make it useless.
The millions of people who bought one because of the functionality it offers may disagree.
Complete control over content
Except that anyone can jailbreak them if that bothers them.
no tethering
Again, jailbreaking if that is important to you.
no background apps
Well, no app store background apps. Some of the built in apps do in fact operate in the background.
no user space that mounts as a USB thumbdrive
As the saying goes,
Re:Not really accurate (Score:5, Insightful)
Suggesting jailbreaking is a stupid answer to legitimate complaints about failings of the device. The average user is not going to do it.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The "average user" won't need to do most of what the GP was whining about either, so I think it's a draw.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, most users will not be doing
- tethering - generally only heavy travelers, with laptops.
- USB thumbdrive - most users don't have thumbdrives.
- syncing options - most people with an iPhone have most of their media in one place, iTunes.
- bugs - yeah, waiting for vendor fixes is unique to Apple.
Just because your mom does some of these things, doesn't mean MOST people do. Respectfully, your mom is an edge case.
I'm not saying these wouldn't be nice options, they would be. An
Jumping to conclusions (Score:2)
used primarily by adults
Really?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You need to be 18 to get a cellphone in your name.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I realize it does reflect poorly on Apple to have apps that are in very poor taste
No, it doesn't. It reflects poorly on those that created the app.
Some people are just retarded, and would call the street builder criminal because someone got killed on their streets.
Which reflects poorly on those people.
Kids with iPhones? (Score:5, Funny)
Who the fuck buys their kid an iPhone?
I want to be adopted.
Re:Kids with iPhones? (Score:5, Funny)
Ballmer's kids had to buy their own.
Parent
with apologies to some cartoon (Score:3, Funny)
Ballmer's kids: Daddy, Daddy, will you show me how to work my Zune?
Ballmer: Sure, let me see show you...
kids: HAHA just kidding Daddy we have ipods like everyone else in the world!
Topless? Ptah! (Score:5, Funny)
"because of a topless photo in one of the app's subscribed-to papers"
That is indeed a tasteless photo. How could they not be wearing a turtle neck sweater? This reeks of disrespect for The Jobs!
My Only Real iPhone Complaint (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not allowed to interact with my customers.
I frequently get feedback (both positive and negative) on the applications I've written. I'd love an opportunity to comment on this feedback, either to address concerns or to graciously accept the accolades. However, Apple keeps a stranglehold on all feedback from customers, and does not permit you to know much of anything about how to contact the customer directly.
I wish this was different, and is one of the reasons I've taken a break from iPhone development for a while.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I frequently get feedback (both positive and negative) on the applications I've written. I'd love an opportunity to comment on this feedback, either to address concerns or to graciously accept the accolades.
The reviews suck for customers, too. There's a budget app from iBearSoft called "Money". It got great reviews, but after buying and installing the app, I discovered that it was just awful. I mean, really horrid. You have to put end dates on all recurring income and expenses for some reason, and when I put an end date of January 1, 2039 on my paycheck, it literally took over 5 minutes to recalculate my budget. Also, it doesn't matter that my wife gets paid a monthly salary: it insisted on dividing that
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But I could only add one.
Do these unscrupulous developers just create a bunch of iTunes accounts and buy their own apps so they can post lots of favorable reviews?
That's just stupid.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:My Only Real iPhone Complaint (Score:4, Interesting)
I think there needs to be some kind of a tagging mechanism so that all users - authors and customers alike - can bring problem reviews to Apple's attention for consideration.
There's an app to stream local National Public Radio stations. Last time I checked, it was filled with reviews like "needs more alt rock: 1 star" or "only had people talking boring!: 1 star". I wish I could tag those "nonsensical".
I've seen plenty of reviews like "this works exactly as described - I love it!: 1 star" because the reviewer mis-selected the rating before posting their review. Maybe we could tag those "inconsistent"?
I saw a review this morning that said they'd been using it for over a month, but the app was first published three days ago. That deserves a "shill" tag.
If I were implementing the system, you'd only be able to see your own tags so that you couldn't unduly influence others with poor moderation. They'd be strictly for Apple's use in identifying bad reviews.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But for Velocity, (which was done in my spare time rather than for my day job) I've not bothered. Why? Well, really because Velocity is such a stupid-simple app that there is l
This is truly mad (Score:5, Insightful)
We have some company deciding that people should not be able to install an application which contains a graphic of ladies with no blouses. You can buy every day at a newstand in the UK two or three newspapers which have, on page 3, pictures of ladies with no blouses. Anyway, Apple does not want you to see these pictures as part of an application on the phone you have just bought.
But then, after you've bought the phone, you can browse the web to the page 3 sites or others, and see those same pictures.
So what on earth are they thinking? Do they really think there is something terrible that people should not be allowed to see in something as commonplace as ladies without blouses? What exactly is so terrible about it? Do they really think that banning this awful stuff from the apps makes any difference at all to what people look at and see on iPhones?
These people are going completely mad in terms of an obsession with interference which they mistake for control. But worse than that, their values about what they want to control are all screwed up.
Do you all still think this is "cool"?
So don't buy their damn phone then. (Score:3, Insightful)
There's lots of alternatives. Even in Soviet USia.
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Interesting)
Instructing a device I own not to display content that I find offensive is not censorship, by any stretch of the imagination. ...and considering that I am a long-haired, Bush-hating, free software-loving, paranoid Slashdot denizen, my definition of censorship is probably on the permissive side.
Parent
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'. They allow people that want to use them to filter content and for those who don't care don't have to. I think it is quite useful actually. Without these controls you can't even do an image search for anything on Google without getting porn. So these content filtering features can even aid someone in finding useful information rather than just porn. (Even though we all know that is all the internet was made for.)
Or is it that people can't stand to have what they look at labeled as 'explicit' or 'mature'?
I am not sure but I just don't see how, as pointed out in the parent, allowing the USER to filter content doesn't anything other than help the user.
Parent
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
The other thing that's stupid about this (Score:3, Insightful)
Newspaper app: allows a user to see an image of a topless woman. Status: denied.
Mobile Safari: allows a user to see as much hard-core porn as he/she wants. Status: open for all users, baby!
NIN app: allows a user to hear disturbing lyrics from one of the band's albums. Status: denied.
Mobile Safari: allows access to Nazi hate sites, al Qaeda recruiting sites, any other hateful site you can think of, and oh, by the way - the same song lyrics that appear in the NIN application. Status: all systems go!
If there
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As Trent Reznor said...
I'd also like to point out all the urine/feces/flatul
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Two issues
1)Parental controls presume that there's an adult mode- a mode where the owner (or their parent) can choose not to be censored
2)There should be multiple groups doing the filtering, not just one. If one group makes all the decisions its ripe for abuse- it's too tempting to censor competitors, negative views of the company, or fold to interest groups. If multiple groups compete, you can choose one that does a good job of it without those worries, since at least 1 group is likely not to do so.
Nei
Re:Democratize Censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think a lot of it is that a decent portion of Slashdot's population is teenagers. Not all (maybe not even most), but you have a lot of 13-17 year old teenage males who are going to complain about legitimate filters. When they're overly broad they (along with everyone else, and fairly I might add) will complain about the situation as restricting what consenting adults can look at. But even when the filter gets properly narrowed down to the appropriate groups those teenagers are still going to complain b
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I know! Why does everyone have a problem with 'parental controls'.
Children have a fundamental human right to free speech and free expression and to be exposed to free ideas every bit as much as adults. It's MORE important for children to have access to ideas so that they cannot be brainwashed by propaganda that sees itself as so flimsy that the only way it can prevail in the wild is by suppressing facts and arguments that would destroy it, long enough for the brainwashing to take hold.
Beyond that, if parents can filter children's content, then national censors can filter
Re: (Score:2)
The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
I hereby submit my new app for app store approval. My app is aimed at teaching parts of the sacred bible to kid, most specifically Ezekiel 23:19-20.
19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were like those of donkeys, and whose emissions was like that of horses.
Since the app is aimed at little kids, it graphically depicts the holiness and splendid beauty of this biblical moment with the Egyptians' donkey-sizes penises as ejaculating like horses.
AMEN.
Parent
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
That's nothing:
Exodus 12:29-30: And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.
Let's not forget:
Isaiah 13:15-16: Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword. Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
And:
Samuel 15:2-3: Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
I would rather let my children read about Egyptians donkey penises than about mass murder of women and children being depicted as a good thing that god encourages and occasionally commits himself.
Parent
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My opinion is easily summed up by this quote:
If man were meant to be naked he would have been born that way.
-Oscar Wilde
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you've not seen this, it's worth a look.
I have a question about this passage (Score:3, Funny)
Is there really that much difference between a horse and a donkey in this regard? I mean, why must the word of God clarify that they had donkey-size penises and ejaculated like horses? Do horses shoot significantly more (or less) "emission" than donkeys? Or are their genitals significantly larger or smaller? What if they had horse-size genitals and had emissions like donkeys -- would that make the girl in this passage more or less of a whore? It just seems like a strange detail to be hung up on, but if
Re:I have a question about this passage (Score:5, Funny)
If you lived in an agrarian society all of your life, these differences would be significant.
How about this revision:
19 Yet she increased her whoring, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in the land of Egypt and lusted after her paramours there, whose genitals were the size of Playstation 3s, and whose emissions burned with the fire of the Xbox 360.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oblig. Bash.org [bash.org]
Re:The Holy Bible is pure (Score:4, Informative)
That's the English Standard Version [esv.org] (ESV).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well we'll certainly miss whatever the fuck it is you were maybe going to write but didn't due to this.
Do you have a link to what you've written for mobile phones thus far (android I'm guessing?)?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me rephrase this for you...
I will *never* publish anything for possibly the most profitable platform for developers, as long as there is something about it that I don't like. I don't care, even if I lose most of my potential clients because of it.
And you think people who _buy_ the iPhone are dumb?
You're saying flat out that you don't care if you lose most of your business? Ethical standpoints are nice and all, but not when there are people who would like to give you money!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)