| reply to ptrowski
Re: Why said by ptrowski:Just because there is volume doesn't mean the filters are not draconian.
They approve-remove apps on a whim with zero rhyme or reason. I do think there is reason there. They kill apps that compete with the apps provided by Apple. They kill apps that make them look bad in the press and that will dredge up a lot of opposition from special interest groups(e.g the recent porn app). They are a company with a product to sell and they don't want their trademark smudged by controversy.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
 ·VOIPo
| said by fAcEtIOUs:said by ptrowski:Just because there is volume doesn't mean the filters are not draconian.
They approve-remove apps on a whim with zero rhyme or reason. I do think there is reason there. They kill apps that compete with the apps provided by Apple. They kill apps that make them look bad in the press and that will dredge up a lot of opposition from special interest groups(e.g the recent porn app). They are a company with a product to sell and they don't want their trademark smudged by controversy. The "porn app" wasn't killed by Apple, the developer pullled it and will be re-submitted. His servers could not handle the load.
Baby Shaker? That really shows a business case. Granted it was pulled after a few days, but how did it make it through in the first place?
I can understand competing applications but even then what the standards for what is approved and not approved are really not equal should we say.
It's their app store, but the QA process there needs some reviewing.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
 EdG
@eastlink.ca | The porn app WAS killed by apple - your propaganda machine is borked.... |
|
|
|
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:The "porn app" wasn't killed by Apple, the developer pullled it and will be re-submitted. His servers could not handle the load. You are going on old info. The developer didn't pull it. Apple killed it.
»news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10273717-37.html
Thursday saw the first softcore porn app arrive for the iPhone, only to disappear hours later. Many, including myself, thought Apple had approved and then banned the app, but a note on the developer's Web site indicated that he asked for the app to be removed.
As it turns out Apple did pull the app--the company confirmed the move in a statement provided to CNET on Friday.
"Apple will not distribute applications that contain inappropriate content," Apple's statement reads. "The developer of this application added inappropriate content directly from their server after the application had been approved and distributed, and after the developer had subsequently been asked to remove some offensive content. This was a direct violation of the terms of the iPhone Developer Program. The application is no longer available on the App Store."
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | Then I stand corrected. The last I saw was the developer pulled it due to load on the servers. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 Reviews:
·VOIPo
| reply to EdG
said by EdG :
The porn app WAS killed by apple - your propaganda machine is borked....
Propaganda machine? Please. I had not followed every single story, and admitted I was wrong.
Keep moving, anon.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
 C_Kill The SocialistsPremium
join:2001-03-19
kudos:3
1 edit | reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:Then I stand corrected. The last I saw was the developer pulled it due to load on the servers. thats what the moron claimed to try and save face
--
"and no matter how drunk you get .. don't lick the wall socket to test polarity..." |
|
EdG
@eastlink.ca | reply to ptrowski
And I posted before your 'back-peddle'...
As for moving on, that is not your decision. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 Reviews:
·VOIPo
| said by EdG :
And I posted before your 'back-peddle'...
As for moving on, that is not your decision.
I did not back peddle, I said I stand corrected and can admit when wrong.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org |
|
1 edit | reply to EdG
said by EdG :
And I posted before your 'back-peddle'...
Admitting when you are wrong and being able to accept new information when it is presented, even when it is contrary to your position, is an admirable thing.
What is not admirable is to ignore arguments against one's position and refusing to reevaluate your beliefs.
said by EdG :
As for moving on, that is not your decision.
What the hell is that even supposed to mean? He made a statement, contradicting evidence was brought forth, and he admitted error. There isn't anything else to it... how could you not move on?
--
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble." |
|
 joakoPremium
join:2000-09-07
/dev/null
kudos:5
 ·Comcast
| reply to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:Baby Shaker? That really shows a business case. Granted it was pulled after a few days, but how did it make it through in the first place? We all know it's an educational tool to show the effects of shaking babies to 1st year medical students.
--
PRescott7-2097 |
|
EdG
@eastlink.ca | reply to gattaca
He stated "Move on, anon" My reply was that my moving on was not his decision to make.
Got 'er, now? |
|
