×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Reconsiders, Approves NIN iPhone App

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the like-a-warm-blankie-for-trent dept.

Media (Apple) 146

gyrogeerloose writes "According to MacRumors, NIN's iPhone application has been approved. Trent Reznor has reported via his Twitter account that the now-approved app was resubmitted without modification, which suggests that Apple reconsidered their initial rejection. This should really come as no surprise to anyone who follows Apple news since it follows the company's typical pattern of handing potentially controversial iPhone apps, especially when it concerns high-profile rejections."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

146 comments

I dont get it (5, Insightful)

think_nix (1467471) | more than 4 years ago | (#27874935)

tfa:
"the band's own application was rejected due to "objectionable" downloadable content that wasn't housed within the app itself."

I mean it is their own content they are distributing so "NIN/Reznor" are ok with it. So why was this rejected in the first place ? I dont own anything with an i, but how many other apps out their download offsite content? Quite a few I am sure?

Re:I dont get it (5, Funny)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27874979)

I dont own anything with an i

Oh yeah? Then how'd you type that, smartypants?

Re:I dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875267)

Copy&paste, its not that hard when you get used to it.

Re:I dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875277)

105 maybe.

Re:I dont get it (5, Funny)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875387)

Copy/Paste.

Re:I dont get it (5, Funny)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875839)

Copy/Paste.

You young kids with your "Copying" and your "Pasting". In my day when a key on our keyboard broke, we learned to live without it. And our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard was in the case with the monitor and the CRT, and we liked it that way.

In retrospect, it sure made WASD games a pain in the ass, though. AAAAAAAAAA *move left dammit* AAAAAAAAAAAAAA *argh, died again!*

Re:I dont get it (4, Funny)

Propaganda13 (312548) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876345)

Copy/Paste.

You young kids with your "Copying" and your "Pasting". In my day when a key on our keyboard broke, we learned to live without it. And our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard was in the case with the monitor and the CRT, and we liked it that way.

In retrospect, it sure made WASD games a pain in the ass, though. AAAAAAAAAA *move left dammit* AAAAAAAAAAAAAA *argh, died again!*

U yung k1ds wth ur "C0pyng" and ur "Past1ng". N my day when a key 0n teh keybard dn't wurk, we learned 2 l1ve wthut et. And r un-adjustable CT-syndr9me-causng keybard was n teh case w/ the stuff, nd we l1ked 1t that w4y.

And thus leet came 2b

Re:I dont get it (1)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876683)

Pffft. Ever try to browse Slashdot and look at porn with no mouse/touchpad while mousekeys wont work on your weird laptop?!

Tab about a hundred times to get to the link you want, then tab another hundred in the next window or until you get the right thumbnail etc. It's a tedious mess of tabs, enters, ALT+F4s, ALT+tabs, Windows and arrow keys, and backspaces. I'll have a broken keyboard over no mouse anyday.

Non-mouse navigability is a great metric for the usability of a website.

Re:I dont get it (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877747)

our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard

How is that different from today? If anything, then the keyboards got even worse.
There is no single ergonomic keyboard on the market today, that is in a human price range (<$150).

The stuff that Microsoft does is *not* ergonomic. It is, what I call "faked ergonomy". This is when it looks ergonomic, but really isn't.
Logitech is even worse. And don't ask me about those el-cheapo curved things. They are just as bad ergonomically. Plus you feel that they are cheap crap, as soon as you use them. ^^

I wish, DataHand keyboards were cheaper. Or at least that DataDesk Tech would still exist and make SmartBoards. :( (Their site exists, but there is nobody behind it.)

Re:I dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27876289)

but...but...thats PIRACY!

Re:I dont get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877285)

Alt + 105 !

Re:I dont get it (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875867)

I believe part of the reasoning here is they want to have 100% control over what goes on the ipod. (hence why the apps have to be approved) If your app downloads something that's beyond apple's control, that bypasses the approval process. Once your main app gets approved, it can download UNapproved material they don't want getting on the ipod. It's like restricting what apps a user can run on their computer, but let them run a shell. From there they can do whatever they want by way of the shell.

Re:I dont get it (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876585)

Not to sound like an Apple Fan Boy. But these apps are a mixed bag. Apple Control of the apps is a blessing and a curse. It is good in the fact that Malware isn't put on the iPhone or stuff that will just not work, or will hinder the system and make it run slow and crash a lot. However Apple does need to be less paranoid on competing Apps or services.

Re:I dont get it (5, Informative)

mauthbaux (652274) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876061)

As I understand it, the "objectionable" was referring to the lyrics in the music rather than fear of infringement by the copyright holder.
Quoting from Engadget [engadget.com] because I can't find the nin.com post:

As posted by Trent himself in response to Apple's rejection eMail:

...I'll voice the same issue I had with Wal-Mart years ago, which is a matter of consistency and hypocrisy. Wal-Mart went on a rampage years ago insisting all music they carry be censored of all profanity and "clean" versions be made for them to carry. Bands (including Nirvana) tripped over themselves editing out words, changing album art, etc to meet Wal-Mart's standards of decency - because Wal-Mart sells a lot of records. NIN refused, and you'll notice a pretty empty NIN section at any Wal-Mart. My reasoning was this: I can understand if you want the moral posturing of not having any "indecent" material for sale - but you could literally turn around 180 degrees from where the NIN record would be and purchase the film "Scarface" completely uncensored, or buy a copy of Grand Theft Auto where you can be rewarded for beating up prostitutes. How does that make sense? You can buy The Downward Fucking Spiral on iTunes, but you can't allow an iPhone app that may have a song with a bad word somewhere in it. Geez, what if someone in the forum in our app says FUCK or CUNT? I suppose that also falls into indecent material. Hey Apple, I just got some SPAM about fucking hot asian teens THROUGH YOUR MAIL PROGRAM. I just saw two guys having explicit anal sex right there in Safari! On my iPhone!

Come on Apple, think your policies through and for fuck's sake get your app approval scenario together.


Later in the threaded discussion, Trent clarifies his position with this little gem:

Everyone - let me be clear. I love Apple products and as goofy and out-of-touch as their app approval process / policy is, I will still use them because they work 1000X better than the competition. This is not a debate, it's a fact. The iPhone is THE most elegant, modern smartphone at this point in time and it's perfect for what we want to do with the NIN app - except for the ludicrous approval process, and that's what I want to draw attention to.

Android is cool, but nobody has an Android phone. Blackberry is OK but the hardware is inconsistent and WinMo straight-up sucks balls. If Apple doesn't get it together, we will most certainly make it available to the jailbreak community. I didn't invest in this app to see it languish on the sidelines from an idiotic policy while this tour is in full swing.

The nin.com [nin.com] front page currently has a link to download the app for those of you who are interested in it.
Disclaimer: I'm not associated or affiliated with Engadget, the above quoting was simply convenient for posting purposes.

Re:I dont get it (0, Troll)

joedoc (441972) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876893)

Android is cool, but nobody has an Android phone.

Reznor is such a tool. He needs to get off the anti-depressants, crawl out from whatever rock he resides under and visit this place called the Internet once in a while.

According to this [androidcommunity.com] hunk of PR, the T-Mobile G1 is ranked fifth in sales in the U.S. right now. Yes, it doesn't sell in the numbers of the (#2) iPhone or the various RIM models, but that's not bad considering the phone choices in the market. Also consider that the G1 appears to have sold itself through a lot of word-of-mouth, considering how little T-Mo has actually advertised the G1.

He also needs to learn that Android is currently being tested on a few dozen different phones from a bunch of different manufacturers, as well as on netbooks and other portable devices. The Android Market is far more open than the Apple app market. If the Android system winds up on as many devices as it's being tested or proposed for, in addition to the few million G1s sold globally already, he's going to miss out on a big market.

Frankly, I don't care. I always wondered what the big deal was about his music anyway. Especially if he needs to prop up something he recorded 15 years ago.

Re:I dont get it (4, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877177)

I always wondered what the big deal was about his music anyway.

The richest, deepest, most complex and powerful polyphonies composed since Bach, that's what the big deal is. I've owned The Downward Spiral since 1995, and I still hear things I haven't heard before.

Apple still doesn't have it together. (3, Interesting)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877137)

Many, many development shops which don't have the enormous global soapbox of Trent Reznor and NIN are still getting shafted explicitly and anally by Apple's backward app approval policies. They don't respond to our emails. They don't tell us why. iFlinger [iflinger.com] .

Re:I dont get it (3, Funny)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876231)

I fap to midget porn using this little app called "Safari" and there was no warning at all that I could be subjected to such horrors, and hairy palms.

Re:I dont get it (3, Insightful)

grausamaffe (1044228) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876587)

tfa: "the band's own application was rejected due to "objectionable" downloadable content that wasn't housed within the app itself."

I mean it is their own content they are distributing so "NIN/Reznor" are ok with it. So why was this rejected in the first place ?

You hit the nail on the head. Apple is arbitrarily rejecting apps by attempting to use the access to "objectionable" content defense. As many others here have pointed out, Safari will give you access to much more "objectionable" content than the NIN app. Apple's acceptance/rejection policy reminds me of something...hmmm Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Guess they need something... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27874937)

... to test the parental controls beta on.

Fuck Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27874939)

Fuck Apple and their shitty everything that they do.

No mention of parental controls? (5, Informative)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27874943)

Egads, that was a terrible summary.

The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

They approved the app this time around because now the iPhone will have parental controls to filter objectionable material (included in the beta of 3.0).

Seriously, that's the biggest part of the whole deal with the NIN app, and it didn't get mentioned at all in the summary.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875021)

That would make sense if 3.0 had been released. So far Apple has told people to re-submit objectionable apps for release with 3.0, but they don't get to the store before the release.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (4, Funny)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875157)

They approved the app this time around because now the iPhone will have parental controls to filter objectionable material (included in the beta of 3.0).

So what you're saying is, because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented parental controls in the week between the initial rejection and the application being accepted.

Wow, I had no idea he had that much influence. Trent Reznor is God.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (5, Funny)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875521)

So what you're saying is, because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented parental controls in the week between the initial rejection and the application being accepted.

Correlation != causation, dammit.

There could be some other factor that caused both events.

Like, say, the aliens who assume human form who have impersonated both Steve Jobs and Trent Reznor (to say nothing of Manny Ramirez or Dennis Hopper) have a diabolical plan to get millions of people to download their thought-control software via NIN downloads over the iPhone.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (0, Offtopic)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875577)

Please, someone undo that insightful moderation. Please!

I don't want anyone who reads that post to think it was anything other than a feeble attempt at humor... and if someone truly thought it was insightful, they need to have their head examined.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875649)

You're lucky we don't hit you with an informative, as well.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875931)

You don't get meta-humour, do you?

Re:No mention of parental controls? (2, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876137)

You don't get meta-humour, do you?

I do when it's, you know, actually funny.

Modding a humorous post "insightful" is not an example of meta-humor, for all values of "sense-of-humor" that are not drawn from the null set. Modding a post complaining about an insightful moderation "insightful" -- now that would be meta-humor.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (2, Informative)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876269)

More likely the mod was trying to do you a favor. You don't get karma for funny mods, but you do for insightful and informative. The mod really liked your joke and gave you karma for it, and you've basically turned it down.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (4, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875575)

The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

So, not an high-profile app, but an high-profile submitter? Sorry, but the point remains, if Trent Reznor had not been involved, raising the profile of the app, it would not have been approved.

Thank god Apple had the wisdom to make themselves the gatekeeper of all iPhone apps. Who knows what kind of damage may have been done if the NIN app had been approved without this charade. Thanks, Apple, for keeping iPhone users all over the world safe.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (1)

slyn (1111419) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875895)

The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

So, not an high-profile app, but an high-profile submitter? Sorry, but the point remains, if Trent Reznor had not been involved, raising the profile of the app, it would not have been approved.

Thank god Apple had the wisdom to make themselves the gatekeeper of all iPhone apps. Who knows what kind of damage may have been done if the NIN app had been approved without this charade. Thanks, Apple, for keeping iPhone users all over the world safe.

There have been a whole lot of apps that were rejected at first and approved later without the help of Reznor. The most notable of which (or at least the ones I can think of off the top of my head) are all the fart apps.

Though it's likely that Reznor's fame is what caused the double take, I'm pretty sure Apple really doesn't care how famous you are as to whether your app gets approved or not.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (1)

cwingrav (8705) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876533)

Right, so because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented a last minute major feature... overnight. Ease up.

Re:No mention of parental controls? (3, Insightful)

santiagodraco (1254708) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875915)

Hmm, wrong.

First off you have NO idea why it was reconsidered. You can speculate all day long, but it's pure speculation.

Second 3.0 is in beta and is NOT released so it has no bearing on the "legal protection" Apple might have from it's parental controls. If that was the reason or concern you can damn well bet Apple would have waited until 3.0 is released before approving the app.

They reconsidered on the merits of the app and the validity of the initial rejection itself, nothing more.

Ehm... where's the content? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27874961)

Is it just me, or isn't there anything here to see outside of the summary? Anyone who could share some insight in what has been happening and why it was really refused in the first place (on both no comment from Apple as far as I've seen) would be much appreciated.

Re:Ehm... where's the content? (2, Informative)

djupedal (584558) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875475)

Apple sent an email to developers yesterday that stated "All apps must be compatible with iPhone OS 3.0

Millions of iPhone and iPod touch customers will move to iPhone OS 3.0 this summer. Beginning today, all submissions to the App Store will be reviewed on the latest beta of iPhone OS 3.0. If your app submission is not compatible with iPhone OS 3.0, it will not be approved."

Some developers had reported balky uploads over the last 24~48 hours that went fine when retried am 5.7.2009. My guess is there was a hold on the background process for a short time until the updated process per any 3.0 goodness could be implemented. It is easy to imagine this carrying back for more than just a day or so. I had one app put on 'extended' review on 5.1 that went in for approval on 4.26 - I've since reworked the related binary under SDK 3.05 and placed it back in the queue. Big deal...life goes on.

Not quite unchanged (5, Informative)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875005)

The app update was rejected because "The objectionable content referenced ... is 'The Downward Spiral'.".

According to Reznor's app developer [nin.com] "we removed the song 'The Downward Spiral' from the server, hoping to appease apple and get this bug fix through."

Re:Not quite unchanged (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875209)

Good to see Trent's music is still "controversial" (thought provoking?) after 15 years.

Not too much music can claim to be edgy after so long. Elvis was shocking to people at first, but hardly that way in 1971.

I think it's a positive attribute.

Re:Not quite unchanged (0, Troll)

Machtyn (759119) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875771)

I've not listened to the song, but I am going to make some assumptions here: It has foul language, has a violent and/or sexual message.

That's considered thought provoking? No, that's just laziness.

Now, if I am wrong, it is because it really does have a thought provoking message on the status of culture, politics, religion, whatever. More points if it leaves out the foul language, violent and/or sexual messages... which, as I say, is laziness.

Re:Not quite unchanged (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875977)

You assumption hold true for a lot of rap music, but not the music of Trent Reznor... mindless swearing/sexuality is mainstream, but a creepy song about killing yourself still has some punch to it.

Re:Not quite unchanged (0, Troll)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876665)

Good to see Trent's music is still "controversial" (thought provoking?) after 15 years.

It's not.

He's a fat ageing washed up prick who gets makes his money making little emo kids think they're anti-establishment by listening to his music and buying all the NIN branded merchandise like the good little consumers they are.

Sure he offends illiterate rednecks in the bible belt but teletubbies do that too in fact just about anyone different to them will offend them.

Re:Not quite unchanged (4, Insightful)

Minwee (522556) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875625)

So, has Apple responded by removing 'The Downward Spiral' from iTunes, so that iPhone users would not be subjected to objectionable content?

Huh. I guess not [apple.com] .

Re:Not quite unchanged (2, Informative)

Fahrvergnuugen (700293) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876187)

No, because unlike iPhone apps in OS 2.X, iTunes music & video content has parental controls.

Parents can prevent their children from downloading objectionable music / video from iTMS, but there is currently no such provision for applications.

Parental controls and ratings for apps are coming with iPhone OS 3.0.

Re:Not quite unchanged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27876901)

iTunes has parental controls?

Then can you explain to me how a song like "StarFuckers Inc.", from an album other than The Downward Spiral, doesn't get the "explicit" label in iTunes? Same for a load of NIN songs that are pretty darned "explicit".

Obviously they aren't very good parental controls, and they certainly aren't being consistent even within iTunes.

Re:Not quite unchanged (1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876823)

Yeah, the world is a complicated place. It is almost as if rules about selling music are old, and as far as selling apps are something new?? Fucking complicated, isn't it, moron.

No, it was unchanged (1)

MunchMunch (670504) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876059)

See, for instance, these two articles:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10235906-37.html [cnet.com]

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/07/happiness-in-slavery-nin-iphone-app-approved-with-no-changes/ [techcrunch.com]

The app was unchanged from when it was submitted. That Reznor quote is misleading--regardless of the tactics they tried prior to approval, in the end the version approved was unchanged from the original.

Re:Not quite unchanged (1)

PJ1216 (1063738) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877771)

Its still there. In fact, its called, "The Downward Fucking Spiral." Not sure if this name change occurred before or after this debacle as I generally use the actual songs I have on the iPhone itself to listen to the music other than the podcasts. Though I've recommended the app to folks who haven't really heard his music and told them its a good way to hear a lot of it very easily for free and completely legally.

Lemme make sure I understand (5, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875023)

You buy a product. Apple then tells you what you can and cannot put on your product? If you really wanted an app on your phone, and it was not available at the Apple Store, would you be able to get it anyhow? Or are you out of luck?

And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (5, Informative)

stokessd (89903) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875133)

You can write your own app and install it on your own phone (that includes compiling somebodies app that you download from the net), but you have to be a developer to get the appropriate keys to push it to your phone. You can't get an executable from the net and download it to your phone either.

There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

Neither method is particularly easy, both methods require that you have an intel based mac.

The obvious solution if you don't like Apple's walled garden method is:

1) don't buy one - but you lose out on what is really a very nice phone and internet gadget

2) jailbreak - then you truly own it, but things can and do break and generally don't work as well as with an non-jailbroken phone (in my experience, your mileage may vary).

Sheldon

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (4, Informative)

stokessd (89903) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875275)

I forgot to add, in addition to having to use an intel mac, you also have to pay to be a developer, $99 a year... Not sure how or if that translates to other countries.

Sheldon

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (4, Informative)

aetherworld (970863) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875583)

No, not really. You have to pay to have your application in the iTunes store. You can develop applications all you want but once you want to distribute them through the store that Apple builds and maintains you have to pay an annual fee. Which, in my understanding of economics, is actually fair.

Also, I kind of understand why Apple doesn't have much incentive to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux. You are, however, free to do so yourself, if you manage to do so without reverse engineering it.

And, if you're well versed in ObjectiveC, there are things like WinChain [blogspot.com] which allow you to build the native iPhone toolchain on Windows (or Linux if you prefer).

So please, for the love of the rest of us, don't spout any populistic crap in the future which has no relation to reality.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875955)

You actually *do* have to be enrolled in the iPhone Developer Program, and pay the annual $99 fee, to be able to test your own application on your own phone, as crazy as it sounds.

Yes, you can develop and test your application on the iPhone simulator on your own computer for free - but putting it on the iPhone requires paying Apple for the priviledge.

Because otherwise there wouldn't really be anything stopping anybody putting whatever software they want on their iPhone - just use XCode to build it yourself and there you go.

But you can't. Unless you jailbreak it.

One of the reasons I decided to go for a Nokia E71 rather than an iPhone. It's not a perfect phone by any measure, and the iPhone has a better web browser, but I'll be damned before I let some silly company force me to pay them for the priviledge of putting my own software on my own phone.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

aetherworld (970863) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876149)

You actually *do* have to be enrolled in the iPhone Developer Program, and pay the annual $99 fee, to be able to test your own application on your own phone, as crazy as it sounds.

But you can't. Unless you jailbreak it.

Um...

Nothing more to add, really... Just jailbreak and test. Or use the simulator. There is absolutely NO reason to develop an app, test it on your own iPhone and NOT deploy it.

My point was that you do NOT have to own an Intel Mac and you don't have to pay apple to just play around with the SDK. It's when you want to commercially deploy apps that you have to pay.

(Actually you have to pay them too when you release it as freeware which kinda sucks, to be honest. They could have at least made a free account for releasing, say, up to a maximum of 3 freeware apps a year. Or even just one...)

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877365)

What is wrong with you? First you admit that you have to pay just to get your app on your phone. And then you turn around again and talk about "comercially deploy". It has absolutely nothing to do with any comercial interests beside that of Apple. It is just about deploying. As soon as you want to deploy your app to any phone you have to pay, even if it is your only own. You just can't even get it on your own phone without paying, and that can't possibly be called a "comercial deploy".

I am personally not judging people very fast but I can't help but think that you are one of the first obvious astroturfers I see here. What other reason could a person have to use that sneaky language and try to weasel around the facts?

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27876117)

No, it is necessary for ad-hoc distribution as well. You are flagrantly wrong in the only statement that contradicts what he said.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (3, Insightful)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875301)

3. Change Apple's behavior by
  a.) Educating people on how they're being controlled by Apple and making them ashamed of it
  b.) Making the hypocrisy of Apple's marketing message synonymous with the brand itself

The key point is that Apple "treats people like a five year old".

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (3, Funny)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875629)

a.) I've had 5 or 6 iPods, now have an iPhone, and I have an Macbook Pro.

Feel free to begin the education process, I'll let you know when I begin to feel ashamed.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (2, Funny)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876627)

You shame your Clan, Yokoto. There is but one honorable solution left for you.

I shall expect to see you at dawn, the blood still warm on the white of your Macbook. We will give you a hero's burial, and the dignity of your family's domain name shall remain intact.

We were brothers, once...

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (5, Informative)

syzler (748241) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875339)

There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

Actually you can share up to 100 ad-hoc copies of the app with others. They do not have to be registered as iPhone developers. There is not a key exchange between the developer and the end user. The end user, however, does have to provide the unique device ID of their Apple device. The App developer then adds the device as an allowed device in the developer's provisioning profile.

To install the app, the end user installs the developer's provisioning profile on the device as well as the application.

There is an exchange, but it is not as complicated as the end user having to generate a key and submit it to the end-user

With that being said, I really wish I could just distribute compiled versions of my apps to friends without having to maintain a list of their current device IDs.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (2, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875591)

1) don't buy one

What alternatives to iPhone and iPod Touch would you recommend for a U.S. resident? Are BlackBerry phones any better?

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877813)

1) don't buy one

What alternatives to iPhone and iPod Touch would you recommend for a U.S. resident? Are BlackBerry phones any better?

As a current BlackBerry user, I'm sold on the iPhone. I think the BB is garbage.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

iamflimflam1 (1369141) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875957)

There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

Ad-hoc distribution: you can install on 100 devices. All you need is the device id. You send out the application and mobile provision file.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (2, Informative)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875185)

Have you walked through a Wal*mart? Ever?

They do a huge amount of business selling products that treat the user like a five year old (and many of those products aren't even intended for five year olds).

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875287)

That's because there's big bucks in pandering to the Narcissistic and Borderline Personality disordered population, which may comprise as much as 1/5th of the nation's populace. People that're effectively children (pre-teen/teen) in parts of their intellectual development. They tend to have VASTLY lowered impulse control, which leads to them spending money all over the place.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (3, Insightful)

flahwho (1243110) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875279)

And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?

Apple is acting more and more like Microsoft

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

Machtyn (759119) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875985)

That's insightful?! Apple has always held a tight control over their products using any means possible. Before I knew about FSF, Open Source, and the ideology behind all of that (a young teen in the 80's), I figured out that a closed system was not good for the customer. IBM clones proved that to me - they were cheaper and performed just as well.

For example, I'll never understand why a Mac user would by the crappy Mac router for $100, when the $30 Belkin, DLink, Linksys was just as good. (Yes, I understand, the latest Mac routers are much better and have more features.)

Apple has been around longer than Microsoft and have been mistreating their customers longer.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

AnalPerfume (1356177) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875393)

"And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?"

Because it's shiney, and unkle Steve is a little less strict that unkle Stalin.....from time to time....if you eat your greens and tidy your room without whining too much.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

RawJoe (712281) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875471)

You buy a product. Apple then tells you what you can and cannot put on your product? If you really wanted an app on your phone, and it was not available at the Apple Store, would you be able to get it anyhow? Or are you out of luck?

This sounds like most (not all, but most) of the cell phones on the market. My wife can't install whatever she wants on her Nokia 2600. Sure the iPhone is labeled in the Smartphone/PDA class, but I don't think installing whatever you want on it is required to be in that class.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875681)

Funny.... I have a Windows Mobile operating system, and I can develop what I want. I can install what I want.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

RawJoe (712281) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875735)

Note I said most. I'd bet that most cell phone users don't use windows mobile either.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875799)

Do you still ask that question? I gave up asking almost a year ago when I saw an iPhone user telling me how backwards I am for using MMS/J2ME and living happily now with my Symbian devices.

The real evil thing is, they made Nokia (!) and Microsoft (!!!) look open market place compared to them. I wouldn't think one day I would defend Nokia's Symbian signed/ Sun's ultra paranoid J2ME certification but when you see the alternative "App Store", you end up defending it.

IMHO iPhone developers should also add "Garage Band" to their order and find a way to sell millions of albums to get treated well :)

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (2, Funny)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876219)

> And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the
> company gets to treat you like a five year old?

Because Apple knows best. I am a little surprised that we have not turned over much more control of our lives to Apple. They make such cool hardware.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876407)

Nope. You don't buy a product. You buy the right to participate (in a sect). The device you receive is merely a token of membership and medium over which you can partake in the flesh of Steve Jobs.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27877159)

And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?

ROTFLMAO. You must be new to the internet. The iPhone is the new Windows 95. Everyone and his brother wants desperately to fit in, so they buy it.

Re:Lemme make sure I understand (1)

2short (466733) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877635)

Yes. That is the deal with the iPhone, and various other products, some from Apple. Vast numbers of people don't care, and buy the products knowing this. Some people don't like it and don't buy them. Some people continue to profess utter mystification, and claim a bizzare mental deficiency that prevents them from comprehending that this is in fact the deal.

I don't have an iPhone, but I'm guessing people who do bought one because it does stuff they want to do (or it's just shiny) and these positives outweigh the amount they care that Apple denies them access to purely theoretical software; that amount of caring being "diddly-squat".

I mean, come on. Feel free to say you hate Apples business model here. But if you really can't figure out why other people don't care I'm not sure your opinion should cary much weight. It's not rocket science.

I was going to write an app (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875191)

...but I found out that they take 6 months to approve/trash your app, there's no justification, and then they don't pay their bills.

Is Apple in financial distress? Any of the financial minds on this board, do you know?

Re:I was going to write an app (4, Informative)

stokessd (89903) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875281)

I have a trivial little app that I made and it took apple about two weeks to approve it. Maybe it's because it's a simple app, or maybe things have been improving.

Sheldon

Re:I was going to write an app (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875323)

If you'd written it, it would be up there by now and you'd be raking in cash instead of bitching online.

Re:I was going to write an app (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27876211)

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/04/22results.html
No, they look to be pretty far into the black to me. They're making a billion in profit a quarter and have massive cash reserves. I doubt that every add takes 6 months to approve at this point, and I don't know what you mean by "then they don't pay their bills".

Also, this:
http://www.adwhirl.com/reports/adwhirl_iphone_advertising_snapshot.pdf (PDF) might be of interest if you are still considering writing an app (if you ever really were...). If you write something people want, even if it's ad-supported, but free to use, you can make quite a bit (and apple doesn't get a cut of your ad revenue like they do off the price of a non-free app).

-Lee

Not reconsidered, just a different approver (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875213)

Nullriver's tethering app had its ins and outs with the app store too. Give it a couple days and the NIN will be re-revoked.

Marketing BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875363)

Typical marketing move create a little controversy with a high profile app; get the famous person endorsing the app involve and like OMG it got approve

App store approval is completely random (5, Informative)

homb (82455) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875399)

You have to understand that this has absolutely NOTHING to do with Reznor or NIN.

Apple's approval system is COMPLETELY RANDOM, and depends on:
- a set of vague rules
- who is testing your product

There have been countless examples of apps rejected, resubmitted unchanged and accepted.

I have in fact gotten the perfect proof: I developed an open-source app. I submitted the app on day 0 and at the same time released the source code in its entirety under a BSD license.
On day +7, the app was rejected because the tester couldn't log in, supposedly. On day +8, I resubmitted. On day +10, the EXACT SAME app was approved on the app store with slightly different graphics. Some guy had taken the source, compiled and submitted a few days after me.
I went and bought (yes, the guy sold the app that I was giving away for free) the app, and noticed that it had all the issues that my app had, and he hadn't changed the code one bit.

To add insult to injury, my app got rejected another TWO times before finally being approved on day +35.

Conclusion: the App Store approval is completely random within a vague framework.

Re:App store approval is completely random (3, Insightful)

Cathbard (954906) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876987)

I'm going to bookmark this post as a perfect example of why one should use gpl. Thanks.

Re:App store approval is completely random (1)

RulerOf (975607) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877357)

I'm going to bookmark this post as a perfect example of why one should use gpl.

I think I get what you mean, but care to elaborate?

Re:App store approval is completely random (1)

Cathbard (954906) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877687)

Simple. Had it been licensed as gpl the author wouldn't have had to pay for his own application and any improvements to the code would have been fed back for all to use including the original author. Instead it was closed off and sold for the benefit of a leech. In this case the closed off version was even presented to the public first who then paid money for an inferior version.

Re:App store approval is completely random (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877629)

Using the GPL wouldn't help in this case. Even if the dude had provided everyone who bought the app with the source, what will they do with it? The source isn't useful unless you're in the developer program. And you'd only get it when you buy the app anyway.

Re:App store approval is completely random (2, Insightful)

2short (466733) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877787)

If he had used GPL, the other guy would have to offer the source for download somewhere, but otherwise could do exactly the same thing. Also, thanks to Apple, that source would not actually let others use the app for free; they'd still have to pay the other guy to get it on their iPhone.

If you don't want others using your code, don't release the source.

How much does it cost to get rejected? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875609)

Hi. I am a celebrity who hasn't done anything interesting in a while. How much does it cost to get my App rejected by Apple and then approved after some controversy, so that I can get noticed?

Love,
Trent

Re:How much does it cost to get rejected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27875715)

What rock do you live under?

Apple May Not Have Reconsidered.... (2, Interesting)

ToasterOven (698529) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875815)

IMO, chances are more likely that Apple did not "reconsider" the decision. Trent resubmitted the app to the App Store, so a completely different reviewer saw the app and probably didn't find anything wrong with it, and therefore approved it. The approval process for the App Store thus far seems to be subjective to the individual reviewer's whims and requirements, in addition to the (very vague) standards set by Apple. So when Trent initially submitted the app, reviewer A found the Downward Spiral reference to be potentially objectionable -- maybe his or her kids only listen to classical -- and when he submitted the second time, reviewer B saw nothing in the app that was an issue -- their kids probably listen to NIN all the time -- and approved it.

Re:Apple May Not Have Reconsidered.... (2)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876025)

Also considering the complaints Apple had been fielding awhile ago, Apple probably hired a lot more people for their review staff, and that increases the chances that your app will be reviewed by a more "lax" reviewer.

I don't think we'll be seeing it anytime soon, (wikileaks please?) but I'm sure Apple starts them out with a simple checklist of "absolutely not allowed" that if the app has any of that, it's rejected immediately. Beyond that, there's probably a second list of more subjective test, things like the baby shaker "in bad taste", profanity, pornography, etc. Anything borderline is bound to get rejected or approved depending on who reviews it, as long as there are some subjective criteria.

And there's always going to be an occasional "oops" of something getting approved that really should not have because it flagrantly violates one of the absolute rules.

Apple has a pretty simple way to fake more consistency in their approval process. When a dev submits an app, remember who the reviewer was. Now, any additional submissions by that dev will always be reviewed by that same reviewer. Resubmit it 10 times and you're probably going to get rejected every time, because it's the same reviewer.

Re:Apple May Not Have Reconsidered.... (1)

ToasterOven (698529) | more than 4 years ago | (#27876717)

Exactly my point, there is likely (as you said) a core objective list of things that are not allowed. After that, it seems to be up to whomever reviews the app.

I can't say I agree with the suggestion of assigning a reviewer to a developer though, as that opens a few issues. Take the NIN case for example... what happens if you get a reviewer that hates NIN's music style and only listens to classical and light jazz music? They will inherently be more likely to find the NIN apps objectionable, albeit by their own standards rather than Apple's. Sure, now Trent's apps get rejected consistently, but the process is not any more fair or equal than it was before.

I think there needs to be a clear set of guidelines that their reviewers need to follow, as well as a similar (if not the same) set of guidelines published for developers to follow. I can see some justifiable reasons why Apple may not want to publish *everything* that would be rejected, because some items may require a more subjective look or may have extenuating circumstances. But at least a clear set of guidelines would help to clear the air. Then, if an app falls into a grey area, where something needs further review, two things should happen:
  1. The developer should be notified that their application is being processed, and that it needs further review for X reason, and
  2. The application is then sent to a smaller, more specialized committee to determine the exact nature of the issue and whether or not that violates the policies.

Then, if the application is rejected after that, the developer needs to be given a very specific and detailed response as to why the app is rejected, and what (if anything) they can do to correct the problem. If necessary, this could be under the NDA (that the dev has already agreed to) so that they could disclose the reasons to the developer without restriction.

Either way, the decision and details should be fully documented so that any future questions could be answered. That way, if app A has been approved, and similar app B is rejected, then a dispute resolution could review the reasoning used in both decisions and determine a more fair resolution. Just my 5 cents :-)

I've always thought... (2, Insightful)

Chris Snook (872473) | more than 4 years ago | (#27875979)

...that Trent could use a warm blankie.

Re:I've always thought... (1)

Zenzilla (793153) | more than 4 years ago | (#27877105)

I always though him and Alanis Morissette should hook up. Jagged little pill, angry at men Alanis, not the post India trip one.

Bow down before the one you serve... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27876615)

You're gonna get what you deserve.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...