Beta
×

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 Reverses Rejection of Ulysses Comic

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the they-need-to-consult-with-chatroulette dept.

The Media 422

gyrogeerloose writes "In yet another of what's become an almost predictable cycle of events, Apple today reversed its rejection of the 'Ulysses Seen' web comic, admitting, 'We made a mistake.' The comic is now available in the App Store — just in time for Bloomsday, June 16. The comic's author, Robert Berry, is pleased, and adds that Apple 'never acted as a censor, never told us what we could or could not say. ... We didn't believe these were good guidelines for art, but respected their rights to sell content that met their guidelines at their own store. Apple is not a museum or a library for new content then, so much as they are a grocer.'"

cancel ×

422 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies... (4, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593040)

It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies, when they work out in your favor. :)

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593050)

Can I pee in your butt?

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Insightful)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593088)

Yeah. This whole episode is really dumb. No, it's not really censorship. But it's still ugly and wrong. I hate iProducts. They are all about control of the user for the benefit of Apple. The thing I hate the most about them is that they are so popular and wrongheaded at the same time. I get angry when masses of people let shininess override good sense.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Troll)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593130)

ROFL, so instead of "The Devil made me do it." the new ridiculous defense will be "My iPad made me do it."

did you even reread your post and notice how stupid it is? Nobody's iProduct tells them what to do. People get them because they do what the user wants it to do. If it doesn't do what you want it to do then don't get one.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Insightful)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593220)

Control does not have to be absolute to be control. Governments use laws to control the behavior of their people all the time, but nobody thinks "The government made me do it." is generally a credible defense.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593482)

An iPad hasn't been elected to Congress, yet ... but given the recent developments in South Carolina I may have a shot to get my 32 GB 3G iPad on the ballot. Think I'm crazy? In politics "shiny" = "success" ...

what I like to do (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593472)

is kick sand in Mac users faces. They're such big wimps they start crying almost immediately.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593152)

"No, it's not really censorship"

Yes, it really is, just not censorship performed by a government. Apple censors the content available on these devices, plain and simple -- why state it any other way? Frankly, what other way is there to describe Apple's behavior: they actively prevent certain material from being published.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (2, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593200)

By such an absurd standard any store that choose not to sell someone's product is also engaging in "censorship".

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593252)

Apple did not just refuse to sell the application: they prevented anyone who owns an iPad/iPhone from obtaining it.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (-1, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593334)

Apple did not just refuse to sell the application: they prevented anyone who owns an iPad/iPhone from obtaining it.

No, they just prevented anyone who owns an iPad/iPhone from obtaining it from their store. There would be nothing Apple can do to stop this person from selling it in an alternative store or through their website to owners of jailbroken iDevices.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (5, Insightful)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593436)

is there any legal way to obtain and install an iApp apart from the official apple appstore ?

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Informative)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593484)

Yes. Jailbreak your iPhone and download it from someone else. Neither act is illegal.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (5, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593438)

or through their website to owners of jailbroken iDevices.

Since when did hacking a device the same thing as using the device "as intended"?

Listen people. I know you can do a whole hell of a lot with a jailbroken ipod/iphone/ipad, but saying you can just hack your device if you want other sources of apps is not an argument that should used to support your hardware of choice Seriously.

A modification != a feature. Stop treating it like one.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593456)

Except that people are now forced to jailbreak the iPhone/iPad, not only voiding their warranties, but also risking another case of Apple sabotaging their appliance. Claiming that it is not censorship because someone could jailbreak their phone is like claiming that there is no censorship in China because someone could use proxy servers.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593502)

Claiming that it is not censorship because someone could jailbreak their phone is like claiming that there is no censorship in China because someone could use proxy servers.

Except that the latter is actual censorship while the former is a hysterical redefining of the term.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (3, Insightful)

sed quid in infernos (1167989) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593486)

There would be nothing Apple can do to stop this person from selling it in an alternative store or through their website to owners of jailbroken iDevices.

No, but it means a user has to choose between a valid warranty plus software updates and access to non-Apple-approved applications. I'd have zero probalem with Apple applying arbitrary and unspecified criteria in their app approval process if they didn't actively work to prevent people from acquiring apps from other sources.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593512)

Then don't buy their phone if you disagree with the terms of use. Did Apple force you or anyone else to buy an iPhone and agree to their terms?

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593386)

Did they? So if you tried to buy a Ulysses paperback from Amazon yesterday, it would ask if you had an iPad or iPhone and then refuse to sell it to you if you did?

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593516)

Amazon's patent on "no, you can't have that because you bought an iPad!!" hasn't been approved yet. Once it does I'm sure you'll not only get refused at the point of purchase but you'll probably get an email from Jeff Bezos telling you that this would never have had to happen if you'd just bought a Kindle.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

greghodg (1453715) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593312)

I'm under the impression that the iStore or whatever is the ONLY place that you can get content for your iPhone/iPod/iThing. In which case your analogy doesn't hold. However, you could argue that you were agreeing to Apple's censorship when you decided to purchase your iShiny in the first place, so you've got no right to complain.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593370)

I'm under the impression that the iStore or whatever is the ONLY place that you can get content for your iPhone/iPod/iThing. In which case your analogy doesn't hold.

Cydia [wikipedia.org] . And that's not the only alternative App Store.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (4, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593474)

Cydia. And that's not the only alternative App Store.

From your link:

"...a software application for iOS that lets a user browse and download applications for a jailbroken iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad" (emphasis mine)

Again. Telling someone "oh sure, you can use a different store...just hack your phone" is misleading at best.

Like I said in response to one of your previous posts, a mod isn't the same thing as a feature. Stop treating it like one.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593528)

He was claiming that NO ONE could obtain an app unless it was through the official app store. This is patently false.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593406)

To an extent, yes. The extent increases depending on market share of the store.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593462)

To an extent, yes.

Sure, if you completely redefine the term to mean something it has never meant or ever even implied.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

cgenman (325138) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593494)

If there is only one store, and it has unlimited shelf space and guaranteed profits, and by driving to any other store you risk having your car banned, then an editorial decision like "we refuse to sell anything involving cartoon wangs" quite effectively removes objectionable content from the public discourse. It's not as objectionable as government censorship, but it is still a form of censorship.

If an area only had Comcast as a potential ISP, and Comcast decided to block 4chan because it offended their Christian sensibilities, that would be a form of censorship. If Walmart convinced your town to pass a rule saying that all garage sales must happen in Walmart parking lots, and Walmart kicked your garage sale out of its parking lot because it didn't like your novelty lamp that looked like a woman's leg, that would be censorship.

Apple has gone greatly out of their way to force their store to be the only arbiter of content on the iPhone. Going to any other store requires software hacks and risks being banned from apple and the AT&T network. As the arbiter, they block content that is dangerous, remove content that violates copyrights, and censor content they find objectionable.

Call a spade a spade. It's censorship.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593542)

If an area only had Comcast as a potential ISP, and Comcast decided to block 4chan because it offended their Christian sensibilities, that would be a form of censorship.

Yes, because that is a suppression of speech.

If Walmart convinced your town to pass a rule saying that all garage sales must happen in Walmart parking lots, and Walmart kicked your garage sale out of its parking lot because it didn't like your novelty lamp that looked like a woman's leg, that would be censorship.

No it wouldn't be. Censorship is about the suppression of speech or other forms of communication. Selling things in your front yard is not a form of speech.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593216)

Describe them as a grocer. :-) I think that's an apt analogy. My grocer might not let me buy Edy's Low-Fat Cookies'n'Cream, but that's not because he's a bad person. He simply chose not to carry that flavor.

And so instead I drive another block to the other grocer to get my cookies-n-cream.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (4, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593298)

"And so instead I drive another block to the other grocer to get my cookies-n-cream."

So, where are all those other places that people can download iPhone/iPad applications?

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1, Funny)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593330)

They drive another block and get a different phone.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593428)

But...but...Apple forced people to buy their phones!!!

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593538)

But...but...Apple forced people to buy their phones!!!

No they just have lots of iSheep who buy iProducts without thinking.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593508)

So someone who already has an iPhone should be forced to spend even more money on another phone? What a great scam Apple is running -- take hundreds of dollars from unsuspecting customers, who will then be forced to go out and buy your competitors' products anyway!

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Troll)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593404)

So, where are all those other places that people can download iPhone/iPad applications?

Cydia [wikipedia.org] .

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (4, Informative)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593520)

Apple considers jailbreaking highly illegal.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

PagosaSam (884523) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593510)

"Describe them as a grocer. :-) I think that's an apt analogy."

Ya, but my grocer doesn't sew my mouth shut when I leave his store!

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

jd (1658) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593234)

And, that, of course, is the most evil and pernicious form of censorship of all. Censorship NOT by a Government is unbounded and unrestricted yet, especially when one or two companies are involved, actually has the potential for greater harm. There is no protection from it, and with increased restrictions against reverse-engineering, no place to hide.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (2, Interesting)

Silly Man (15712) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593342)

let me know when you open a store someplace so I can demand you sell my porn...otherwise I'll complain you are censoring my porn.

It's Apple's product and Apple's store. The idea you can force a company to sell anything doesn't sound very cool to me. If you don't like that, you are free to choose a competing product or build one yourself.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (5, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593452)

If I run a store, I'll actively censor porn. I'll let you complain about my censorship all you want. I'll even quite happily explain to you why I'm censoring you. If you want to organise a mass campaign to reverse my censorship, or just use your persuasive skills to change my mind, I'll consider your opinion.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593526)

That's ridiculous. If I write a letter to the NYTimes and they don't publish it, is that censorship? No, it's editing. If a bum wants to wash my car's window at a stoplight and I tell him no, is that censorship? No, it's my choice not to purchase his services. If I make new soda that's 10 times better than Coke, and McDonalds still refuses to sell it, is that censorship? No, it's a simple business decision.

Being censored by its definition implies a much darker--existentially speaking--scenario than having a product denied access to a private marketplace.

You may as well pull a godwin and call them Nazis, as if they're systematically gassing developers. Hyperbole is unnecessary here. People have every right to dislike their decisions, but it's just stupid to call it censorship.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593190)

Actually it *is* really censorship. Stop making excuses for corporations. Just because Apple backpedals when public opinion goes against them doesn't mean their initial impulse was out of line with what they truly believe. In fact, this episode reveals their total lack of actual integrity since they don't actually stand behind a coherent set of beliefs, just the desire to reap maximum profits. Don't condone it just because it's wrapped up in the warm blanket of corporate rhetoric.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593324)

No it isn't. Refusing to carry merchandise is in no way censorship.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593208)

Not to mention the iDevices are all about the exact same DRM(only allowing trusted apps to run) and Trusted Computing that everyone here was railing about a few years ago. But once it's wrapped in a shiny package, there are legions of supporters who leave no end justifying these practices. Instead we had a great brouhaha about DRM in Vista which doesn't really stop a user from installing or playing back any other content.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593434)

Yes, I know. That's really absurd too.

I own an Apple laptop and it runs OS X. OS X has many proprietary parts, but it's at least generally open and doesn't try to control what I can see or install beyond making me type my password.

But I won't own an iProduct. Mostly because even if I buy one I don't really own it. Yes, they are nice looking, have good user interfaces, and are otherwise well-designed. But I require that when I buy something I own it. And that isn't true of those products.

My feelings about corporations and their products are based on principles and not popular opinion.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593228)

I see your point. However, think about it this way: What would happen if Apple didn't attempt to put some kind of filter on apps in the app store? It would become a chaotic mess (even more so than it already is!).

Personally, I can see why people prefer the dictator approach to content. It's too much effort to filter out all the crap, so why not let the dictator do it?

Now, we all know that the dictator will make decisions that don't make any sense, or maybe might not be in the best interest of all of us... But the benefit we get (e.g. not having to think about what apps to get) far outweight the negatives in our information overloaded society.

BTW I'm not saying that that's what we want; as techies we are used to filtering out the crap. But this is the great unwashed masses we're talking about here.

There IS a market for devices which gives us full control, which is why you see phones like the droid doing so well. The market for devices appealing to the great unwashed masses is a little bit bigger though.r

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593270)

Yeah it might turn out like some of the Android horror stories where users ended up with viruses on their mobile phone...

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593132)

"It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies, when they work out in your favor. :)"

When one is a fanboi/fangrrl/fan-nullo ALL their policies can be creatively construed as tasty.

I, for one, welcome my Applelicious overlords and hope their stay atop my queening stool will meet with their favor. :)

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593204)

Why should we feel good about Apple's policies? They arbitrarily censor content on the iPhone/iPad, and they only back down when it looks like more than a handful of people might be angry over it. I do not think Apple would have changed its decision on Ulysses had the story not made the New York Times; most of the applications that Apple rejects are never reconsidered, even in cases that are clearly censorship.

Re:It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies.. (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593246)

It's easy to feel good about Apple's policies, when they work out in your favor. In much the same way as it is easy to feel good about lynchings when you are white, yes.

Gatekeepers (4, Insightful)

Improv (2467) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593052)

The fact that Apple *could* reject apps for not meeting their rather precise ideas about what "The Apple Experience" should be like is still a big problem. If it's not an open platform, it's a step backwards.

Re:Gatekeepers (-1, Flamebait)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593082)

Yea, cause the anarchy of the 'open' world works so bloody well, hence the last 10 years of 'The year of the Linux desktop'

Re:Gatekeepers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593138)

Apple's closed ecosystem works for the big herd of sheep. Open platforms work for those who think.

Re:Gatekeepers (2, Insightful)

TrancePhreak (576593) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593186)

The years of the Windows desktops beg to differ.

Re:Gatekeepers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593534)

That doesn't even make sense. The GNU/Linux desktop hasn't even had mass publicity and been put in front of people's faces like Apple and MS Windows systems. So to say it hasn't worked out so well is just garbage. If anything it has had mass success where where MS Windows and Apple have failed when it has been put in front of people. That is in the technical arenas like web servers, sciences, embedded devices, etc.

Re:Gatekeepers (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593102)

Yes, I agree, but right now its even worse than that. What "The Apple Experience" means is under constant construction and it changes with Jobs's mood. How in hell are content creators going to trust apple?

Re:Gatekeepers (1)

Bakkster (1529253) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593358)

Content creators can't trust Apple. Of course, Apple is alright with this, since they still haul in boat-loads of money.

Re:Gatekeepers (1)

Third Position (1725934) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593396)

O, Stephen will apologize ...if not, the eagles will come and pluck out his eyes...

Re:Gatekeepers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593286)

It's a huge step forward. I believe they approve something like 17,000 new apps ever day. Having someone else sort through and separate the cruft from the keep is a huge plus for me as a customer. And I can accept that there will be, from time to time, false negatives. So be it.

Anyways, for any media content that someone somehow can't get past the screen at Apple, just put it up on a website and anyone can view it there anyway (just don't make it in Flash, as that operates poorly on many browsers/platforms, if at all).

Apple's immense success in the supported apps field demonstrates somewhat conclusively that their app store is actually one of the biggest steps forward in this area in human history.

Btw, I am all for Linux and open source. But no one makes you or anyone else buy an Apple iPhone or buy apps through their app store (I have one of their phones and have only ever downloaded free apps from the store). And there is literally no phone on the market that compares to the new iPhone 4 that is coming out. The experience is well worth the cost of admission. People pay to see movies in movie theaters. It's not because they can't see them at home or find free ones someone made themselves.

Free is good. But so is quality. I am willing to pay for quality. I am willing to pay for a better experience. Time is finite.

Re:Gatekeepers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593378)

17,000 apps / day? You mean they have 6,205,000 apps after a year?

LMFAO

Re:Gatekeepers (1)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593336)

It is a big problem? It is a step backwards?

If you are correct then an IPad/IPhone with an open app store should sell like crazy. It sounds like you are the next Steve Jobs. What's holding you back?

Re:Gatekeepers (2, Insightful)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593414)

He forgot to invent a superior web search algorithm in 1997, thereby failing to found Google and becoming a billionaire corporate executive able to fund Android development.

Re:Gatekeepers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593360)

IT'S A PENIS !

Let the experiment play out (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593522)

The fact that Apple *could* reject apps for not meeting their rather precise ideas about what "The Apple Experience" should be like is still a big problem.

I disagree. The fact is, Apple is offering a choice that we've only seen in one other case so far - Steam.

The App Store is Steam, generalized to all applications. The favorite word of the moment is curated - Apple says the store is curated, my which they mean the apps in the app store have some level of QA and editorial filtering applied, just as you would find in the exhibit of a museum.

Similarly Steam offers a wider variety of games, but Valve approves what goes in Steam. Not just anyone can produce a game for Steam.

Now you would say, but users can create applications outside of Steam. That is true - but the same is true of the iPhone, via two paths.

The first is of course Jailbreaking, millions of people do this and Cydia will sell you anything you want to buy. It's not as huge a market but it is plenty viable, and it's most viable for the users that care the most about a truly open system - developers.

The second path is web apps. Given the abilities of HTML 5, and the hooks into most (if not all) of the device sensors like location, orientation, and touches - you can produce most of the applications people would want to use these days in a web app. That path is also totally open as Apple cannot block (and does not try to block) whatever you visit via the web.

So the iPhone is the platform that gives you a wider choice that a purely open platform - because you are free to try a totally open route, but also free to partake of a carefully selected market of applications where you know the base level of quality is reasonable and the applications will at least run.

Many technical people seem to want to destroy that choice because the editorial control offends them, but I say I want to see the experiment proceed because I think in the end an editorial garden is where most users need to stay to be safe. We've seen with Windows and to some extent other platforms, what happens when a large mass of non technical users is mixed with a totally open system and unsavory elements.

If people across the world truly value an absolutely open market, than Android will flourish.

If people across the world value a more carefully curated ecosystem, then the Apple App Store will flourish.

Let the experiment proceed.

Big surprise there (2, Interesting)

gearloos (816828) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593064)

Big company stomps some poor guy--then finally after all the bad press turns around and changes their mind. Big Surprise there. like thats never happened before.

Re:Big surprise there (4, Interesting)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593118)

I wonder if they ever review and reverse rejections that are not widely publicized. If anyone had a story like that, it would be interesting to hear.

Every day (3, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593544)

I wonder if they ever review and reverse rejections that are not widely publicized. If anyone had a story like that, it would be interesting to hear.

Yes.

In some cases of course, rejections are because an app crashed or the UI was bad. In each and every case, Apple tells you what you need to fix to be accepted.

In cases where you violate policy, you can state your case and say why you think your application does not violate the things they think it does.

Bloomsday, 2010 (3, Funny)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593086)

Having used his iPhone to locate the best pork kidneys in Dublin, Bloom spends a useful day selling context-sensitive ad clicks for his website, before skyping the hospital to check on Mrs. Purefoy. Having checked with his webcam and discovered Molly up to nookie with Blazes Boylan, he checks his iHo app for the best dominatrix in Dublin. While there he meets Stephen Dedalus, who has spent the day wandering around using location reporting to avoid Buck Mulligan. They end up in Bloom's kitchen planning an app to provide tourists with tours of the bits of Dublin the tourist board doesn't tell you about, before Bloom goes upstairs, takes a photo of Molly's ass and emails it to Boylan. The book ends with Molly updating her Facebook page with a comprehensive dissing of Boylan's performance, and her tearful announcement that from now on she's going to stick to Leo.

Good analogy (1)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593096)

I think the artist has it right. Apple is not a museum or a library, and free speech is not at issue. They are more like a grocer, where they stock as much inventory as possible that they feel is appropriate to their venue. And like a grocer, they screw up sometimes. OK, often.

Re:Good analogy (1)

Bakkster (1529253) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593170)

Apple is not a museum or a library, and free speech is not at issue.

Agreed. It's reasonable to disagree with the policy when it does things wrong or stupid. It's unreasonable to bring topics like 'free speech' and 'programmers rights' into it, because they either don't apply, or don't exist.

Re:Good analogy (1)

baxissimo (135512) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593282)

They are like a grocer who has a monopoly on where you can buy your food. I would be perfectly happy with Apple being as autocratic as they like with their app store if it weren't the *only* source for apps for their platforms. It seems blatantly anticompetitive to me. Consider if Microsoft decided you could only buy Windows apps through them. It would never be allowed. Apple is seriously strolling right down the path toward a massive DOJ action against them.

Re:Good analogy (1)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593390)

The iPhone is far from the only smart phone out there so they sure don't have a monopoly. Don't like Apple or the iPhone? Then buy something else. You have lots of choices. One is bound to make you happy enough to quit whining.

Re:Good analogy (2, Interesting)

MBCook (132727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593328)

I don't mind Apple's policies at all. If they don't want to sell certain kinds of things, that's fine. I would actually prefer they get rid of more of the ultra-juvenile stuff, like the fart apps.

The biggest problem Apple has is how arbitrary this stuff feels. An app was OK for 3 revisions, but the new bug fix, which doesn't change content, is suddenly bad because of something that's been there for quite a while. There is no good checklist that you can look through and be reasonably certain that your app will be OK. Once your app is approved, that's no proof that it won't suddenly be found to be running afoul of some rule later.

For some apps, this isn't as much of a problem. If you make a little top-down racing game (like Super Off Road), or a simple utility like a sextant, it's unlikely someone will complain later about some small bit of content. But Apple isn't going to read every app submitted with content the size of a large novel (actually, iBooks should help with that, that's where these should be going now). But if your app isn't clear cut, you never really know if you're OK.

"The Official 10 Page Checklist With 200 Questions for App Approval" being published would be a big improvement. I don't think there is anything like that internally in Apple, which is how this stuff happens.

--Happy iPhone user

Apple is like Whole Foods (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593098)

Apple Store = Whole Foods
 
And we actually need food more than we need apps, so why aren't people complaining about Whole Foods' limited selection and arbitrary standards?

Re:Apple is like Whole Foods (2, Insightful)

pavon (30274) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593240)

If the appliances in my house refused to work with food that didn't come from Whole Foods then I would be complaining about their limited selection and arbitrary standards. And more so about the appliances.

Re:Apple is like Whole Foods (4, Insightful)

baxissimo (135512) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593300)

so why aren't people complaining about Whole Foods' limited selection and arbitrary standards?

Gee, maybe it's because there are other stores where we can buy food?

Re:Apple is like Whole Foods (1)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593416)

You are aware that there are stores where you can buy non-Apple phones, yes?

Re:Apple is like Whole Foods (1)

captainboogerhead (228216) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593476)

Sigh. Yes. When your 3 year contract is up.

Give the Man a Prize (2, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593110)

Apple is not a museum or a library for new content then, so much as they are a grocer.

While many may have troubles understanding this (which is why I'm going to quote it in the hopes of it being read again), it is nice to see that the person directly impacted by things least understands it well (which speaks greatly of his character).

Re:Give the Man a Prize (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593352)

The problem is that it's the only grocer in the town for the iDevice users. And Apple considers it illegal to try to shop at other groceries.

Microsoft parallel (1)

by (1706743) (1706744) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593114)

Well, this is the best I could find. [dmwmedia.com]

Yeah, yeah, Troll, Offtopic, etc. ...

Bad analogy? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593134)

Grocer's keep the objectionable content behind the counter in plain brown wrappers. Why can't Apple do the same?

Re:Bad analogy? (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593256)

Whoah, you didn't warn me about the 's' at the end of a word there. And you were talking about grocer's of all thing's.

Sony, Microsoft? (4, Insightful)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593142)

Why no complaints about Sony and Microsoft? They both have a number of machines for which you must pass a draconian test to even get a dev kit. Basically, if Apple made the devkit $10k then you'd all be happy? Locked in systems have been around for more than a decade. The difference with Apple is that the devkit is $100 and anyone can publish on them.

I've had games rejected by Sony and Microsoft: you fix the problem and send it back. No different on the Apple store. Apple is usually quicker tho.

Re:Sony, Microsoft? (2, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593262)

Actually, the dev kit is free. It's only $100 to get the signing certificate to allow you to deploy to a device, rather than just run on the simulator. However, when you consider that in order to write for an Apple mobile device, you also have to have an Apple computer, you may as well factor in the cost of your macbook or imac or whatever in as part of the cost of the dev kit. Of course, if you already had the Mac anyway, then sure, the dev kit is free. But it's still a higher barrier to entry if you intend to move from another platform specifically with the intent of developing for the phone.

Re:Sony, Microsoft? (4, Insightful)

FrostDust (1009075) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593394)

The complaints are there because the iPhone is a mobile phone, not a game console.

Gamers are used to the idea that their systems can only play "approved" media, with the indie/homebrew developers being seen as on the fringe.

With mobile phones, at least with smart phones, you can install whatever program you can manage to find. A Blackberry, Win Mo., Symbian, etc. device doesn't require you to get approval before installing a program. They act like most PCs, where you can install what you want, but it's your responsibility to not install harmful stuff.

While Apple's strict control over their App store may have had a hand in the success of their products, but it's a phone, not a video game system. Treating it the same as a Xbox is disingenuous at best.

Re:Sony, Microsoft? (1)

EvanED (569694) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593468)

That's a really good question. One possible answer is this: closed gaming consoles (which is what I assume you're alluding to; it's about the only thing you can be) have been the norm for decades now. (Even the original NES had a lockout chip in an attempt to prevent unlicensed games.) By contrast, the iPhone brought forth a new level of control over the platform that didn't really exist before. You never needed any approval to run software on Palms or WinMo or Symbian, and you don't need an approval to run software on Android or Maemo. The iPhone is really in a class of its own, rather than continuing the norm.

So yes, as you say "locked in systems have been around for more than a decade", but not really in the same market as Apple's locked-in systems.

"It's always been like this so it's okay" is a pretty poor argument for not changing, but it does provide a little bit of an excuse. Paving the way into censorship is a much worse position than following into it.

Re:Sony, Microsoft? (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593478)

It's the question of gaming console vs. mobille computers.

Re:Sony, Microsoft? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593496)

Why indeed? I think it's pretty irritating that it's so damn hard to develop for these consoles.

Mind you, in my experience, MS and Sony are a lot more helpful about explaining what can be done to fix the problems. Apple seems to offer the brick wall response.

New form of media? (3, Interesting)

webdog314 (960286) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593148)

The problem may be that Apple (or rather developers using Apple) is presenting Apps as a content distribution media (iTunes). People with content that could easily be placed on the (unrestricted) web, are choosing to use Apps as a means of selling their wares. I doubt very much that Apple will restrict what books it sells on the iBooks store based on their content. Or maybe they will.

Re:New form of media? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593206)

I doubt very much that Apple will restrict what books it sells on the iBooks store based on their content. Right. It's not as if Apple would block an eBook app just because someone might download the Kama Sutra using it! [macnn.com]

Re:New form of media? (1)

webdog314 (960286) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593254)

I didn't say ebook APP, I said iBooks, as in the epub books Apple sells on the iBooks section of iTunes. That was the whole point.

Re:New form of media? (1)

Midnight's Shadow (1517137) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593412)

The problem may be that Apple (or rather developers using Apple) is presenting Apps as a content distribution media (iTunes). People with content that could easily be placed on the (unrestricted) web, are choosing to use Apps as a means of selling their wares. I doubt very much that Apple will restrict what books it sells on the iBooks store based on their content. Or maybe they will.

That actually raises some interesting questions. At what point does Apple's restrictive policies move from the realm of merely selling an app that could prove useful (like a grocer) to being censorship (as in the news)? Will it be when a majority of sources have to go through the Apple store to get seen or when things never get seen by a majority of people because Apple restricted it? Will the collection of distribution through the Apple store force it to become a news distribution source?

I don't know but it is something to think about.

The trials of iUlysses (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593212)

Note to Ulysses authors: The correct response to censorship is NOT to bend over backwards to meet the arbitrary moralistic dictates of the censor, but to speak out loudly AGAINST that censorship. The correct response to Apple banning your app would be to NOT MAKE AN APP FOR THEIR PLATFORM. So long as people like these comic authors continue to apologize for Apple and exclusively support only their platforms for special content, this kind of behaviour will never change. Unfortunately it seems these days that artists are far more concerned with looking like artists (and that means using Apple products exclusively) than standing up for, or even really understanding, their own art.

This just in (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593296)

Apple sucks.

Film at 11. (Viewer discretion advised)

A mistake? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593364)

So do Apple's policies permit or not permit nudity?

If so was this nudity or not?

If it is, why are Apple violating their own policies?

And if it isn't then how many other pieces have been misclassified as nudity?

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593374)

What? There's some capricious and arbitrary approval process for applications for the iOS systems? Why didn't anyone tell me this before? You'd think that slashdot would have at least mentioned this at some point before now.

Apple owns you now, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593388)

but not me, because I am a PC.

- Life without walls

-sigh- (4, Informative)

ultramk (470198) | more than 4 years ago | (#32593400)

They review on the order of 10,000 apps a week. This kind of thing is inevitable when you have a limited number of people with that kind of workload. People are making judgment calls all day, so some edge cases are going to get miscalled. Humans are making the decisions, and humans make mistakes.

They say that 95% of apps get approved within one week. That means that about 500 apps a week are rejected for various reasons. Here on /. we see these rejection stories about once every two weeks. That means for every 999 apps that are rejected, 1 is controversial. Almost all of those controversial decisions get reversed.

I wish my record of decision making was 1/1000 blown calls.

If they're just a grocer, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32593536)

If they're just a grocer, will they let me buy my groceries from someone else?

Oh, not, they won't let me do that.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?