3 ms·
This definitely seems capricious, and it certainly must have some chilling effect on anyone considering building an app for the iPhone. From my limited perspect
by andrewljohnson 17y ago
This definitely seems capricious, and it certainly must have some chilling effect on anyone considering building an app for the iPhone. From my limited perspective as a lefty computer geek, this seems like a real blunder.
On the other hand, half the country lives in "fly over" America, and doesn't want to see smut or have their children subjected to smut on the iPod. So, I can see how this decision was made.
- jgrahamc 17y agoThis definitely seems capricious, and it certainly must have some chilling effect on anyone considering building an app for the iPhone. It'll have a chilling effect on people who want to build an application with wobbling tits in it, but I don't see that as a bad thing. It's not just people in the mid-West who don't want smut in the App Store. I can easily find smut on the Internet via my iPhone if I want it. I don't need it to be in the App Store.
- andrewcooke 17y agobut do you need it not to be in the app store? i don't need anything to be in the app store myself, but luckily for you "i don't need anything to be in the app store" is not the same as "i need the app store to be empty". is that clear? there's a difference between not caring and forcing your opinions on others.
- jleyank 17y agoI have always thought that those truly secure in themselves find it easy to live and let live. Those with doubts seem (have?) to go overboard to enforce their world view on others. Maybe it lessens their insecurity, maybe they're trying to remove temptations on themselves, ... And Apple's just a business. Getting points with (potential) customers is all well and good until there's a noticeable impact on the bottom line for doing so. Nobility's gotta pay the bills, too.