Has Apple recently hired a bunch of immature 12 year-olds? I realize that there's nothing wrong with a little lightheartedness and levity. Nobody should have to be 100% serious and straightforward all the time. That would make life boring. But when I am walking through the mall and I see that bright white Apple logo beckoning me from afar to enter the store (like a beacon) I am thinking of quality high end products, not vomit, poo and sperm. Am I overreacting here? Should I just shut-up and deal with it? Or do I have a valid point?
The apps you're complaining about are written by third party developers, and it's entirely possible they're 12 years old.
Apple is not creating these games and putting them out there for us. They have built a device that developers want to create a product on to sale to a consumer, whoever that might be. Apple shouldn't be blammed for an item that is sold through their app store. I do not want Apple (or the US government, with consoles) telling me what I can or cannot play on my system of choice.
Why should Apple not be blamed? Do they not have the final say as to what apps are approved? I thought Apple was the judge, jury and executioner as to what apps make it through the approval process.
Do you want the individuals who look at these games making the choice for you as to if you should be allowed an opportunity to play a particular game?
The developer of said game should be questioned for his taste by those who dislike his game. But Apple should not be blamed for the game being out there for us to make up our own minds about if we want to play the game.
Every time they decline an app or game they are doing just that. If they do not approve of a game then they essentially just made the choice for us.
And they have taken away my right as a grown adult to decide if I believe a game is right for me. I disagree with apple when they make that choice for me. Not when they give me the choice to make up my own mind.
LordCrom I couldn't agree more. This should be applied to life as a whole and not to the app store. The market will decide. If it stays than people don't find it as offensive as they thought. There is no reason you cannot make your own decisions, but I understand that some are used to being told what they can like and what they can't.
If apple wants to sell crapps, that's fine by me, but at least they could make another category for immature humor/school kid fun apps. Those apps are taking up room from 'proper'(* apps and browsing through them in the appstore is annoying. (*: yeah I know I know... Who am I to judge what is proper or not - I'm not a stiff upper lip type of guy but still I think there could be some general standards applied to the apps) If I go to a real life store, I'm not expecting to go through a ton of 2nd rate sh*t when seeking for groceries. I'm all for freedom of speech and expression, anti-censorship and anti-control and all such, but in appstore I'm a paying customer and I expect them Apple to have some control over the wares they sell.
Apple accept those apps because they mean money for them. When there is an app that competes with one of theirs, it is not approved. Apple is not a moral or ethic regulator. It is a company that loves money more than other companies.
A sidenote to organerito's comment of Apple caring only about their revenue: do you think it might be possible that Apple will be putting some limits to free apps someday? Freebies don't generate any direct income to Apple (except the dev program fees), and if the ratio of free vs. paid apps tilts heavily towards the former, they might think about limiting free stuff (allowing only lite versions of paid apps, for instance). I read somewhere that paid apps were in majority so this is a highly theoretical thought... or who knows, maybe they are rejecting a lot of great free apps already :/ Back to topic: I think Apple is risking a fair amount of prestige if they were to open the gates of appstore without some censureship. On the other hand, allowing certain adult material (ok, p0rn) would surely lift Apple's revenues to high heavens
just want to straight things out: isperm is a game. maybe not a great concept, but still it's something better then simple sounds like making poo or vomiting.
iFart dominated Christmas downloads and made iphone app related headlines. Once people found out goofy trash like that sold, every redneck who knows how to read started churning out grossology apps.
The problem about limits is to be as fair as possible. For example, I am a professional classical musician. There are a lot of popular music that I think it is garbage, but many others like it and love it. There will be always low music, and apps and people who are willing to get those. Just because I don't like that music and apps, it doesn't mean they should disappear. Apple wants to be as encompassing as possible. Even though, Apple doesn't make money with free apps, it is very good advertising for them. The first app I got was a free one.
Do they? I have always been a PC user, and shunned from buying Apple products mainly because of their elitist image (and price, of course). With the free appstore politics they are definitely shedding that snobby image... Marketwise, that may be better for them, but the more lax they let their standards become, the harder it may be to draw the line in the end. Mind you, it's all the same to me what they sell in their store, as long as it is categorized so that apps are easy to find and and customers need not wade knee-deep in vomit and poo when browsing for entertainment
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall As much as I hate all of the sophomoric, pointless, puerile crap that appeared on the App Store the moment Apple opened the doors to the adult rating system and therefore approval of all of the "inappropriate" apps kicked off by iFart, they have their place and a right to exist there. I'm sure some of the developers of such apps were young'ns, but I have absolutely no doubt that many of them were from professional companies who were just looking to cash in on the craze while it lasted -- and while I disapprove of them on general principle, I can't say I blame them. They all made money to one degree or another, and a select handful made a lot of it (relatively speaking), and I'm pretty sure that most of you, if you had the skills and recognized the opportunity, would have tried to get a piece of the pie, too. (I said most.) I wouldn't expect Apple to create a category just for them because it would slap such apps with a particular label that could stigmatize them and those who download them -- like having a separate department store section explicitly labeled "fat clothes." I'm not defending these crappy apps, mind you -- well, I'm defending their right to exist, I suppose -- but keep in mind: They'd never be made if people weren't willing to pay money for them. Who's really to blame: The people who create the market for something stupid, or the people who fill it?
