iPhone Purity Test Means No Selling Bathing Suits To Women

from the that's-obscene! dept

Lots of folks have been submitting the story of how iPhone developers are reasonably pissed off about Apple’s new edict barring “adult-themed applications” in the iPhone app store, though it has continued to allow big brand name adult apps, such as those from Playboy. But what has it banned? Well, don’t try selling bathing suits to women. Apparently, that’s considered an adult app.

While this is certainly Apple’s right to do, this is one of the reasons why, in the long run, Apple’s rather arbitrary app store policies are going to backfire. Developers are increasingly getting pissed off, or worried that Apple might suddenly pull the rug out from under them, with little explanation and barely any recourse. That’s not an environment that appeals to developers in the long run. Yes, given the size of the iPhone (and soon iPad) market, plenty of development will continue. But in the long run, some of the more innovative and valuable apps will appear on other, more open platforms first, and make those platforms more appealing.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: apple

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “iPhone Purity Test Means No Selling Bathing Suits To Women”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Modplan (profile) says:

I don’t get why it’s so hard to be able to give users the ability to set alternative sources for apps. You wouldn’t need to provide a completely different store front, just do what Linux distros do – simple sources.list file or similar and GPG keys for security :/

Oh wait, apparently viruses would kill iPhones the world over, not to mention the whole issue with exploding from using 2 apps at once.

Anonymous Coward says:

I feel bad for Mike's Dog

“Apple’s rather arbitrary app store policies are going to backfire. “

I bet you’re one of those types of people that beats your dog whenever she does something wrong. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, what I am saying is that it’s mean and if you take enjoyment out of it (Streisand Effect, anybody?) It’s just a little weird.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: I feel bad for Mike's Dog

I too, feel bad for Mike’s Dog. That’s why I’m inviting his slightly kidnapped dog to the First annual CFW-(RTB) party “Trollin’ Time”.

Secondly, it seems that Mike’s wife has in iPhone (Last paragraph of the article, in “Full Disclosure”) and is trying to pick out a swimsuit for the First annual CFW-(RTB) party “Trollin’ Time”! Will you be there?

Dan says:

“But in the long run, some of the more innovative and valuable apps will appear on other, more open platforms first, and make those platforms more appealing.”

Not meaning to be ctitical of Mike…..sometimes it seems like ‘the long run’ of de-throning Apple as a platform provider is getting longer all the time. By the time it happens, Jobs will no longer care.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Apple's Store

Didn’t Google have to pull a few hundred Rogue Android Smartphone apps from the Android market a few months back because they were actually phishing attacks?

It’s good that Google is on top of these things and tests the apps. Oh wait, it’s actually the community.

Bank Account scams? Sorry, there’s no app for that.

Anonymous Coward says:

Depends on who your are.

Apple’s head of worldwide product marketing, Phillip Schiller, told the Times on Monday that the source and intent of apps were taken into consideration when the ban was applied. Well-established companies with “previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format” (e.g. magazines like Playboy, FHM, and Sports Illustrated) are not held to the same rigorous constraints…

So they seem to be using “it’s for the children” as a bullet-proof excuse for protecting their business relations with other big companies.

Jimr (profile) says:

They needed a rating system. And rate each application. Then on a maintenance screen the user could opt-in or opt-out from viewing certain applications based upon this rating.

As a parent, right now, I sit beside my kid as we scroll through the apps. I do not look forward to the day when the top 25 apps are all bikini apps. I for one would like the option to restrict the results returned based upon some rating. The key here is MY OPTION.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...