Do iPhone App Store Reviewers Spend Their Time Searching for Porn?
A while back we mentioned that an update to popular Twitter client, Tweetie was rejected by the iTunes App Store because, at that particular day and time, ****itlist showed up as a popular trend on Twitter. Later that same day Apple reversed the decision. But they haven’t, apparently, reversed the capricious lunacy that led to it.
Latest example: the e-book reader Eucalyptus has been rejected because not once, but twice, an App Store reviewer specifically searched for “the kama sutra of vatsyanya translated fr…” (or at least searching for enough of it to be offered that search term, then selecting it).
Developer James Montgomerie blogs about his frustrations, the continued opaqueness of the App Store review policy, and points out the blatant inconsistency of Safari, Google Mobile, and a variety of other built-in and already approved 3rd party apps providing complete internet search access to pretty much any content imaginable. (And some we’d frankly rather not imagine, thanks!)
Needless to say — and regardless of Apple’s statistics saying 98% of all apps are approved within 7 days of submission, 35,000+ apps in the store, and over one billion downloads — that simple, clear, and consistent guidelines, and developer support equal to the customer support Apple touts and prides itself on, are still not available some 10 months since launch, is embarrassing.
The App Store is a phenomenal success, no doubt about it, but doesn’t matter how fine your tuxedo is if you keep walking around with one or more battered, bloody eyes.
Need more absurdity? Forbes profiles the trials and tribulations involved in getting an app approved about US President Obama’s dog in cartoon form…
[via @chokenberry on Twitter, and the Reptile]
May 21st, 2009 at 1:49 pm
I read a post about an app called “*** Clock – nice girl, beautiful, ****, hot, no depiction of porn *** photos girls hardcore photo breasts erotic bikini bikinis kinky pictures teens adult picture topless or nude model, nothing from MAXIM, FHM, Hooters, PLAYBOY, PENTHOUSE or any others”
Yes!! that long text is the actual name, and guess what it is approved!
May 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pm
oops, that’s S e x clock and you’ll find it in the app store
May 21st, 2009 at 1:59 pm
HAHA!! omg, you’re right! For a second there I though it was a spam post! I guess since the app appears to not actually contain porn, Apple didn’t reject it. But I’d still think they’d make them change that hideous name.
May 21st, 2009 at 2:48 pm
I thought it was a joke too. I’m amazed that it was approved.
And the name just couldn’t get classier… (sarcasm)
May 21st, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Been there, suffered that, though “public ridicule” was the reason :
http://thecodist.com/article/myapprejectedbytheappstorebecauseitcouldbeusedto39ridiculespublicfigures_39
May 21st, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Oops it mangled the url, just go to my name’s link.
May 21st, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Doesn’t seem to be any consistency with the reviewers, I’ve posted screenshots of the Scrable game on the iPhone suggesting some rude C* and S* words: http://blog.scoopz.com/2009/05/12/iphone-game-scramble-suggests-rude-words/
I even emailed iTunes support to ask why that app was approved yet Tweetie was rejected initially for trend words and they replied:
[quote]Content found on the App Store may contain material that some customers might find offensive, indecent, or objectionable. Although Apple welcomes and appreciates your comments and suggestions. The possibility that customers may encounter such content is addressed in the “Objectionable Material” section of the App Store Terms of Service. [/quote]
May 21st, 2009 at 6:21 pm
That is hilarious about the name of that app. I guess you were searching the app store under some of those terms iDutch? You hornball you!
May 21st, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Wow – another example of how absurd Apple’s app review team is. You would think Apple would have tried to fix the problem by now. Maybe when the other app stores gain traction Apple will have some pressure to fix things..
May 21st, 2009 at 10:34 pm
I smell fundamentalism at work here. At least one member of Apple’s app review team is a ***-hating, “moral” fundamentalist and as such is going out of his/her way to search for the Kama Sutra. Yes, I’m serious. This is not only the most likely explanation but the only one. As the author said, they obviously searched for that specific title more than once. Further, they do not do that for every submitted app, because several others that could locate the Kama Sutra were not held to the same standard. Therefore the only conclusion one can reach is that Apple has inadvertently hired an evangelical onto their staff that is subverting the process. And that person is either being unsupervised or improperly supervised. Further, Apple is at fault for not providing an escalation/appeals process. It’s a hideous situation.
May 27th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Ha, that’s funny. If they are looking for iphone porn why don’t they just hop on safari and go to http://ipinkvisual.com
October 22nd, 2009 at 8:06 am
Trapped: end of second grade when the basic doubling rule for endings beginning with vowels is learned. ,
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:59 am
Morphology, together with syntax, constitutes the classical domain of recursion à la HCF. ,