Anti-iPhone iPhone game makes it past Apple's review process

Post by w1ntermute » Tue, Sep 13, 2011, 10:28 PM UTC

jccc wrote: post #54

w1ntermute wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seeks to protect users (and their children) from malware, pornography and offence (and protect Apple from bad publicity and legal action by selling such things to its users). Do people really still buy this line? If they're trying to protect users and their children from "malware, pornography and offence," shouldn't they be blocking those things in the iPhone web browser as well? And what about on the Mac? All t…

Apple doesn't sell Web sites through Safari. It does sell apps through the App Store. There's quite a bit of difference in responsibility when money changes hands.

Post by w1ntermute » Tue, Sep 13, 2011, 10:35 PM UTC

sambeau wrote: post #66

w1ntermute wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seeks to protect users (and their children) from malware, pornography and offence (and protect Apple from bad publicity and legal action by selling such things to its users). Do people really still buy this line? If they're trying to protect users and their children from "malware, pornography and offence," shouldn't they be blocking those things in the iPhone web browser as well? And what about on the Mac? All t…

Do people really still buy this line? What line? Why else would they do it? The control that they over the iOS platform has provided the first truly safe computing environment. This is, in my opinion, more important to its long-term success than the innovative user interface. This is the part that other companies have so-far failed to copy. Apple don't seek control for it's own sake—it's a lot of work and very expens…

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 13, 2011, 10:37 PM UTC

CJCorona wrote: post #77

sambeau wrote: post #18

I'm not surprised that this got through as it is more likely to offend Apple than a user. Apple's control of the App Store is not without good reason. It seeks to protect users (and their children) from malware, pornography and offence (and protect Apple from bad publicity and legal action by selling such things to its users). While an overzealous employee might take it onto themselves to try to protect Apple from cr…

Well Apple has now removed the app from the store. What's the good reason for that you'd like to share with us?

Post by iradik » Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 12:27 AM UTC

zdw wrote: post #15

One big point - Apple supports it's products longer than the rest of the industry, thus they don't end up in landfills as quickly. For example: - The original iPhone was released in June of 2007, and had the newest iOS (3.x) available until the release of iOS 4 in June 2010. - The iPhone 3GS was released in June of 2009, and is still getting OS updates, even to iOS 5 released later this year. How many Android phones…

Post by burgerbrain » Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 4:28 PM UTC

cube13 wrote: post #60

robin_reala wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t someone run the numbers and find that the number of suicides / head at Foxconn was significantly lower than the number of suicides / head for the general population in that region?

IIRC, it was something like 20 suicides in the last year, with Foxconn employing 300,000-400,000 people at the facility. According to wikipedia( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_ra... ), the average total number of suicides per 100,000 in China is around 6.6. So you get, depending on the actual number of workers, either the national average for China, or slightly below it.