Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

ikamasutra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 170 posts

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#161

Post by therealarmen »

ricardobeat wrote: post #159
phil wrote: post #128

The crazy thing is the #4 paid app is this violent fantasy about shooting people with a sniper rifle and that's apparently OK: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/clear-vision-17+/id500116670?... The #5 paid app is a scam designed to confuse (check out the reviews): http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/lock-my-screen/id507265508?mt...

That's really curious. The "lock-screen" app has a Rated 4+ indication, yet it's actual ratings are 1-star. There's something fishy here, how come this doesn't get the appstore lords' attention?

Rated 4+ refers to the approved age group, not average review rating.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#162

Post by fpgeek »

_ea1k wrote: post #64
michh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until your carrier decides you don't need the ability to install non-market apps and disables the option. Oh, and the phone in question is not yet rooted. This is a matter of time if it isn't already happening. Google can do the open and free dance all it wants but with the carriers standing between you and Google...

In the US, AT&T used to restrict things this way. They quit doing so quite a while back. I am unaware of any other carriers doing this.

It is worth noting that AT&T quit restricting non-Market applications (back when it was the Android Market) because of the Amazon Appstore. People kept asking how they could get it (because they wanted the Free App of the Day and the like) and AT&T eventually gave in.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#163

Post by fpgeek »

bluetshirt wrote: post #110
AndrewDucker wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree regarding Google Play. Appstore is a threat because if you want software on your Apple phone then it is the only legal method. But with Android you can install software from any app store you like, or directly. Google provide an app store as a service, but it's only one of many.

Jailbreaking your iPhone is NOT illegal.

For now. There's a DMCA exception that hasn't been renewed yet. Did you comment in support of it?

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#166

Post by dhimes »

glenra wrote: post #156
dhimes wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My iphone didn't come with this. Maybe it's because I am a business customer and had to buy it through the ATT store? I'm in the Boston area, in case that's pertinent.

According to Apple, an iPhone includes "Apple Earphones with Remote and Mic": http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html The standard set looks a lot like plain white earbuds, but there's a tiny clicker thing on one of the headphone wires. In recent models that is (1) a microphone, (2) an up/down volume control, (3) a sort of generic action button - single-click to answer an incoming call or hang up an active one. When l…

iphone 4 - so I don't know what they mean by recent. No clicker thing, etc. etc.

OT: I've been stupidly downvoted for many things recently, including my observations about the exercise that kids get a few days ago (I have three boys, 11-17 y.o., coached in the town leagues for years, know a helluva lot of kids and watched them grow up, but I guess that doesn't qualify my observation or make them pertinent to such a discussion in any way...).

I've never complained about a downvote-- until now.

Somebody downvoted me because my fucking iphone 4 didn't come with a mic. I'm afraid our community is getting really fucking stupid. It's not that I care about karma, but I grieve the loss of the community.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#167

Post by fpgeek »

winthrowe wrote: post #94
Drakim wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the most knowledgeable within mobile geekery, but couldn't you in buy an android phone with no contract over the net and get a sim card for it?

The point regarding IMEIs was that if carriers get antagonistic enough, it would be possible to change the blacklist that (some) carriers use for stolen phones into a whitelist that disallows any third party phones.

Outside the US, governments take the promise of being able to take a SIM and put it into an unlocked phone very seriously, so I'd say this is a strictly local problem. In fact, I'd wonder how Deutsche Telekom's regulators would react if T-Mobile (DT's US subsidiary, at least for now) started doing something like this (that they probably wouldn't permit in Germany).

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#168

Post by nooop »

acqq wrote: post #75
treelovinhippie wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes exactly! Could you imagine how far behind the Internet (and society) would be if any website you wanted to launch had to first be reviewed and assessed by Apple/Google/ ! This system of app review and locked-down pay-wall systems makes commercial sense for now, but ultimately it is not scalable, doesn't provide quality and is too slow. Any system that goes against the grain of a major trend, progressing along a r…

> Could you imagine how far behind the Internet (and society) would be if any website you wanted to launch had to first be reviewed and assessed by Apple/Google/ You can have now your site accessible from the iPhone without the approval from Apple. It's not about availability, it's about the convenience of selling on the regulated highly accessible market . To sell in their store you enter the contract between them a…

Walmart is not a monopoly (and even more not a monopoly by design that will never be anything else).

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#169

Post by nooneelse »

ErrantX wrote: post #108
bambax wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case the crux of the problem is that they're deleting an app that's almost as old as the app store itself. Curating content is almost impossible to do; app stores should limit their reviews to exclude: - viruses - blatant spam and copyright violations and THAT'S IT. Assessing the quality of an app is what users' ratings are for (and of course excluding adult content is just childish).

> Assessing the quality of an app is what users' ratings are for As an app store user I disagree. User ratings in the app store are not really a useful guideline in my experience - and it often takes trying several (reasonably well rated) apps to find one that is actually usable. For example; it took me the best part of 10 tries to find a working tourist map of a city I was visiting a few weeks ago. The app store rev…

I would very much like a free-for-all to be listed in the app store at all, but then give people the ability to create "curated streams" that users can subscribe-to/filter-with. That way, no bizarre censorship or arbitrary in-or-out decisions, but users could, if they wanted, only ever have to look at the store owner's "best of breed" channel.

Re: IKamasutra: Apple Hates Brunettes

#170

Post by ricardobeat »

therealarmen wrote: post #161
ricardobeat wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really curious. The "lock-screen" app has a Rated 4+ indication, yet it's actual ratings are 1-star. There's something fishy here, how come this doesn't get the appstore lords' attention?

Rated 4+ refers to the approved age group, not average review rating.

Ha.
Post reply on HN