Apple: "If You Want To Criticize Religion, Write a Book"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I would agree with you if Apple didn't have a complete monopoly on the applications sold for their devices (something that I regard as immoral and wrong in itself, but that's not the topic now). But as it stands, they have almost complete control everything you do on your device, so banning applications for being offensive is plain and simple censorship, making Apple a direct enemy of free speech.TWEWER said:
I'm glad to actually see some people responding negatively to this. The complete lack of criticism of Apple's bullshit in my direct environment disturbs me immensely. Almost everyone will say that freedom is an important value, yet very few seem to be willing to defend their freedom in practice.
That being said, Apple IS basically saying that they're going to be a nanny state now, so maybe you can see where people are coming from in this case?erttheking said:
either way it seems rather strange that they're now trying to close the barn door years after it would have made any difference, as if now they suddenly have standards or something
The mediums are different. It might feel wrong to you but I would agree with Apple on this one. There are things that can be expressed in a book that cannot be in a video game or movie, and this goes the same whichever way around it's considered.
I don't strictly agree with the censorship, but I do agree that apps, movies, books and songs should be handled differently. Not all ideas and concepts belong in a free app and with kids running amok on the service Apple do have a responsibility to keep shit away from them. The consequences of not doing so would be worse than any controversy about standards. There is a line and while not well defined, it's a good idea to keep the app store in some form of check. Actually, it should be patrolled harder, particularly apps with microtransactions which allow kids to spend $1,000s of their parents money on twinkly stars and golden coins.
Fixed. You could say that about Microsoft too. They aren't has freedom loving as people want them to think.Adam Jensen said:
But, but we don't want freedom! We have as much as we need and no more! There's no need for us to take apart our phone and see what's inside as we love Apple and promise not to make them angry!TheNarrator said:
/sarcasm
This mentality is why I left both Apple and Microsoft and went straight to Linux for the majority of my work. Some of us want to know what's inside our phones, and a good chunk of us like our freedom. We're not ready to give up our freedom just for using a locked down device.
No need to make it personal against the guy you're discussing it with. I agree with you, but you're forgetting that most people aren't technologically savvy. 10 years ago, it was predicted that we'd all have some idea of what goes on inside a computer, but people can't even tell me what certain "buttons" do. I'd say it's more Apple's fault for actively brainwashing the consumer by realizing that no one knows exactly what's going on inside their product when they have a certain feature.teh_gunslinger said:
In my opinion, it all comes down to being a pain in the ass and not wanting to understand what Apple meant by what the said, or having common sense and reading between the lines.
Basically, it says it's not taking chances with games that tackle heavy matters unless they are deep in content, as much as most books and movies do. A strategy game, probably as superficial as every other strategy game in the app store, going about an actual and CURRENT conflict... Well, that's controversial, potentially offensive (many people who take part in conflicts find the games offensive), and it's not the sort of thing you'd want to put in your store, hell, Six Days in Fallujah also got canceled for those reasons, people just didn't speak the words.
If the game had the depth of a book to it, of a documentary, it would probably pass, I believe, after all, the app store (in the Mac) has games that could be considered "controversial" but have enough content to go over it.
Last but not least, it's hard to do an honest game about a current conflict, it's not over, not enough facts are known.
Basically, it says it's not taking chances with games that tackle heavy matters unless they are deep in content, as much as most books and movies do. A strategy game, probably as superficial as every other strategy game in the app store, going about an actual and CURRENT conflict... Well, that's controversial, potentially offensive (many people who take part in conflicts find the games offensive), and it's not the sort of thing you'd want to put in your store, hell, Six Days in Fallujah also got canceled for those reasons, people just didn't speak the words.
If the game had the depth of a book to it, of a documentary, it would probably pass, I believe, after all, the app store (in the Mac) has games that could be considered "controversial" but have enough content to go over it.
Last but not least, it's hard to do an honest game about a current conflict, it's not over, not enough facts are known.
Really? Someone decided to dispense with the legalese and go back to "I'll decide what is and isn't allowed by my own judgment, whatever process that may describe"? That's pretty damn audacious.
I can see Apple blocking something like "Endgame Syria" and having a defense for doing so (I vehemently disagree with this defense) without being political in its censorship. But when it bans something like "Drone+"? I don't see how anyone could argue that an app pinpointing the locations of US drone strikes on a map was ?not useful or entertaining enough? because I sure as hell could have used it. And then to block it later for being ?excessively objectionable or crude content?? How is that anything other that political censorship?
I regret not getting an android 
....I missed out on a snes emulator
you know what? I dont get it....I don't get people who go crazy over iphone and wait in lines to get the latest model
I have an iphone 5 and you know whats amazing about it? NOTHING absolutly nothing....at best its a useful device for accessing the internet...at worst its an expensive brick I'm stuck with for 2 years...as it is it is not a big fucking deal
I hate to make sweeping generalisations and call people names but.....but what the hell is wrong with some people?
....I missed out on a snes emulatoryou know what? I dont get it....I don't get people who go crazy over iphone and wait in lines to get the latest model
I have an iphone 5 and you know whats amazing about it? NOTHING absolutly nothing....at best its a useful device for accessing the internet...at worst its an expensive brick I'm stuck with for 2 years...as it is it is not a big fucking deal
I hate to make sweeping generalisations and call people names but.....but what the hell is wrong with some people?
So basically "Think different" is now totally untrue, since there's no thinking about the content left for the users and definitely nothing different since everything has to be the way Apple decides.
I know this decision is really about Apple trying to avoid potential lawsuits, but negative reaction and experience is still an experience that influences the way people think. Instead of using their omnipresent power and control on their platforms to do what they like and allow experiments and risky stuff (I mean in terms of design and ideas, not necessarily adult and religious content) while still keeping users, they choose to just be extra conservative with a basically very liberal false image.
I know this decision is really about Apple trying to avoid potential lawsuits, but negative reaction and experience is still an experience that influences the way people think. Instead of using their omnipresent power and control on their platforms to do what they like and allow experiments and risky stuff (I mean in terms of design and ideas, not necessarily adult and religious content) while still keeping users, they choose to just be extra conservative with a basically very liberal false image.
I must be missing something, but I honestly don't see what the big deal is. Apple provides a service and they wont support certain things on it. If you're fine with that then ok, if you're not then buy from someone else.
Oh yeah, I'm a sheep because I have an Ipod, which I use on a regular basis and genuinely enjoy to have and "harms consumer electronics and the user" because they don't let everything on and they cost a little bit much. I couldn't even bring myself to read anymore after that beyond insulting first sentence of your post. When you want to actually debate like a civil Human being, come find me, until then later.teh_gunslinger said:
EDIT: Am I a sheep or am I a hipster? Make up your God damn mind!
They're saying that they're not going to let some apps onto the app store based on their own judgement, but didn't people get angry at Valve for letting that crappy zombie game onto Steam? And considering how just about everyone who calls people who buy apple products "sheep" considering that I'm very content with my Ipod, you'll forgive me if I'm a little less than sympathetic towards them. It's not like Apple has a monopoly on computers, smart phones and tablets, there's plenty of others out there, and I like what I get from Apple. God, every single time I go onto the Escapist the less I want to be here, I only ever get insulted here for (not being a PC gamer/buying from Apple/not being an atheist/not jumping on the backs of video game companies for every last little mistake they make). Really, coming on here is slowly turning into a miserable experience.weirdguy said:
Apple's more of a cult than a religion.Scars Unseen said:
They are Apple, and this is nothing new for Apple. People knowingly buy their products anyway.Oskuro said:
You know how people use the term "vote with your wallet?" This is the endgame.
So they're going out of business?TWEWER said:
But jokes aside, if they don't want "pretentious bullshit," why is it limited to games only?
Actually, it's because you're tacitly supporting a corporate culture of censorship and thought control.erttheking said:
Also, sheep lost all meaning ages ago. It didn't have meaning as far back as the eighties.
And when they were doing bad things, people actively called them on it. Their monopolistic behaviours and the like? People didn't make excuses.thesilentman said:
The thing is, Microsoft isn't really the issue and it's not either-or. Criticising Apple is not an endorsement for Microsoft.
You had me until that point. I think you're overestimating the depth of the majority of the literary market. I'll repeat the same for film, too.Milanezi said:
Potter Stewart, the man behind the quote, was a centrist in his time. That alone would make many of his views far left in this day and age. Consider that the "Liberal Lion" of the SCOTUS who stepped down a couple years back was, at the time of appointment, a Republican appointed by a Republican.William McQuiston said: