Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Media (Apple) Media Cellphones Handhelds Music Hardware

Apple Reconsiders, Approves NIN iPhone App 146

Posted by timothy
from the like-a-warm-blankie-for-trent dept.
gyrogeerloose writes "According to MacRumors, NIN's iPhone application has been approved. Trent Reznor has reported via his Twitter account that the now-approved app was resubmitted without modification, which suggests that Apple reconsidered their initial rejection. This should really come as no surprise to anyone who follows Apple news since it follows the company's typical pattern of handing potentially controversial iPhone apps, especially when it concerns high-profile rejections."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Reconsiders, Approves NIN iPhone App

Comments Filter:
  • I dont get it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by think_nix (1467471) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:19AM (#27874935)

    tfa:
    "the band's own application was rejected due to "objectionable" downloadable content that wasn't housed within the app itself."

    I mean it is their own content they are distributing so "NIN/Reznor" are ok with it. So why was this rejected in the first place ? I dont own anything with an i, but how many other apps out their download offsite content? Quite a few I am sure?

    • by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:22AM (#27874979) Journal

      I dont own anything with an i

      Oh yeah? Then how'd you type that, smartypants?

      • by Sir_Lewk (967686) <sirlewk@nospaM.gmail.com> on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:08AM (#27875387)

        Copy/Paste.

        • by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:49AM (#27875839) Journal

          Copy/Paste.

          You young kids with your "Copying" and your "Pasting". In my day when a key on our keyboard broke, we learned to live without it. And our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard was in the case with the monitor and the CRT, and we liked it that way.

          In retrospect, it sure made WASD games a pain in the ass, though. AAAAAAAAAA *move left dammit* AAAAAAAAAAAAAA *argh, died again!*

          • by Propaganda13 (312548) on Friday May 08, 2009 @10:29AM (#27876345)

            Copy/Paste.

            You young kids with your "Copying" and your "Pasting". In my day when a key on our keyboard broke, we learned to live without it. And our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard was in the case with the monitor and the CRT, and we liked it that way.

            In retrospect, it sure made WASD games a pain in the ass, though. AAAAAAAAAA *move left dammit* AAAAAAAAAAAAAA *argh, died again!*

            U yung k1ds wth ur "C0pyng" and ur "Past1ng". N my day when a key 0n teh keybard dn't wurk, we learned 2 l1ve wthut et. And r un-adjustable CT-syndr9me-causng keybard was n teh case w/ the stuff, nd we l1ked 1t that w4y.

            And thus leet came 2b

            • Pffft. Ever try to browse Slashdot and look at porn with no mouse/touchpad while mousekeys wont work on your weird laptop?!

              Tab about a hundred times to get to the link you want, then tab another hundred in the next window or until you get the right thumbnail etc. It's a tedious mess of tabs, enters, ALT+F4s, ALT+tabs, Windows and arrow keys, and backspaces. I'll have a broken keyboard over no mouse anyday.

              Non-mouse navigability is a great metric for the usability of a website.
              • There is a much more comfortable solution: Just enable search-on-typing. Then enter the first letters of the link, until it highlights, and press enter. :)
                (Unfortunately, when pressing tab, it does not behave like bash, but goes to the next link of all links.)

                Then try mapping your window manager's keys better. A mapper tool helps.
                But it is true: A good website has to be nicely navigable with the keyboard only.

              • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

                by navyjeff (900138)
                I don't want to trigger a flamewar, but there are two extensions for Firefox that enable keyboard commands to make it just like your favorite text editor/quasi operating system:

                Firemacs [mozilla.org]
                Vimperator [vimperator.org]

                or if you want to go the full monty: Conkeror [conkeror.org]
                (unrelated to a famous red squirrel)

          • our non-adjustable CT-syndrome-causing keyboard

            How is that different from today? If anything, then the keyboards got even worse.
            There is no single ergonomic keyboard on the market today, that is in a human price range (<$150).

            The stuff that Microsoft does is *not* ergonomic. It is, what I call "faked ergonomy". This is when it looks ergonomic, but really isn't.
            Logitech is even worse. And don't ask me about those el-cheapo curved things. They are just as bad ergonomically. Plus you feel that they are cheap crap, as soon as you use them. ^^

            I wish, Data

            • How is that different from today?

              Gee, maybe the fact that you can move the keyboard independently of the monitor?

              You can actually (*gasp*) tilt the keyboard to a better angle for your wrists, and raise it or lower it in relation to your desktop and monitor?

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Glove d'OJ (227281)

        ALT+0105 on the keypad. Recreate any ASCII character with simple numbers.

    • by v1 (525388)

      I believe part of the reasoning here is they want to have 100% control over what goes on the ipod. (hence why the apps have to be approved) If your app downloads something that's beyond apple's control, that bypasses the approval process. Once your main app gets approved, it can download UNapproved material they don't want getting on the ipod. It's like restricting what apps a user can run on their computer, but let them run a shell. From there they can do whatever they want by way of the shell.

      • Not to sound like an Apple Fan Boy. But these apps are a mixed bag. Apple Control of the apps is a blessing and a curse. It is good in the fact that Malware isn't put on the iPhone or stuff that will just not work, or will hinder the system and make it run slow and crash a lot. However Apple does need to be less paranoid on competing Apps or services.

    • Re:I dont get it (Score:5, Informative)

      by mauthbaux (652274) on Friday May 08, 2009 @10:07AM (#27876061) Homepage
      As I understand it, the "objectionable" was referring to the lyrics in the music rather than fear of infringement by the copyright holder.
      Quoting from Engadget [engadget.com] because I can't find the nin.com post:

      As posted by Trent himself in response to Apple's rejection eMail:

      ...I'll voice the same issue I had with Wal-Mart years ago, which is a matter of consistency and hypocrisy. Wal-Mart went on a rampage years ago insisting all music they carry be censored of all profanity and "clean" versions be made for them to carry. Bands (including Nirvana) tripped over themselves editing out words, changing album art, etc to meet Wal-Mart's standards of decency - because Wal-Mart sells a lot of records. NIN refused, and you'll notice a pretty empty NIN section at any Wal-Mart. My reasoning was this: I can understand if you want the moral posturing of not having any "indecent" material for sale - but you could literally turn around 180 degrees from where the NIN record would be and purchase the film "Scarface" completely uncensored, or buy a copy of Grand Theft Auto where you can be rewarded for beating up prostitutes. How does that make sense? You can buy The Downward Fucking Spiral on iTunes, but you can't allow an iPhone app that may have a song with a bad word somewhere in it. Geez, what if someone in the forum in our app says FUCK or CUNT? I suppose that also falls into indecent material. Hey Apple, I just got some SPAM about fucking hot asian teens THROUGH YOUR MAIL PROGRAM. I just saw two guys having explicit anal sex right there in Safari! On my iPhone!

      Come on Apple, think your policies through and for fuck's sake get your app approval scenario together.


      Later in the threaded discussion, Trent clarifies his position with this little gem:

      Everyone - let me be clear. I love Apple products and as goofy and out-of-touch as their app approval process / policy is, I will still use them because they work 1000X better than the competition. This is not a debate, it's a fact. The iPhone is THE most elegant, modern smartphone at this point in time and it's perfect for what we want to do with the NIN app - except for the ludicrous approval process, and that's what I want to draw attention to.

      Android is cool, but nobody has an Android phone. Blackberry is OK but the hardware is inconsistent and WinMo straight-up sucks balls. If Apple doesn't get it together, we will most certainly make it available to the jailbreak community. I didn't invest in this app to see it languish on the sidelines from an idiotic policy while this tour is in full swing.

      The nin.com [nin.com] front page currently has a link to download the app for those of you who are interested in it.
      Disclaimer: I'm not associated or affiliated with Engadget, the above quoting was simply convenient for posting purposes.

    • by rAiNsT0rm (877553) on Friday May 08, 2009 @10:20AM (#27876231) Homepage

      I fap to midget porn using this little app called "Safari" and there was no warning at all that I could be subjected to such horrors, and hairy palms.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by grausamaffe (1044228)

      tfa: "the band's own application was rejected due to "objectionable" downloadable content that wasn't housed within the app itself."

      I mean it is their own content they are distributing so "NIN/Reznor" are ok with it. So why was this rejected in the first place ?

      You hit the nail on the head. Apple is arbitrarily rejecting apps by attempting to use the access to "objectionable" content defense. As many others here have pointed out, Safari will give you access to much more "objectionable" content than the NIN app. Apple's acceptance/rejection policy reminds me of something...hmmm Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

    • How is this not obvious? They have so many apps to screen, do you really think they spend that much time reviewing each one? Mistakes like this will happen.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    ... to test the parental controls beta on.
  • by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:19AM (#27874943) Journal
    Egads, that was a terrible summary.

    The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

    They approved the app this time around because now the iPhone will have parental controls to filter objectionable material (included in the beta of 3.0).

    Seriously, that's the biggest part of the whole deal with the NIN app, and it didn't get mentioned at all in the summary.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:29AM (#27875021)

      That would make sense if 3.0 had been released. So far Apple has told people to re-submit objectionable apps for release with 3.0, but they don't get to the store before the release.

    • by 0xdeadbeef (28836) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:42AM (#27875157) Homepage Journal

      They approved the app this time around because now the iPhone will have parental controls to filter objectionable material (included in the beta of 3.0).

      So what you're saying is, because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented parental controls in the week between the initial rejection and the application being accepted.

      Wow, I had no idea he had that much influence. Trent Reznor is God.

      • by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:21AM (#27875521) Journal

        So what you're saying is, because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented parental controls in the week between the initial rejection and the application being accepted.

        Correlation != causation, dammit.

        There could be some other factor that caused both events.

        Like, say, the aliens who assume human form who have impersonated both Steve Jobs and Trent Reznor (to say nothing of Manny Ramirez or Dennis Hopper) have a diabolical plan to get millions of people to download their thought-control software via NIN downloads over the iPhone.

        • by 0xdeadbeef (28836)

          Correlation != causation, dammit.

          If you actually understood what that means, why are you trying to claim that parental controls have anything to do with it?

          • If you actually understood what that means, why are you trying to claim that parental controls have anything to do with it?

            Are you kidding me? Your sarcasm detector didn't peg? Maybe you should take it in to have a professional look at it.

      • Trent Reznor is God.

        He'd [sing365.com] disagree. [sing365.com]

    • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:25AM (#27875575) Homepage Journal

      The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

      So, not an high-profile app, but an high-profile submitter? Sorry, but the point remains, if Trent Reznor had not been involved, raising the profile of the app, it would not have been approved.

      Thank god Apple had the wisdom to make themselves the gatekeeper of all iPhone apps. Who knows what kind of damage may have been done if the NIN app had been approved without this charade. Thanks, Apple, for keeping iPhone users all over the world safe.

      • by slyn (1111419)

        The decision to approve the app had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was a high-profile app. They didn't reconsider just because Trent Reznor, with his celebrity status, bitched and complained and tried to Streisand the rejection.

        So, not an high-profile app, but an high-profile submitter? Sorry, but the point remains, if Trent Reznor had not been involved, raising the profile of the app, it would not have been approved.

        Thank god Apple had the wisdom to make themselves the gatekeeper of all iPhone apps. Who knows what kind of damage may have been done if the NIN app had been approved without this charade. Thanks, Apple, for keeping iPhone users all over the world safe.

        There have been a whole lot of apps that were rejected at first and approved later without the help of Reznor. The most notable of which (or at least the ones I can think of off the top of my head) are all the fart apps.

        Though it's likely that Reznor's fame is what caused the double take, I'm pretty sure Apple really doesn't care how famous you are as to whether your app gets approved or not.

      • by cwingrav (8705)

        Right, so because of Trent Reznor, Apple implemented a last minute major feature... overnight. Ease up.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Hmm, wrong.

      First off you have NO idea why it was reconsidered. You can speculate all day long, but it's pure speculation.

      Second 3.0 is in beta and is NOT released so it has no bearing on the "legal protection" Apple might have from it's parental controls. If that was the reason or concern you can damn well bet Apple would have waited until 3.0 is released before approving the app.

      They reconsidered on the merits of the app and the validity of the initial rejection itself, nothing more.

  • Not quite unchanged (Score:5, Informative)

    by dazedNconfuzed (154242) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:27AM (#27875005)

    The app update was rejected because "The objectionable content referenced ... is 'The Downward Spiral'.".

    According to Reznor's app developer [nin.com] "we removed the song 'The Downward Spiral' from the server, hoping to appease apple and get this bug fix through."

    • Good to see Trent's music is still "controversial" (thought provoking?) after 15 years.

      Not too much music can claim to be edgy after so long. Elvis was shocking to people at first, but hardly that way in 1971.

      I think it's a positive attribute.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by Machtyn (759119)
        I've not listened to the song, but I am going to make some assumptions here: It has foul language, has a violent and/or sexual message.

        That's considered thought provoking? No, that's just laziness.

        Now, if I am wrong, it is because it really does have a thought provoking message on the status of culture, politics, religion, whatever. More points if it leaves out the foul language, violent and/or sexual messages... which, as I say, is laziness.
        • You assumption hold true for a lot of rap music, but not the music of Trent Reznor... mindless swearing/sexuality is mainstream, but a creepy song about killing yourself still has some punch to it.

    • by Minwee (522556) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:29AM (#27875625) Homepage

      So, has Apple responded by removing 'The Downward Spiral' from iTunes, so that iPhone users would not be subjected to objectionable content?

      Huh. I guess not [apple.com].

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        No, because unlike iPhone apps in OS 2.X, iTunes music & video content has parental controls.

        Parents can prevent their children from downloading objectionable music / video from iTMS, but there is currently no such provision for applications.

        Parental controls and ratings for apps are coming with iPhone OS 3.0.

      • by mgblst (80109)

        Yeah, the world is a complicated place. It is almost as if rules about selling music are old, and as far as selling apps are something new?? Fucking complicated, isn't it, moron.

    • See, for instance, these two articles:

      http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10235906-37.html [cnet.com]

      http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/05/07/happiness-in-slavery-nin-iphone-app-approved-with-no-changes/ [techcrunch.com]

      The app was unchanged from when it was submitted. That Reznor quote is misleading--regardless of the tactics they tried prior to approval, in the end the version approved was unchanged from the original.

    • by PJ1216 (1063738) *
      Its still there. In fact, its called, "The Downward Fucking Spiral." Not sure if this name change occurred before or after this debacle as I generally use the actual songs I have on the iPhone itself to listen to the music other than the podcasts. Though I've recommended the app to folks who haven't really heard his music and told them its a good way to hear a lot of it very easily for free and completely legally.
  • by MyLongNickName (822545) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:29AM (#27875023) Journal

    You buy a product. Apple then tells you what you can and cannot put on your product? If you really wanted an app on your phone, and it was not available at the Apple Store, would you be able to get it anyhow? Or are you out of luck?

    And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?

    • by stokessd (89903) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:40AM (#27875133) Homepage

      You can write your own app and install it on your own phone (that includes compiling somebodies app that you download from the net), but you have to be a developer to get the appropriate keys to push it to your phone. You can't get an executable from the net and download it to your phone either.

      There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

      Neither method is particularly easy, both methods require that you have an intel based mac.

      The obvious solution if you don't like Apple's walled garden method is:

      1) don't buy one - but you lose out on what is really a very nice phone and internet gadget

      2) jailbreak - then you truly own it, but things can and do break and generally don't work as well as with an non-jailbroken phone (in my experience, your mileage may vary).

      Sheldon

      • by stokessd (89903) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:55AM (#27875275) Homepage

        I forgot to add, in addition to having to use an intel mac, you also have to pay to be a developer, $99 a year... Not sure how or if that translates to other countries.

        Sheldon

        • by aetherworld (970863) on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:25AM (#27875583) Homepage

          No, not really. You have to pay to have your application in the iTunes store. You can develop applications all you want but once you want to distribute them through the store that Apple builds and maintains you have to pay an annual fee. Which, in my understanding of economics, is actually fair.

          Also, I kind of understand why Apple doesn't have much incentive to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux. You are, however, free to do so yourself, if you manage to do so without reverse engineering it.

          And, if you're well versed in ObjectiveC, there are things like WinChain [blogspot.com] which allow you to build the native iPhone toolchain on Windows (or Linux if you prefer).

          So please, for the love of the rest of us, don't spout any populistic crap in the future which has no relation to reality.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:59AM (#27875955)

            You actually *do* have to be enrolled in the iPhone Developer Program, and pay the annual $99 fee, to be able to test your own application on your own phone, as crazy as it sounds.

            Yes, you can develop and test your application on the iPhone simulator on your own computer for free - but putting it on the iPhone requires paying Apple for the priviledge.

            Because otherwise there wouldn't really be anything stopping anybody putting whatever software they want on their iPhone - just use XCode to build it yourself and there you go.

            But you can't. Unless you jailbreak it.

            One of the reasons I decided to go for a Nokia E71 rather than an iPhone. It's not a perfect phone by any measure, and the iPhone has a better web browser, but I'll be damned before I let some silly company force me to pay them for the priviledge of putting my own software on my own phone.

            • You actually *do* have to be enrolled in the iPhone Developer Program, and pay the annual $99 fee, to be able to test your own application on your own phone, as crazy as it sounds.

              But you can't. Unless you jailbreak it.

              Um...

              Nothing more to add, really... Just jailbreak and test. Or use the simulator. There is absolutely NO reason to develop an app, test it on your own iPhone and NOT deploy it.

              My point was that you do NOT have to own an Intel Mac and you don't have to pay apple to just play around with the SDK. It's when you want to commercially deploy apps that you have to pay.

              (Actually you have to pay them too when you release it as freeware which kinda sucks, to be honest. They could have at least made a free account fo

          • by Draek (916851)

            You can develop applications all you want but once you want to distribute them through the store that Apple builds and maintains you have to pay an annual fee. Which, in my understanding of economics, is actually fair.

            Whether it's fair or not depends on the answer to a single question: can you distribute an app you wrote through any method other than the store that Apple builds and maintains? one that doesn't involve the people you're distributing to having to register as developers themselves?

            Also, I kind of understand why Apple doesn't have much incentive to port Xcode to Windows and/or Linux. You are, however, free to do so yourself, if you manage to do so without reverse engineering it.

            I'll give you an incentive to port it to Windows and/or Linux: because most developers don't have an Intel Mac, most developers don't *want* to buy an Intel Mac, and most developers don't give two shits about whether it's fair for

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by 0xdeadbeef (28836)

        3. Change Apple's behavior by
          a.) Educating people on how they're being controlled by Apple and making them ashamed of it
          b.) Making the hypocrisy of Apple's marketing message synonymous with the brand itself

        The key point is that Apple "treats people like a five year old".

        • by Hijacked Public (999535) on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:29AM (#27875629)

          a.) I've had 5 or 6 iPods, now have an iPhone, and I have an Macbook Pro.

          Feel free to begin the education process, I'll let you know when I begin to feel ashamed.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by guyminuslife (1349809)

            You shame your Clan, Yokoto. There is but one honorable solution left for you.

            I shall expect to see you at dawn, the blood still warm on the white of your Macbook. We will give you a hero's burial, and the dignity of your family's domain name shall remain intact.

            We were brothers, once...

      • by syzler (748241) <david@syzdek . n et> on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:02AM (#27875339)

        There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

        Actually you can share up to 100 ad-hoc copies of the app with others. They do not have to be registered as iPhone developers. There is not a key exchange between the developer and the end user. The end user, however, does have to provide the unique device ID of their Apple device. The App developer then adds the device as an allowed device in the developer's provisioning profile.

        To install the app, the end user installs the developer's provisioning profile on the device as well as the application.

        There is an exchange, but it is not as complicated as the end user having to generate a key and submit it to the end-user

        With that being said, I really wish I could just distribute compiled versions of my apps to friends without having to maintain a list of their current device IDs.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by tepples (727027)

        1) don't buy one

        What alternatives to iPhone and iPod Touch would you recommend for a U.S. resident? Are BlackBerry phones any better?

        • 1) don't buy one

          What alternatives to iPhone and iPod Touch would you recommend for a U.S. resident? Are BlackBerry phones any better?

          As a current BlackBerry user, I'm sold on the iPhone. I think the BB is garbage.

        • by PJ1216 (1063738) *
          BlackBerry phones are *arguably* better. Some people swear by them while most iPhone users will tell you their the worst things in the world. Personally, while I own an iPhone 3G, I'm somewhat jealous of my friends' Storms (2 friends and my brother have Storms). The Storm is probably the most similar one in functionality to the iPhone, though Bold, Curve, and Pearl all get pretty good reviews as well.
      • There's also an ad-hoc distribution method where you can share 5 copies of your app with others, but they too have to be registered and there's a key exchange process. so you can't just hand out the app or install just any app.

        Ad-hoc distribution: you can install on 100 devices. All you need is the device id. You send out the application and mobile provision file.
      • 2) jailbreak - then you truly own it, but things can and do break and generally don't work as well as with an non-jailbroken phone (in my experience, your mileage may vary).

        Not really trying to prove you wrong here, because I also only have my own experience to draw upon, but what kind of problems did you run into? Pretty much the only difference I noticed between my iPhone and a non-jailbroken version is that I can ssh into it, and have access to a non-apple "app store" in the form of cydia.

        Stability, compatibility with apple's stuff (like the app store and itunes), all seems to be the same. Could it be that you installed a buggy app from cydia, and that it's not actually t

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by maxume (22995)

      Have you walked through a Wal*mart? Ever?

      They do a huge amount of business selling products that treat the user like a five year old (and many of those products aren't even intended for five year olds).

      • by MyLongNickName (822545) on Friday May 08, 2009 @08:53AM (#27875257) Journal

        Ah, so Apple users are basically Wal-Mart shoppers. Thanks for the insight.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        That's because there's big bucks in pandering to the Narcissistic and Borderline Personality disordered population, which may comprise as much as 1/5th of the nation's populace. People that're effectively children (pre-teen/teen) in parts of their intellectual development. They tend to have VASTLY lowered impulse control, which leads to them spending money all over the place.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by flahwho (1243110)

      And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?

      Apple is acting more and more like Microsoft

      • by Machtyn (759119)
        That's insightful?! Apple has always held a tight control over their products using any means possible. Before I knew about FSF, Open Source, and the ideology behind all of that (a young teen in the 80's), I figured out that a closed system was not good for the customer. IBM clones proved that to me - they were cheaper and performed just as well.

        For example, I'll never understand why a Mac user would by the crappy Mac router for $100, when the $30 Belkin, DLink, Linksys was just as good. (Yes, I unde
    • "And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the company gets to treat you like a five year old?"

      Because it's shiney, and unkle Steve is a little less strict that unkle Stalin.....from time to time....if you eat your greens and tidy your room without whining too much.
    • by Ilgaz (86384)

      Do you still ask that question? I gave up asking almost a year ago when I saw an iPhone user telling me how backwards I am for using MMS/J2ME and living happily now with my Symbian devices.

      The real evil thing is, they made Nokia (!) and Microsoft (!!!) look open market place compared to them. I wouldn't think one day I would defend Nokia's Symbian signed/ Sun's ultra paranoid J2ME certification but when you see the alternative "App Store", you end up defending it.

      IMHO iPhone developers should also add "Gara

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by mrsquid0 (1335303)

      > And why in the hell would anyone buy a product where the
      > company gets to treat you like a five year old?

      Because Apple knows best. I am a little surprised that we have not turned over much more control of our lives to Apple. They make such cool hardware.

    • by SharpFang (651121)

      Nope. You don't buy a product. You buy the right to participate (in a sect). The device you receive is merely a token of membership and medium over which you can partake in the flesh of Steve Jobs.

    • by 2short (466733)
      Yes. That is the deal with the iPhone, and various other products, some from Apple. Vast numbers of people don't care, and buy the products knowing this. Some people don't like it and don't buy them. Some people continue to profess utter mystification, and claim a bizzare mental deficiency that prevents them from comprehending that this is in fact the deal.

      I don't have an iPhone, but I'm guessing people who do bought one because it does stuff they want to do (or it's just shiny) and these positives outw
  • Nullriver's tethering app had its ins and outs with the app store too. Give it a couple days and the NIN will be re-revoked.
  • by homb (82455) on Friday May 08, 2009 @09:09AM (#27875399)

    You have to understand that this has absolutely NOTHING to do with Reznor or NIN.

    Apple's approval system is COMPLETELY RANDOM, and depends on:
    - a set of vague rules
    - who is testing your product

    There have been countless examples of apps rejected, resubmitted unchanged and accepted.

    I have in fact gotten the perfect proof: I developed an open-source app. I submitted the app on day 0 and at the same time released the source code in its entirety under a BSD license.
    On day +7, the app was rejected because the tester couldn't log in, supposedly. On day +8, I resubmitted. On day +10, the EXACT SAME app was approved on the app store with slightly different graphics. Some guy had taken the source, compiled and submitted a few days after me.
    I went and bought (yes, the guy sold the app that I was giving away for free) the app, and noticed that it had all the issues that my app had, and he hadn't changed the code one bit.

    To add insult to injury, my app got rejected another TWO times before finally being approved on day +35.

    Conclusion: the App Store approval is completely random within a vague framework.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Cathbard (954906)
      I'm going to bookmark this post as a perfect example of why one should use gpl. Thanks.
      • by RulerOf (975607)

        I'm going to bookmark this post as a perfect example of why one should use gpl.

        I think I get what you mean, but care to elaborate?

      • Using the GPL wouldn't help in this case. Even if the dude had provided everyone who bought the app with the source, what will they do with it? The source isn't useful unless you're in the developer program. And you'd only get it when you buy the app anyway.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by 2short (466733)
        If he had used GPL, the other guy would have to offer the source for download somewhere, but otherwise could do exactly the same thing. Also, thanks to Apple, that source would not actually let others use the app for free; they'd still have to pay the other guy to get it on their iPhone.

        If you don't want others using your code, don't release the source.
  • IMO, chances are more likely that Apple did not "reconsider" the decision. Trent resubmitted the app to the App Store, so a completely different reviewer saw the app and probably didn't find anything wrong with it, and therefore approved it. The approval process for the App Store thus far seems to be subjective to the individual reviewer's whims and requirements, in addition to the (very vague) standards set by Apple. So when Trent initially submitted the app, reviewer A found the Downward Spiral referen
    • by v1 (525388)

      Also considering the complaints Apple had been fielding awhile ago, Apple probably hired a lot more people for their review staff, and that increases the chances that your app will be reviewed by a more "lax" reviewer.

      I don't think we'll be seeing it anytime soon, (wikileaks please?) but I'm sure Apple starts them out with a simple checklist of "absolutely not allowed" that if the app has any of that, it's rejected immediately. Beyond that, there's probably a second list of more subjective test, things lik

      • Exactly my point, there is likely (as you said) a core objective list of things that are not allowed. After that, it seems to be up to whomever reviews the app.

        I can't say I agree with the suggestion of assigning a reviewer to a developer though, as that opens a few issues. Take the NIN case for example... what happens if you get a reviewer that hates NIN's music style and only listens to classical and light jazz music? They will inherently be more likely to find the NIN apps objectionable, albeit by t
  • by Chris Snook (872473) on Friday May 08, 2009 @10:01AM (#27875979)

    ...that Trent could use a warm blankie.

    • by Zenzilla (793153)
      I always though him and Alanis Morissette should hook up. Jagged little pill, angry at men Alanis, not the post India trip one.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    You're gonna get what you deserve.

  • So it take being a rockstar to get things past QA? I knew they had a weakness.

  • Is now remove the app from the Apple Store, citing "This is a company that has no clue about the direction it is headed, nor its path for the future. I refuse to market my product through a company that is most certainly guaranteed to fail by making so many incongruous decisions."

    It would only take the words of a few select people and Apple would DIE.

    I wish Trent would realize his power and wield it.

    • by cowscows (103644)

      I think you're seriously overestimating the power of celebrities. Particularly when dealing with something as mundane as a mass produced cell phone. Trent Reznor or anybody else famous can say whatever they want about how much the iPhone sucks, but just as easily as I can listen to them, I can walk over to one of the handful of coworkers in my office that have iPhones, try it out, and make my own decision.

      • by Khyber (864651)

        Or you could just ask around in Japan what the hot shit really is. The iPhone bombed over there, because there are more powerful and more capable phones made there.

        Trent wields the confidence of MILLIONS of people. Remember the outcry the Dixie Chicks caused criticizing the war? Trent could cause the same thing.

        Take a closer look a history and see just what celebrities can do. *cough* RONALD REAGAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE *cough*

  • Rant and Whine (Score:3, Interesting)

    by apuku (576996) on Friday May 08, 2009 @06:13PM (#27882931)

    I don't think of myself as an Apple fanboy, but I have bought lots of Macs over the years (starting with a Lisa 2 with MacWorks waaay back in 1984 - I'm old, too). I tend to like most of Apple's products, but the app store sucks, at least for developers.

    First of all, you have to submit your app and wait an indeterminate amount of time (usually a week) for it to be approved presumably by some semi-trained monkey-boy. Then there's the whole release date fiasco that costs you sales unless you know about it.

    But the worst part, is the freakin' rating system: rate-on-delete? YGTBFKM! And the ratings show up in the 'App store' app, but not in iTunes? And your competitors come along and give you the lowest rating and you have no recourse. Or the luser who didn't read the app description - it's enough to make a BOFH's head explode! I mean, my calculator app may not be great, but it's not crap. http://ghostwood.org/software/ [ghostwood.org] (sorry about the shameless self-promotion).

    Anyway, I understand where Trent's coming from - which, come to think of it, is a scary thought.

"The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was." -- Walt West

Working...