Apple Balks, Finally Relents, At Possible User Queries of Dictionary App 259
Geoffrey.landis writes with a snippet from CNET reporting another example of offputting treatment at Apple's App Store: "'In this case, it's a dictionary app called Ninjawords (so called because ninjas are 'smart, accurate, and really fast') that was rejected three times over the course of two months, mostly because 'objectionable' words could be looked up and found in the dictionary's search function, Gruber reported.' PCWorld also reports the story." Note that the app was eventually approved, but only after a few go-rounds and changes.
censor overlord (Score:3, Insightful)
Is this affecting developers? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have downloaded the Xcode development environment, and lately I've been working on a cool idea for an iPhone app. The more stories I read like this, though, the more I'm wondering whether or not I want to bother.
I've already been jerked around by Apple in regards to this. I have a coworker who, when he found out that I can develop software, agreed to pay for my enrollment in the dev program in exchange for helping him out with some coding. So he bought an enrollment package for me, we filled out the info, and the next day, I got an e-mail from Apple saying that because my application and payment information didn't match up, I had to provide them a notarized copy or a government-issued photograph to prove I am who I claim that I am. I sent them back an e-mail saying that I didn't feel comfortable providing them my personal information, that nowhere in the terms I agreed to did it say that such documentation was required, and that if they want to send me a letter or call my phone to verify my information, I'd welcome the opportunity to do so. They have yet to reply back, so tomorrow, I'm probably going to ask for my coworker's money back and just register myself under my own company's name instead.
So developer-to-developer, I can't help but wonder, is it worth it? Sure, there are stories around of people making a million bucks off of $0.99 apps, but the kind of stuff I have in mind is niche-oriented, and I don't plan to be a millionaire; it's more of a hobby than anything else.
I have an iPhone and I love it, but I don't like the thought that I can't install stuff that I might want because Apple says so. I really don't like being jerked around as a developer and told what other people can and can't run of mine that I write, especially when there's no danger of causing the system to crash or anything like that.
I can't help but wonder if Apple keeps jerking developers around like this if eventually they'll give up and move on to another platform. Apple is customer-focused, and that's great, really, it is. But at what point will they realize that they need developers on board too, just as much or more than we need Apple?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is this affecting developers? (Score:5, Interesting)
Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great... (Score:5, Funny)
Strange. I looked up "duplication of core functionality" on Wikipedia, and it redirected me to "monopoly".
Re:Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple does not have a monopoly. But for all the specific anti-competitive practices we blast Microsoft for, Apple either matches them, or does worse in many regards.
What really gets me is when I used to read Matt Asay's supposed blog about FOSS. Repeatedly he would praise people for leaving Microsoft for Apple, Lotus or other proprietary products. In fact, it seemed not a day would go by without him praising what a wonderful company Apple was, again on a blog supposedly focused on FOSS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Said perfectly... (Score:5, Interesting)
Reposted from the story site:
shbc123 says:
Wed Aug 05 13:24:53 PDT 2009
Re: Apple Screws Up Again, Censors iPhone Dictionary App
Should Apple not also censor what music can be placed on iPods? If they're truly doing this to maintain the sanctity of their phone, how can they justify allowing objectionable music on their music players - what music is able to be placed on iPods should also be dictated by Apple. What about on their computers themselves. Why don't they prohibit any objectionably programs to be installed on their Macintosh computers? Perhaps the next release of OS X should implement another level of parental controls - Apple controls, which would supersede parental controls.
And then there's the claim that they reject certain apps because the provide features similar to ones already built in. Forgetting the fact that the user has already purchased the device, why can't a user decide for themselves who's implementation of a given feature they prefer? Following the same logic as above, why doesn't Apple police Macintosh applications? Firefox? Forget it, it provides functionality that's already available in OS X in the form of Safari. And again, what of their iPods. Why doesn't Apple police music available on their music players? So you want to listen to Pearl Jam AND Sound Garden? Sorry, Apple has determined they're too similar so you'll have to choose one.
I'll admit to never being much of an Apple fan, but I must say I've really enjoyed my iPhone. But this nonsense must end. If it doesn't by the time my AT&T contract is up, I'll be shopping for a nice new Android phone. Thank you Apple. My first experience as a customer is quickly turning sour.
Good to see (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good to see (Score:5, Insightful)
some people still think about the children.
Absolutely. Don't want a kid hearing anything objectionable! In the interests of reaching this wonderful, Utopian, and completely achievable goal, I suggest we also ban children from all other sources of possible profanity, such as:
using the Internet,
playing video games,
watching TV,
going outside,
being around strangers,
being around their parents and other relatives, and
being around all other children, those vile little deviants.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
don't forget objectionable thoughts, lobotomies for all!
Re:Good to see (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way to raise a properly educated, informed, and morally "good" kid is to introduce them to the horrors of the world and let them decide what actions and materials are best for their life. If they have never seen the bad, they cannot appreciate the good.
Re:Good to see (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly.... I want my child to see as much of the world as possible. Look at the starving kids in Africa, look how stupid that guy looks when yelling profanities (and watch how I better handle the situation), look at the "gross" and "objectionable". And read every damn book that has ever been banned.
That's all good, but... goatse?
Re: (Score:2)
That's all good, but... goatse?
Someone, give this man an Insightful +5.
Re: (Score:2)
You aren't likely find goatse in a dictionary app.
But Safari is included out of the box.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What's seeing goatse going to do, turn them into sexual deviants? Burglars? Murderers? Liars? Will it even give them nightmares? No, it won't do any of those things. Everyone seems to accept ideas about what kinds of things harm children on faith, without worrying about how.
Re:Good to see (Score:4, Insightful)
Will it even give them nightmares?
Actually, it very well might do that.
I'm confused (Score:2)
+1 Sarcasm or +1 Insightful?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Read every banned book? What a terrible idea, I'm sure lots of them were awful (in the sense that they were marginally readable pablum, not in the sense that they are naughty or heretical).
Anyone care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone actually care about these apple app stories?
Users and devs both know what their getting into, when they jumped on apples' locked down platform.
Everything that followed was inevitable.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a pattern. A very boring pattern. I prefer the Penrose pattern stamped into a square of Quilted Northern.
Wellll, (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apple were to get away with censorship, and no one complained, who might follow Apple's example? Maybe the Bing-a-lings who run Microsoft? And, if no one objects to MS censoring what MS customers can see on the net, then who is next?
Yeah, I know, lots of people don't buy the slippery slope arguments. Buy it or not, give it some thought.
The developers who are fighting Apple on this are doing us all a service, believe it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Slippery slope [nizkor.org] is a falacy. End [wikipedia.org] of discussion. /sarcasm
Re:Wellll, (Score:5, Insightful)
This guy is free to register ninjawords.com and put up his dictionary as a web application ...
My immediate thought was that if I were developing a dictionary app, I'd simply (simply? Hah! ;-) include a feature that allows for downloading dictionary "modules" from the Web. And I'd document the files' formats.
Of course, the first thing many users would download would be the "naughty words" module. But my justification would be something different. There are all sorts of specialized sub-dialects of English that use specialized jargon. Computer software is one. Medicine is another (with a tree of sub-specialties). World of Warfare is another. There are zillions of them. Just imagine how useful it could be if the people dealing with a specialty with its own jargon could provide a dictionary module to everyone in their field. That would be a prime selling point of a dictionary.
The program itself probably wouldn't even come with a built-in dictionary. Instead, it could read a "basic English" module that lacks all the objectionable words, as well as the huge stock of words most people have never heard. Then it would contact a list of known dictionary-module sites, and present the modules to the user as a checklist. If they want the dirty-word module, they can check it. If they want the fly-fishing-jargon or the Hello-Kitty module, they can check it.
Nobody in any software store would have any reason to object to my basic distribution. And I wouldn't be responsible for the words or definitions on some obscure web site that I've never heard of.
It could also be a useful approach for dictionaries in other languages, too. Just make sure it supports Unicode, and other people could start setting it up themselves.
(OTOH, there's wiktionary.org, which could probably do something similar today. Dunno how easy it would be to make an excerpt for just one or two languages, though.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What'd make even more "sense", though, is to not document to format and sell unoffending specialised modules yourself. ...
Ah, but you missed my point, which was to be able to say in all innocence that you aren't supplying the things that offend the retailers' or censors' sensibilities. That's being done by other people that have nothing to do with you.
Actually, I suppose it could be useful to cooperate on the side with the developers of the add-on modules. A true entrepreneur would do this, for a price, a
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Anyone care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Developers should indeed know better, but I think a lot of people don't know what they're getting into. It's only through publicising stories like this that people will realise and go elsewhere.
This is a very worrying issue - whilst Apple are a niche player, imagine if they did end up becoming a monopoly on mobile platforms? Mobile computing is going to become ubiquitous in the next few years, and I'm very worried at any possibility of it being locked down and controlled by a single company, who could arbitrary decide what applications are allowed, or dictate whatever changes or censorship it liked. This sort of thing can't have enough publicity, just to minimise the risk of this happening. People need to support the many open alternatives whilst there's still a market.
The worrying thing is that it's on a traditionally anti-censorship site like Slashdot that support for the Iphone seems to be strongest.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I care. Every time one of these types of stories come up, people either respond by saying "get over it" or "boycott." I think that's the wrong way to think about things.
In my opinion, sometimes it's better to make so much noise that the controlling party has to change. It HAS worked in the past, despite what the naysayers like to believe.
What is the solution ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What is the solution ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, my mom is the person I know who was the most interested in getting an iPhone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
...and does anybody think these kids don't already know all the dirty words anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
...and does anybody think these kids don't already know all the dirty words anyway?
Most parents will go to extreme lengths to keep that delusion intact.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I for one have my doubts that even by the age of 10, any kid knows all the dirty words. Especially considering how quickly new dirty words (or new dirty meanings for old words) are being coined in English these days.
Visit urbandictionary.com [urbandictionary.com], for example, and see how many of the definitions you or your child know before reading them there.
Keeping up with the latest fashions in dirty words is more than a full-time job.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What is the solution ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The solution is to tell Apple to fuck the hell off.
Re:What is the solution ? (Score:5, Funny)
I looked up the word 'fuck' but I can't find it in my iDictionary.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What is the solution ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe they should kick out the iPhones browser, since much more naughty things than words can be looked up.
Or maybe should realize that the people using their phones don't need any more handholding than the people who USED to use AOL for internet access. Just because Steve Jobs became a power within Disney doesn't mean the iPhone should be forcing the cute n cuddly Disney experience on its owners.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The only possible justification for parental controls is give the easily offended an outlet for the ridiculous demands they make on the rest of society. Don't like something? Censor it yourself.
Parental Controls in addition to baseline level of bowdlerism is just absurd.
Re: (Score:2)
Censorship - it Just Works, Out Of The Box!
I'm not a fan of the Iphone, but I've got to admit, they're way ahead on this one.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What is the solution ? (Score:4, Funny)
There are task forces underway to... ensure every home has a large print bible with big pictures of a non-Jewish Jesus.
How? With full-frontal non-circumcised nudity?
100% proof... (Score:5, Funny)
Relents? (Score:5, Insightful)
What is apple's rationale behind this behavior? (Score:5, Interesting)
Could someone please explain Apple's rationale for their extremely conservative (and stupid) position on keeping everything suitable for a 6 year old? Why not let everything in and have parental controls if they're so concerned? I mean you can surf porn sites with the built in safari browser, so they should allow all 'look up' type apps with that same rationale, or ban safari or censor its web access.
I'm surprised they haven't banned Brushes because you can draw naked ladies with it.
Well, in any case, my iPhone is still slated to be pounded into ground glass as soon as my contract is up. Pretty much had it with the thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Safari can be censored. Check the parental controls.
Re: (Score:2)
on keeping everything suitable for a 6 year old?
Elementary school dictionaries have these words in them too. Many 6 year-olds even go through the effort of highlighting them.
Yet Another Apple Store Rejection Story (Score:2)
I don't know if I should be saddened by the fact that all these stories about Apple Store rejections mean more publicity for a company such as Apple (under the principle that no publicity is bad publicity), or be pleased by the fact that the danger of developing for a closed platform is being so widely exposed.
Just who do they think they are anyway? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just who do they think they are anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who appointed Apple to be the legal guardian and nanny of iPhone users?
To be fair, the iPhone users did.
Which is why I don't have an iPhone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who appointed Apple to be the legal guardian and nanny of iPhone users?
I was going to say Jennipher Dickens, except Apple was applying rejection terms to applications from the start before Baby Shaker(*) made it to the store. But I think you can hold her responsible for the ramping up of the rules.
And the kinds of rejections we see now indicate to me that there are people on the approval panel inside Apple protesting these rules by making these sorts of ridiculous rejections to pressure Apple with bad press to let up.
(*) And a misunderstood "game" it was: it intended to educat
Re: (Score:2)
Who appointed Apple to be the legal guardian and nanny of iPhone users?
I'm pretty sure Apple did.
Text fields? (Score:2)
If someone is looking up a "bad" word... (Score:4, Insightful)
If it is a "bad" word, the dictionary ought to tell you, in addition to the definition, that it is not a polite word.
Even my paper dictionary has "fuck" in it. My kids know all the "bad" words, and they know when not to use them (when their mother is around.)
Does the iPhone prevent them from browsing urbandictionary.com?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If someone is looking up a "bad" word... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are missing the point - the big problem is that Iphone can only use software that is on the app store, therefore Apple's decisions on what's allowed on the store are equivalent to Apple deciding what apps are allowed on the platform, and that is the issue. No one cares about simply not being hosted on a store.
Now sure, Apple are still free to make a locked down platform if the like. Equally, people are free to criticise Apple for doing so. And yes, not buy their Iphone - and how will people know not to buy the Iphone? That's right, with stories like this.
No, you don't get to decide what goes in my journal. But if Slashdot decide to disallow naughty words - whilst that would be their "right" - people would clearly still have the right to criticise them over that decision. No one's claiming that Apple don't have a legal right - that's a straw man. Saying "But but, they have a right" could apply to most of the stories that make Slashdot (or the news in general). Most of the time, that's not the issue.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess I don't see it as a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm). It's their platform to begin with, they made it and decided what it would be. Their rules are made known when downloading the SDK and paying the 99$ fee. It would only be a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm) if they were the only game in town. Vote with your wallet.
As for complaining about it, sure you're free to complain. However, reading most of the comments here, it seems like people aren't actually complaining more than trying to insinuate that Apple is acting agains
Re: (Score:2)
heir rules are made known when downloading the SDK and paying the 99$ fee.
I think the issue at hand is that the rules aren't actually made clear - see this blog of rejections [tumblr.com] for examples of things that have caught developers out.
It would only be a "BIG PROBLEM" (tm) if they were the only game in town. Vote with your wallet.
In terms of possible earnings, the iPhone might not be the only game in town, but it is probably the best game in town - it's got global reach, increasing market penetration, and a standard platform (iPhone gen 1, 3G or 3GS; or iPod Touch gen 1 or 2, all with the same mode of interaction), which makes it very easy to code for, as opposed to the multitude
Re: (Score:2)
Users have to download and SDK and pay a fee now?
No, but Users don't submit apps and get them rejected either. Users decide to purchase the iPhone based on the apps available, which have already gone through the screening process. They choose iPhone based on if it fills their needs or not. Developpers get apps rejected if they don't follow the rules and as such, it's important for them to know the rules. And if it's not a BIG PROBLEM, why did you say it was ? It's a small problem and the discussion here could be about alternatives instead of just whi
Haha. (Score:3, Funny)
And yet I still want one. (Score:2)
Quick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So Apple shout "NO SOUP FOR YOU! NEXT!"
So many caps? Ok. PERL sucks.
If you mean did not relent, then yes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:If you mean did not relent, then yesOKAY WHO .. (Score:5, Interesting)
Alright, inquiring minds want to know just who at Apple looked up all these words to see that they were actually in this app in the first place? Who has that dirty little mind to look up all these naughty words -- and is still allowed to work at bright shining, purer than Ivory Soap Apple?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hahah, charade you are (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple isn't just the new Microsoft. Apple is the new Mary Whitehouse and Thomas Bowdler.
Apple Is Like Any Other Corporation (Score:2)
I, for one, wish that the fanbois would just shut up about Apple's supposed superiority. You get what you pay for, Apple costs more, it ought to be better. Better != Divine.
Re: (Score:2)
Best Quote from TFA: (Score:5, Funny)
Apple Computers (Score:2)
Apple declares: "F[CENSORED] it, we're evil" (Score:2, Informative)
After bricking unlocked iPhones, kicking applications off the iPhone store that might even slightly compete with iTunes in the far future and charging developers for the privilege and filing a wave of patents on basic well-known computer science, Apple Inc. today filed a Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission declaring that it was openly adopting Evil(tm) as a corporate policy [today.com].
"F*** it," said Steve Jobs to an audience of soul-mortgaged thralls, "we're evil. But our stuff is sooo good. You'll
Ban the phone app (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe Apple should ban the phone application in the iPhone since users are currently able to communicate bad words.
Android = Open (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
how open the Android system is. Did I mention it was open? open, open, open
So's my Pre
OK, so where can I download the Pre's source code, and under which Open Source license is it released?
I found open source apps they use [palm.com], but their own code is strangely absent.
No Calculator App then? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No Calculator App then? (Score:5, Funny)
Same story with similar app (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm a developper of ZenTap ( video [youtube.com]), it isn't dictionary (basically is text editor) but one of it's abilities is the text prediction.
Apple rejected one of the first versions (called FastMail) of zentap because they found some "bad" words in the predictions.
And what I've done to fix it? Nothing
I resubmit it without any changes but in the submission form there are a section(Application Rating Detail) where you have to mark things like:
Offline Wiktionary ? (Score:2)
Since the author of NinjaWords submitted it to AppStore, I think he wants to makes some money from it.
This is quite unethical, because it's basically a dump of wiktionary: http://en.wiktionary.org/ [wiktionary.org]
(the dumps can be downloaded freely)
and frankly, it's not the best dictionary on the Web (see for example http://www.tfd.com/ [tfd.com] )
A free offline Wikipedia already exists for the iPhone:
http://collison.ie/wikipedia-iphone/ [collison.ie]
So, I really don't see the point of this application.
Is it so lame that it needs so much PR ?
Appl
wow (Score:2)
!
A dictionary that is missing the most commonly used words!
Foresighted U.S. Censorship for the Knockout
Apple has done this before (Score:4, Informative)
"Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple's reasonable judgement may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod touch users."
The screenshot provided with the rejection notice should the same type of words as in the OP. Again, words you had to search for to find.
More recently, Apple decided that because Dictionary provides uncensored access to Wikipedia, it must carry a 17+ rating. The text in this case was:
"Dictionary allows unfiltered access to Wikipedia, which includes frequent mature or suggestive themes. Applications must be rated accordingly for the highest level of content that the user is able to access."
As an app developer, this kind of behavior on Apple's part is very frustrating. Apple have fallen off their rocker, IMO.
This article is too forgiving. (Score:5, Insightful)
This summary is way too forgiving!
Apple went crazy with this one, far more than they have before.
The summary says: "Note that the app was eventually approved, but only after a few go-rounds and changes."
Yeah, the few go-rounds and changed included *Completely removing* words apple didn't like, including the word "ass" among other things.
Note that the developer already went out of their way on the very first version of the program to prevent offensive words from coming up as suggestions for other things - i.e. typing "fuc" did not bring up "fuck" as a suggestion, you had to already know a profane word in order to see its definition.
Apple still rejected it even with those modifications, and didn't approve it until certain words were completely removed, including fuck, shit, etc AND the developer had to give their program a 17+ age rating!
This goes beyond apple's normal bullshit into a whole new level of bullshit.
-Taylor
took long enough for this to get here. (Score:2)
Ask the idiots that are still trying to burn books for their content. You guys have the wrong bad guys here.
We need to look at a society that thinks that bad words are no good for kids and so we must ban them so that we can claim we are responsible parents and not
Apple VP Responds...The Rest of the Story.... (Score:3, Informative)
http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/phil_schiller_app_store [daringfireball.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Needs clarification : Monopoly on what ?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this is why no platform has any software with naughty words in it. And Microsoft are so liable for every Windows application out there.
Oh wait, they're not. The issue with it being on their store wouldn't be an issue, if they allowed the platform to use software from anywhere, like every other platform on the planet.