Apple's Schiller personally responds to App Store criticism
In an unprecedented move, Apple executive Phil Schiller has personally responded a report that criticized the company's handling of a third-party dictionary program on the iPhone App Store.
In an e-mail to John Gruber of Daring Fireball, Schiller explained that the developers of the application Ninjawords were asked months ago to resubmit their application once iPhone OS 3.0 with parental controls came out, due to questionable content included in the software. Instead, the developer decided to remove the "offensive" words, which were included in the application's source Wikitionary.org, but not in traditional dictionaries.
"The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable," wrote Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. "A quick search on Wikitionary.org easily turns up a number of offensive "urban slang" terms that you won't find in popular dictionaries."
Schiller's e-mail this week was in response to a highly critical column published by Gruber two days earlier, in which Gruber said that Apple censored the developer's application and rejected it for including references to common swear words. The Apple executive denied both of those statements.
However, Schiller did say that the best course of action for the developer would probably have been to follow the suggestion of the App Store reviewers to wait for the parental controls on iPhone OS 3.0.
"Apple did not ask the developer to censor any content in Ninjawords, the developer decided to do that themselves in order to get to market faster," Schiller wrote. "Even though the developer chose to censor some terms, there still remained enough vulgar terms that it required a parental control rating of 17+."
Schiller's response is interesting not only because Apple executives rarely comment on anything publicly, but also because it is one of the most prominent examples of the company defending its App Store approval process. The iPhone maker has repeatedly come under fire recently for how it handles the approval of applications for the App Store, from the length of time it takes for software to be reviewed to the availability of promotional codes
Apple is even under investigation from the Federal Communications Commission for its rejection of the Google Voice software, as well as other third-party applications that utilized Google's service. One such program that was removed from the App Store has been re-released for free by the developer on hacked iPhones.
In an e-mail to John Gruber of Daring Fireball, Schiller explained that the developers of the application Ninjawords were asked months ago to resubmit their application once iPhone OS 3.0 with parental controls came out, due to questionable content included in the software. Instead, the developer decided to remove the "offensive" words, which were included in the application's source Wikitionary.org, but not in traditional dictionaries.
"The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable," wrote Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. "A quick search on Wikitionary.org easily turns up a number of offensive "urban slang" terms that you won't find in popular dictionaries."
Schiller's e-mail this week was in response to a highly critical column published by Gruber two days earlier, in which Gruber said that Apple censored the developer's application and rejected it for including references to common swear words. The Apple executive denied both of those statements.
However, Schiller did say that the best course of action for the developer would probably have been to follow the suggestion of the App Store reviewers to wait for the parental controls on iPhone OS 3.0.
"Apple did not ask the developer to censor any content in Ninjawords, the developer decided to do that themselves in order to get to market faster," Schiller wrote. "Even though the developer chose to censor some terms, there still remained enough vulgar terms that it required a parental control rating of 17+."
Schiller's response is interesting not only because Apple executives rarely comment on anything publicly, but also because it is one of the most prominent examples of the company defending its App Store approval process. The iPhone maker has repeatedly come under fire recently for how it handles the approval of applications for the App Store, from the length of time it takes for software to be reviewed to the availability of promotional codes
Apple is even under investigation from the Federal Communications Commission for its rejection of the Google Voice software, as well as other third-party applications that utilized Google's service. One such program that was removed from the App Store has been re-released for free by the developer on hacked iPhones.
Comments
Now this is interesting. I guess Apple never make up their mind and I think they screwed up BIG time this time.
Kasper or Appleinsider - have you designed mobile site for iPhone yet? It's taking too darn long to load on AI site on iPhone.
When are you going to redesign the website too? :P
First!
Now this is interesting. I guess Apple never make up their mind and I think they screwed up BIG time this time.
Kasper or Appleinsider - have you designed mobile site for iPhone yet? It's taking too darn long to load on AI site on iPhone.
When are you going to redesign the website too? :P
Works fine for me. You still rocking the EDGE network?
The app's in there now and the "truth" has been discussed, so it's time to move on. This isn't as bad as I've seen a lot of people try to make it sound (even after Apple's comments.)
...It got themselves a lot of free PR though.
I suspect that was actually goal...
Why did Apple hire the Jesus police in the first place? Just put in place a check off that you're over 18 and be done with it.
You do realize that that is exactly what Apple did do. If you read Gruber's account and then Shiller's response there is NO conflict between the two accounts. The published letter of rejection from apples states exactly what Shiller stated and there is nothing in Gruber's article to indicate that Apple told them to censor the dictionary, just to wait until 3.0 to allow the 17+ check box.
What I really wanted to hear him respond to was the Google Voice rejection. That is what EVERYONE is upset about, yet Apple finally responds when it relates to some POS dictionary.
You do realize that that is exactly what Apple did do. If you read Gruber's account and then Shiller's response there is NO conflict between the two accounts. The published letter of rejection from apples states exactly what Shiller stated and there is nothing in Gruber's article to indicate that Apple told them to censor the dictionary, just to wait until 3.0 to allow the 17+ check box.
OK- then where's all the Porn Apps?? Don't tell me there is no Apple censorship- that's utter BS.
Why did Apple hire the Jesus police in the first place? Just put in place a check off that you're over 18 and be done with it. Who cares? There will always be something to offend someone these days regardless.
this comment offends me in so many ways, you have no idea
Works fine for me. You still rocking the EDGE network?
this comment offends me in so many ways, you have no idea
Good. Let's keep it that way.
OK- then where's all the Porn Apps?? Don't tell me there is no Apple censorship- that's utter BS.
That's a business decision - they don't want to piss off a large group of vocal, connected people to make a few $ off of pron. You saw the huge public freak out when there were topless women - it was all over the front page of CNN. Compare that to this (and even Google voice) and the only people talking about it are the tech community - Apple knows what they are doing and it's best to just not get involved in the "is pron ok" argument. Just avoid it all together, it's a smart business move.
Funny that this debate should be over a dictionary, when the word to describe the controversy is being used incorrectly. Doesn't anyone know what the word "censor" means? if not, maybe they should look it up.
Not that I really care if Apple censors a dictionary but the application of the word in the arguments is spot on with the actual definition...
"to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news> ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>"
OK- then where's all the Porn Apps?? Don't tell me there is no Apple censorship- that's utter BS.
Well, what would you prefer them to do? Reject porn apps outright (which they do now because those clearly do violate Apple's App Store guidelines) OR approve them and then put black bars on all the naughty parts after the fact?
Personally, I will always prefer the former to the latter.
That's a business decision - they don't want to piss off a large group of vocal, connected people to make a few $ off of pron. You saw the huge public freak out when there were topless women - it was all over the front page of CNN. Compare that to this (and even Google voice) and the only people talking about it are the tech community - Apple knows what they are doing and it's best to just not get involved in the "is pron ok" argument. Just avoid it all together, it's a smart business move.
Since when is censorship a good business decision? I guess WalMArt knows what there doing to by censoring lyrics too? We all know how fanstastic a company WalMart is. At lease let us put non- sactioned Apple apps on our phones if Apple doesn't want to sell them. Like widgets on our computers.
this comment offends me in so many ways, you have no idea
Go back and re-read then- I changed it to a PG13 Version so you wont be offended. Judas priest!