reported that Apple had taken the drastic step to remove over
4,000 adult-themed apps (although some say the number is as
high as 5,000) from the App Store. Apple released a short
statement explaining the removals, noting, "If we find these
apps contain inappropriate material, we remove them and request the
developer make any necessary changes in order to be distributed by
Now, however, Apple marketing guru Phil
Schiller has shed a little more light on the removals and has given
the reason for why as much as 3% of the 140,000+ apps in the App
Store were jettisoned. “It came to the point where we were getting
customer complaints from women who found the content getting too
degrading and objectionable, as well as parents who were upset with
what their kids were able to see," Schiller told the New York
Times. The latter point is an interesting one considering that
parental controls to prevent such content from being seen by
children – perhaps the parents just aren't bothering to enable the
Fred Clarke, one of the men behind
banned app Sexy Scratch Off, said that he was shocked by Apple's
sudden change of direction with regards to adult apps. “We’re
showing stuff that’s racier than the Disney Channel, but not by
much," said Clarke. “This goes farther than sexy content. For
developers, how do you know you aren’t going to invest thousands
into a business only to find out one day you’ve been cut off?”
Surprisingly enough, a Playboy app and
the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit 2010 app are still available from the
App Store. In fact, the latter is listed under the App Store's
"What's Hot" section -- hot indeed.
With regards to those two high profile
apps that were spared, Schiller simply said, "The difference is
this is a well-known company with previously published material
available broadly in a well-accepted format."
In other words, if your bikini models
are provided by a little-known developer, you're toast. However, if
your bikini models are backed by Sports Illustrated or Playboy,
you're home free.
quote: Apple is transforming computing devices into what consumers have wanted for 15 years:
quote: Closed platforms are easier to use and more mass consumer friendly compared to open platforms.
quote: they spend way more on these devices due to closed application access points such as the app store than they would have with an open platform. Why?
quote: Because they are not techies like you. You are tech literate, you know ins and outs of PC hardware and software, but mass consumers don't. Hence they buy those closed platforms, being unable to deal with complexities of the open ones.
quote: Linux is the ultimate openness and see what is its market share in desktop/consumer machines.
quote: So far huge growth of Apple and an influx of iphone/imac/ipod/etc copycats
quote: The Mac has failed to gain market share because it isn't restricted enough, i.e., it isn't a closed platform
quote: Apparently in this case, the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many!