Why Apple removed 5000-odd “offensive’ apps
In view of the recent purging of overtly sexy apps, Apple has come under fire for practicing double standards because not all adult-oriented iPhone apps were removed from their App Store, according to PC World. Coming to their defense is Phil Schiller who currently sits as Apple’s senior VP of worldwide product marketing. He announced that Apple’s move to remove the “offensive” application complies with requests from parents and women around the world – saying that the apps are degrading. They did not want children to access these apps, seeing how many young children now own or have access to either an iPhone or an iPod Touch, both of which can be used to access the App Store and its “derogatory” content.

Apple admits to practicing double standards?
The very same Phil Schiller who said that the ban was created in view of users’ complaints regarding sexually offensive apps in the App Store, later revealed that “previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format” are not bound to the same rules. In other words, life (and business) goes on for magazines like Playboy, FHM and Sports Illustrated while other apps like Strip Simon are being punished. What we think is most ironic is that Apple deemed it inappropriate to allow apps depicting even a woman clad in a figure skating costume but gave the green light for Sports Illustrated to show women in skimpy bikinis. Is there logic to this?

Which apps survived the purge?
Here are some apps that survived the purge. Only Apple knows how they are allowed to remain in the App Store.

Sports Illustrated 2010 - With “pictures and videos of the world’s most beautiful models”, there’s bound to be a bikini-clad model or two.

Playboy - So what if there are no fully nude photos, it’s still Playboy, and not very kid-friendly either!

FHM - There are videos with incriminating titles such as “Young and Hardly Innocent”, the type that you don’t want your child to see.

Popularity: 1%

No related posts.