

Apple, It's Time to Delete Safari From the iPhone - jasonlbaptiste
http://gizmodo.com/5446287/apple-its-time-to-delete-safari-from-the-iphone?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gizmodo%2Ffull+%28Gizmodo%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

======
ubernostrum
First comment at the article makes a rather solid point: when it ran an
initial story this morning about the app being approved, Gizmodo characterized
Forchan as a "porn app":

[http://gizmodo.com/5445065/apple-approves-porn-app-in-
under-...](http://gizmodo.com/5445065/apple-approves-porn-app-in-
under-12-hours)

But now that it's been pulled from the store, Gizmodo changes to representing
it as "exactly the same as Safari" and downplays the porn aspect.

(and note that the two Gizmodo stories were posted 90 minutes apart -- amazing
how quickly Gizmodo moved to completely reframe the story...)

~~~
jacoblyles
It is nothing more than a image-only web browser, right? How does Gizmodo's
framing of the story change the facts?

~~~
Lazlo_Nibble
I'm not sure the app is (was) a pure image browser. The dev said: "There is
currently over 100,000 pics spread between 15 categories with much much more
coming soon." The "categories" thing makes no sense unless the app was able to
associate specific sites/boards with certain categories ("blondes,
brunettes...") somehow, either by linking to the boards directly or by
detecting a "known" categorized board/subboard when the user browsed to it.

Bottom line is that if there were any nudity/porn sites included in the URLs
that enabled the "category" feature, the takedown was probably justified.

------
ryandvm
What's so complicated about this? Apple likes to control every aspect of its
products. Apple's customers like this.

If you don't like how Apple sanitizes the "Apple Experience" then buy an
Android phone.

~~~
m0th87
I'd be OK with this if the network effect didn't exist. If the iPhone becomes
the de facto standard, it's a loss for mobile developers everywhere.

~~~
amalcon
Mac users generally got along OK when Windows was the _de facto_ standard on
desktops (i.e. now). If the iPhone becomes the _de facto_ standard, I suspect
users of the next runner up platform or two will still get along OK.

I mean, I've never been big into any apple products in the past, but I've know
a lot of people over the years who were very satisfied with their Macs.

~~~
m0th87
Windows being the de facto standard was bad. It held the web back for years,
because Internet Explorer remained stagnant.

------
jsz0
This article fails to mention what rating the app was submitted with. Seems
like a crucial point. We know Apple doesn't allow pornography-specific apps
but they have allowed in general purpose applications that _could_ be used for
this purpose in the past but they have to carry a mature rating since Apple
cannot vouch for the content. It would be really trashy if they submitted this
as a kid safe application that defeats parental controls. Not sure that's the
case, since Gizmodo didn't bother to cover it, but it would be interesting to
know what rating this app was submitted with.

------
sophacles
Obviously the situations are different -- vastly so. First of all, safari
doesn't sound like the name of a scary anti social networking site, it sounds
like an adventure instead! Second, since apple can do no wrong (in its own
mind), porn in safari must be a hack, and probably violates TOS and warranty.

Edit: forgot the :P, but it is a joke

~~~
jhancock
I suppose the parent comment was being sarcastic.

Safari can also mean an adventure (using essentially slave labor) to illegally
kill lions and elephants. The name forChan doesn't mean the same thing to non-
IT-geeks.

This seems to be just another case of the App Store behaving badly (unless
there is more to the story, like malware). It is very unfortunate that Apple
is profiting so well from the App Store model. I can imagine many companies
wanting to replicate the closed-platform, you must use our one store model.
Its a shame to see free markets devolve.

~~~
sophacles
Indeed -- it was a mocking reply to a snarky article. Unfortunately it seems
inventing absurd positions to justify someone else's behaviour is a form of
humor lost on people here.

~~~
scott_s
Or people didn't think the attempt at humor was funny and was just noise. As
I've said here before, you're probably not as funny as you think you are.

~~~
sophacles
I can accept that, but why not stop at -1? Why keep downvoting -- unfunny joke
does not need to be beaten down the same way racist troll does.

~~~
scott_s
Maybe they do - while one is morally inferior to the other, they're both
noise. (If there was not a limit at -4, I suspect a racist troll would
eventually go more negative than a simply unfunny attempt at humor.)

------
sjs
Doesn't Safari for iPhone come with parental controls? That could be one
difference right there.

