But after some point, with the image established, inclusion is the winning strategy -- or else money is left on the table, or an opening for other competitors emerges. Few adults hold a lower opinion of bookstores, cable-operators, and movie-theaters that include among their range of offerings some things that are diametrically opposed to their personal political/religious/social standards.
When does a a platform proprietor know when to shift? Is the shift best done rapidly or gradually? Even if the model is correct, is Apple being too conservative in opening up?
Uh... this is wildly untrue. You don't find XXX movies at mainstream theaters or Barely Legal magazine at Barnes and Noble. Likewise you'd be hard pressed to find your typical college-educated liberal at a christian bookstore.
You will find books, magazines, and movies with nudity and sex at Barnes and Noble -- far moreso than allowed under current App Store standards.
Also, to the point of the original app rejection, you will find plenty of material that mocks all sides of the political spectrum. A countdown to Obama's inauguration with a negative caricature of Bush is mild compared to what you can find in bookstores, cable-channels, and theaters.
Those outlets carry such material without their customers getting offended by their mere availability.
You're making a big leap here. You're saying that people can't tell the difference between a telephone and a store, but they can tell the difference between an application written in HTML and Javascript and an application written in Objective-C? (Remember, Apple doesn't regulate web content, and web content can be launched via an icon on the home screen.)
The reality here, I think, is that Apple just wants some time in the tech press. They hadn't really been doing anything interesting, and people were talking about Windows and Android instead of the iPhone. Now that's changed.
Relevant video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UMX-btHwYE
I get that we're all technical people here, but you're looking at this wrong. Imagine this conversation:
BOB: I am really angry at this thing my kid was playing with. It portrays a class of people as less than human.
TOM: That's horrible, where did she find it?
BOB: HorribleWebsite.com
TOM: That's tough, have you talked with her about being careful on the net?
Now Bob's daughter may have been using an iPhone, or an Android phone, or a computer, it doesn't matter. The Internet is unavoidable, and we have to deal with things that we don't like.
Lets try another.
BOB: I am really angry at this thing my kid was playing with. It portrays a class of people as less than human.
TOM: That's horrible, where did she find it?
BOB: She bought it on the AppStore.
TOM: Apple lets them sell that sort of thing? I'm going to take my son's away and get him another phone. I don't need that in my life.
Now, does either Bob or Tom know the different between an "Objective-C" application and an HTML5 offline bookmark? I can't tell, and it doesn't matter. They do know whether this offensive content can be avoided by abandoning the platform based on whether this is "web" content or not.
But sure, show your crying kittens video. Apple doesn't know what they're doing, their success was probably just luck.
Bob: Heya Tom, it's Bob from the office down the hall! Good to see you, buddy... how've ya been? Look at my awesome iPhone. It can read email and stream Pandora at the same time.
Tom: Uh, no it can't.
Bob: Yeah, well look at this boob app.
Tom: Again, not possible.
Bob: Oh yeah. Because of Apple's strange policies towards the app store, I can't run two applications at once or make my own decisions on what content I find appropriate. And what is and is not appropriate can change without any advanced notice to me, meaning that if an inappropriate app has a bug in it, the developer will never be allowed to fix it for me.
Tom: So why did you buy that piece of junk again?
Bob: Because it was cheaper than the Nexus One.
Tom: You get what you pay for.
Being a playwright is fun.