> I mean, if Apple actually actually cared about adult content in general, they would remove browsers from all their content, lest their users be exposed to an infinite torrent of smut and filth.

You say this like it’s possible. If it were, I’d bet it would ship by default in browsers.

In any case, the fact that they have a stake in content at all is a moral choice. They could allow users to install apps through any other way than Apple, but they don’t.

It’s a huge mistake to lump all of Apple’s behavior with regard to their stores into one.

They would lose so much money on third party app stores, that this is clearly a fiscal issue for them. You would need a mountain of evidence showing that Apple thinks that’s a moral issue.

Their content stores is another beast. While adult content sells, I suspect that Apple believes they can make more money while remaining squeaky clean. This has obvious benefits when selling to parents, but it also makes Apple seem more refined and upmarket compared to an AppStore full of “hot babe” calendars and similar. This is more of a hunch than the previous argument though.

The interesting exception is their podcast offerings, where they allow for a lot of sexual content. This also bolsters my suspicions that it’s all financial, since I do not believe that Apple makes much money on podcasts, if any at all.

I am not familiar with the android app store. Do they have the same restictions? And if they don’t, is it really hurting the brand.

Last time I used android, I recall plenty of “hot babe” type apps. But human memory is notoriously unreliable.

Nowadays? No idea. Haven’t used it since 2011 or so.

They could pretty easily block the 100 most popular porn sites in Safari if they cared to. This wouldn't be 100% effective, but it would do something if that were their goal.

Restricting people to the app store where they get a cut of all sales is a business choice, not a moral one. They get more money when you can only buy stuff in the way that gives them money.

Let’s get this said early in the conversation.

Apple isn’t interested in restricting your access. They’re interested in brand association. Nobody conflates Apple’s Sari browser with adult content.

This is about Apple producing or licensing content. They don’t want their name, logo, or brand associated with certain content. It will limit their ability to ship content like Game of Thrones, but it’s not about blocking content produced by third parties.

Yes it is. Apple block stacks of content on iOS, and heavily restrict any mechanisms for people to access them otherwise.

Social networking sites for BDSM sexual minorities are banned from the app store. Sites like Comixology frequently delist books from their app because they're terrified of Apple's arbitrary and capricious censorship deleting them off the platform entirely, despite the fact they don't even accept payments via any Apple systems. They block sexual health education apps.

Apple is very interested in restricting people's access to sexual content and to sexual minorities that Tim Cook isn't a member of.

That’s a brand issue again. The App Store is hosted by Apple. They choose not to host certain content. That’s not the same as restricting access. You can fire up any number of BDSM sites in your browser.

Last i checked my phone was more than a browser. They’re restricting access to app installation.

Yes, that's my point.

Blocking the top 100 most porn sites would do nothing because it’s incredibly cheap to register a new domain name. My point was more that it’s silly to even consider it as a possibility.

And just because this was a business decision doesn’t mean it’s not a moral one—they’re emphatically against you using your own device to your own ends.

Blocking the top 100 most popular porn sites would make it harder for users to reach those sites. It would harm he porn sites that they were morally fighting against by rendering their valuable domain names useless for a lot of users. It's not silly just because it's not 100% effective.

If they were emphatically against you using your device to your own ends, they would do something in the browser.

> If they were emphatically against you using your device to your own ends, they would do something in the browser.

I can't say I care much about their intentions. I can say that they are preventing me from using my device very effectively.

Apple doesn’t restrict people’s ability to consume what they want; they simply choose not to be a distributor of things they choose not to distribute. You can watch porn on a Mac — that doesn’t mean Apple has to become an outlet for its distribution. It’s kind of a libertarian view: do what you want, that doesn’t mean they have to promote or sell it themselves.

I tried the Showtime app trial a while back. There was definitely porn in the "After Dark" section. Considering how heavy handed they've been with other apps in the past, I was a bit surprised.

When Apple prohibits distribution except via their stores that ceases to be a valid argument.

You can consume all you want through “the open web”.