From his recent comment on an app being allowed into the store, then later rejected, for an offence that large numbers of high-profile games also commit and aren't punished for: "this is Apple being consistent, not inconsistent".
How is that not correct? Apple has stated that apps with runtimes interpreting code are not allowed, and now they're banning an app that does that. How is that not consistent?
I'm glad you asked, since apparently I wasn't clear in my previous post.
Firstly, only apps that download AND run code were not allowed, now apps that download OR run code are not allowed
That's inconsistent over time, not necessarily a bad thing, though it was a change made quietly which is a bit of a poor show.
On top of that there are still lots of apps, games mainly, running interpreters. That's also inconsistent, on a completely different axis.
So yes they are meeting the letter of the (current) law in the banning of this particular case, but "consistent" is not a word I would leap to using in this case. The simple fact that they're kicking out an app that was already in, rather than blocking entry in the first place, makes it a strange word choice.
From his recent comment on an app being allowed into the store, then later rejected, for an offence that large numbers of high-profile games also commit and aren't punished for: "this is Apple being consistent, not inconsistent".