Pundit Country

MC Siegler wrote recently in Techcrunch about the seeming disorder of the iPhone application approval process. Since it’s emergence, there hasn’t been much rhyme or reason to the process by what apps gets approved or rejected or why there is such a lag time between updates once they’ve been submitted for approval. And it’s not a new problem, but has been a feature of the store since its inception. And Siegler isn’t the only author to notice the growing problems.

Most recently there has been the controversy surrounding the Nine Inch Nails app which was accepted, then rejected, then accepted again after no changes were made to it. Then there is the entire issue of nudity in apps. Unlike the initial version of the store, there is a process in place for developers to indicate whether the submission in question is intended for adult audiences. That system would appear to have answered the many potential issues consumers face when trying to prevent minors from obtaining access to such apps. But the few that were initially approved were removed with Apple citing the same rules prohibiting what they viewed as obscenity they had in place prior to the App Store upgrade. It prompted one site, Joy of Tech, to post their all-encompassing guide to the App Store approval process that has been the source of frustration for many.

The whole process has led me to conclude that Apple management have either given no instruction or concrete process to its authorization staff or the process is so vague that its open to multiple interpretations. This alone is an odd position for Apple which normally reigns tight control over all aspects of its product line. And it makes it all the more puzzling why it appears nothing has been done to address it. Siegler notes the same concerns:

This makes no sense. To the point where I’m not sure there is anyone actually in charge of all of this for Apple. Instead, I’m starting to think this whole system is run by a group of people, all with different thoughts on the approach Apple should take with apps. And none of whom seem to communicate with each other very well.

Despite the enormous amount of revenue the store is generating, it’s an issue Apple would do well to alleviate sooner rather than later. There aren’t many avenues for its competitors to exploit, but this could be a significant one. While developers for the iPhone are likely loyal Mac users themselves, a clearer, more transparent submission policy as well as a faster submission-to-consumer acquisition process could very well be the edge companies like Palm, RIM, and Sprint would need  to lure the more creative talent away from Apple. Either way, it’s Apple’s game to lose and so far they don’t seem too concerned about even playing.

Related articles

• First iPhone porn app drama (textually.org)
• Dan Frommer: Smartphone Wars Are Set, Who’s Going To Win? (huffingtonpost.com)
• So Far, Push Notifications on the iPhone are a Letdown (readwriteweb.com)

You know what the top 5 myths the Republican Party are spreading about liberals? Find out at my new column over at Kontraband UK.

The producers and director of the The Hangover must have known the comedic quality they were getting when they cast not one, not two, but four former cast members of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Cast members Ed Helms, Rachael Harris, Rob Riggle and Matt Helms all had their stints on Comedy Central’s fake news show before moving on with their careers in television and film. In fact, the movie is loaded with current and former comedians, which is why the whole endeavor looks so much fun.

The Hangover is director Todd Phillips’ latest film with Warner Brothers staring Helms, along with fellow comedian Zach Galifianakis, Bradley Cooper, Heather Graham, and Rachael Harris. The basic story follows four guys sneaking off to an overnight in Las vegas to celebrate the upcoming marriage of the mutual friend Doug (played by Justin Bartha). The four start the night out with a spiked drink and wake up the next morning in a wrecked hotel suite, a tiger in the bathroom, a missing groom, and no idea what happened the night before.

The film has one of the better hooks I’ve seen in a movie in quite some time, starting with Doug’s soon-to-be-wife Tracy (Sasha Barrese) frantically phone each Doug’s friends, Phil (Cooper), a schoolteacher who can’t stand the life he feels he’s trapped in, Stu (Helms) a stressed-out dentist who’s self-esteem has been ground under the foot of his domineering girlfriend Melissa (Harris), and Alan (Galifianakis), a kind of idiot savant, leaning strongly toward the idiot end of the spectrum. As she is about to hang up Phil calls, telling her they can’t find Doug and that their wedding, which is to take place in five hours, isn’t going to happen. We are then taken back two days and the plot once again moves forward. It was a great way to introduce us in three minutes very quickly to the characters and the basic plot.

This kind of classic setup grabs the audience immediately and sets them up for a grand adventure. What I appreciated most was the film’s ability to keep me engaged as each layer of the plot began to unfold from the discovery of the tiger’s origins, to Stu’s very polite henpecked badass alternating between losing it and staying calm, to Alan’s inability to understand even the most simple of situations, to the introduction of a crazed, naked Asian man looking to kick some major ass. It was all hilarious.

Overall, there were a lot of aspects that were great about this movie. Cooper’s ability to really pull off a larger comedic role, Helm’s sudden, unexpected musical recap halfway through the film, and Ken Jeong’s Mr Chow character stealing virtually every scene he was in. However, there were some parts I wasn’t a big fan of. While there are a great many fans of Galifianakis’ brand of humor (kind of like Steven Wright if he’d had a stroke), I’m not one of them, so most of the time he was on the screen, I was cringing. But if you like what he brings to his comedy act, then you’ll love him in this film. He most certainly makes the role his own, so I suppose that’s saying something for him. Additionally, Phillips completely wasted his two female characters. Both Harris and Graham are very funny women whose talents were mostly squandered in this film. Harris’ character was reduced to an angry shrew while Graham was back to playing the sex kitten role she’s been trapped in time and time again. Both have excellent comedic instincts and I found myself at the end wishing they had been used more. However, neither of these problems are enough to not strongly suggest you see this film. You’ll enjoy youself with a solid plot and great performances.

Related articles

• The Hangover (cinemablend.com)
• The Hangover Review (screenrant.com)
• The Hangover Review (themovieblog.com)

from The Daily Dish.

Sadly, I don’t think it would be reasonable to expect the same from the U.S. if faced with a similar situation. We just freak out too much at the small things to have the capacity to adequately address the big ones.

“No democracy has been nearer the fire and survived than was Britain in that long winter [of 1940]. And one reason for survival was that the nation did not betray the things in which it believed. After Italy entered the war, one of the few murder cases to reach the Law Lords on appeal was decided. An Italian citizen, long resident in Britain, had been convicted by the lower courts of killing a British seaman in Soho. The high court reversed the verdict, set the Italian free, and in the pubs, and in Parliament, on the buses, and in newspaper offices this was regarded as the normal functioning of British justice.

At a time when German bombers were coming through in the daylight over London, when the Germans were expected on the beaches the first foggy morning, the House of Commons, which might have been destroyed with all its members by one well-placed enemy bomb, devoted two days to discussing the conditions under which enemy aliens were being held on the Isle of Man. For the House of Commons was determined that, though the Island fell, there would be nothing resembling concentration camps in Britain, and the rights under law of enemy aliens would not be abused. That is what the British collectively believed,”

- Edward R. Murrow, in the foreword to the second edition of  “This I Believe,” published in 1952

Zachary Roth at Talking Points memo writes up a quick summary of a report conducted by Health Care for America Now (HCAN) that lays waste to the claim that reform legislation for healthcare will destroy the best system currently available. The key paragraph:

But the notion that most American consumers enjoy anything like a competitive marketplace for health care is flatly false. And a study issued last month by a pro-reform group makes that strikingly clear.

The report, released by Health Care for America Now (HCAN), uses data compiled by the American Medical Association to show that 94 percent of the country’s insurance markets are defined as “highly concentrated,” according to Justice Department guidelines. Predictably, that’s led to skyrocketing costs for patients, and monster profits for the big health insurers. Premiums have gone up over the past six years by more than 87 percent, on average, while profits at ten of the largest publicly traded health insurance companies rose 428 percent from 2000 to 2007.

Read the whole article here.

Related articles

• The Dumbest Thing I Have Ever Seen An Insurance Company Do (thehealthcareblog.com)
• The health care status quo is not good enough (mydd.com)
• Study: Americans Struggle To Pay For Health Care, With 40 Percent Delaying Treatments Or Services (huffingtonpost.com)