# New iOS Guidelines - no more carrier restrictions



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

New guidelines were released for iOS



> 2.22 Apps that arbitrarily restrict which users may use the app, such as by location or carrier, may be rejected


This should give Bell and Telus users the ablility to use Rogers apps and vice versa.


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

Joker Eh said:


> This should give Bell and Telus users the ablility to use Rogers apps and vice versa.


Which apps are carrier-specific besides the ones like MyRogers for checking your account information, etc.?


----------



## Limit77 (Oct 6, 2010)

Bell's Montreal Canadiens app / Krock 105.7 Kingston radio station app (Rogers)

I'm sure there's lots.


----------



## kyoru (Jan 15, 2009)

Curious as well as I can't think of any apps that do this besides the fido/rogers one


----------



## SnowDX (Nov 10, 2010)

Bell has a Bell TV app restricted
to Bell Mobility customers. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I am a Bell TV subscriber for over 14 years now and cannot use their app because my iPhone is on Telus. Go figure.


----------



## An Old Soul (Apr 24, 2006)

The word "arbitrary" is important here. Carrier apps for account info isn't arbitrary, by my measure.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

Rogers has their Sportsnet app.


----------



## andreww (Nov 20, 2002)

The wonderful 680 News app is locked to Rogers subscribers only.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Yes all Rogers Media apps, are locked to Rogers customers only. Like mentioned 680 News app which I like for quick news updates. Maybe some don't care but if you go the reviews you will see many reviews and complaints about Bell and Telus customers not being able to use the apps, which doesn't make sense why they limited it because I didn't know you has to be a Rogers customer to tune your radio to 680 News or the Fan 590 in Toronto. , but hey.


----------



## MomentsofSanity (Jul 9, 2008)

SnowDX said:


> Bell has a Bell TV app restricted
> to Bell Mobility customers.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That one particularly irks me. Sure my phone is Rogers but my satellite is Bell and they get FAR more of my money every month.


----------



## Guest (Feb 16, 2011)

Joker Eh said:


> New guidelines were released for iOS
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This should get Apple's own apps rejected, along with a ton of other applications. iTunes and iBooks both restrict based on location as do most of the TV centric apps like Hulu, ABC, PBS, etc.

Apple is really starting to make me very cranky when it comes to the app store and iOS approval crap. They have 2 sets of guidelines, one for them and one for the rest of the world.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

mguertin said:


> This should get Apple's own apps rejected, along with a ton of other applications. iTunes and iBooks both restrict based on location as do most of the TV centric apps like Hulu, ABC, PBS, etc.
> 
> Apple is really starting to make me very cranky when it comes to the app store and iOS approval crap. They have 2 sets of guidelines, one for them and one for the rest of the world.


I think you are little off, Apple does not restrict content on their apps ( like the ones you mentioned) because they want to, it is because they have to. You are comparing apples to carrots. You need to talk to the government and CRTC.

You think Netflix wants to restrict content? You think they like hearing the negative feedback that their Canadian content sucks.

Why Rogers would restrict a Bell user from listening to 680 News or reading the news off 680 news app, is beyond me, why you want to p*** off listeners makes no sense. Do they think someone would switch mobile carriers just to use a 680 news app, and vice versa to Bell and their tv app.


----------



## Guest (Feb 16, 2011)

I understand that there are some reasons why they restrict SOME things and I guess you're right about those examples ... but there are still double standards at play with Apple's iOS and their approval process. Apple apps are allowed to do whatever they want them to do but other developers are not necessarily allowed. How about the whole issue of "private" API's? Apple can use them for their apps but if another app tries to use them they get rejected. That's not exactly a level playing ground is it?

Apple can do things with their own apps that other developers can't .. pretty anti-competitive if you ask me.


----------



## andreww (Nov 20, 2002)

It is their store, I think they can do what they like.


----------



## Garry (Jan 27, 2002)

Joker Eh said:


> I think you are little off, Apple does not restrict content on their apps ( like the ones you mentioned) because they want to, it is because they have to. You are comparing apples to carrots. You need to talk to the government and CRTC.
> 
> You think Netflix wants to restrict content? You think they like hearing the negative feedback that their Canadian content sucks.
> 
> Why Rogers would restrict a Bell user from listening to 680 News or reading the news off 680 news app, is beyond me, why you want to p*** off listeners makes no sense. Do they think someone would switch mobile carriers just to use a 680 news app, and vice versa to Bell and their tv app.


 
Can you point me where on the the CRTC website it says that it regulates content for Internet companies? The reason Netflix has lousy Canadian content is because they are still ironing out the licensing of product for Canada. It's the distributors, not the CRTC that gives a yay or nay to netflix.

But, I'll wait for your link that shows the CRTC dictates programming for them, or any other internet based company.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I prefer Pocket Tunes to listen to radio anyway.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

mguertin said:


> Apple can do things with their own apps that other developers can't .. pretty anti-competitive if you ask me.


Isn't their own device? Is it not their OS? Is it not their delivery system?

Microsoft can do things with Windows that no developer can do, should I bring a lawsuit and complain anti-competitive?


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

Garry said:


> Can you point me where on the the CRTC website it says that it regulates content for Internet companies? The reason Netflix has lousy Canadian content is because they are still ironing out the licensing of product for Canada. It's the distributors, not the CRTC that gives a yay or nay to netflix.
> 
> But, I'll wait for your link that shows the CRTC dictates programming for them, or any other internet based company.


Sorry I thought it was the CRTC that force the regulations about allowing content in Canada. Do they not? 

from this site a simple google search provided.
Telecom Trends: Blocking content



> Recall that last summer, TELUS got into trouble for blocking access to a website without the permission of the CRTC. The basis is Section 36 of the Telecom Act which states:
> [Content of messages]
> *36. Except where the Commission approves otherwise, a Canadian carrier shall not control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of telecommunications carried by it for the public.*So, Section 36 tells us that we need the Commission to approve any control of the content that carriers handle for the public.


So I am assuming the distributors here in Canada have approval from the CRTC to force iTunes, iBooks, Netflix, and all others to block content here in Canada.

Maybe someone can correct me but I have thought this to be the case. If I find more I will provide.

Edit: A thought how can a canadian broadcaster limit me on what I watch on the Interent? They must have some government agency to prevent me from doing such, no?


----------



## fyrefly (Apr 16, 2005)

Joker Eh said:


> Edit: A thought how can a canadian broadcaster limit me on what I watch on the Interent? They must have some government agency to prevent me from doing such, no?


This isn't the CRTC. This is the licensing windows that the broadcaster pays for either from the Canadian Production company, or from the US Broadcaster.

They get a Broadcasting "window" that allows them a certain number of "plays" (airings) w/in a certain time period. For most primetime stuff, it's two plays - simulcast with the US. 

Now-a-days Digital Rights are included in that - but it usually limits the broadcaster to when they can post online (24-48 hours after initial airing) and how long they can have it up there (# of recent episodes, # of weeks/days available online).

That is all dictating by content licensing terms, not by the CRTC in the least.


----------



## Guest (Feb 16, 2011)

Joker Eh said:


> Isn't their own device? Is it not their OS? Is it not their delivery system?
> 
> Microsoft can do things with Windows that no developer can do, should I bring a lawsuit and complain anti-competitive?


It's been done! Albeit slightly different than your example ... it was about Microsoft distributing their Internet App with their OS therefore being anti-competitive against other web browsers. Doesn't look very much different than Apple's approach IMHO.

Read this: United States v. Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ... then substitute in Apple, iOS and iTunes (which is required to even use any of the iDevices).

Don't get me wrong, I'm an Apple fan through and through, but they are starting to go places with iOS that might be a bad sign for things to come. The biggest concern for me here is that Apple controls 100% of the application distribution channel for iOS (unless you jailbreak your device) and is setting rules for it that they don't have to follow themselves. To me that's about as anti-competitive as it gets.... "Oh you want to do _that_ thing like our app does ... Nope! Too bad for you! Next!"


----------



## Garry (Jan 27, 2002)

This is also the explanation for geo-locking sites in the US from Canada.
The US Broadcasters (or streaming services) just don't hold the broadcasting or digital rights for the product in Canada, so they block Canada from their videos.


----------



## Joker Eh (Jan 22, 2008)

mguertin said:


> It's been done! Albeit slightly different than your example ... it was about Microsoft distributing their Internet App with their OS therefore being anti-competitive against other web browsers. Doesn't look very much different than Apple's approach IMHO.
> 
> Read this: United States v. Microsoft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ... then substitute in Apple, iOS and iTunes (which is required to even use any of the iDevices).
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm an Apple fan through and through, but they are starting to go places with iOS that might be a bad sign for things to come. The biggest concern for me here is that Apple controls 100% of the application distribution channel for iOS (unless you jailbreak your device) and is setting rules for it that they don't have to follow themselves. To me that's about as anti-competitive as it gets.... "Oh you want to do _that_ thing like our app does ... Nope! Too bad for you! Next!"


How come the US and Europe did not go after Apple because you can't buy a Mac without Safari. Not that I don't like it, i use it because it was built by Apple, the same for IE I use it on Windows and nothing else.

Never understood the lawsuit MS faced, because they didn't stop you from installing another browser. Thats a discussion for another time.

On the original topic i think this change is a good one.


----------



## Guest (Feb 17, 2011)

Joker Eh said:


> On the original topic i think this change is a good one.


Then I'll agree to disagree  Who knows .. time will tell where this all goes to. I hope I'm wrong about it


----------



## johnnydee (Feb 10, 2004)

mguertin said:


> Then I'll agree to disagree  Who knows .. time will tell where this all goes to. I hope I'm wrong about it


I also think we are going down a rocky road!
When regulators and content providers decide what they think we should be able to watch, hear, listen to and even think about because after all it's for the greater good!

Don't let government bureaucracies decide what is good for you! ie CRTC!

It's very scary!

Rise up people rise up!


----------

