Join Product Reviews on        
Me So Holy Apple iPhone App Rejected

Me So Holy Apple iPhone App Rejected

By: Peter Chubb | May 12, 2009 | 2 Comments

Apple has rejected a new iPhone and iPod Touch App called “Me So Holy,” The app allowed you to place a shot of your face in to a portrait of Jesus or some other religious figure. The app has been rejected with the same arguments that were made with the Nine Inch Nails app, but that has now been approved.

Cnet News has said that Benjamin Kahle, the developer of the “Me So Holy” app is wondering why the application for the iPhone and iPod Touch has been deemed offensive or objectionable. He seems to think that apps such as his are suffering from the after effects of Baby Shaker.

We understand that both Baby Shaker and Nine Inch Nails apps were violent and deserved to be taken down, but Kahle asks if religion should be placed in to the same category as these. He certainly has a point there; let us know your views on this sensitive subject.

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

Download our free iPhone and iPad apps, or read more in Cell Phones, Phone Software.

You may also like...

  1. Apps for 4th of July 2010 Apps for 4th of July 2010
  2. Reported: First designs for Infiniti Leaf rejected Reported: First designs for Infiniti Leaf rejected
  3. St. Basil’s Cathedral anniversary Google Doodle: Most holy St. Basil’s Cathedral anniversary Google Doodle: Most holy
 
Next Story: Capcom: 13 PS3 titles and 12 Xbox 360 titles planned
Previous Story: Far Cry 2 Patch: Corruption problems addressed with update
Tags:
  • GreenishBlu

    This app is harmless, but stupid. The baby shaker app did indeed deserve to be taken down…

    But I’m a little puzzled at why you say the NIN app was ‘violent’ and ‘deserves to be taken down.’ Do you even know what you’re talking about? Why don’t you try looking into things before you make statements like that.

    If you work really hard, you can find links to songs with naughty words, and… Well, that’s the worst of it. It’s basically a message board app and tour-photo sharing app. It’s actually a pretty innovative app if you woyld bother to take a look at it. It’s not something *I* have a use for, but to dismiss it as ‘violent?’ seriously?

  • David Brewer

    It is obvious that whoever, notice that they don’t have bylines like real reporters, wrote this had no idea what they were talking about. First off if there is any group that will get offended before anyone else it is religious zealots crying about the lack of respect for their silly ideology. Secondly, the NIN:Access app for itunes wasn’t violent at al and the reason that Apple rejected it initially, and then recanted and accepted it unchanged 2 days later, was that you could access “profanity”, music with dirty words, through the app. Apple’s SDK states “Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple’s reasonable judgement may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod touch users.” The NIN app was accepted so obviously it didn’t violate the terms of the Apple SDK. Get you facts straight. Here was Kahle’s actual complaint “Is religion really to be placed in the same category as these violent apps? Sex, urine and defecation don’t seem to be off-limits, yet a totally non-violent, religion-based app is.” Where does he mention NIN? If you are going to paraphrase him at least give him credit. Notice there are no ” ” around the comment? What kind of journalist are you? Even a 2 second Google search yielded the actual information which you were pathetically trying to reference.