I can be silent no longer. I have tried for nearly a year to love my Apple TV; yet every time I try to do anything beyond playing music with it, I begin to unconsciously claw my eyes out. I think that Apple TV is the worst product I have purchased that has come out of Cupertino -- and in many ways, one of the worst products I have purchased at all. Read on for the sordid details of my hate-hate relationship with my Apple TV.

A new kind of App Store rejection is making the rounds in the iPhone World. It's not about violating the SDK. It's not about objectionable content. It's about Apple empowering its reviewers to reject software without providing any substantive reason or feedback. TUAW reader Kenneth Ballenegger received the following rejection notice for his iLaugh application.

This kind of rejection is a gamechanger. Devs have complained that Apple's review policies to date have been inconsistent and arbitrary, since it was relatively easy to compare rejections and demonstrate the multiple standards in play. This rejection shields Apple's internal processes even further. Instead of moving towards transparency and responding to developer concerns, Apple has pointed itself in the opposite direction.

Making this rejection sting more, the app already was in the App Store; this submission was a bug-fix update. The premium edition of the same app, submitted at the same time, was approved without issue. It seems that previous and current approvals for the same application would argue in favor of letting this version through, or at a minimum providing an explanation of what's wrong with this one. As Christina posted yesterday, developers aren't getting straight answers about App Store rejections, even at WWDC.

"Sole discretion" hides a lot of possible review errors, both subjective and accidental. It makes it harder than ever for smaller companies to appeal rejections and denies them a factual basis on which to evaluate whether their rejection was issued in error. It also gives a firm answer to those who have been hoping for a transparent ticketing system and a open appeal process. Apple isn't interested; it's their store, their rules, and Caveat Developer to anyone whose business plan depends solely on Apple's beneficence.

An app full of admittedly lame jokes might be an appropriate candidate for App Store rejection, but the combination of veto power, the opaque review/appeal process, and inconsistent and capricious application of Apple's ax adds up to a troublesome situation in the developer ecosystem and in the App Store.

Postscript: Kenneth writes in to clarify that the 1.1.1 bug-fix update submitted 3 months ago was rejected. This will not affect his 2.0 Lite version, which was just submitted.

This is just becoming stupid. For the past year, we've heard from developers who have had their apps rejected from the App Store for the silliest of reasons. You know, the app might allow someone to access content that could also be accessed through Mobile Safari, it might display an Old-English translation of the Kama Sutra, or include potentially adult language; but this rejection wins the "most asinine rejection ever" award: Because we said so.

Meet Craig Robinson. Craig is an artist and illustrator. For the last ten years, he's been creating these extremely cool Minipops, tiny pixelated renditions of celebrities and musicians. Check out Radiohead and The Office (UK). These creations have built up a nice fanbase, and Craig even published a book, aptly titled Minipops, in several countries. When Yahoo! Music launched a few years ago, Minipops were featured.

So Craig and his friend Matt decided to create a Minipops iPhone app -- essentially a portable version of the Minipops collection, along with some clever commentary for each illustration and the chance to "guess" what each image represents. The app was rejected from the store under the guise of being potentially offensive. This was shocking, but the guys persevered and resubmitted the app. Once again, rejected. Originally, Craig thought it might have been his sometimes sarcastic commentary that was the offensive part, but the second e-mail made it clear that they found the pixelated illustrations themselves offensive.

Keep in mind, these illustrations are very, very cute -- and if anything, flatter the people they represent more than anything else. Plus, these illustrations have been published not only in Craig's own Minipops book, but used in various other media as well. A book about Michelle Obama will even feature the Minipops of the Obama family.

• Unified mailbox as an option: This works great in OS X. I sure am getting tired of checking 3 email accounts with hundreds of extra finger swipes every day. Even an icon to get me to any inbox I want to see would be an improvement. Some people don't want this. A simple software switch would be fine.
• Louder speakerphone: I have no idea why this as been such a problem since day 1. The volume of this phone is just not loud enough in a noisy environment. Maybe this is a hardware thing, maybe it's software. Whatever. Just fix this!
• Getting to Bluetooth and location manager: These settings are just buried too deep. How about a switch in the top level of settings? Once again, save me all that tapping.
• Consistency of app settings: Sometimes they appear in settings, sometimes within the app. I shouldn't have to scrounge around trying to guess which app works which way.
• Moving icons around on the desktop: Have you ever tried to organize icons by type, or popularity? Gee whiz, what a nightmare. Maybe this could be done by dragging apps in iTunes, or some easy method on the phone itself would be even better. As it is now, it's like one of those old plastic puzzles where you had to get things in order. Every drag of an icon on the iPhone often has unexpected or at least unwanted results. This is not one of those 'it just works' things on the iPhone.
  

Apple, Google, Yahoo! and Genentech are subjects of a fresh antitrust investigation surrounding hiring and recruiting practices among companies in the tech industry, according to Washington Post staff writer Cecilia Kang.

"By agreeing not to hire away top talent, the companies could be stifling competition and trying to maintain their market power unfairly," antitrust experts said in the article. Hiring and recruiting can sometimes be a touchy affair, as Apple found out late last year when trying to hire Mark Papermaster. The investigation may suggest some kind of written agreement among large tech firms to not hire away each other's top talent.

According to the New York Times, Justice has only requested documents for the ongoing investigation. Neither the Justice Department nor any of the companies mentioned in the story had any comment.

This comes in addition to another Justice investigation into ties between the boards of directors of Apple and Google, and whether or not having Google CEO Eric Schmidt on both (and Genentech CEO Arthur Levinson on all three) constitutes antitrust violations. Some consider Apple and Google to be competitors in certain areas such as phone handsets.

The Obama administration is stepping up efforts to investigate anti-competitive activity among high-tech companies, and is already investigating Google's deal with book authors to republish their work via Google Books.

[Via AppleInsider]

After gathering in front of Apple's offices in Taiwan earlier this week, protesters are now demanding a substantive response from Apple by the end of the month regarding alleged workplace labor and safety violations at Wintek, one of Apple's display component suppliers.

Labor groups associated with the protesters claim that Wintek unlawfully fired 619 workers, cut salaries without negotiation, and forced employees to work overtime without pay to fulfill rush orders. The company has since re-hired 20 of those workers and says it is operating within the law. Wintek has also threatened legal action if "company and stakeholder interests" are jeopardized. Wintek further claims that labor groups are violating their agreements and encouraging workers to demand benefits illegally.

The protesters appear to be using the popularity of Apple's brand name to get attention to their cause. "We want to go through Apple to put pressure on Wintek," said Chu Wei-li, secretary-general of the Taipei-based National Federation of Independent Trade Unions.

Apple Asia released a tepid response after the protests. Spokeswoman Jill Tan said, "Apple conducts regular audits of suppliers to make sure they comply with Apple's code of conduct. We require corrective actions when we find violations."

An audit is exactly what aggrieved Wintek employees say they are demanding. MacNN says that rights groups associated with the protests are also asking the Electronics Industry Citizen Coalition to investigate Apple's delay in responding to the matter.

Wintek was recently rumored to be the winner of the display contract for Apple's "media pad" tablet device. Some analysts predict the tablet will go on sale next year.

Apple has previously found itself in the middle of other labor disputes. In 2006, Foxconn workers protested low pay and poor working conditions while assembling iPods. Apple conducted its own investigation and found that the company violated overtime rules and unreasonably punished workers. Since then, cute pictures of Foxconn employees have thawed the image of the supplier.