All we have is "Apple [..] expect[s] apps to provide a really great user experience"
vs this low-res screenshot of some video or animation (can't even tell which and there is no UI visible) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-17/a-screenshot-of-the-in...
As you said, if the app part is starting a video that could just as well be on youtube, there is no use in it. If it has a decent interface to discover different videos, it can make sense. But we can't know based on the spare facts we have and for this I blame that company, not apple. Even on their website there is not a single screenshot showing the app...
thanks. indeed very very unspectacular. I personally prefer the android store, where anything can be published, but can understand how apple says the app part of this thing has no value.
Its unfortunate we have a gate keeper like that. How many ideas started out as simple proofs of concept, how many world changing ideas appeared stupid at first. The users should be the ones deciding which apps are worth having on their phones.
At this point we're limited to whatever Apple can imagine is useful. Long term this will stifle innovation.
This makes me wonder if Apple could let more of their app selection process be a crowdsourced function? Outside of illegal content or porn I can't imagine why Apple should block anything on content grounds to satisfy their 'walled garden' protective goals, and cultural content like in the OP is certainly relevant to the indigenous communities involved.
I'm sure the actual movies are decent enough, but as an app there's hardly any functionality and it does look like it violates Apple's policy.
This has nothing to do with 'digital colonisation' and everything with rejecting shitty money-grab made-in-an-afternoon apps.