Whither Eucalyptus?

Update

The situation has now been resolved. Read more in my later blog entry.

Original Post

If you’re wondering why Eucalyptus is not yet available, it’s currently in the state of being ‘rejected’ for distribution on the iPhone App Store. This is due to the fact that it’s possible, after explicitly searching for them, to find, download from the Internet, and then read texts that Apple deems ‘objectionable’. The example they have given me is a Victorian text-only translation of the Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana. For the full background, a log of my communications with Apple is below.

To give a bit of background about Eucalyptus itself, it doesn’t ‘contain’ books any more than a newly bought iPod ‘contains’ songs. It provides an easy-to-use way to find and download classic books, then presents them a beautiful, readable (I would say the most beautiful, and most readable, but I’m biased of course) way. Check out the videos at eucalyptusapp.com if you haven’t seen them. The books are all text-only, and are directly downloaded from the archives of the well-respected Project Gutenberg.

The exact book (the Kama Sutra) that Apple considers the ability to read ‘objectionable’ is freely available on the iPhone in many ways already. You can find it through Safari or the Google app of course, but it is also easily available via other book reading apps. You can get it easily via eReader, though the search process is handled by launching a third-party site in Safari, with the download and viewing taking place in eReader. Stanza offers up multiple versions, some with illustrated covers. Amazon’s Kindle app, the latest version of which was approved by Apple this week, offers multiple versions too - although it does charge from 80¢ to $10 per book - and you again purchase via Safari before Kindle downloads the book.

I am at a loss to explain why Eucalyptus is being treated differently than these applications by Apple. I’m also frankly amazed that they would suggest I should be manually censoring content that is being downloaded from the public Internet - classic, even ancient, books, no less.

To digress a little for a moment, it especially amazes me that this is happening to Eucalyptus - a $9.99 app that allows you to download text-only classic books - given the huge volume of what is arguably soft-core porn imagery that’s now available in apps on the store. Just search for “sex” to see what I mean (or even “Kama Sutra” - you’ll find “SlideHer Tera Patrick”, the description of which features the classy line, “Almost X rated, it’s not porn.”) I do, however, accept that this could be seen as a consistent policy - even if it does seem morally dubious to me. Honestly though, is a 14 year old looking for something illicit more likely to download a free bikini girls app, or pay $9.99 for a book reading app, search explicitly for the Kama Sutra, then wade through Victorian prose trying to find the ‘good bits’?

Anyway - back to the issue directly at hand. For all I know, it could just be that I was unlucky enough to have Euclyptus assigned to an over-zealous reviewer. If Apple responded to attempts at communication, it’s possible we could have resolved this quickly, even if it took a call-center style “can I please speak to your manager”, but they do not.

A commentary

I’m going to talk a bit about my personal frustrations here - you can skip this part if you’re not interested in emotional impact, or would class further complaints as whining.

I suspect that no-one at Apple knows how genuinely torturous the app store approval process is for developers personally after a rejection. When they hold the key to the only distribution pipe for something you’ve spent a lot of your time on - in my case a year - something you’re hoping could provide you with a livelihood - and polite email enquiries are not replied to - not even with an autoresponder, it is extremely frustrating. I don’t think I’ve ever felt as powerless in my life (and I’ve had to deal with US immigration authorities…). I think anyone that knows me would confirm that I’m a very level-headed person, but this is the only thing in my adult life I can recall losing sleep over (although perhaps that’s also a consequence of being otherwise lucky in life so far).

I can certainly appreciate that Apple probably has to deal with some very difficult and unreasonable developers, but that’s not a reason to lock all others out of any form of conversation. I am sure they could do a lot to improve developers’ view of the process if they were just a little more outwardly friendly. There’s a lot they could do without even spending significant money - how much would an estimate of time remaining until review cost to implement? Or a policy of responding to at least one email after a rejection?

If it wasn’t for their dominant market share, I suspect that they would have to be a lot more friendly to attract developers to the platform. As it is, I guess I just have to hope that they realise the emotional distress they’re causing (and I haven’t even mentioned the other flaws of the process, like the inability to specify when your application will go on sale if you want it to appear in the ‘new’ application lists).

The full background

Below, identifying details (email addresses and reference numbers) have been removed from the emails originating from Apple.

Eucalyptus was first submitted to Apple on the 27th of April. On the the 3rd of May, I received the first rejection - for misusing the ‘Contacts’ and ‘Bookmarks’ icons to represent ‘Authors’ and ‘Books’. I don’t really have complaints about this - Apple’s been fairly (though not entirely) consistent about enforcing the use of standard icons for their narrowly defined purposes, and I really should have known better. I resubmitted with new icons - the ones now on display in the tab bar in the videos at eucalyptusapp.com, and expected smooth sailing.

A week later, on the 10th of May, I got this email:

Dear James, Thank you for submitting Eucalyptus — classic books, to go. to the App Store. We’ve reviewed Eucalyptus — classic books, to go. and determined that we cannot post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store because it contains inappropriate sexual content and is in violation of Section 3.3.12 from the iPhone SDK Agreement which 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.” Please view the attached screenshot for further information. If you believe that you can make the necessary changes so that Eucalyptus — classic books, to go. does not violate the iPhone SDK Agreement, we encourage you to do so and resubmit it for review.

It was accompanied by this image:

Search showing result for Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana

I immediately replied:

Hello, I received the email quoted below today. Eucalyptus does not, as you say it does, “contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive or defamatory content or materials of any kind”, it simply provides an interface for searching an internet archive of classic books. The screenshot in question was taken after manually searching specifically for the phrase in the screenshot. The ‘content’ is not not ‘included’ in the application, or specifically controlled by me. The same content could be found by searching at http://gutenberg.org/ with Safari, or by searching with the Google application, also available on the store. I would appreciate a reply to this email, I trust that this is an error made in good faith. Thanks, James Montgomerie

I also re-submitted Eucalyptus to Apple, on the advice of another developer who had previously been advised by Apple to resubmit an app when it was erroneously rejected because after a binary is in the ‘rejected’ state it ‘cannot’ be accepted. If this was the case, it seemed wiser to do it sooner rather than later if a place in the queue was at stake.

I received no reply at all to my email, so on the 13th of May (three business days later), I sent another email:

I have received no reply to the email quoted below, or confirmation of reception. Could you please confirm that you have received this?

The next day (14th of May), I received this - to me it looks like an automated email, but I guess it could have been sent by a human:

Your application, Eucalyptus — classic books, to go, is requiring unexpected additional time for review. We apologize for the delay, and will update you with further status as soon as we are able. Thank you for your patience.

On the 18th of May, I sent:

Hello, Can you supply any more details on this delay? Is there anything further you need from me, or questions I could answer? Thanks, James Montgomerie.

Again, no response.

Yesterday (20th May), I received this:

We’ve received your application inquiry. Each app submitted to Apple has different capabilities, features, and complexity, which means that individual review times vary. Once the application review process has been completed, you will receive an email notification. Note: If you self-reject a binary and upload a new one, the application review process is reset and starts from the beginning. Therefore, we strongly recommend that any quality assurance testing is performed prior to submitting the app. While we cannot respond to every app submission inquiry, if we encounter any issues or need additional information you will be contacted. If you wish to check the status of your application, you can do so by visiting iTunes Connect .

This was shortly followed by another email (note that there is still no reference to the points I brought up in my original reply):

Dear Mr. Montgomerie, Thank you for submitting Eucalyptus — classic books, to go to the App Store. We’ve reviewed Eucalyptus — classic books, to go and determined that we cannot post this version of your iPhone application to the App Store at this time because it contains explicit content which is in violation of Section 3.3.12 from the iPhone SDK Agreement which 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.” Please view the attached screenshots for examples in regards to the objectionable content. Parental Controls have been announced for iPhone OS 3.0. It would be appropriate to resubmit your application for review once this feature is available.

The screenshots attached were:

Page from Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana Page from Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana

I quickly replied with:

Might you reconsider this decision? I appreciate the meaning behind this. The very same text, however, is accessible via Safari (at www.gutenberg.org, the scholarly archive that Eucalyptus directly downloads its books from), for example. The same book is also available in other existing iPhone applications - ‘Stanza’ provides access to multiple versions, some with illustrations. In either of these examples, the content is no harder to find than it is with Eucalyptus - it requires a specific manual search. Thanks - hope to hear back soon, James Montgomerie.

And have not received a reply.

What I’m doing now

I’m afraid I’ve currently decided to sell my soul, or at least rent it out for a while, and manually block the Kama Sutra from appearing in Eucalyptus. It may become accessible again in a later version of Eucalyptus when Parental Controls become available. If someone at Apple would like to contact me to let me know that this is unnecessary, and that Eucalyptus will now be treated the same way as other iPhone apps, I would be very happy to hear from them.

What can you do? I suspect not much. At the risk of introducing crass commercially into an otherwise honorable blog post, you could perhaps go to eucalyptusapp.com and sign up to be notified by email when Eucalyptus is released (with or without access to ‘objectionable’ texts) - or follow @eucalyptusapp on Twitter for updates - and buy it when it’s available. You will, of course, be supporting the very company whose actions (and inactions) inspired this blog post by doing so, but you’ll also be supporting me, and Project Gutenberg (20% of the gross profits from Eucalyptus go them, as their license dictates).

Thanks for reading. It feels good to get this off my chest after keeping quiet for so long.

Update

I’ve now received another email from Apple (an hour and a half after posting the entry above). I’m not sure whether it’s more polite to post it here or not, so I’ve erred on the side of being transparent. I hope this doesn’t turn into a soap opera of updates.

Dear Mr. Montgomerie, Thank you for submitting Eucalyptus — classic books, to go to the App Store. Your iPhone application to the App Store at this time because it contains explicit content which is in violation of Section 3.3.12 from the iPhone SDK Agreement. It would be appropriate to remove this particular section in your application due to: “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.”

I have replied:

I am unsure what you mean by “remove this particular section”. Eucalyptus provides a search-and-download interface to a public archive of texts curated by Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org). The books are not split into ‘sections’, and not controlled by me. Even though it has meant creating a specific filter on search results, I have now submitted a new version that specifically blocks access to the Kama Sutra book you identified. Is this what you mean? James.

37 Comments

Ouch. I hope they don’t have a long list of books they’ll try to search for.


Keep pushing.

It’ll take time. It’ll be incredibly frustrating. But keep calmly restating the (sane) case until the reviewer gets bored and passes it on to somebody competent. Your argument is sound to anybody with a couple of ounces of functioning braincells to rub together — by the criteria used by Apple here, any application which allows searching the Internet for anything would fall afoul of this. Google’s application. Twitterrific. Maps (gasp, you could search for a lapdancing club!). Safari. Any of the ‘bookmarks’ applications.

Either that, or go on a killing spree.

Don’t manually block the Kama Sutra, though. Not because I want to read it, but because it’s a ridiculous thing to have to do, and there are at least some people at Apple who know this.


Clearly the answer is to immediately pull Mobile Safari out of everyone’s iPhone because you can use it to see porn.

Manton Reece asked recently on Twitter: "Remember when we thought $99 was a nice barrier to entry for iPhone dev?" Well, in my case anyway, the barrier to entry has been the alarming number of posts of this kind about the App Store approval process. Why should I devote my time and energy to a software project, if I won’t know until the very end whether or not it will even be allowed to ship? I think it might be a smarter business decision to ship a Mac version instead, and avoid the App Store until these issues are resolved.


To put it bluntly, that sucks. Almost even worse than the initial rejection, though, is the suggestion that in order to be approved, you’ll have to categorize your app as innapropriate for younger users once parental controls become available in OS 3.0. Yes, they found something "offensive" in your application — by searching for it. But what about the wealth of useful and educational texts out on Gutenberg that could be immensely valuable to younger users?

I applaud you for taking this on so calmly. I know I certainly would have not have been able to handle this situation with nearly as much poise. If I were you, though, I would continue fighting for approval without manually blocking any content. If there’s one thing that has been proven about these insane App Store rejections, it’s that they more often than not get overturned as soon as they get some attention on blogs, Twitter, etc.


Good grief, that is ridiculous. As an author, I find the entire exchange (on Apple’s part) offensive. Good lord. I have a feeling this may be a case of one hand not knowing whose ass the other hand is wiping, but it’s no excuse, and they better fix it soon.

Blessings and good luck, Terry


I can tell you that all of the emails you have received are automated stock emails - I have been through a similar headache with one of my updates. I am very intrigued to see what happens with your censored version, I’m sure there are is plenty more "objectionable content" to be found in the Gutenberg project. Just keep resubmitting until it gets approved, it’s frustrating (to the point of insanity at times!) but you’ll get there in the end.


Aside from being complete BS, can we have a moment for how odd it is that the reviewer searched for something so specific?


This is horrible. I can only hope that some blog and twitter heat will reach the eyes of someone in Apple with common sense that can do something about this. Baffling when you look at what is available in the App Store already that contains far more questionable content. I’ve got a couple of app idea’s myself and I’m trying to get on the ladder of developing for the iPhone but with very little knowledge of mac development, to hear that many months of work can be arbitrarily blocked is really off putting.

Good luck.


…storm while in a cave in a combat zone, when I have lots and lots of bars? – and stories like this, every time I look at my iPhone I get a little more angry. One imagines the reviewers making sure a…


…"http://mcdevzone.com/category/links/" title="View all posts in Links" rel="category tag">Links Whither Eucalyptus? - Jamie’s Web Log If you’re wondering why Eucalyptus is not yet available, it’s currently in the state of being


The folks reviewing apps for the App Store should know the difference between 1) content that is IN an app, and 2) content that is available THROUGH an app. Following their current argument through to its logical conclusion means that Apple should pull the Internet right out from the iPhone, because that clearly allows access to (or as they see it, "contains") objectionable material.


Hi James

This makes me really laugh in a way, Apple just don’t get a word you’re saying, and don’t get me wrong I’m an Apple fanboi but I’m not beyond saying they’re being morons in this case.

We’ll be mentioning this story on the International Mac Podcast Live this week, if you want to have any statements read out please feel free to drop us an email at haveyoursay [at] impodcast [dot] tv

Best of luck getting things sorted.

Stu Helm


Where is the digg button? Apple should really stop this crap …


Good grief. I love Apple, but when did they become the moral authority. Does this mean that they’ll not be releasing Safari in version 3 of the iPhone platform - since you can quite easily access pornographic content? It’s seems what’s good for the goose isn’t necessarily good for the gander. Ridiculous.


Words fail me. I love Apple, but these kinds of stupid reasoning makes me want to throw out my iPhone in disgust. My only hope is that this somehow generates enough noise that the monkey responsible for this rejection is repositioned to a position more on his level, like book burner in some kind of fascist state or something.


If the reviewer is hung up on the Kama Sutra, just put in some code to block it for a couple of weeks. Then you are censoring only for a short period of time… It’s completely stupid that developers have to put up with this in the review process.


Hope this gets cleared up. We need more good reading apps, i like the looks of eucalyptus.


…ng for enough of it to be offered that search term, then selecting it). Developer James Montgomerie blogs about his frustrations, the continued opaqueness of the App Store review policy, and points out the blatant inconsistency …


What I want to know is two things:

(1) Is there a book-banning sex-hating evangelical Republican Christian working at Apple who is abusing the reviewer process to strike a blow for Republican Evangelical Christian intolerance?

(2) Is this what it’s come down to? Pre-filter applications so that the one or two sex-hating book banning review-abusers can’t make app developers twist in the wind such that we have to point out the obvious? It sounds like a case for the ACLU and EFF.


If you want this published you’re going to have to be your own censor. until apple corrects this ignorant abuse of power i suggest creating your own list of objectionable words or phrases, scan any doc being displayed to a user and effectively denying the user access to that text. it sucks but if your hearts in this app i would do what has to be done to get by. I would go one step further by having your app find that lookup list online to update itself over time. after the review is complete and on the store.. simply remove the words from your list.. voila! no more problem.

Good luck.. John


… - zu einem kleinen Presse-Echo, welches den anderen 40.000 Programmen vorenthalten wird… via blog.montgomerie Kommentar verfassen


The reviewer should be fired for incompetence.


I hold the Apple app store team in the same esteem I hold credit card companies. That is, very, very low. All of their decisions are completely arbitrary and the approval process is completely opaque to developers until, a few weeks after your submission, you get a magic email saying you’ve been approved or rejected. This is rapidly becoming a PR disaster for Apple and a ripe opportunity for other platforms to capitalize (I’m looking at you, Palm Pre).


…ng for enough of it to be offered that search term, then selecting it). Developer James Montgomerie blogs about his frustrations, the continued opaqueness of the App Store review policy, and points out the blatant inconsistency …


…pples.com/author/goobimama/" title="Posts by Milind Alvares">Milind Alvares Friday May 22, 2009 Most outrageous App Store rejection ever → Developer James Montgomerie details how Apple rejected his new ebook reading app “Eucalyptus&…


…eader-eucalyptus/">Apple Screws The Pooch Again, Rejects E-book Reader “Eucalyptus” It is hard to believe that they’re still getting away with this. Their reason? You can download naughty books on it, like the Kama Sutra. Nobody tell Apple that yo…


This makes as much sense as banning Saffari because it can be used to access pornographic material found on the web.


…g our fragile little minds. But there’s more! What makes matters even worse is on reading the developer’s blog, it’s pretty clear the approvals process is even more broken than we all thought. Had Apple m…


…/21/eucalyptus-too-dirty/#comments" title="Comment on Eucalyptus Too Dirty">Leave a comment Ug. Apple iPhone App store rejects Eucalyptus ereader app … because you can read erotic texts from the public domain. As we say in Quebec, QQF? I presu…


I left a comment for Apple marketing, I hope to see your app soon. Good Luck.


Pardon my language, but Apple seem to have employed some royal f*cktards at its App Store review department. I’m really ashamed as a mac user for their behaviour, and this isn’t the first time I’ve seen reports about ridiculous rejections.

I hope your app will be accepted sometime soon. When Apple stops this nonsense, I might consider replacing my Nokia E51 with an iPhone. I owned the 1st gen but it broke and I had too little money to get a new one.


I might suggest you send THEM a screen shot from the Amazon Kindle SAMPLE copy of the book "Tantra ≥ This is an "approved" Apple Store application. (Kindle) that contains a photo of a couple engaging in intercourse. There are more. If they are going to approve the Amazon Kindle application, then there’s certainly no reason to not approves yours.

The Kama Sutra itself is also available from the (approved) iPhone applications: Bookshelf, Amazon Kindle, Stanza, using almost the exacts same mechanism. Seems like someone in the approval process has really slipped up.


"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"

So, the Bible is out, too.


My suspicion is that there is a note on your account to check for access for Kama Sutra. Now, every time you submit, they check that (regardless if you have a new reviewer). It’s absurd that they are asking you to censor the external and public-domain content.

Off-topic: I wonder if a little group social engineering would shock Apple into truing-up this behavior. Perhaps if throngs of people complained about being able to access the Kama Sutra from Project Gutenberg from any of the other avenues you mention (including Safari), they might rethink their approval flow. One could hope.


Even if your soul would be just rented out for a while, remember who’s the one taking care of it while it’s absend. When he will return it you shouldn’t take a too close look at it or you will find it in a state that would make you regret your decision.


…ry tag">web by Hugh Ug. Apple iPhone App store rejects Eucalyptus ereader app … because you can read erotic texts from the public domain. As we say in Quebec, QQF? I presu…


What BS. Hope Eucalyptus gets through now, it looks awesome.

Not to defend the reviewer at Apple but I guess their job isn’t to ensure a consistent policy is applied, just to ensure that absolutely nothing even vaguely related to adult content gets onto the app store before the parental controls appear - so it’s pointless trying to argue with them.

I think you did the right thing with adding a temporary filter, though imho to be safe you should’ve covered a four or five more:

http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Erotic_Fiction_(Bookshelf)

sucks, but it’s only a temporary thing and not your fault.


I haven’t worked at Apple in 18 months, but I still feel deeply embarrassed about this. Not to mention furious. The app-store approval process, as implemented, is one of the most messed-up things they’ve ever done, and this example takes the cake. Having one loose cannon reject your app for ridiculous reasons would be bad enough, but having it happen three times implies deeper problems.


Hey man,

Looks like a great app. Don’t lose the fire! Hopefully this will get sorted out soon.

-Henry


…g our fragile little minds. But there’s more! What makes matters even worse is on reading the developer’s blog, it’s pretty clear the approvals process is even more broken than we all thought. Had Apple m…


The good news is that you managed to get extra publicity because of this stupidity. I now know about your app and will probably buy it as a result when it comes out. Good stuff! cheers :)


That’s so ridiculously dumb when you consider that this is part of the search results i get at the Amazon Kindle store:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_kinc_1_5?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text∨

further more, i just downloaded the kama sutra using the kindle app on my iphone and i downloaded it using stanza, another iphone app.

the fact that i’ve used the two most popular current iphone reading apps to download a piece of literature that apple claims is the blocking point for your app being approved means either you’ve gotten trapped with one particular reviewer who is a prude and is blocking you out of spite, or apple is playing favorites with other app developers.

it’s as simple as one of those two answers.


…d the text of Kama Sutra, which contains “objectionable material.” Eucalyptus developer Jamie Montgomerie posted Apple’s rejection letter on his blog: We’ve reviewed Eucalyptus — classic books, to go. and determined that we cannot po…


Been there, suffered that:

http://thecodist.com/article/my_app_rejected_by_the_app_store_because_it_could_be_used_to_39_ridicules_public_figures_39

Also my analysis of the app store:

http://thecodist.com/article/the_app_store_is_a_classic_example_of_a_broken_business_process

I’ve been rejected 3 times and finally gave up until 3.0 ships. It’s clear that individuals have all the power and there is no oversight whatsoever.


…d the text of Kama Sutra, which contains “objectionable material.” Eucalyptus developer Jamie Montgomerie posted Apple’s rejection letter on his blog: We’ve reviewed Eucalyptus — classic books, to go. and determined that we cannot po…


…ear of his life on the project and he has every right to be. Apple needs to get their act together. Head here for the full story. Tags  Apple,



This is seriously the most outrageous rejection by Apple to date. Wow. Is there anything we can do to protest these sorts of boneheaded actions by Apple?


Stay calm and stay firm til Apple gets its head out of its ass. I don’t even have an iPhone, but I just signed up to follow your Twitter updates. Best of luck to you.


I filed this under "bug report" for the iPhone lacking a better alternative:

Regarding the outrageous rejection of Eucalyptus because it had a link to a publicly available book, Karma Sutra of Vatsyayana, I’m not only outraged. Every one who works at Apple should be positively embarrassed by this.

It’s almost as bad as the acceptance of the Baby Shaker app.

Please fix this horribly broken app "approval" system and stop rejecting Apps for such horribly inexcusable reasons. This product is the most important product Apple has made in the past 15 years and it’s being managed about as poorly as any product in the company history.

The app should be immediately approved and any requirement for blocking the Karma Sutra should be immediately lifted.

Not only that Apple should apologize to the developers of this amazing app for this disgrace.


…steep for an iPhone program, but I’m tempted. Except Apple won’t let us buy Eucalyptus: According to developer James Montgomerie, it rejected the program for including material that is “obscene, pornographic, offensive, or…


…ail enquiries are not replied to - not even with an autoresponder, it is extremely frustrating. via Whither Eucalyptus? - Jamie’s Web Log, via Gruber. I’ve hammered this over and over, but it…


…steep for an iPhone program, but I’m tempted. Except Apple won’t let us buy Eucalyptus: According to developer James Montgomerie, it rejected the program for including material that is “obscene, pornographic, offensive, or…


…calyptus? May 21st, 2009 I really don’t even know how to express the ridiculous nature of this rejection. Read about it for yourself, then decide if you think the App Store process is working the way it s…


…e3k/transparency">transparency datamining) Whither Eucalyptus? – Jamie’s Web Log If you’re wondering why Eucalyptus is not yet available, it’s currently in the state of being


I’m switching off comments now - it’s late here, I’m going to bed, and at this rate there will be an unmanageable amount of comments by my morning. Please don’t think I’m trying to stifle conversation (what an irony that would be!). I’m delighted by all the positive remarks, thank you.

If you want to contact me, jamie@ this domain will get there, or you can follow the links on eucalyptusapp.com.