Apple is facing its first biggest argument over well-established voice software Siri, after the cutting-edge iPhone search service declined to direct people to abortion services.

Siri - one of the mainly well known qualities of Apple's latest iPhone 4S - drew the ire of bloggers and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League when it could not place abortion clinics when asked.

The service is a voice activated electronic personal assistant intended to 'help you do the things you do every day.'

It will direct consumers to a Chinese restaurant or inform you what time the doctor opens.

However NARAL's president, Nancy Keenan has criticized to Apple chief executive officer Tim Cook that Siri is not giving users with exact or full detail about women's reproductive-health services.

Megan Carpentier, a feminist blogger also revealed this week that consumers in Washington DC who ask the device where they could obtain an abortion were going to anti-abortion emergency centre operating by religious groups.

And consumers in New York reveal that when they made the same demand were told "I didn't locate any abortion centers." When Siri is inquired why it is anti-abortion she replies: "I just am."

Apple says Siri's incapability to pull up data was not deliberate, accusing the error on the reality it was still in beta, or testing, stage.

For those who considered Apple may have programmed an ethnic stand into Siri they can be certain that it is able of searching prostitutes, Viagra and gun shooting series.

Now the American Civil Liberties Union has initiated a petition calling for Apple to stick the bug.

"If Siri can inform us about Viagra, it should not give dire or no data about contraceptives or abortion care."

However Brandi Swindell, a famous anti-abortionist said she was delighted that the device is encouraging the self-respect of woman and 'keeping human rights in the womb.'

Apple utilized a numbers of online resources to locate for information and relies largely on evaluation website Yelp for local businesses.

''Our clients desire to utilize Siri to locate all kinds of information and while it can locate a lot, it doesn't far ever find what you want,'' Apple spokeswoman Natalie Harrison said.

''These are not planned blunders meant to offend everybody, it merely means that, as we bring Siri from beta to a ultimate product, we find locations where we can do good, and we will in the coming weeks.''

As lots of you identify, I’ve often been serious on these pages of Apple’s incapability to completely capitalize on the living room. I’m a solid believer that the firm has a actual chance to be a leading force in home entertainment, and yet, it hasn’t made something to show that. Up till now, the Apple TV is the pioneer offering it has, and most would consent, that that device is stagnant just a “hobby.”

Accurately why Apple has been so reluctant to completely double down on the living room is anyone’s presumption. Maybe it’s because the firm is so paid intention on mobile inventions, like the iPad and iPhone. Or maybe it just doesn’t see any chance in the living room.

Though, my assumption is that Steve Jobs didn’t observe a good basis to hunt after the dominance of another space until his firm could completely remark its place in the mobile market. What’s more, I’m not agreed that Jobs required Apple to be a new Sony, offering a host of home-theater goods that only few people like.

And while I appreciate that idea, I do consider that the single product Jobs should have initiated is a game console.

The technique I observe it, the game console is the focus of any home-theater set-up. For several folks, it’s the device they utilize to see movies, stream Netflix content, and play games. It’s an all-in-one option.

And so far, during his period as CEO at Apple, Jobs never show any sign that he would try and take on Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo in the gaming space.

But will Tim Cook?

I suppose he should. Looking around the App Store, it has become richly obvious that Apple is now, at the very slightest, a game seller. And at the very most, the firm is no dissimilar from Nintendo, offering a moveable device that allows possessors play video games, while relying on third parties to increase those titles.

What’s more, Apple’s devices have been thieving largest market share away from other manufacturers of portable-gaming goods, thanks to the average customer’s wishes to rise up their phone, check e-mail, play some stages in a game, and then place a call.

Setting Apple’s victories in the mobile gaming world, why shouldn’t Tim Cook desire to fight in the living room with a game console? After all, Apple has confirmed that it appreciates how to build a gamer-friendly device, it has a marketplace in the App Store to present digital titles to clients, and it has the cash on hand to make a device that could set a new set in the gaming market.

At this level, there’s purely no convincing cause for Apple’s new CEO to not at least deem offering a game console. The video games manufacturer is ready for a new contestant to shake things up and initiate it on a fresh lane.

Why shouldn’t the Tim Cook-led Apple be that representative of transform?