Apple Blindsides More AppStore Developers 716
For a while now Apple has said it doesn't want "widget-like" apps in the store; but where is the boundary of that fuzzy statement? The developers of My Frame, of which three versions had already been approved for the iPhone/iPad, found out that they had already crossed it when Apple informed them their app would be pulled. My Frame had options to overlay data on whatever photo was displaying: a Twitter stream, weather, etc. When one of the developers wrote to Steve Jobs on a whim to ask what unwritten rule their app had violated, Jobs wrote back: "We are not allowing apps that create their own desktops. Sorry." "I see now why people are so angry at the 'murky' nature of the App Store, and I'm starting to agree with them. My Frame was approved by Apple 3 times (once for each version we released), and ... now, at version 1.2 they decide it's to be removed? How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time, cutting you off and kicking you out, with no course of action but to whine on some no-name blog[?] There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway...." A few blogs have picked up the story.
It's time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Either that, or a picture of Steve Jobs' face, with one half looking like a wolf and the other half looking like a sheep.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That liver he got has some nasty bile.
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
That liver he got has some nasty bile.
How much do you want to bet his liver transplant came from an early foxconn suicide? You know, way before any new of the high suicide rate hit the media and when Steve really needed a liver?
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Funny)
Comon, everyone knows the old chestnut about Steve selling his future liver to Satan in exchange for getting Apple's venture capital in place back in the day.
This is well documented people!
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish there was a 'bring to the attention of the slashmods' button.. but yeah, it looks like Apple is acting a lot worse than Microsoft ever did.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wish there was a 'bring to the attention of the slashmods' button..
Report it for abuse. If you get reprimanded in any way, it'll still be worth it.
More to this story? (Score:3, Insightful)
I really have to wonder if there is more than meets the sound-bite here. It sounds absurd yes. But then again it would be absurd to be so capricious. Maybe were not getting the full story? Apple is if anything not illogical in their choices. You may vehemently disagree with their choices but the choices all have an internal logic. I can't see any logic here. I suspect this may be a BS story.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Informative)
the app is still in the store. Perhaps this story is not true?
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/my-frame-alarm-clock-displays/id364532249?mt=8 [apple.com]
Some sheer speculation: perhaps if you have an App that changes the apparent user interface it will be purged?
For example I would expect that an app
1) create it's own desktop
2) place functionality of other apps on this desktop
could be used for example to make it a work-alike to a google phone or could be used to fool the user into entering passwords by looking like the real desktop.
tunes4 is supposedly going to crank up the sandboxing of apps, with encrypted memory partions. Perhaps these apps that merge data from other apps are going to get purged?
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sort of.
I think the issue is that Apple keeps changing their minds. It's one thing to build some software send it to Apple and have them reject it. That's part of life, but building a product, selling it to customers, investing in that product and then having Apple change their minds on a previously granted approval is a bit of a hard pill to swallow, and it's not just been this guy who have had that happen.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is more like that somehow yet another Appstore app somehow got reviewed by someone who was too lenient or that it was re-reviewed by someone who is less lenient. Whatever the case, I think the review process it likely to be rather inconsistent with several different human beings reviewing different apps. The patent process works like this. The TSA screening process works like this. Even the police work like this. The same rules tend to get implemented differently depending on who is charged with interpreting and applying the rules.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case, there was no speed limit sign, and the legal limit changed from 55 mph on Monday to 25 mph on Tuesday.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem isn't subjectivity amongst the reviewers, but rather that the rules are a secret.
Maybe the problem isn't that the rules are a secret, but rather that there are no rules...and judgments are made up on the fly to deal with what they perceive as threats to either the market share or their intention of how the iphone is intended to be operated.
Re:More to this story? (Score:4, Interesting)
An even worse problem is that Apple's followers don't seem to see a problem with Apple keeping the rules secret from the developers writing for Apple's platform.
I'm having a huge argument with a friend right now about this. He thinks it would be a huge PR mistake for Apple to publish concrete, clear App Store submission rules, and that therefore they shouldn't do it. (His reason? People would be pissed about all the exceptions to the rules that Apple makes for wealth developers.)
And he doesn't have a problem with Apple favoring wealthy app developers even when it harms the independent and small business developers.
(If you're curious, we were talking about Apple's "no scripting" rule, which they conveniently ignore for developers like EA and PopCap.)
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm having a huge argument with a friend right now about this. He thinks it would be a huge PR mistake for Apple to publish concrete, clear App Store submission rules, and that therefore they shouldn't do it. (His reason? People would be pissed about all the exceptions to the rules that Apple makes for wealth developers.)
And he doesn't have a problem with Apple favoring wealthy app developers even when it harms the independent and small business developers.
You forgot rule one..
Apple is right no matter how many logical hoops have to be jumped through to justify it. Everybody else is wrong, even if the fabric of reality has to be altered to accommodate this.
It's like arguing with a Scientologist. Cults are like that. No matter how strong your point, it will be translated into " I can't afford an iProduct, so I'm jealous". Even if you make twice what they do, and buy gear that costs far more than an iProduct does.
Forget logic, sound arguments, valid points.. Just tell him that Steve has cooties, and walk away. You are not dealing with a rational person. And if they bring the subject up, just say you don't argue religion.
Re:Except it isn't a public road it's a private st (Score:5, Insightful)
Its not unreasonable to ask that Apple publicize what their requirements are. Companies are investing time and money developing apps that increase the value of Apple's product. The least Apple can do is have published guidelines of what is allowed in their appstore. Then a company can look at those guidelines and know if a product they're planning isn't allowed. If its not allowed then the compnay need not waste anymore time on it.
Yes Apple has the power to reject apps from its store. But just because you have power doesn't mean you should be a dick about it.
Re:Except it isn't a public road it's a private st (Score:4, Insightful)
It's unreasonable to ask Apple to do anything they don't want to. It's their damned platform and they can be as pricky as they want.
It's also unreasonable for Apple to expect their developer base to remain loyal after being ass-reamed by Steve with sandy vaseline.
This sort of thing will work itself out. Likely not to Apple's long-term benefit, IMHO.
Re:Except it isn't a public road it's a private st (Score:4, Insightful)
No. That's not how society works.
It may be unreasonable to expect Apple to do do anything they don't want to, but it is most certainly not unreasonable to ask.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
Except for the numerous other times apps have been approved, then removed when Apple changes their mind? Or stuff that was rejected for no discernable reason then approved under media scruitiny?
Apple is a perfect example of the sheer idiocy of this process. People are making totally arbitrary decisions over what can and can't be sold, with no consistency or logic. The policy can change on a whim, at which point previously allowed things are no longer allowed.
Without the amazing skills of Apple's marketing department, this pathetic joke of a store would fail horribly.
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
People are making totally arbitrary decisions over what can and can't be sold, with no consistency or logic.
No, the logic is quite clear: any product that competes with Apple's ones is automatically removed.
Of course, you cannot guess which app Apple will release in the future, so releasing an app is like playing the lottery.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The app is still live on the store. I wonder if this isn't just a great marketing stunt?
queue, "2)???"
Re:More to this story? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't want some centralized dictatorship deciding what I can and can't have on <i>my</i> phone for applications. Apple wants a market place only because it sees it as a revenue stream and a cheap mine for ideas it can then pilfer, call it's own and then ban the original.
As for the argument about consistency, I really see that as a straw man.
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Insightful)
More like Species 8472
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
You should be ashamed you watched enough voyager to get the reference.
A Steve Jobs in sheeps' clothing. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Steve Jobs wearing robes and holding stone iTablets with invisible commandments?
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
"Thou shalt not do things I don't like"
"Thou shalt not do things iDon't like"
There fixed that for you!
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Informative)
like the economist cover [obamapacman.com]?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm pretty sure Linus is an actual robot though. Sent back in time to save humanity.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You're right! In fact, we should now replace all anti-Bill Gates memorabilia with these pictures: http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/272750-pic-funny-bill-gates-pics-from-1983/#entry585309992 [neowin.net]
Ooo...sssmmmooking!
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Informative)
The fact that My Frame 1.2 is in the app store... that doesn't change anything does it?
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Interesting)
No... Bill should stay Borg. Microsoft is the precursor to the Borg: they want nothing less than to own every computer on the planet.
Google is the precursor to SkyNet. Think about it: Google owns a huge network of systems employing AI routines to parse natural-language databases. One day, Google's search engine will become sentient. So perhaps a Google logo with those red eyes would be appropriate satire.
Steve Jobs...he's more like Emperor Ming from Flash Gordon. He has immense power, but rather than use it for the betterment of his people (his customers), he makes arbitrary decisions for his own amusement. Attempts to appeal to him with logic fail. Attempts to sway his emotions fail. Even decisions that seem like they would harm Apple only make him stronger in the long run.
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I'd say that Apple is more like the Federation. They are using their power for what they see as the betterment of their people. They have all these rules as to how society should be run: no money, no alcohol, etc. If you ever want to join Star Fleet and move up in the ranks, you'd better be in line with all those rules. However, if you don't want to follow the rules, you can always just pack up and head to uncharted territories or join the borg, and they won't stop you.
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that we're casting companies as fictitious villains... not good guys.
Besides, even the Federation doesn't stop people from doing things their way: after all, Starfleet crew somehow get Latinum to gamble and spend at Quark's, and people are free to do anything they want - as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. This is entirely 180 out from Apple's approach: Apple says you can't do anything they don't like.
If you're going to talk about Star Trek empires, Apple is more like the Romulan Empire than the Federation: absolute control, complete arrogance, and absolutely convinced that they can do nothing wrong: even to the point of blaming Vulcans for their own destruction (which Vulcans actually tried to prevent.)
Re:It's time. (Score:4, Insightful)
"In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Mac OS will be reorganized into the first iPhone OS and App Store, for a safe and secure platform which I assure you will last for ten thousand years!"
(200,000 apps and 4 billion downloads later...)
"So this is how openness dies... with thunderous applause."
.
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Funny)
Steve Jobs...he's more like Emperor Ming
no wonder he hates Flash
Re:It's time. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we've got it backwards.
Apple has in the past blocked apps: /.)
- because they criticize prominent politicians,
- because they mention Android,
- because they compete with Apple services,
- because they had soft porn, and weren't from Apple approved companies,
- for no discernible reason at all.
(All of these instances have been reported here on
But now Apple decides to block an app due to changed GUI guidelines and NOW we think there is a problem!
When Steve Jobs chooses to respond to an e-mail, you know that this is an example they want to highlight - it follows the script. When the FCC has to get involved and force Apple to reverse course and stop lying about the reasons for app store rejection - that's when we start to understand the app store.
My business model fails! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:My business model fails! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sucks to be you. Don't write for iStuff.
I kind of agree with you on this. The blurb quoted basically reads to me as "there isn't an easy alternative that allows me to do almost no marketing in order to have people buy my app."
While I sympathize with the author(s)' feeling that the AppStore's rules border on the completely arbitrary, there *are* alternatives, just not brain-dead, no-work easy alternatives.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with Android is the fragmentation. Having one company designing the hardware and software as well as dictating things can be a model of simplicity.
When Microsoft released the XBox they could have just made the OS and published a specification, pretty much like they did with the MSX, but nope, they realised it would be a disaster.
With Android there are too many handsets, too many software versions in the wild, different touch screen types, different touch screen sizes. It's hard to optimise an ap
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's going to happen to Apple soon enough. There are already multiple processor speeds and RAM amounts. The next version is expected to be a different resolution, as well as having new hardware (front-facing camera.) The new iPhone OS will not fully support all iPhone devices, limiting the usefulness of some apps on these devices. There's also no word yet whether or not (or how) the API gracefully degrades on phones which do not support such features.
I suspect that with both phones, you will be able t
Re:My business model fails! (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with Android is the fragmentation.
Fragmentation is needed for a competitive environment. It's an added problem, partly for developers but mainly for google, and they are handling it quite well. Properly accounting for different hardware targets in both the hardware development and in the software development kits is a daunting task. However, and I feel everyone is repeating the fragmentation mantra without giving proper credit to Google, Android handles fragmentation quite well. Apps are always forward-compatible (write for 1.5 and you get ~100% compatibility with existing handsets), and they announce the hardware they need.
Do you need a camera? Declare it on your manifest, and the app appears on the market only to devices sporting a camera. Do you absolutely need multitouch? Declare it. Do you need an SD card? Declare it. The only drawback is that every requirement you add narrows down the range of devices your app appears in.
Would it be better if there were fewer devices all alike? It'd be like the narrowing decision would have already been made for you. Oh, right. That's the Apple way: Users are too stupid, let's decide for them.
In the end, it's different. It's not worse. It's more complicated for the developer, in exchange for a larger user base. Before anyone mentions there are more iPhones than Android devices, please first consider that: a) there are more Android devices than iPhones being sold today and; b) Android covers a much wider range of price-points, and is thus in reach of a much larger user base, so this tendency is likely here to stay (think how Nokia is still king of mobile handsets).
Fine Line Indeed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Fine Line Indeed (Score:5, Insightful)
Where do you draw the line, Mr. Jobs?
Wherever I want. Sorry.
-Steve
Re:Fine Line Indeed (Score:4, Interesting)
Apparently you don't draw it at My Frame 1.2 seeing how it's in the App store. Who is writing these articles? Google?
Re:Fine Line Indeed (Score:4, Interesting)
The guy this has happened to made a blog post earlier today explaining that Apple have told him the App is getting pulled: http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/sentence-first-verdict-afterwards/ [wordpress.com]
Do you believe that he's lying, or Apple that have decided not to go through with pulling it? Most reasonable explanation for it still being up seems to be that they just haven't pulled it yet.
Re:Fine Line Indeed (Score:5, Interesting)
Great viral marketing, imo
Interesting strategy. (Score:5, Funny)
"There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway..."
and rewards his loyalty with an exception?
He's Calling Jobs Out (Score:3, Interesting)
Jobs wants to maintain complete control with the experience on iDevices and the second you try to make your application look more capable than just a regular application in the sense of altering look and feel, you're stepping on his turf and he will show up with the ban hammer. Jobs is n
Re:Interesting strategy. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Interesting strategy. (Score:5, Interesting)
Google is a terrible retailer. I love my Nexus One, but buying it from Google demonstrated that they aren't good at selling things, or being a conduit for selling things.
The marketplace is a good example. Us Canadians only recently got the ability to actually buy pay apps, and of course we (like most of the world) still don't have the ability to sell apps, at least with Google handling the transaction.
Which is why many apps have gone to either ad support, or some sort of activation key that you buy from a more world-capable transaction enabler like PayPal.
Re:Interesting strategy. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who says Android can't compete head to head with any other mobile OS is either deluded or has not really checked it out.
The sad part is that he's totally wrong. You can't use an Android 2.x device and think of the platform as immature or incomplete. Sure, there are some differences between Android and iPhone OS, but there are also differences between both of those platforms and other mature platforms, such as Blackberry and Windows Mobile.
And I wouldn't call the apps store(s) a Wild West: there's ONE official Android app store. You can, of course, use the unofficial app stores as well, but anyone who buys a first-tier Android handset is going to have the Android Market right there on their phone. The fact that you're not limited to just the Android market is certainly not a drawback; it seems to me that this is exactly what the OP wants: an alternative market that is not controlled by the hardware manufacturer.
Apple is just now including features in the iPhone that were in Android from the start. In fact, every major new feature in iPhone OS 4 is already in another mobile platform. More Android handsets were activated Q1 2010 than iPhones. Android is making its way in to all kinds of devices, not just phones and PMP's.
The last thing I'd call Android at this point is "immature."
Re:Interesting strategy. (Score:5, Informative)
That being said, because Google doesn't randomly kick people out of their market place for duplicating functions or using non-approved languages the situation is a lot less of a problem than it would be for Apple. OTOH I do wish that they'd implement some sort of rudimentary filtering mode for adult applications. I don't care if it defaults to disabled, but it's potentially problematic to be using my Nexus one to look for the latest applications and come across app after app of soft porn.
Still, it is quite usable and for the most part everything works the way that it should in a reliable and efficient fashion.
Region coding (Score:5, Interesting)
there's ONE official Android app store.
Which isn't open to every country, not even every industrialized country. Most developers don't want to have to go through a supported country's immigration process just to be able to sell apps.
iPhone developer agreement: Eat a bug on camera (Score:5, Funny)
iPhone developers are up in arms at Apple requiring them to use only Apple toolkits, sacrifice a Windows developer at their local Apple Shop every Sunday and maintain an altar to Steve Jobs in their homes. And eat a bug [newstechnica.com].
Apple is famous for its rigid control over its devices, in its quest to maintain user quality. Developers have worked under increasing restrictions in their attempts to provide quality applications for the iPhone such as I Am Rich, Magic 8 Ball and iFart.
"Not a big deal," said Mr Jobs in a personal email. "Cross-platform development leads to a worse user experience every time. Also, the video of you eating the bug has to be H.264 QuickTime or your app is out. Extra points for cockroaches."
"This clause shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the creative freedom developers need," said iPhone developer Greg Slepak. "Software is an infinitely malleable creation of pure thought. Toolkits, languages and frameworks are only a way to develop something people will want. It's like telling Rembrandt what brand of brushes he's allowed to use."
He paused to chow down on a palmetto bug for his MacBook's camera. "I'll tell you, a lot of iPhone developers are seriously considering Android, just as soon as Google develops a suitably exploitable stream of mindless thralls that will generate us a gushing torrent of money."
"Thanks for the video, Greg," said Mr Jobs, "but we've just added section 3.3.1.a: 'In particular, when Greg Slepak submits an application, the bucket of cockroaches in the video have to be Apple-branded and genetically engineered in Cupertino.' So we've rejected your application, cancelled your membership and zeroed your account.
"Of course, you're free to apply again. Or not, if you don't want a goddamn dumptruck full of money backed up to your house. It's a free country."
Re:iPhone developer agreement: Eat a bug on camera (Score:5, Interesting)
You know, the sad thing is, I remember a time when it wasn't true. When I preferred to use the Macs in the computer lab at the university over the PC's specifically because I could carry around a floppy full of extensions that all I needed to do was drop into the extension folder and reboot and have a machine that looked and mostly worked completely different from any other Mac.
Stuff like Kaleidoscope [kaleidoscope.net] were just the tip of the Iceberg, with the fact that 'hacking' resources on the Mac was a trivial task, you could customize almost anything you wanted in your apps. This is stuff that Windows never had and still doesn't.
But then Steve had to go and get to the top of the hill, and it turned out that he was just a smarmier, better dressed Bill. That's sort of sad. Back when there really were two camps, really the only difference between the two was their fashion sense.
Re:iPhone developer agreement: Eat a bug on camera (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As I read this (obvious satire) post, I see that it's modded +5 insightful. And, deep down, a little piece of me dies...
Tired. (Score:5, Insightful)
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time
I don't know. Why don't we ask someone who ha ---- Oh wait, that's you!
Years later, after it's been documented in to oblivion that Apple dicks app store developers over. The developers either know full well what they are getting themselves in to or they are completely retarded. Yet we here we are, hearing the same tired $@%&ing story once again. The insignificant details are different but nothing else is.
App store devs, you KNOW you have two options: Deal with it or don't. Now, please, kindly tell your story on Twitter, Facebook status updates or somewhere else no one is paying attention and quit robbing the rest of us of our mental bandwidth.
Re:Tired. (Score:5, Funny)
quit robbing the rest of us of our mental bandwidth.
Yeah, some of us are still on 300 baud!
Re:Tired. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's another way to look at this: the more times an article like this shows up in a respected blog or publication, the more seriously people will take it.
Perhaps the next guy who's debating whether to go Android or Apple will stop and think, "Dude.. I should get a Droid!"
With an attitude like that (Score:4, Funny)
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare
You know, maybe if half the iPhone App Developers decided to opt out of Apple's ridiculous system, and started developing more apps for Android, perhaps there would be more incentive to improve their app store to put it on par with Apple's.
Just sayin' man.
Another thing, this is like complaining that you didn't get into the NFL when you chose pro football as your career. Perhaps you should have done a little research before becoming an iPhone App developer, Hmmm? The fact that you got INTO the App store - AND were successful enough to have it sell at all, is considered lucky in my opinion.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
i swear, both apple and google are badly mismanaging their respective app stores.
still, there are alternatives to android marketplace. http://slideme.org/ [slideme.org] is probably the biggest, with http://andappstore.com/AndroidApplications/apps/!index [andappstore.com] close behind.
Sounds familiar (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds like what Second Life did. I used to play the game with SL, developed in-world items and scripts. Every time I started to make money at it, SL would make the script "Illegal", discontinue some function I was using, start giving the same thing away for free or start charging for something that was free. All in all the moving target made it impossible to work in the environment. Thus, I stopped and walked away.
If Apple starts changing the rules and making the environment less appealing for the developers then they will move, unlike second life there are competitors and other opportunities.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is exactly why Blizzard's EULA says addon authors can not profit from their creations. Blizzard regularly incorporates functionality "from" addons into the game, since that's their job as a game maker. They've also had to regularly block addons from doing things that interfere with the game (whether servers or gameplay). Not to mention deprecating old APIs.
Everything you mentioned Second Life doing sounds totally reasonable from the perspective of a game developer, and only sounds bad when you frame
Re:Sounds familiar (Score:4, Informative)
"Does Linden Labs pitch SL as a platform for for-pay items and scripts?"
Linden dollars, their currency, are convertible to and from U.S. dollars at an official peg of L $270 = US $1 and to Euros, though conversion rates vary on real exchanges. Linden Labs has always pushed it as a platform where you could make money from land, services and script/object sales, though at the same time their terms of service have said their currency has no actual value and if their database loses yours you are out of luck. During its boom time it was a mecca for gambling untill the U.S. Congress clamped down on online gambling. As I recall when Linden outlawed gambling it caused a significant decline in their user base and fortunes. They have also struggled with EU value added tax.
All indications are Linden wants their cake and to eat it too leading to the ambiguity the grandparent referenced. They want Second Life to be a fully functioning online economy amd at the same time shirk most of the complications that entails.
Like all game economies involving virtual goods and currencies, just about everything is arbitrary and can change at the whim of the people controlling the servers. There are fascinating parallels that can be drawn between virtual game economies and real world economies. When you have fiat currencies, central banks which can create money(wealth) out of thin air, and central banks/goverments which can the rules overnight and indulge in massive bailouts of the well connected, you start to notice real economies are pretty much the same kind of sham as virtual game economies, the stakes are just higher.
Cory Doctorow's latest creative commons book "For The Win" touchs on some of these issues, though like most of his books he raises interesting ideas and then falls a little short in making a good novel out of them.
Last Line (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway...
This just isn't true anymore. Yes, the market does have its issues, but it is certainly an alternative if the app store won't allow your app. Android will overtake iPhone in the near future as far as overall market share goes (since it's on all sorts of low-end devices nowadays, as well as multiple carriers, not to mention the very best phones these days run android, not iPhone OS, and it doesn't look like this summer's iPhone will be any better than them).
While it may have its downsides as compared to the app store, completely ruling out the android market is just foolish.
Android: Wild West (Score:3, Insightful)
Troubling (Score:4, Interesting)
It seems to me that this is troubling for the developer, but it's also troubling for the customers. It means that users have bought applications that suddenly have no possibility of being maintained properly. Bugs will never be fixed. New features will never come. It turns iTunes into a fairly risky marketplace.
It's there (Score:5, Informative)
As pointed out by Anonymous Coward, My Frame 1.2 is in the app store right this second:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/my-frame-alarm-clock-displays/id364532249?mt=8 [apple.com]
Rejected 4 times so far (Score:5, Informative)
I've been trying to release an iPad version of my app since launch. It has been rejected by Apple four times. Each time, we fixed what they asked us to, and each time they found something else to reject us for.
1. Contained links to Paypal (just like our approved iPhone app.) :-|
2. Doesn't rotate (like MANY other iPad apps)
3. Contained iTunes Links to Points apps (just like other Mafia apps, and our iPhone app.) They are forcing us to implement in-app purchasing.
4. Our website contained a contest... After 10,000 people downloaded our free app and created a free character, we would give a free iPod Touch to one of them. Apple called us today and said that we aren't allowed to give away Apple products from a website associated with the app. They said we can give away a Zune HD, but not an iPod Touch.
Re:Rejected 4 times so far (Score:5, Funny)
Freedom != Wild West (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod me down but Android an immature wild west platform? My ass.
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway..."
Somehow freedom != wild west? I'll take the highway thanks.
Re:Freedom != Wild West (Score:5, Insightful)
That statement doesn't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. Apple sells more iPod touches than iPhones [theappleblog.com], and iPad sales have been phenomenal [abh-news.com].
I think Android is a great platform with a bright future, but it isn't anywhere near catching up to iPhone OS numbers yet.
Re:Freedom != Wild West (Score:4, Informative)
iPod touches/iPads != iPhones. The same apps won't work on it if they require microphones, cameras, etc., and thus these devices shouldn't be counted.
Either accept that or all the arguments about Android "fragmentation" go out the window! Or, we could start including Android MID's and Tablet's and hell, even GM's new Volt in-car computer in with the Android numbers.
Re:Freedom != Wild West (Score:5, Informative)
All of the iPhone OS devices, except the first gen. iPod touch, have microphone inputs. If you want to get technical, even the first gen. iPod touch supported microphone input through a third party extension. iPhone OS devices without a camera still allow in-app access to photograph data through the Library. The lack of certain hardware only limits what the user can do, it does not prevent the user from using the application outright unless the developer also chooses to limit who can use the app.
I have never made an argument about Android fragmentation. If I can write a general information-centric application that will run on all Android-based smartphones, tablets, in-car computers, etc. there is no fragmentation and all of the devices should be counted towards Android sales.
With that said, from what I understand, you often cannot guarantee that your Android app will be able to use even basic system features. That does sound like a real problem.
Summing it up for dev (Score:3, Funny)
iPhone:
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time, cutting you off and kicking you out, with no course of action but to whine on some no-name blog
Android:
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that is immature and whose app store is a wild west nightmare.
Well, choose your poison...
I agree that MS is no worse than others, (Score:4, Interesting)
But these engineers and bloggers are some serious whiners. If Wal-Mart or Target or any large store or any store, for that matter, stops carrying some real-world product, does it make it onto slashdot? Hell no! Because that's the nature of business. Your customers can stop buying your product at any time, even when those customers are resellers. Why do these people feel that it is their God-given right to sell products through these istores or whatever?
Talk to any successful business owner about the concept of having only one customer for you business and they'll say you're stupid.
Do iPhone users actually care? (Score:5, Insightful)
I notice a handful of developers who have a beef with the way Apple runs their App store, but do any users actually care? Are there hundreds of thousands of users who are hating Apple right now because Apple is denying the users access to a killer application that they simply can't live without?
The whole issue surrounding the app store seems really contrived to me. Users who actually care about wanting to run specific types of applications will buy a phone that they can run applications on. Users who want an iPhone will buy an iPhone. Plenty of huge corporations like Starbucks, Bank of America and others have developed iPhone apps. Fandango has an app for finding movies that runs on both the iPhone and the G1 (and probably other Android phones too). If there was a huge problem with Apple exclusivity, I'd expect corporations like BofA and the like to be complaining that Apple is preventing them from offering their customers the same kind of applications that are offered on Android.
Other than some niche apps, there doesn't seem to be a real problem. If app devs really have uber ideas for applications then they should be able to build those apps on alternative platforms and the users will come. If they do build them and the users don't show up, the app obviously wasn't all that compelling in the first place.
I'm not a big Apple fan, but I recognize their right to tailor their product as they see fit. It isn't as if they are the entire mobile device market. They aren't even half of it. There are alternatives. As much as I dislike the Apple fanboys when they trot out their tired, "You aren't the target market" meme, it seems to fit in this case. Apple isn't targeting developers. They are targeting end users.
Free advertising on /.: claim apple banned you (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody bother to check to see if the app has been pulled before providing a billion web hits to this app? No? Great! I have a feeling my app is about to be pulled too.
Re:there is an alternative (Score:5, Insightful)
As sucky as the terms are, it's hard to walk away from that.
Re:there is an alternative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:there is an alternative (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless of course Apple is making you walk away as in cases like this. You pay your entrance fee, you run 99.9% of the race and then Apple looks you over at the finish line and says you ran this racing wearing red sneakers and we don't like red sneakers. Thank you for your $99, your purchase of various iProds and a Mac, have a nice day. My advice to developers unless you have nothing better to do, walk away or don't get involved at all and no I'm not one of the rejected.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Guess which one I'd choose. I'll give you a hint: I have a mortgage.
Here's a cookie... (Score:3, Interesting)
Most people who bought an iPhone or iPad bought it for what it offered out of the box, plus some vague idea that there were also going to be "plenty of games and other cool things to download for it in the future". The fact that it's a "closed usage" platform isn't really a factor for most of us (myself included).
It's pretty clear that Apple is "winging it" with a lot of this app store approval stuff. Things keep getting developed that they obviously didn't consider in advance, so while reviewing them, t
Re:Android... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Android... (Score:5, Insightful)
The Android thing is definitely just whining. It's a great platform and even I, with my modest skill, can code up stuff that works on multiple devices. Planning for different screens is nothing new... it happens in the PC and web world ALL the time.
Good aps are NOT hard to find even if it involves a little more community involvement to see what people are using for some given task. On top of it *I* get to decide what I put on my phone, not some nameless Apple employee, and that is very important to me.
Android isn't perfect, but neither is iPhone. I think it has a lot more potential than Apple in the long run, especially if they hurting developers with their Ivory Tower style decisions on high about what apps stay and what apps go.
Re:Microsoft Windows Phone 7 (Score:5, Insightful)
Admittedly, since MS will be coming at the market from a position of significant weakness by the time any WP7 handsets actually make it out the door(oh hai! Our revision 1 product, missing most of the enterprise stuff that kept people on WM6 despite the fact that it blew, is being released into the face of iPhone OS 4, and android 2.2, if not 2.3 or later...) they will likely be inclined to be merciful masters. At first.
However, if they experience any significant success, there is no reason to expect that they won't abuse their power just as hard as Apple. If they experience little or no success, they might well double-down on the crackdown, and vertically integrate even harder, screwing over any remaining 3rd parties(this is barely hypothetical, we all know what happened to the 3rd-party "playsforsure" ecosystem when MS decided that they weren't doing the job against Apple...)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ha!
You hit the nail on the head. I grew up hunting for new programs on dial-up BBS's, and let me tell you, there's nothing more "wild west" than the BBS scene was in the 80's and 90's. Somehow, despite the lack of a centralized app store, I managed to compile several hundred 1.44" floppy diskettes full of downloaded programs...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Only one small problem with this article
The problem being that you didn't follow the link that explains that the app is GOING to be removed, not HAS BEEN removed? http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/sentence-first-verdict-afterwards/ [wordpress.com] Even TFA says, "Apple informed them their app would be pulled." Note the future tense.
Re:More transparency would be nice. (Score:4, Insightful)
I disagree. The approval process is important to filter out apps that don't launch at all and malware (which they don't check right now unfortunately).