Apple Rejects iPhone App As Competitive To iTunes 375
DaveyJJ sends news of yet another rejection of an iPhone app by Apple, with perhaps a chilling twist for potential developers of productivity or utility apps. John Gruber of Daring Fireball writes: "Let's be clear: forbidding 'duplication of functionality' is forbidding competition. The point of competition is to do the same thing, but better." Paul Kafasis (co-founder of Rogue Amoeba Software) makes the point that this action by Apple will scare talented developers away from the iPhone platform. And Dave Weiner argues that the iPhone isn't a "platform" at all: "The idea that it's a platform should mean no individual or company has the power to turn you off."
Apple Design Awards (Score:5, Informative)
SDK Agreement, anyone read it? (Score:5, Informative)
By the way, I've cut and paste what I found to be relevant to this topic, two paragraphs of the Terms and Conditions of the iPhone SDK download Agreement and the first paragraph of the iPhone Application Submission Agreement.
SDK Terms and Conditions
1. Relationship With Apple Inc. ("Apple"). You understand and agree by becoming a Registered iPhone Developer, no legal partnership or agency relationship is created between you and Apple. Neither you nor Apple is a partner, an agent or has any authority to bind the other. You agree not to represent otherwise. You also certify that you are of the legal age of majority in the jurisdiction in which you reside (at least 18 years of age in many countries) and you represent that you are legally permitted to become a Registered iPhone Developer. This Agreement is void where prohibited by law, and the right to become a Registered iPhone Developer is not granted in such jurisdictions.
9. Apple Independent Development. Nothing in this Agreement will impair Apple's right to develop, acquire, license, market, promote or distribute products, software or technologies that perform the same or similar functions as, or otherwise compete with any other products, software or technologies that you may develop, produce, market, or distribute. In the absence of a separate written agreement to the contrary, Apple will be free to use any information, suggestions or recommendations you provide to Apple for any purpose, subject to any applicable patents or copyrights.
iPhone App Submission Agreement
1. iPhone GTM Programs. The web applications you submit will be considered for inclusion in Apple's iPhone product pages, ADC web pages, Apple eNews programs and other related Apple developer and marketing web pages and programs (collectively "iPhone GTM Programs"). You understand and agree that Apple has complete discretion over whether to include your web applications in any iPhone GTM Program. You also understand and agree that Apple reserves the right, at its complete discretion and without prior notice to you, to remove your web applications from any and/or all iPhone GTM Programs. Should Apple decide to include your web application in one or more iPhone GTM Programs, you agree that Apple shall have the right, and you hereby grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive right and license, to use, reproduce, publicly display, reference, link to, and distribute in connection with such iPhone GTM Programs, your web application URL and all related information and materials (including without limitation images, trademarks, and logos) you provide with your submission to Apple (collectively, the "Submitted Materials").
End Result
Apple covered themselves very well on this topic and basically, if you are going to develop an app for the iPhone, you should be well aware of the risks and they are fairly, clearly stated.
Apparently (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Well, yeah (Score:5, Informative)
if this poll posted earlier today [engadget.com] is any indication, it would seem the majority do [have their iPhones jailbroken]
You're not serious? Not only is that statement contrary to all common sense, but that poll has all the statistical reliability of a Slashdot poll. For a start, non-technical users tend not to read Engadget, let alone know how to get an iPhone jailbroken.
I take your point that you can jailbreak your iPhone to allow third-party software, but it's far from the same thing as Apple allowing any third-party software on their phone.
For a start, most iPhone users won't have the first clue who iphone-dev are, what Cydia or even a GUI is, what apt is or what Debian/Ubuntu are. To the average user, iPhone applications come from the app store - that's the end of it. For these users, who I imagine make up the vast majority, Apple controls the software they're allowed to install on their iPhone.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Informative)
"compared to Apple's gargantuan bite of your work"
If you actually tried to get an application on ANYBODY ELSE'S 'application stores', like handango, or through one of the telco's, you would know the true meaning of gargantuan. Try 60/40 split for THEM. Or worse. As in, you get less than half. Apple has slapped all the other mobile phone application stores upside the face with pricing. And you can offer your app for free if you wish. How many other app stores let you do that?
Now, is there room for another competitor to come in and offer better terms than Apple. Certainly.
Just as a WAG, I would guess Google probably will go for something in the 15%-25% range for their app store, to slightly undercut Apple, while still being a little more than break-even for bandwidth, returns, techsupport and credit-card fees.
Re:Isn't it about time the law did something? (Score:2, Informative)
You overlook something critical. Apple does not have a monopoly. Rules are different for monopolies, pure and simple.
You're also comparing a phone to an operating system, which is a stretch. I can install Firefox and VNC on OSX any time I want.
Re:Wait a second.. (Score:5, Informative)
Hello, antitrust lawsuit. Welcome to Microsoft's shoes, Apple.
I don't think the iPhone is popular enough for that yet. They aren't leveraging a monopoly, because they don't have one.
I think it's much more likely that we will see antitrust action about the lock-in between newer iPods and iTunes (Only iTunes can put music on those, because a special hash has to be generated). Apple is very dominant in the mp3-player market, and they are using that to dominate the market for media player software -- and to promote the iTunes store.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:4, Informative)
Why should it follow that an open design leads to no profit
Uhh, he didn't say that. Weird, you got modded insightful for it. I guess the mods fell for your strawman. What he said was "If openness coincides sufficiently well with developer self-interest, then openness may win out as well." Given MS's success in software, which is far *far* from open, I'd say he's absolutely right.
Re:Well, yeah (Score:5, Informative)
[citation needed]
What sort of Apple hardware parts aren't standardized these days? All of the system internals are relatively "normal," and don't seem to contain a sufficiently higher percentage of proprietary bits than a Dell would.
I'm not a fan of their iPhone strategy, but this other information seems pretty blatantly false. Apple lets its users run Windows on their machines (and helps them do so, a la Boot Camp, and their publicized support of Parallels/VMWare). I ran Ubuntu on my old G4 without a problem. The only major linux support issues on any remotely recent mac have to do with NVidia's lack of open drivers, rather than anything specific to Apple.
The iPhone/iPod software licensing seems a bit draconian, though nobody's forcing you to buy one...
I have a Mac, and I use it as I see fit. I'll probably get a touchscreen iPod once Apple comes to its senses regarding app licensing (which, to be fair, is a lot more liberal than how most phone companies treat 3rd-party apps)
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Informative)
The first Android phone, the HTC Dream, will be out "soon" [engadget.com]. Beware the curse of the early adopter however; while the Dream may (or may not) live up to its name, later offerings will surely be better.