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."
This reminds me (Score:2, Interesting)
For the knee-jerk types out there (I can see it now: "but its theirs and they can do that if they want so nyaa!"), I will point out that whether Apple has the right to behave in this way is an entirely separate question; my post here is assuming that they do.
People are surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have stated multiple times on Slashdot and have multiple times be called a troll...
THIS is EXACTLY the same behavior Apple exhibited with the Apple and their token program!
Ah, but this is so old news (over 20 years ago) that people tend to have forgotten!
Now Apple is all good and dandy! BS!
Re:Competition? (Score:5, Interesting)
To ensure that developers keep using their platform?
To make sure that the Latest and Greatest apps are developed, first and foremost, for the iPhone and not for the Android or another platform?
tell me again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell me again why this phone is so cool?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Competition with planned features? (Score:1, Interesting)
Who wants to bet that Apple will add this feature in the next release and doesn't want to deal with thousands of people demanding their money back when they realize they just paid for something they were about to get for free?
This sort of problem points to a clear need for a way to getting app concepts preapproved by Apple prior to development. Apple should never reject a useful app after it has been written. If Apple is going to reject lots of useful apps for reasons outside the scope of the developer agreement, the burden rests squarely on them to provide another way for app writers to obtain guidance so apps never get written if they have little chance of being approved.
If Apple needs a good reason to solve this problem, here's one: in the absence of such a concept approval program, an individual (non-corporate) developer would have to be an idiot to risk months of development time only to have Apple reject it arbitrarily. Thus, individual iPhone developers are better off releasing quick, half-assed products that take a week to develop and suck massively, then fix the bugs after Apple has approved the first version. If Apple wants the quality of 1.0 versions in the store to be utter bollocks, don't worry--it will get there soon enough if they don't improve their developer relations. And, of course, every time an app developer does that, it costs Apple bandwidth.
Re:People are surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have stated multiple times on Slashdot and have multiple times be called a troll...
THIS is EXACTLY the same behavior Apple exhibited with the Apple and their token program!
Ah, but this is so old news (over 20 years ago) that people tend to have forgotten!
Now Apple is all good and dandy! BS!
Yeah, I know what you mean. I posted on this same story and said that a company which believes in its products isn't afraid of competition; I was almost instantly modded Redundant even though all preceding comments were about whether the iPhone can be considered a "platform". It seems that Apple is another of these near-religious subjects that weak-minded people get all upset over and of course that's your fault for saying something with which they disagree. In a society where many children don't even know who their father is, it seems that there is a lack of calm, collected, strong-minded men not given to this type of childish impulsiveness who could perhaps model a better example of how to live. Make no mistake, it is about how to live; that sort of impulsive, reactionary mentality is not at all limited to this subject or this Web site. If anyone perceives my disdain of it as being caused by a lower score on a Slashdot posting, they have missed my point entirely.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:4, Interesting)
If they released all their software to Symbian OS, at least S60 with high end device features (e.g. N95) simultaneously, that would teach Apple. It would be a great favour to Symbian users too. I am not speaking about high end,commercial software of course.
Not applying for iPhone competition or WWDC something doesn't match it.
Funny is, there is a huge fight in Symbian scene, people ask Nokia (the Godfather) why they gave up their "Download! for PC" which was working perfectly, years ago before iPhone was even mentioned.
Yes, believe or not, Nokia had "App store" on Windows OS at least and still has it inside every recent S60 phones ROM, not an option even, that app is on every phones root level menu. The result? Still not updated! I think Apple already knows the Symbian platform is not really competitive with current management so they feel comfortable taking decisions like that.
Re:Apple stop the insanity! (Score:5, Interesting)
iPhone is neat hardware.
Yes it is. Artificial and intentional crippling makes me really angry because this device is capable of doing so much more. It's a beautiful device will horrible restrictions that would make even Microsoft blush. Crippling is enough to make one not become an Apple developer.
*Crosses fingers* C'MON ANDROID!!!
I don't get it (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a fan of Apple hardware. I've got an iPod Touch. I'd never use the app in question because I'm happy with the way iTunes handles my podcasts.
But I don't see why Apple should care about this app. I assumed the Slashdot summary was way off base, which more often than not is the case nowadays - but it's pretty accurate in this instance. So why is Apple doing this? As far as I know they don't make money off of podcasts - heck, most of them are free. So why should they care? Are they worried that, somehow, this will be used to move other files onto the iPod/iPhone? I just can't figure it out (and yeah, I'm discounting with prejudice the conspiracy theories that seem to be rampant here today - those don't really stand up to any sort of analysis either).
It just doesn't make sense.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, a friend and I have recently come up with two ideas for fun phone apps, and have been waffling between doing them for iPhone or for Android.
The coolness and market base of iPhone combine to create a strong draw towards iPhone. But at the same time, I'm already a seasoned Java developer and learning Objective-C and Cocoa is a pretty hefty hurdle to overcome when I'd like to get things rolling quickly.
Additional crap like this is making me lean more and more away from iPhone and increasingly towards Android/HTC. This may well be the tipping point.
The one last thing that may seal the deal for me, once HTC comes out, is whether or not it will easily sync contacts and calendars with my mac. If it does, HTC may well end up being my personal phone, which would definitely push me away from developing for iPhone.
Re:Competition? (Score:3, Interesting)
From a business standpoint, why should they allow it?
1) Make iPhone more useful
2) Sell more iPhones
3) Profit
Re:One Can Hope (Score:2, Interesting)
Does anyone wonder why there is no skype for the iPhone?
Re:One Can Hope (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing about it is, talented developers often find themselves in the "software architect" position on projects; that is, deciding upon which platform to build a project. While popularity of a platform (and therefore the possibility of profit) does have an impact on that decision, many developers find that it's simply easier to code on open platforms, as well as obtain assistance from the community that's built up around them.
Economic reasons are not the only thing looked at, in other words.
Openmoko and FreeRunner: Just across the pond... (Score:2, Interesting)
... there's freedom, for developers, and users as well:
"Our license gives developers and users freedom to cosmetically customize their device or radically remix it; change the wallpaper or rebuild the entire house! It grants them the freedom, for example, to transform a phone into a medical device or point of sale device or the freedom to simply install their own favourite software. Beyond freeing the software on our devices we have also released our CAD files under Creative Commons. And at Linux world 2008, we announced the release of the schematics for our products."
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Main_Page [openmoko.org]
Re:Isn't it about time the law did something? (Score:2, Interesting)
This used to be the case, but not anymore. In the world of (legal) digital music distribution, Apple has nowadays at least as much marketshare and influence, as MS ever had for desktop OSs. And whereas MS steadily loses its market share every day, Apple keeps gaining more and more, with hardly any end in sight.
I can install Firefox and VNC on OSX any time I want.
Your statement reminds me of the old Soviet joke "I too can go to the Red Square and say that Reagan is an idiot, and nothing will happen to me". VLC (thats what I meant to say, was a typo) and FF are not competitors to Apple's business model, just like iTunes isn't a competitor to Windows. The bottom line is that Apple blocks what it percieves to hurt its business in an uncompetitive way. Music competitors to Apple is as Firefox/VLC is to MS. If we wouldn't tolerate MS blocking Firefox on Windows, we shouldn't tolerate Apple blocking a competitor to iTunes on iPhone/Pod.
Re:People are surprised? (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple is no more nor is it any less evil than Microsoft or any of their ilk. Is it any surprise that they're exercising strict control over the iPhone? No. No. No, not at all!! It's the same behavior Apple has exhibited with everything it produces!
"Let's be clear: forbidding 'duplication of functionality' is forbidding competition. The point of competition is to do the same thing, but better."
Sure. Why would they want to possibly put themselves in the position of admitting that someone "did iTunes" better than they do? Their business practices and marketing are almost the same thing; they need to promote "Cult of [Apple]" and to effectively justify their approach they need to be able to say, "No. We did that application/utility better. See what our strict adherence to our policies brought us? A better product." If they can't say that then the millions (billions?) they've spent on their marketing for the last 30 years is worthless.
They built the cult for a reason.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple's cut (30%) is extremely low for what you get. Unlimited distribution, completely flexible pricing, international markets, hosting, updates, auto-pariticpation in their "top 100" lists and "feature apps", etc. And the $99 entry fee is also very comparatively low. If you can't make back $99/year on the App Store, you're doing it wrong.
And if the argument is ease of development, Apple definitely has Google beat so far regardless of ones ability to share. I'm no huge fan of XCode, but iPhone development is really easy. So easy that here we are less than two months after release and there's thousands of apps. My guess is that within a few months all the big names will have their stuff ported including Skype. So from a user's point of view.
So it's good for the users, and good for the developers. In return, you occasionally (4 apps so far out of 3000) get slapped down by Apple. I don't think it's going to affect the market much.
Hence why no iphone for me (Score:2, Interesting)
Agreed. Feature wise, the iPhone is probably the best phone on the market now.
Freedom wise? It's not the worst, but pretty close. The phone can only be purchased locked from certain providers. Your limited with what you can do with it. Developers have to follow a strict platform toolset, and applications can ONLY be downloaded (legitimately: jailbreaking phones doesn't count for non-slashdot readers) through iTunes.
Take most Windows Mobile phones on the other hand, and you have all the developer toys, loads of applications, and the ability to upgrade (in some cases even to the truly open Android as it matures)
By the way, this is not the first publicized instance of Apple banning an iPhone app (ie:that rich-person ruby screensaver), just the first with a legitimate purpose (that we know of).
Re:Prepare to be spun (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple stopped releasing source code. There was an outcry. They reversed themselves. The Apple apologists claimed that Apple had merely "not released the code yet", despite the fact that Apple had stopped releasing code, with several binary releases going by without any source releases.
You're reducing anyone who disagrees with you to an "Apple apologist" endlessly shouting down dissension with a "PR talking point."
Can you point out anything more official than blogs to show that Apple stopped open-sourcing Darwin? I've seen many blogs make the point, but they've never had anything more than a delay between a major OS release and the source code appearing to prove their case. It's all just speculation.
In your other examples, you're probably hitting the mark. You also forgot the factory in Burma, which was shut down by Apple only after people realised and complained that Apple were (effectively) supporting the military junta in the suppression of the people's democratic rights. Or something like that (it was back in... '96?). That was a very real example you should add to your list.
But the Darwin thing seems to be nothing more than a delay. Not every conspiracy about Apple is true, you know. Sometimes stuff just happens.
Re:WHY?! (Score:5, Interesting)
The competition honesty isn't up to scratch yet. The vast majority people care about how well the device works and how the interact with it, not the business policies of the manufacturer and carrier (God knows that no carrier would be in business if that was the case). I'd absolutely love to see more genuine competition in this area, as the iPhone certainly has a number of shortcomings. But most of the companies are just trying to hop on the touchscreen bandwagon and completely miss the point. My iPhone experience has been for the most part very positive (AT&T much less so, but again, that's true of all carriers) - it's got some small things that bother me, but for the most part nothing major (that isn't specific to AT&T).
Now I've got the original model, and the 3G model seems to be having quite a number of other things causing problems so I've been relatively unaffected. I've experienced the slow backups and some unstable apps (some are better than others, to say the least, though on the whole the 1.x jailbreak apps were somewhat more solid for whatever technical reason) which has been mostly addressed by the most recent firmware. My two issues that remain are a lack of CalDAV calendar support directly on the device (the desktop iCal supports it, but you can only sync local calendars and one subscribed calendar via Exchange/MobileMe) and some weird WiFi issue that I think are more related to bad signal strength than something software-related.
Point being that on the whole, the device is fairly solid. Competition is a very good thing, no questions about it. But I've seen and played with the "competition". While some of those devices have things that some people bitch about (MMS and video recording to name two; I care about neither), they still tend to have clunky software interfaces and other arbitrary restrictions put in place by the carrier in order to charge you that much more. Hell, as far as I'm aware Verizon still disables Bluetooth data access on most phones so they can charge you $1.99/mo for their proprietary phonebook syncing (I didn't think to ask despite being in one of their stores today; my father was getting his second-time-broken Blackberry replaced by a lying and mostly incompetent albeit attractive sales rep). That kind of stupid nickel-and-diming BS is half the reason I left Verizon for AT&T in the first place. Of course, they're guilty too for the most part, but Apple negotiated some pretty reasonable deals for the first-gen phone, at least as far as the cell industry is concerned.
I'm NOT defending Apple here - I think blocking an app for this reason is absolutely despicable. I hope competition comes along and applies some real pressure. I hope that Android comes along and starts kicking ass. But that hasn't happened yet. There's no denying that Apple raised the bar on cell phones in quite a number of different areas and they've seen a lot of success as a result - but I certainly hope that information is used against them to create even better products. Like you imply, competition is absolutely a good thing. It's just not all there yet.
Re:People are surprised? (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem here is that this information is so old that only those that were from that generation remember it.
I only remember it because I was working with a contractor at the time (was still in highschool around 1986) was doing Apple work. He complained to me how he had to sign this that and other form. And how he had to sign each and every executable with his developer token.
Tracking down this information from 1986 is actually very difficult, and I have tried and tried to track it down on the web.
Of course this new generation of Apple folks would NEVER believe information from 22 years ago.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:3, Interesting)
One question - why would you want to "manage files" on my mp3 player in the first place? I'd much rather do that from a PC. Why are you having to delete mp3 files, anyway?
you cannot install applications without your pc and itunes.
Completely untrue. You can buy and install applications directly from the iPhone/Touch. It's very quick and easy to do. That you don't know this really strains your credibility on this topic.
Re:Apple Design Awards (Score:3, Interesting)
I for one would love to see NetShare [nullriver.com] enter and win an award for their iPhone application.
It was a great idea, filled an important need many users were having, and got pulled due to seemingly contradictory reasoning (AT&T allows other mobiles to "tether" on their network).
What a great way to shame Apple and get some easy media attention on the issue.