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."
One Can Hope (Score:5, Insightful)
``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.''
I hope it will, but I doubt it. I hope the talented developers will favor open platforms over closed ones, help create and improve open platforms, and help making the world more open.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Funny)
As an iPhone developer, I hope it will too. Less competition for me. :-)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean there are people here that are sad enough to actually give a shit about their Slashdot karma rating? Oh dear.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope the talented developers will favor [profitable] platforms over [unprofitable] ones, help create and improve [profitable] platforms, and help making the world more [profitable].
There, fixed that for ya. Really, when push comes to shove, developers want their proverbial bread on the table as much as anyone else. If openness coincides sufficiently well with developer self-interest, then openness may win out as well. If it doesn't, then there's not much hope for it; ignoring economic incentives (or disincentives) doesn't make them go away.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Insightful)
``If openness coincides sufficiently well with developer self-interest, then openness may win out as well.''
If, at least, developers act in a way that maximizes their self-interest. In practise, that is probably only partially the case. At best, they will act in a way that they _think_ maximizes their self interest ... but their thinking can be affected, say, by a clever marketing campaign.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Does anyone wonder why there is no skype for the 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:One Can Hope (Score:5, Insightful)
that is why i prefer phones with windows mobile. .net language with netcf support, third party tools like lazarus).
there are no restrictions for applications, the developer have a wide choice of developer tools (vb, visual c++, any
there is skype for windows mobile (afaik it was the first mobile port of skype), there are other voip apps, starting wm6 there is even a built in voip support.
and i don't get why people whine about the interface. it is pretty much the same well known windows interface. even my mum and dad and my girlfriend can use their windows mobile smartphones (xda, xda II and xda III). if you can cope with windows on your desktop, you'll have no difficulties with wm. i do own an ipod touch (it was a gift) and i don't like the interface at all. if i want to delete an mp3 file, with my htc universal i start up my favourite file manager (total commander in my case), go to the file, open the context menu, chose "delete" and i am done. with the ipod touch i have to delete the file in the itunes on my pc, then synchronise. it sucks.
Re:One Can Hope (Score:5, Insightful)
there are no restrictions for applications, the developer have a wide choice of developer tools (vb, visual c++, any .net language with netcf support, third party tools like lazarus).
Its a pretty sad world when Windows is less anti-competitive then someone else.
Developers, Developers, Developers (Score:5, Insightful)
Right from day 1, Bill Gates knows that it's 3rd party developers who make his OS successful. That's why Ballmer goes around shouting "developers, developers".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Exactly... The iPhone app store is Apple's first attempt at NOT treating third party developers with utter contempt. They're having growing pains. I bet in a few years, they'll be much better. They might even stop poisoning 3rd party developers' food and kicking their dogs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, there was NetShare. Granted, AT&T called the shots there, but that doesn't make the application any less banned.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have to agree - MS has actually done some really cool stuff lately and Apple some really stupid stuff.
I think right now developers are in a good place - MS seems to be reacting to the competition from Apple and Linux/Android by making things better for *us*, which makes it better for the consumers in the long run.
Popfly has gotten my kid finally interested in programming (much like basic did for me), XNA is a blast, and even Studio Express is pretty nice for a free dev studio.
Compared to Apple getting nas
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
you have to make the operation on a completely different device. if you don't have access to your pc, you are s.o.l. you cannot access your files without your pc and itunes, you cannot install applications without your pc and itunes. it is a much more complicated approach.
Re: (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: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.
Corrections (Score:3, Insightful)
Unlimited distribution
not really. It's limited to whoever can buy from the iPhone App Store. You can't -also- distribute it via a third party vendor, or on your own website. Now if you could, then it's unlimited.
You have a mistaken notion of distribution. Just because you cannot physically put the binary on your website and have them download it from you, does not mean you cannot virtually distribute it through your own website, or through an aggregator.
After all, if a user clicks on a link, and gets an ap
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.
Re: (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.
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: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: (Score:2, Insightful)
For people with OS X development experience, the learning curve is minimal to non existent.
Yep, it's exactly like coding for Mac OS X, except you have the extra step of praying to whichever deity you think will help you the most that your app isn't too good.
There's nothing quite like enforced mediocrity.
Re: (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 toward
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd be happy to favor an open platform if anyone used the devices.
But heres the reality of it, there are millions of iPhones out there and no openmoko or android phones worth meantioning. So while its great to be an idealist and 'do the right thing', I'll have to be honest with you, I'd rather be able to sell my software and eat.
And thats pretty much how everyone else without someone to support them feels as well. It easy to be an idealist living with mommy and daddy, a little harder when you have to feed
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> I'd be happy to favor an open platform if anyone used the devices.
You should consider Symbian then. Last time I looked, it had 20 times the market share of Apple.
Well, yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
The last comment clearly has it right. The iPhone is not a platform, it's Apple's toy that you're allowed to use. Is anybody really surprised?
You're never going to be allowed to use alternative hardware, obviously, and with the subscription status and deals with phone companies, you're going to be seriously restricted when it comes to software. How long did it take them to allow any third party programs on their phone?
Re:Well, yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the problem with language. Once Apple sells the phone, it is no longer Apple's phone - it is the customer's.
Since WHEN has apple ever allowed people to own their own equipment? Apple has never been about freedom (as in beer, or choice apparently), it has been more like a mortgage company.. Leasing you the use of your home/equipment until such time as they see fit to no longer support it. It was a great frustration to me, when I use to service Apple computers (eons ago... Back before the last ice age..) to not be able to order a replacement part from a 3rd party source with ease. Apple, for as long as I can
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:Well, yeah (Score:4, Funny)
I'm on an iPhone so take this as you will.
my phone, their app store. no one is bitching about not being able to buy windows vista or a Zen at an apple retail location.
Re:Well, yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only are restrictions placed on the app store, but on the device itself. It wouldn't be a problem if anyone could set up their own app store to distribute software to iPhone users.
no one is bitching about not being able to buy windows vista or a Zen at an apple retail location.
A better analogy would be buying a Mac and then only being allowed to buy software from Apple retail locations.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It wouldn't be a problem if anyone could set up their own app store to distribute software to iPhone users.
I'm also an iPhone owner, people and companies are already doing this.
A vast amount of iPhone users have their phones jailbroken (if this poll posted earlier today [engadget.com] is any indication, it would seem the majority do) thanks to the iphone-dev team. Cydia is a GUI application installed which uses apt at the backend, just like debian/ubuntu, for installing third party software. Pretty much anyone can get an
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:Well, yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
It is time for us to start supporting OpenMoko instead of complaining about apple's policies!
--jeffk++
Apple Design Awards (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple Design Awards (Score:5, Insightful)
A boycott of the iPhone Apple Design Awards would undoubtedly send a message to Apple, but I doubt it could be pulled off. Those awards are coveted; it's such a big temptation for developers that they won't miss out on it just for a stand on principles.
If that be the case, then what they have are not principles at all.
Re: (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 seemi
This reminds me (Score:2, Interesting)
For the knee-je
Apple stop the insanity! (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope this trend ends soon. The screening of apps started not long ago and I think was a result of the amount of crap that Apple allowed to sell on the store. Between the numerous "flash light" apps and the infamous "I am Rich" app a lot of people were annoyed at the signal to noise ratio. Then there was "Netshare" which was pulled because it violated ATTs terms of service (luckily I got my copy early.)
My guess is that Apple responded to all this by making it some middle manager's responsibility to come up with a set of ground rules to "improve" the situation. He/she/the committe or whatever obviously went way overboard. As a potential iPhone developer it gives me the chills that you could spend months on a project just to have it rejected for a rediculous reason like the one here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"As a potential iPhone developer it gives me the chills that you could spend months on a project just to have it rejected for a rediculous reason like the one here."
If Apple really wants that tight control, they should allow a way for proposals to be submitted before development begins. That way months aren't wasted on the project, and you would know early on whether your project is bad. (I'm not an Apple Store dev so I don't know if this is currently an option).
Actually, maybe it's not such a great idea be
Re:Apple stop the insanity! (Score:4, Insightful)
Nonsense. The screening of apps starting in the very beginning with a process designed to enable that very thing. Apple stated from the start that they would be screening apps. Only fools believe it's for anything other than Apple's best interests.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense. The screening of apps starting in the very beginning with a process designed to enable that very thing. Apple stated from the start that they would be screening apps. Only fools believe it's for anything other than Apple's best interests.
I think it's more a question of whether Apple perceives that giving its customers what they want, the way that they want it and thus creating happier customers is in its best interests more than strict control is in its best interests. Obviously any for-profit corporation is going take actions that it believes to be in the best interests of its profitability; it's what those actions are that tell you what sort of company you are dealing with.
Re: (Score:2)
September 13th, 2008 NetShare, banned from the AppStore Looks like Apple has decided they will not be allowing any tethering applications in the AppStore. As such, NetShare will not be available in the iTunes AppStore. We are seeing a lot of similar reports from various developers who's applications were abruptly removed and banned from the AppStore without any violations of the terms of service. This is all unfortunate news for the iPhone platform end-users.
http://www.nullriver.com/ [nullriver.com]
I noticed Tris is gone too.
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!!!
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: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: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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now Apple is all good and dandy! BS!
Huh? Who is saying that? Normally pro-Apple blogs are almost universally against this, tech sites like Slashdot are almost universally against this, so who's on Apple's side here?
Perhaps you might like to read some of the comments in this topic today and recalibrate your sense of reality.
Re: (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 cour
The culprit is obvious (Score:2)
Linux did it. [today.com]
It is not an open platform (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you think this is a bad thing, don't develop for it and don't buy an iphone, it's that simple.
You left out the part about raising a big stink about it so that others don't make the same mistake of buying it, or taking the risk of developing for it, either.
Re: (Score:2)
What risk? Apple was clear right from when the SDK was launched that you couldn't do apps that duplicated the functionality of the built in apps. And also various other categories of apps that were not allowed (porn, gambling for money etc.)
People who have gone ahead and developed apps that they weren't sure were OK should have asked before spending time on them.
Re: (Score:2)
You're absolutely correct.
I won't do either.
Re: (Score:2)
Things like the gameboy and xbox live tightly control the available content, and I don't see nearly as much bitching about them as I do about the iphone.
Probably because neither of those pretended to be a complete computer. The iPhone's biggest appeal is that it is more than just a phone, and is, in fact, a general-purpose pocket computer.
Apple never said this, but frankly, that's where the hype comes from, and I imagine that's largely what these developers see in it.
It's also directly detrimental to consumers -- here's an example of an app which probably would have been beneficial, but Apple blocked it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It is not an open platform (Score:4, Insightful)
tell me again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell me again why this phone is so cool?
Re:tell me again... (Score:4, Insightful)
Because it costs a lot
Re: (Score:2)
Sir, I am afraid you need re-education. Please step into the reality distortion field.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (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 Da
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.
Openmoko (Score:4, Funny)
Come on in, the water's fine in the Openmoko pool! A truly free platform, and anything compiled for Linux on an ARM CPU will run (assuming the dependencies are also present).
Apparently (Score:2, Informative)
Port it to Android and Windows Mobile (Score:2)
Windows Mobile is offered on a LOT of devices these days and is gaining in popularity. If Apple isn't offering a level playing field for 3rd party developers, then use your talent to write applications for other mobile platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon.mp3 (Score:2)
I own a tmobile Wing and I have had no problems using the Amazon mp3 service to download songs on the go, and then I have the music DRM free and can use it however I like.
Amazon could certainly stand to make a streamlined interface for use with the Windows Mobile Internet Explorer, since it's very handy to hear a song on the radio and then simply go and get it when I'm out and about. Then I can put it on my stereo when I get home or play immediately.
With Iphone you're paying for something that supposedly wo
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.
Apple now is just like the rest now (Score:2)
I lump Apple, Microsoft and Google together these days. Same business practices and callousness to their customers and the public.
Well, who will be the next up and coming company that we can love and rely upon? - that is, until the lust for money drives them into the same above category.
Wait a second.. (Score:2, Insightful)
They rejected an iPhone app because it COMPETES with the iTunes service?
Hello, antitrust lawsuit. Welcome to Microsoft's shoes, Apple.
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.
I hate arguing semantics, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
"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.""
I disagree. All of the modern game consoles are clearly platforms, yet you must have approval in order to develop and sell software for them. You have to submit your game to MS, Sony or Nintendo and they have to approve it. They can (and will) refuse authoring and certification of your game if you fail to meet their criteria. Granted, I don't
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
First it was Apple couldn't win against clones... (Score:2)
Now it seems that Apple can't compete when it comes to applications on their hardware...
I see a pattern here...
Potentially visionary ideas, incompetent execution... It's almost funny, yet sad in a way...
Don't bother trying to defend Apple on this one Fan-boys...
Nono, they should! (Score:3, Funny)
They should allow it, and sell zunes in the apple store.
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?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They seem to have been doing ok running 'exclusive'. So i pose the question again, why should they invite competition?
As a side note, there are some similar non compete restrictions when you buy Visual studio from Microsoft, so this isn't like its a new concept and they seem to be doing well with it.
Re: (Score:2)
>there are some similar non compete restrictions when you buy Visual studio from Microsoft
Really? Care to support that argument with some facts? A quick through some VS eula's does seem to say that in Visual Studio 2002 you couldn't compete head on with Access provided you were using their JET backend... but other than that... you can build what you want.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is up to customer. If they have rejected to buy iPhone because of how Apple handles it, things could change.
Are they happily buying and lining up? Oh, some percentage of them hacks their iPhone, it doesn't matter to Apple at all. In fact, Apple would be happier since they have all void their warranty ;)
I still don't get the point of Android and I am a Symbian/J2ME user. Google should explain why they don't put their force behind Symbian and J2ME instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It can also eat away at their bottom line just as easily.
Its a business risk they don't feel is worth doing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It can also eat away at their bottom line just as easily.
Its a business risk they don't feel is worth doing.
I think that's inherently part of the problem. When you're an upstart company or at least new to a particular market (especially in a market full of established, entrenched competitors), you're more willing to take a risk like that because the very business itself is a risk that could easily fail. When your brand becomes well-known and you become more and more established, there is also a tendency to become more and more conservative because you like your current position and are interested in keeping it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
From a business standpoint, why should they allow it?
1) Make iPhone more useful
2) Sell more iPhones
3) Profit
Re: (Score:2)
I must have missed the court decision where they were declared a monopoly. Mind showing us your reference?
Re: (Score:2)
I must have missed the court decision where they were declared a monopoly. Mind showing us your reference?
Indeed. The iPhone is not the only cellphone available; it is not even the only "smart" phone available. Right now many people may feel that it's the best; in the recent past that was not the case and in the future that may or may not be the case. This is definitely not a monopoly. Hell, I wish the operating system market was more like this! I don't like what Apple is doing here, but my grounds for objection have nothing to do with monopolies.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
which is not the only possible channel of distribution
I thought it was? Is there another way (that doesn't include modifying hardware or system software or invalidating the warranty) of getting apps onto an iPhone?
Are you serious? (Score:4, Insightful)
Where is the integrity in a developer knowingly creating an application to do something a product already does? You mean to tell me that in the marketplace of ideas that developers are so bereft of creativity that they cannot think of something unique?
You're either not serious, or out of your mind.
Are you seriously trying to say that a developer should never develop an application that does something another application already does? Even if it does that something much better than the original?
In that case, we don't need Firefox or Opera because we have Safari; we don't need Adium because we have iChat; we don't need VLC because we have Quicktime.
Screw competition! Right?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, you're being fairly silly. While it's probably completely within Apple's rights to do this, it's a total shoot-themselves-in-the-foot move. The computer world is full of competing software, and for every Apple written application out there, there's a big pile of competing apps available. More often then not, the Apple apps are be able to stand successfully on their own. Apple doesn't need to lock out competitors to be successful, they just need to keep making quality software, and that plus their
Re:Fiefdom (Score:5, Insightful)
You can. The problem is that if you want to make money, selling iPhone apps is the way to go, not selling Symbian Apps. At this time there are far more Symbian smartphones out there than iPhones. But for the most part owners don't buy any software that doesn't come with the device.
Apple have made it so easy to purchase applications that lots of people do.
Oh, and I spend years writing Symbian software. The iPhone SDK and tools are about 100 times nicer and faster to work with.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fuck 'em. There's competition licking at their heals, and short of the semi-retarded Apple fanbois, folks will go to the competition, and leave the mental midgets that dream of giving blow Jobs, Apple will be fucked.
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: (Score:3, Funny)
The competition honesty isn't up to scratch yet.
Not up to scratch?? Well... I guess it depends on your POV.
But I fully agree, that "The iPhone is a piece of shit, and [thebestpag...iverse.net] :D
so is your face."!
Too bad Apple is morphing into Sony (Score:3, Insightful)
The last great truly innovative and OPEN product Apple made was the 12 inch G4 Powerbook IMO. Yes I have an ipod touch and a G5 tower but I won't be getting any more Apple products if they become an entirely closed mainly consumer electronics focused company.
Dual booting XP and Ubuntu isn't THAT bad that I'm not wiling to put up with more of this crap on a computer which is supposed to be a UNIVERSAL Turing machine. It's getting worse than Microsoft who I left to get a Mac in the first place.
Why? The App Store isn't just a "walled garden".. (Score:4, Insightful)
... but a "walled garden with land mines." Speaking as a developer, with Apple's terms of service, you not only can't see the land mines in the garden, but you can't even see the walls.
Speaking as a developer, it won't be possible to treat the iPhone as a viable platform for building and running a business until Apple comes clean with its real terms of service and requirements. Right now you have no idea if the app you're working on will ever be allowed to see the light of day.
It's reminiscent of what's happened with eBay over the last few years. Literally thousands of people quit their day jobs to build their businesses around eBay, and now they're finding themselves elbowed aside. eBay altered their deal, and all a small-time seller can do is pray that they don't alter it further. Right now, iPhone developers are in the exact same boat: completely at the mercy of a company whose interests are only coincidentally aligned with the "sharecroppers" who bring the real value to the table.
Re: (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.