Apple Rejects iPhone App As Competitive To iTunes

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."

Comments

One Can Hope

[RAMMS EIN]

``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

[John Whitley]

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

[RAMMS EIN]

``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:One Can Hope

[dunkelfalke]

that is why i prefer phones with windows mobile.
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).

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

[aussie_a]

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.

Well, yeah

[FroBugg]

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

[the_humeister]

That's the problem with language. Once Apple sells the phone, it is no longer Apple's phone - it is the customer's.

Re:Well, yeah

[jmpeax]

It's not quite as simple as that, though.

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:Well, yeah

[statusbar]

It is time for us to start supporting OpenMoko instead of complaining about apple's policies!

--jeffk++

It is not an open platform

[blool]

Apple has created an embedded device and is choosing to tightly control the available applications for it. If you think this is a bad thing, don't develop for it and don't buy an iphone, it's that simple. 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. People jailbreak/develop home brew apps for the devices and don't expect to be embraced by the hardware creators. If you want to develop for an open platform develop for the PC or another device which actually wants and maintains good relationships with independent developers.

Re:tell me again...

[calmofthestorm]

Because it costs a lot

Re:Fiefdom

[BasilBrush]

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:Apple Design Awards

[causality]

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.

Developers, Developers, Developers

[Frankie70]

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".