Slashdot Mirror
Mentioning Android Is a No-No In iPhone App Store
donberryman writes "Apple has told a software developer that its application cannot be included in the iPhone App Store if it mentions Google Android. The developer just wanted to mention that the app was a finalist in Google's Android Developer's Challenge." The developer complied with apparent good humor. Here is their blog post, which includes the text of the iPhone store's not-quite-rejection.
There's not an app for that.
Wow the list of magical things you can't do with your iPhone app sure is growing.
The wording of Apple's reply is a gem in and of itself:
While your application has not been rejected, it would be appropriate to remove “Finalist in Google’s Android Developer’s Challenge!” from the Application Description.
Please log into iTunes Connect to make appropriate changes to the Application Description now to avoid an interruption in the availability of Flash of Genius: SAT Vocab 2.2 on the iPhone App Store.
That's a nice app you have there; would be a shame if anything happened to it...
So how is this developer's desire to port something from Android to the iPhone and advertise it different from Apple's desire to have Windows applications running on OSX and actively advertise it?
Oh, now I get it. You push the little guys around when you're the big man on campus. Certainly is interesting I can find literature about Symbian on your site. Tell me, if a very popular Symbian or Blackberry app was ported to the iPhone, would you allow the developer to advertise it? Because I'm betting you would.
My work here is dung.
Even if beginning with the best of intentions, a censor will always, eventually, come to use his power to censor to benefit himself.
Does anyone remember way back when anti-competitive behavior was illegal? I guess it just depends on which company does it.
I wouldn't take bets.
Does anybody think Barnes and Noble would be willing to post a sign saying your book was #38 in its category on Amazon?
They would mention a book is a national best seller, even if the majority of the books were sold on Amazon. He's not promoting Android, he's promoting the fact that he was a finalist in a competition, which just happened to be hosted for Android apps.
Apple is certainly clear on what they want control over. Flash on the iPhone anyone? NOT!
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
While I'm sure many will eagerly jump forward to proclaim, yet again, how evil Apple has become, to me, this just makes sense. Mentioning that the app was a finalist in Google's Android Developer's Challenge implies that the app is compatible with an Android system. Even if one moron downloads it thinking that it will work on their Andriod phone, it's one person too many. Makes sense to me.
Apple can't have Android inside Steve Jobs' Reality Distortion Field.
Does anybody think Barnes and Noble would be willing to post a sign saying your book was #38 in its category on Amazon?
Yes?
"Hey they book got good reviews, it must be good, let me buy it."
Impulse purchasing ftw.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Lots of books have their review list, etc. shown on the back. Do you think the Washington Post wouldn't review a book that has "#4 NYT Best Seller" on the cover?
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Not to mention all the apps on the Android store with references to the iPhone.
Does anybody think Barnes and Noble would be willing to post a sign saying your book was #38 in its category on Amazon?
No, but I see all the time people with stickers on their book covers indicating their position on the New York Times Best Sellers list, or the Oprah Bookclub.
You can't expect to place ads for a competing store's award in another retail store.
This isn't that. This is advertising that you won a Fields Metal at a Nobel Consortium (with an enormous pinch of salt).
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
I think everyone's going to dogpile on Apple for this, but I think they're missing the point, the point of the removal isn't the word Android, or Google, but the whole phrase of Google Android Developer Contest. They want to be disassociated with that contest. Given that Apple hasn't delisted apps that claim compatibility with other phones, and they even list a whole crap load of Android podcasts and other Android content in the iTunes store, I don't think Apple's paranoid about just the Apple or Google part.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
It's getting clearer and clearer that the appstore model is quite broken.
While I can see why Apple would want to keep it like that (they make loads of money off of it), a far better (for the consumer and community) model would be a packaging system á la apt/yum with added hooks for payment for commercial apps. That way you could add your app to any repo that would accept it, or start your own repo.
There are a few security considerations to this approach, but I'm sure they could be worked out.
I sincerely hope Android/Google can move in this direction.
I don't see this guy mentioning that his application was a finalist in a developer challenge as such.
If anything it makes it stand out...
Gee, how did Apple find out in the sea of 5,000 applications that turn your phone into a flashlight?
They probably search for 'android' and snuff the mention of it out.
It is their store.... they can do what they want and for that reason I don't buy from it.
I have seen tons of apps on the android store that mention iPhone or the fact that the same application was written for it.
We don't see Google snuffing those out....
This Apple has worms in it.
You clicked through and made 2 root level comments. That doesn't speak to you trying to ignore it.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
I wonder how a game where an archer (who just happens to look like a certain Android) shoots an Apple (that just happens to have a bite taken out of it) off of it's pedestal would be received? Hrmmmm...
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
i, for one, welcome our new apple overlord
Good catch. I think an apple fanboy got his feathers ruffled a bit. Blind loyalty is blind.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
We shouldn't be too surprised as censorship is among the usual tools of choice for dictatorial governments. Who expected benevolence?
When he is around, he usually posts (at least) 2 root level comments to every story.
It sort of seems like spamming, but not quite. It is mostly just odd. I don't think it is driven by Apple lovin'.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it all right. [returns to the Germans] So! It's all forgotten now, and let's hear no more about it. So, that's two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Hermann Goering, and four Colditz salads.
No, but then Barnes and Noble isn't the only place you can sell your book. If you don't like their policies, you can also put it up for sale on Amazon, Books-A-Million, any number of local bookstores, and probably even stores like Wal-Mart, Target, etc.
On the other hand, Apple's app store is the only place to offer applications for iPhones, iTouches, and now iPads. The author of this application can't simply go through some alternate means of distributing his application without asking people to jailbreak their device, something that is at best iffy to do if they want to maintain service.
If Apple would let developers put their apps up for download from their own web site or alternate app stores, then I wouldn't complain. Apple has the right to accept, deny, or place any conditions on apps in its app store that they want. However, that's only half the story. My problem with their attitude is that they have set themselves up so that their store is the only store in town; they have a monopoly over distribution of iDevice applications. They have final authority over what I can and can't run on a device that I own, and as this story illustrates, they are grossly misusing that authority.
Personally, I can't understand why anyone would want to by an iPad, given that it is going to maintain this paradigm. With phones, people are somewhat used to this. With the iPad pushing into the netbook and ultraportable laptop market, though, it is completely unacceptable. Imagine if you bought, for example, an HP laptop, and they told you the following: "Congratulations on your new HP laptop! To obtain applications, visit apps.hp.com. Oh, and we're sorry if it causes any inconvenience, but that is the only way you may install applications on this new laptop. Everything else is blocked, and if we find out that you're trying to install apps from anywhere except hp.com, your laptop could be deactivated. Congratulations again!" Well, that's Apple, and it boggles my mind that anyone would tolerate it.
These shenanigans are precisely why I, as a developer, got a refund on my developer program application and told them that I will be not be developing for the iDevices. It's also why I, who used to be an advocate for Apple devices, am strongly urging people to not buy their products these days.
I'm not surprised by this. Apple is well known for censorship/DRM.
-- (this is a sig) My Computer Programming Forumhttp://www.programers.co.nr/
It amused me that when I clicked on the link to the blog, I was returned a "503: Service Not Available" page.
I guess they are being hammered by Slashdot traffic right now, but I thought it also was a curiously coincidental comment on Apple's own response to their app.
That wouldn't exactly be advertisement for Wal-Mart, though; rather the opposite. :P
The flash of supidity is thinking visitors to the iPhone App Store have any significant interest in Android apps.
Unless they also have an Android phone, in which case they are going over to the Market for those apps.
More Apple paintywaists, and more=less. Not a real big deal, but I wonder how Apple would react to a developer who mentioned their app was a finalist for a Nokia or Microsoft competition.
And the dev has a sense of humor. So they don't seem to need the mentions to achieve their goals. Good for them.
Apple can bite ME.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
"Winner of the Google developer challenge for (competing app Apple forbids the name of)"
1984 was not supposed to be an instruction manual.
HEIL JOBS!
And they wouldn't refuse to carry the book if the manufacturer shipped it with a sticker on it saying "Voted Best New Author In Amazon.com Awards" or something, which seems like a pretty decent analogy to this case.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
There's not just monopoly. Anticompetitive does NOT require that you have a monopoly. Neither does collusion or illegal tying.
Why is Apple demonized for not willing to subsidize their competitors advertising?
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
You know it's rather funny to see all the whining and bitching and demonizing of Apple over this when the app developer himself says:
I suppose it’s logical, and I’m not complaining; Apple is a wonderful company to work with. I took out the offending bit from the description.
Apple doesn't want to list an app that mentions a competitor. (And in a fairly irrelevant way, too. The fact that another version of the app won an award doesn't necessary have any bearing on the iPhone incarnation, does it?) So, in effect, they don't want to advertise for the competition on their own system.
OK, maybe it seems a bit petty, but this isn't really censorship. It seems more like intelligent business practice.
It is amazing how Apple Koolaid drinkers will spin and twist events to absolve Apple of any wrongdoing 99% of the time.
Jeez, Apple, what were you thinking when you did this? You come across as a bully. As a Mac user I'm disappointed.
1999 iMac DV SE, 200? eMac, multiple iPod shuffles, 2.4 duo 15" MacBook Pro, iPod Touch 2G, iPhone 3GS
Old wording: Finalist in Google's Android Developer's Challenge!
New wording: Finalist in Large Internet Search Company's Human-Looking Robot Developer's Challenge!
At least he was able to preserve the basic meaning in the reworded version.
Android is now an un-word
A tip to you. You are totally correct, and are posting in a thread which does actually reflect poorly on Apple. And they managed to do it without any help from Tim C.
Stevie boy is finally cracking up? This sounds like the (lost) battle with Microsoft back in the 80s.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Your droids ... They'll have to wait outside.
Service Temporarily Unavailable The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later. ^^ The Slashdot Effect is with us and very, very real, my friends. :)
..is part of the experience their users want.
We used to call that the Microsoft experience, though. Know how you can talk to a Microsoftie and they'll talk about all the problems as though they're just "normal" and that's just how computers (fail to) work? iPhone users want to be like that. Can't multitask? That's normal! Need to get approval from the platform's creator? That's normal! Isn't everything like that? Yes, everything is like that, as long as you control what "everything" means. "Everything" means all Apple handhelds.
Do any of you haters think that Walmart would let one of their suppliers mention "Target" or "Kmart" on signage in their store? I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. It's Apple's store. You play by their rules.
Apple has managed to help mobile developers make 4.6 BILLION dollars in the last year... That's about 4.5 billion dollars more than the industry made in the prior year. Complain all you want. What they're doing is working and working beyond anybodies wildest expectations... That is presuming that we define "working" as "making developers money so they can develop more great software".
I used to work in the Co-op, and products there routinely mentioned Tesco. Newspapers were the worst - e.g. some free offer with Tesco's logo on giant letters at the top of the front page.
Last time I checked, Android apps couldn't run on an iPhone (and vise-versa). The Android version of the app may have won a prize but that doesn't apply to the iPhone version. Ask anyone who has ever played the "same" game on XBox360, PS3, Wii and PC; just because they have the same name, doesn't make them the same app.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Hey, let's actually highlight the actual reason instead of cherry-picking words that support your thesis:
inappropriate or irrelevant platform information
How is saying an app won an Android Developer Contest not irrelevant to the iPhone platform? That strikes me as the very definition of irrelevancy, because it's not the same platform.
Furthermore, the original poster is pointing out that many apps in the app store today mention Android. Well you just totally blew by that one, didn't you? How do you mesh you assertion that Android is verboten when plainly it's not by the presence of counter-examples?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I use Media Monkey and it does sync the iPod Touch... kind of.
First, it only syncs music, not apps. (duh)
More importantly, though, it seems like the sync is buggy as hell. I don't even try to use my iPod Touch to play music anymore, because it rarely goes more than three or four tracks without locking up and becoming unresponsive for a good minute or so, before finally failing to play the next song and giving up. Basically all I use the iPod Touch for now is as an authenticator for WoW and occasionally to listen to podcasts in the car.
Also worth mentioning that for MM to sync the iPod Touch, you need to have iTunes installed... And a very, very specific version of iTunes at that.
Apple is certainly clear on what they want control over. Flash on the iPhone anyone? NOT!
I like it this way. Of course, I don't own any Apple devices but Apple is a large enough company to throw some weight around and if this helps kill flash forever it will make me happy. If Apple can accomplish this, then I nominate them for a noble prize.
I will forgive any and all tyrannical behavior from Apple if this end is achieved.
They warn only when syncing. Although it was a free app, so maybe they only warn when it's a paid app. --Sam
You can talk about how bad this is all you want, but if you really want to make a difference vote with your feet, I was looking to buy iPad when it's out, NO MORE and I'm switching to Google Android Phone! Censor this!
Nah, they'd slap a "30% Off! Members save even more!" sticker over that.
I have been an apple user and STRONG proponent since the 6400 days. Though, these days I am no longer a proponent, simply a happy user of the hardware I purchased previously. However, even this is changing, as with every update to the OS, more and more of the sky is being blocked out with the OS becoming more and more closed. This seems like a direct attack at the heart of *nix, which has been the poster-child of openness (Linux/BSD). Microsoft is already on life-support, but the family is selfish and unwilling to let go, and simply pull the plug. Apple seems to be racing with great zeal for the same fate.
The way apple has been making their system more and more closed (ever since they closed-sourced the OSX kernel), has been a steady decline into a place where apple will no longer be the "Alternative".
It seems they are terrified of the prospect of losing their main revenue stream: hardware. However, they changed their business model ever since the old iMac (colored) came out. Where they are no longer just hardware, they are a user experience. On the other hand, they still seem to be terrified of the prospect of a repeat of what happened in the early 90s when they opened their hardware to other non-apple producers and almost went out of business due to cheaper supply of apple hardware from non-apple producers. Sadly, they don't want to accept the new business model as being a solution to this problem. It seems as though they have one leg in the past and one racing for the future. If they don't be careful, this may rip their company apart.
To Apple:
Openness != lower profits. However, openness is the future, I think this is an established business reality at this point. Stop waging war on this, you will lose, and we the people WILL win in the end. So while you may win a few battles with release of some neat things (iPad), you will lose the war, because those you depend on most dearly will abandon you...and they are not the consumer, as you may think... this will begin with the fall of your King. Who has lost his path, perhaps even led astray by those advisors he trusts most. Because they know he is short on time. They know there will be strife. So they are trying to shut all the exits from the outside, so those inside will have no way out. The momentum in the wrong direction is so great at this point, that sadly, there is very little chance the company will be able to stear clear of the rocks ahead.
"Here lays the broken spirit of Apple - April 1, 1976 - January 27, 201X"
Huh? [devShell.org]
The iPhone has not supported flash for 3 years now, and flash hasn't been hurt in the slightest. Apple can't kill flash unless they have a viable alternative... and html5 isn't it as long as IE rules the web.
A giant customized Starbucks in Cupertino California where lattes and no soy skim macchiatos are given out free to all employees. The background music involves a playlist of Nora Jones, David Matthews, John Mayer, and Bono on loop from an Ipod docked somewhere in the Apple/Starbucks facility. Hours are long but morale is surprising high as developers, hardware and software, are given 30 minute breaks to masturbate to the new itunes interface.
All developers sit at cafe type tables with a Mac Book Pro while their lord and master Steve Jobs stands deskless in his predictable attire of a turtleneck and jeans. In fact, this is the preferred (mandatory) dress code at Apple. Jobs walks around to each and every department, separated by latte and vegan preferences, and checks on the performance and efficiency of his developers. At any given point in the day one may see Mr Jobs yelling at a programmer for not implementing a button in the perfect shade of corn flower blue (#6495ED) and immediately sends him to the apple punitive chamber, consisting of a HP Compaq running Vista Basic.
There are 2 software development departments and 2 hardware development sections in Apple. For software there is the Apple core team, Apple Open Source team. In hardware there is the Apple systems and management team and the iDevice team. Since the OSX kernel consists of a BSD darwin kernel there is no real need for low level programmers and as such the entirety of the Apple core team consists of UI designers and photoshop junkies. All software churned out from the core team is designed in a program strikingly similar to Visual Studio's form designer but with Cocoa Objective C generated instead. The 16 hour day (Jobs demands 16 hour days since he himself never sleeps) of a core dev involves lining up the right shade of chrome with the latest photoshopped graphite button and maintaining the correct color scheme, not an easy job at all.
The Apple open source team involves a little bit more coding, which is mandated to be done in TextEdit or the option of a $80 third party mac text editor. The Apple open source team doesn't actually create much code but searches the internet for interesting BSD licensed software and modifies it as it's own through obfuscation and conversion to objective C. Many of the items a mac user sees comes from the open source world stamped by apple such as the ability to play music taken from 67 different originally linux based players, CD burning, and the overall ability to click a mouse. Apple's legal department has no qualms about this practice and has assured many that since most of the code is BSD and if any is GPLed many Linux hippies should be grateful that Apple fostered WebKit by using KHTML and adding some Gecko bloat. Perhaps one of the most important items that the open source team has done to date is use parts of the FreeBSD to keep the kernel up to date.
There's not much to say about the Apple systems and management team. I suppose they can be classified in to desktop and laptop systems. Because hardware work is beneath Apple in general and thought of being only worthy of Windows Users and as such can be found working on these beauties in the starbucks bathroom. Desktops are currently made by buying dell machines and putting them in Lian Li cases, where the majority of the costs goes to buying titanium Apple emblems to paste on the sides. Laptops consists of the rebranding of only the most silver and black Sony Viaos but talk has been going around about rebranding Asus EeePCs for a new Apple netbook but you didn't hear that from me, for fear of my life.
The iDevice team's job is to develop for the ipod, iphone, itouch, and many other portable electronics apple may release in the future. Their jobs are very interconnected with the open source team as well as the core dev team. Using firmware from random samsung devices and giving it an OSX skin the ipod stands as a shining example that infringement only applies to greasy file sharers and that the music player remains the best in market
with Apps involving sex, Hitler's Mein Kampf, and Android.
So much for my dream of making a game where you fight Nazi hooker androids.
From TFA: "I suppose it’s logical, and I’m not complaining; Apple is a wonderful company to work with."
Is this sarcasm? I honestly couldn't tell.
Must be awesome to get to work at a company with all the character of an insecure 4th grader.
Apple has really screwed too many developers. No Flash, No Silverlight (yeah it's flamebait but it comes down to being open / closed) and now this. What do they think developers will do? Their laptops sold because the alpha developers bought into the fact that MacBooks were at one time the best laptop. This is no more as Ubuntu 10 drives new graphics innovation and now Google's android platform will be completely open.
Long live freedom Screw Apple!
Darth Null
'my force was not properly instantiated"
True, the App Store model is monopolistic and overall has rather nasty side effects, but the rejected description stated that the app had been a finalist in Android's developer challenge.
This information was simply irrelevant, because the Android app is a completely different beast to the iPhone OS one. It's like Microsoft advertising Office 2007 by saying that Office 5.1a for the Mac won an award, somewhere. True, it was probably inadvertent, but if I was browsing the synaptic repositories and came across the Skype package, I wouldn't want to know about how well it runs on AmigaOS.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
You are using a false analogy.
The Washington Post does not sell the book, only it's reviewer's opinion of the book. At no time does the Washington Post have to mention the NYT or it's best seller list and Post's customers never see the competitor's name in the Post's review.
In this case, the description of the product in the App store mentions Android and the Android contest. Android and Google is in direct competition with Apple and its devices.
Do you think you would see "#4 best seller on Amazon.com" on a book sold at Borders or Barnes and Nobles?
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Interpretation: "I have nothing useful to say, and just want to call people names. News at 11!"
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
And the next time the customer decides to buy a book, he goes to Amazon, orders it on-line, and B&N loses at least one sale.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
That's not the same thing. If the Post had a section for authors or publishers to put in their own sales pitch, and someone decided to put in favorable reviews by other companies, that'd be about the same. A dead-on analogy would be if a blurb on an Amazon product page had "Barnes & Noble Top Pick!" listed. Does that happen?
It would probably be rejected, and you'd be sued for copyright and trademark infringement by both Google and Apple.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
"Does anybody think Barnes and Noble would be willing to post a sign saying your book was #38 in its category on Amazon"
Ironically, I've seen similiar signs in many BANs.
Also, it isn't uncommon for a retail outlet to let you know where else to buy a product. It's called 'customer service'
Hell you can even learn how to compete with BaN at BaN:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Home-Based-Bookstore/Steve-Weber/e/9780977240609/?itm=1&USRI=amazon
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This rejection must have hurt them dearly. I mean, getting front page coverage on Slashdot must have really damaged their app sales. I weep for them.
To blog is sublime
Apple is communism. They get to dictate what the hardware you purchase can do, and they can push any kind of BS restrictions they like. For this reason, smart people don't buy Apple products.
Announcer: Buy an iPhone and see why 2010 will be like "1984"
Imagine how popular Intel motherboards would be if you had to specially write programs for them without mentioning brand interoperability or non Intel accolades. e.g.: Intel "We'd appreciate it if you'd not mention you program works on AMD chips or we'll hurt you financially." Oh wait... Another thing, given this, how come Apple lets Mac format software get sold on the same disk or in the same package as Windows and/or Linux software? Why don't I have to go through itunes to get it? I hope Apple loosens up a bit or goes the way of soldered ram...
You guys have it all wrong. This is a good thing. Apple isn't competing with Google. They are just trying to protect users from malware apps that turn users into evil androids! Have you people not seen Blade Runner?
I'm pretty sure that EU will slam Apple because of this kind of practices, sonner or later. And I'm comfident that if that happens, people here will complain "Again the evil EU is just punishing American companies! :'("
I love my ipod but when Apple does things like this, which it seems they do every other month, it really chaps my ass.
I'm sick of seeing app descriptions like the one used for this app before the change.
Telling people that its great for Android is of no value what so ever to an iPhone user.
Its just a wasted fluff piece that takes up space for what should be a real app description.
Listing off the reasons why other people think your app is awesome BEFORE you actually tell anyone what your app does is fucking annoying for those of us looking for apps.
Most of us don't give a shit what awards you've one, awards are generally politically based and rarely a direct relation to how good something is, regardless of the award.
I don't want to read about 10 different awards you got, I want to know what the app does and what features its got that make it worth my money and/or time.
Everyone here is bitching about Apple being so controlling and 'censoring' and you guys STILL DON'T GET IT. You keep going on about how Apple is wrong all the while ignoring that they have a growth rate thats off the charts.
I appreciate that Apple wants this pointless bit of information removed from the description, it does nothing useful to me. I don't use android, and if I'm buying a flashcard app for my iPhone I'm probably not also going to carry it around on my Android phone since having both would be retarded in and of itself.
You might be wise to listen to their marketing department. They've always been the smaller company that could. People like Apple (outside of the fanboys of geekdom, we all have our own things that we love, we don't count) for a reason, maybe its cause they are trendy, but I think its more than that, and this is an example of one of those reasons.
When you go to the store and buy a boxed application that runs on OS X and Windows, and it says so on the box, its because it runs on both. They don't put the OSX version in the box and advertise that you can go buy a Windows version if you want also. Nor do Windows only versions of software tell you about the Mac version. This App is sold in a store for software that when you buy/download it, it will only work on the iPhone (barring some hacked device that runs iPhone OS or a vm or simulator), so theres no reason to mention Android, it will just confuse all the people who have NO FREAKING IDEA what Android is, which is pretty much everyone outside this community. They may know that Google has the Nexus One, or that you can buy a Droid, but they have no clue what Android OS is.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
This is newsworthy? A non-story about a bunch of iPhone developer wankers? You guys really hard up today?
Well they certainly aren't censoring the keyword "amazon.com" from their website or store...
Besides, do they really think the kind of person who would be buying an iPhone or an iPod touch wouldn't already know what Android is anyways? Not to mention the fact that if someone is already browsing the app store, then they probably already own one. It's a bad move if you ask me...
It's called BrokeAndroid. It lets you smash up an android phone on your iPhone. I guess it's ok if you're ripping on Android http://itunes.com/Apps/BrokeAndroid
-- http://vectorvector.tumblr.com/
That is irrelevant, because the could do so. They could refuse to carry those book. And, you will notice those are the titles of books specifically about or directly related to Amazon.com. The app in question is not directly related to Android or Google, but the app's description mentions Android directly.
Your comparison is apples and grapes.
I see you think everyone's life revolves around technology. Many people by an iPhone because it is Apple and cool. Many people buy an iPod because iPods are popular. They are not buying technology, they are buying fashion accessories that have a particular function.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Yes and Yes.
If I'm at B&N I'm there to buy. If an Amazon buyer is in B&N, they are not going to buy from B&N, they are there browsing to fill out their Amazon whish list. If anything, that Amazon endorsement is more likely to encourage impulse buying. Best Buy would absolutely advertise the fact that their music is not censored in order to differentiate themselves.
The phrase in question was not an endorsement for Android, it was an endorsement for the app. You can't be complacent towards a store trying to cover up the fact that they have competitors. You can't seriously think that people will be browsing the iPhone app store, see that the app they want is also available for Android, and then decide to toss their $500 phone in favor of a new Android driven phone, new cell phone contract, etc.
I think you're missing the point. They threatened rejection because they didn't want users to hear the name "Android." But dropping the banhammer on the word "Android" in the appstore only prevents people who already own an iPhone from finding out android exists.
What are they afraid is going to happen? Are they afraid iPhone users will drop their contract (pay an enormous cancellation fee) and switch to an android-based phone?
Your point was that "people by (sic) an iPhone because it is Apple and cool..." If that's the case, are you suggesting that "Android" will be cool (and thus a threat) because of the usage of its name in the appstore?
Now, don't get me wrong because I love that Windows has some competition. Still, I can't shake the feeling that we look the other way too much when Apple does some evil authoritarian tactic to boost its sells. I for one, will vote with my wallet in the future and avoid the iPhone.
Ipods used to sync easily in Linux until Apple encrypted the song database file. At the time I had some sympathy for them. The whole reason they were 'allowed' to sell digital music was that they agreed to not allow ipods to do certain things. The primary restriction was that you couldn't copy songs off of an ipod. So you caould copy songs from your friend's computer to your ipod, but you couldn't copy them from your ipod to your friend's computer. That seemed like a reasonable compromise (and still allowed for some small amount of theft).
Well every linux ipod loader in the old days could also unload songs. So much for that. I'm not saying I didn't take advantage of that capability too. Anyway, now that iTunes downloads aren't DRM'd, and have some kind of personal tracking id embedded, that's probably not the problem any more - if it ever was. But I wouldn't be so quick to assign purely evil motives to Apple's actions. This 'no mention of Android at the app store' bit sounds plain petty. Not quite rising to the level of evil.
Of course an iTunes version for Linux would put to rest any notion that they are trying to use the iPod to somehow stifle competition between Linux and OS/X. Again, I assume it's cheapness/laziness more than evil there.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Of my Macbook Pro, iPhone and iPod, I cant even think of any use of them, that isnt restricted in some insane way.
IPhones gonna be my last Apple purchase. Sorry, but you blew it big time..
I see it as an advantage that Apple has control over applications being distributed to consumers, because of quality control. Hope that Apple will not get demonized for just telling a developer that certain things are not allowed.
It was the ~android version of the app won an award. For these tiny applications, the GUI practically ~is the application. Claiming that the iPhone version of the app won an award is simply false advertising, so Apple tactfully asked them to fix the language.
Think Evil.
Steve has spoken lets worship our savior and führer...
Or, their customer might do what many people do, switch companies after their contract is up to get a new or different phone.
No, and it is interesting that you are trying to put words in my mouth by selectively quoting me. Shows that you can't support your arguments honestly. What it will do is raise awareness of Android and Android based products in the minds of Apple appstore customers. It is basically an advertisement for a competitor on Apple's site.
The people missing the point is you and the people like you who are bashing Apple for behaving in its own best interest. Do you think any company wants any information about a competitor on its own website? No company wants their customers to be able to go to their own website and have those customers see their competitor's name or product referenced.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I like Apples products somehow - OS-X is a decent Unix and has many of the strengths of Linux. They are pretty and have some impressive features (like timemachine)
still I never bought any of their products, because I always thought that they'd just become the next Microsoft (or the third IBM if you want), if they become big enough in a market... and here we are - Apple suppressing competition...
I should buy a crystal ball or so...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Of course not. That movie was made before the iPhone. :P
I agree 100%, When the other phones on the horizon are breathing down his neck and better plans will come with them, the time to get snitty to developers isn't now. This isn't like old school punk where you can alienate the audience and get away with it either. The Ipad isn't going to provide any level of protection even if you added absorbent wings and will soon be overwhelmed by competitors out for blood.
Granpa' Jobs business model is as obsolete as the music industry and Macintosh will soon be fossilizing along with it. Hard to convince people how cool you are when you act like such an asshole.
C'mon now,how many Moonies left the cult when their phones got bricked? When their Imacs turned to obsolete junk? How about Ipod antics? You can't keep peeing in the soup and expect company to stay for dinner.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Apple is afraid of words now?
Google should just remove Apple and all Apple App related sites from its search index. Maybe that will teach Apple not to be such a bunch of whining pussies.
APPLE IS JUST AS EVIL AS MICROSOFT. We just like to ignore that fact because they're pretty.
tks you ellerne saglk hocam
Steve Jobs is so lucky to have so many sheep like you, I mean users.
Please. You expect way too much sense from an Apple hater.
A tip to the GP: Displaying your ignorance and stupidity to the world does not actually reflect poorly on Apple.
People using the word "haters" usually brings to mind some over-defensive Microsoft fan ranting at the criticism of his favourite OS. When does the same thing, only in a far more deeply paranoid manner that smacks of hysterical terror going on at Apple, the Apple goons trump out the very same phrasing.
Sad, very sad, and I say this as I write this post on my Mac Pro (early 2008)
http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?cid=26362097
You're confused in that most apps on the appstore have the same author and publisher. There's no requirement for this to be the case, any more than its required for a publisher to write up your back cover on a novel. That said, book publishing's an old business and software is still young, so there are a lot more self-published authors in the latter.
Point being, your use of the terms "author" and "publisher" are interchangeable inasmuch as they could be the same person but don't have to be.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Without absolutes, everyone is blind - no matter their opinion.