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.
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...
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
Android is now an un-word
Because, 1) none their competitors do not have similar restrictions in place, and 2) they do not provide any venue for installing applications on one's iPhone apart from the App Store, so censoring that is effectively censoring the entire platform.
Also, Apple does not "subsidize" anything here. The developer wrote application for their own money, and a cut of any sales of the app go to Apple, part of which is used for store maintenance. It is a very large stretch to call that "subsidizing" in any way.
Well, I guess you're one of those guys who think that kicking people with t-shirts mentioning companies competing with Olympic sponsors out of Olympic venues was a grand idea. After all, the logic is exactly the same.
It works perfectly for users. Apple doesn't care about the developers. It never has.
Users have a simple App to access the store. All the apps are tested for compatibility, and the store won't let or will warn if you try to purchase an app that is not compatible with your device. The apps are tested to ensure they follow basic UI guidelines and that they fail gracefully when connectivity is limited or unavailable. Purely as a user, what's not to like?
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.
It's an application doing the same thing, and written by the same people. Yes, I think that's relevant. You know those stickers they often place on movies - e.g. "Avatar, from the director of Titanic"?
As a side note, you yourself have cherry-picked one particular highlight, and ignored the other two, which plainly state that "platform compatibility" and "general platform references are not relevant" - which, to me, unambiguously says that even mentioning that there is an Android version of the same app would already break this rule.
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?
It's very well documented that Apple review process is extremely inconsistent, and one application can pass, while another one can be blocked, both featuring the exact same thing. We've also seen cases of an application being allowed, but a subsequent version being blocked, because of something that was present in the original version. There have been a slew of /. stories on this - I'm too lazy to look them up, so JFGI.
So, I'm not at all surprised that some applications got away with mentioning Android, while others did not.
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.
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