Slashdot Mirror
Apple Blindsides More AppStore Developers
For a while now Apple has said it doesn't want "widget-like" apps in the store; but where is the boundary of that fuzzy statement? The developers of My Frame, of which three versions had already been approved for the iPhone/iPad, found out that they had already crossed it when Apple informed them their app would be pulled. My Frame had options to overlay data on whatever photo was displaying: a Twitter stream, weather, etc. When one of the developers wrote to Steve Jobs on a whim to ask what unwritten rule their app had violated, Jobs wrote back: "We are not allowing apps that create their own desktops. Sorry." "I see now why people are so angry at the 'murky' nature of the App Store, and I'm starting to agree with them. My Frame was approved by Apple 3 times (once for each version we released), and ... now, at version 1.2 they decide it's to be removed? How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time, cutting you off and kicking you out, with no course of action but to whine on some no-name blog[?] There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway...." A few blogs have picked up the story.
It's time to retire the Bill Gates Borg photo and replace it with a Steve Jobs Borg photo for Apple stories.
Sucks to be you. Don't write for iStuff.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
I have some guys here at work who use their iPhones for VNC quite religiously. VNC is a tad bit closer to "its own desktop" than this app, granted it is a snapshot of another machine's desktop. Where do you draw the line, Mr. Jobs?
Is he hoping that Steve reads:
"There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway..."
and rewards his loyalty with an exception?
As long as the userbase remains as large as it is, that means leaving a lot of money on the table for many developers.
As sucky as the terms are, it's hard to walk away from that.
iPhone developers are up in arms at Apple requiring them to use only Apple toolkits, sacrifice a Windows developer at their local Apple Shop every Sunday and maintain an altar to Steve Jobs in their homes. And eat a bug.
Apple is famous for its rigid control over its devices, in its quest to maintain user quality. Developers have worked under increasing restrictions in their attempts to provide quality applications for the iPhone such as I Am Rich, Magic 8 Ball and iFart.
"Not a big deal," said Mr Jobs in a personal email. "Cross-platform development leads to a worse user experience every time. Also, the video of you eating the bug has to be H.264 QuickTime or your app is out. Extra points for cockroaches."
"This clause shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the creative freedom developers need," said iPhone developer Greg Slepak. "Software is an infinitely malleable creation of pure thought. Toolkits, languages and frameworks are only a way to develop something people will want. It's like telling Rembrandt what brand of brushes he's allowed to use."
He paused to chow down on a palmetto bug for his MacBook's camera. "I'll tell you, a lot of iPhone developers are seriously considering Android, just as soon as Google develops a suitably exploitable stream of mindless thralls that will generate us a gushing torrent of money."
"Thanks for the video, Greg," said Mr Jobs, "but we've just added section 3.3.1.a: 'In particular, when Greg Slepak submits an application, the bucket of cockroaches in the video have to be Apple-branded and genetically engineered in Cupertino.' So we've rejected your application, cancelled your membership and zeroed your account.
"Of course, you're free to apply again. Or not, if you don't want a goddamn dumptruck full of money backed up to your house. It's a free country."
http://rocknerd.co.uk
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time
I don't know. Why don't we ask someone who ha ---- Oh wait, that's you!
Years later, after it's been documented in to oblivion that Apple dicks app store developers over. The developers either know full well what they are getting themselves in to or they are completely retarded. Yet we here we are, hearing the same tired $@%&ing story once again. The insignificant details are different but nothing else is.
App store devs, you KNOW you have two options: Deal with it or don't. Now, please, kindly tell your story on Twitter, Facebook status updates or somewhere else no one is paying attention and quit robbing the rest of us of our mental bandwidth.
Whale
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare
You know, maybe if half the iPhone App Developers decided to opt out of Apple's ridiculous system, and started developing more apps for Android, perhaps there would be more incentive to improve their app store to put it on par with Apple's.
Just sayin' man.
Another thing, this is like complaining that you didn't get into the NFL when you chose pro football as your career. Perhaps you should have done a little research before becoming an iPhone App developer, Hmmm? The fact that you got INTO the App store - AND were successful enough to have it sell at all, is considered lucky in my opinion.
Or Steve Jobs in a sheep suit.
So I just looked on the App Store and their application is there at version 1.2. Did they just rant prematurely?
Sounds like what Second Life did. I used to play the game with SL, developed in-world items and scripts. Every time I started to make money at it, SL would make the script "Illegal", discontinue some function I was using, start giving the same thing away for free or start charging for something that was free. All in all the moving target made it impossible to work in the environment. Thus, I stopped and walked away.
If Apple starts changing the rules and making the environment less appealing for the developers then they will move, unlike second life there are competitors and other opportunities.
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway...
This just isn't true anymore. Yes, the market does have its issues, but it is certainly an alternative if the app store won't allow your app. Android will overtake iPhone in the near future as far as overall market share goes (since it's on all sorts of low-end devices nowadays, as well as multiple carriers, not to mention the very best phones these days run android, not iPhone OS, and it doesn't look like this summer's iPhone will be any better than them).
While it may have its downsides as compared to the app store, completely ruling out the android market is just foolish.
I don't think Android even needs a market app. I don't have a market app for my PC, and I don't have any trouble finding and installing software. And the lack of such an app doesn't seem to be dissuading anyone from developing desktop apps.
Google has publicly stated that Froyo (Android 2.2) came out 6 months ahead of schedule. And yet... there seems to be no timeline for their improvement of the UI or accessibility and organization of the market place. While freedom is important, a little standardization would go a long way in improving the Android platform for both developers and consumers.
It seems to me that this is troubling for the developer, but it's also troubling for the customers. It means that users have bought applications that suddenly have no possibility of being maintained properly. Bugs will never be fixed. New features will never come. It turns iTunes into a fairly risky marketplace.
He's calling him out. At best he'll trigger Jobs to outline his logic similar to the Flash issue. At worst his concerns fall on deaf ears. But for the rest of us, it might be a little pointer in the right direction.
... or where the precise line will be drawn for what an application can and can't do is 1) interesting and 2) a potential time saver for new application developers. You want to make a new look and feel? The message is loud and clear: either do it on the immature Android operating system or don't do it at all. And that advice stands until Jobs apologizes and approves applications like My Frame.
Jobs wants to maintain complete control with the experience on iDevices and the second you try to make your application look more capable than just a regular application in the sense of altering look and feel, you're stepping on his turf and he will show up with the ban hammer. Jobs is not interested in a new container for viewing or looking like an operating system catching like wildfire and usurping Apple's bread and butter: being the best, fluid, sexy interface. That's how they make their money. That's one of the big components that justifies a massive price point on these products. That's a lot of Jobs' strategy and I think a lot of people know it including the shareholders.
So the strategy to publicly ponder how far this will go
My work here is dung.
Yeah, the only thing I would really add to the Android App market is the ability to search it easily online. That hardly makes it a "Wild West nightmare" though.
As pointed out by Anonymous Coward, My Frame 1.2 is in the app store right this second:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/my-frame-alarm-clock-displays/id364532249?mt=8
--- What?
I agree with you 100%. The only reason I have an iPod touch is that I won it at work. All I use it for is to play music and a few TWiT podcasts. For my phone I have a Blackberry - love it!
K Man
The Android thing is definitely just whining. It's a great platform and even I, with my modest skill, can code up stuff that works on multiple devices. Planning for different screens is nothing new... it happens in the PC and web world ALL the time.
Good aps are NOT hard to find even if it involves a little more community involvement to see what people are using for some given task. On top of it *I* get to decide what I put on my phone, not some nameless Apple employee, and that is very important to me.
Android isn't perfect, but neither is iPhone. I think it has a lot more potential than Apple in the long run, especially if they hurting developers with their Ivory Tower style decisions on high about what apps stay and what apps go.
Hard to walk away from it yes. But it seems the choice here is to walk away from it on your own terms, or be arbitrarily and randomly kicked to the curb without having had the time to develop a go-forward plan.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
I've been trying to release an iPad version of my app since launch. It has been rejected by Apple four times. Each time, we fixed what they asked us to, and each time they found something else to reject us for.
1. Contained links to Paypal (just like our approved iPhone app.) :-|
2. Doesn't rotate (like MANY other iPad apps)
3. Contained iTunes Links to Points apps (just like other Mafia apps, and our iPhone app.) They are forcing us to implement in-app purchasing.
4. Our website contained a contest... After 10,000 people downloaded our free app and created a free character, we would give a free iPod Touch to one of them. Apple called us today and said that we aren't allowed to give away Apple products from a website associated with the app. They said we can give away a Zune HD, but not an iPod Touch.
I really have to wonder if there is more than meets the sound-bite here. It sounds absurd yes. But then again it would be absurd to be so capricious. Maybe were not getting the full story? Apple is if anything not illogical in their choices. You may vehemently disagree with their choices but the choices all have an internal logic. I can't see any logic here. I suspect this may be a BS story.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Given that the devs are pissed about the vendor's control of the platform(which Microsoft plans to emulate), rather than the platform's technical prowess, I'd say that anybody who is hoping that Windows Phone 7 will save them is moderately delusional.
Admittedly, since MS will be coming at the market from a position of significant weakness by the time any WP7 handsets actually make it out the door(oh hai! Our revision 1 product, missing most of the enterprise stuff that kept people on WM6 despite the fact that it blew, is being released into the face of iPhone OS 4, and android 2.2, if not 2.3 or later...) they will likely be inclined to be merciful masters. At first.
However, if they experience any significant success, there is no reason to expect that they won't abuse their power just as hard as Apple. If they experience little or no success, they might well double-down on the crackdown, and vertically integrate even harder, screwing over any remaining 3rd parties(this is barely hypothetical, we all know what happened to the 3rd-party "playsforsure" ecosystem when MS decided that they weren't doing the job against Apple...)
Mod me down but Android an immature wild west platform? My ass.
There is no alternative platform, despite what others may say about Android, it's immature and their app store(s) are a wild west nightmare. It really is Apple's way or the highway..."
Somehow freedom != wild west? I'll take the highway thanks.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Most people who bought an iPhone or iPad bought it for what it offered out of the box, plus some vague idea that there were also going to be "plenty of games and other cool things to download for it in the future". The fact that it's a "closed usage" platform isn't really a factor for most of us (myself included).
It's pretty clear that Apple is "winging it" with a lot of this app store approval stuff. Things keep getting developed that they obviously didn't consider in advance, so while reviewing them, they're basically thinking, "Hmm.... is THIS particular thing something that could get in our way, down the road?" If they decide it is, then bam... no approval for you.
But 90% of the time, the people I see complaining about this stuff were writing apps they should have known were pushing the boundaries in some way. EG. Don't try to re-invent or modify the look and/or functionality of any of the existing UI elements or applications. Don't try to create apps that add features to existing, basic functionality of the device either (such as trying to offer wireless iTunes syncing). Otherwise, you're deep into that gray area where Apple may, at any time, suddenly decide they dislike what you're doing.
If your app brings something new and useful to an iPad/iPhone - then you should be just fine, assuming you followed the rules and didn't use off-limits APIs or something to build it.
I doubt, for example, the guys bringing the Bento database to the iPhone/iPad had any issues, since the devices never had built-in database functionality before. I'm not aware of anyone having a lot of app approval issues when submitting apps allowing people to draw pictures with an iPhone/iPad either.
Guess which one I'd choose. I'll give you a hint: I have a mortgage.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Ha!
You hit the nail on the head. I grew up hunting for new programs on dial-up BBS's, and let me tell you, there's nothing more "wild west" than the BBS scene was in the 80's and 90's. Somehow, despite the lack of a centralized app store, I managed to compile several hundred 1.44" floppy diskettes full of downloaded programs...
Try AppBrain. It gives you online searching, an install queue, and user defined lists (which I find quite useful for managing possibilities/recommendations I might want to try later).
(C) Kaki Sain, 2011. By reading this, you have illegally copied my property to your brain.
Unless of course Apple is making you walk away as in cases like this. You pay your entrance fee, you run 99.9% of the race and then Apple looks you over at the finish line and says you ran this racing wearing red sneakers and we don't like red sneakers. Thank you for your $99, your purchase of various iProds and a Mac, have a nice day. My advice to developers unless you have nothing better to do, walk away or don't get involved at all and no I'm not one of the rejected.
Only one small problem with this article
The problem being that you didn't follow the link that explains that the app is GOING to be removed, not HAS BEEN removed? http://shiftyjelly.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/sentence-first-verdict-afterwards/ Even TFA says, "Apple informed them their app would be pulled." Note the future tense.
"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
How long will it be that Steve Jobs or Eric Schmidt replaces Bill Gates as the computing nemesis?
iPhone:
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time, cutting you off and kicking you out, with no course of action but to whine on some no-name blog
Android:
How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that is immature and whose app store is a wild west nightmare.
Well, choose your poison...
Its not unreasonable to ask that Apple publicize what their requirements are. Companies are investing time and money developing apps that increase the value of Apple's product. The least Apple can do is have published guidelines of what is allowed in their appstore. Then a company can look at those guidelines and know if a product they're planning isn't allowed. If its not allowed then the compnay need not waste anymore time on it.
Yes Apple has the power to reject apps from its store. But just because you have power doesn't mean you should be a dick about it.
I don't think Android even needs a market app.
But you are (presumably) technically adept. Joe sixpack couldn't use an .apk-file if his life depended on it.
And really, if Windows had an app-market, i'd be all over it. A standard way of doing trivialities such as installing and updating is really needed IMO.
What?
there's ONE official Android app store.
Which isn't open to every country, not even every industrialized country. Most developers don't want to have to go through a supported country's immigration process just to be able to sell apps.
If your app doesn't match up to the level of quality that Apple require[sic], then it's a message
And given that the very things that make your app meet Apple's quality control one day can be disqualification criteria the next day means the answer is simple:
1. Don't write any innovative, interesting, and unique applications, or
2. Write your applications for another platform where the arbitrary rules are less ambiguous or do not exist.
Apple certainly has the right to kick out "any old piece of crap" should they choose, but after the application has enjoyed sales, and as a result of an arbitrary rules change? Well, yes, they still have the right.
The trouble is, people write applications because they want to make a profit, and arbitrary vague rules will lead the best developers to stop putting massive effort into supporting a platform that may not support them. You'll still have plenty of developers who will take the risk, but the ones who put massive amounts of effort into their applications only to have them yanked because the background was just the wrong shade of puce or Steve's chair hit the "REJECT" button instead of the wall that particular moment will eventually learn to go elsewhere.
Other app stores are fledgling and not as well-organized, you say? Agreed. But who do you need to push to other platforms to make the other platforms succeed?
DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
But these engineers and bloggers are some serious whiners. If Wal-Mart or Target or any large store or any store, for that matter, stops carrying some real-world product, does it make it onto slashdot? Hell no! Because that's the nature of business. Your customers can stop buying your product at any time, even when those customers are resellers. Why do these people feel that it is their God-given right to sell products through these istores or whatever?
Talk to any successful business owner about the concept of having only one customer for you business and they'll say you're stupid.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
It's unreasonable to ask Apple to do anything they don't want to. It's their damned platform and they can be as pricky as they want.
It's also unreasonable for Apple to expect their developer base to remain loyal after being ass-reamed by Steve with sandy vaseline.
This sort of thing will work itself out. Likely not to Apple's long-term benefit, IMHO.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
I notice a handful of developers who have a beef with the way Apple runs their App store, but do any users actually care? Are there hundreds of thousands of users who are hating Apple right now because Apple is denying the users access to a killer application that they simply can't live without?
The whole issue surrounding the app store seems really contrived to me. Users who actually care about wanting to run specific types of applications will buy a phone that they can run applications on. Users who want an iPhone will buy an iPhone. Plenty of huge corporations like Starbucks, Bank of America and others have developed iPhone apps. Fandango has an app for finding movies that runs on both the iPhone and the G1 (and probably other Android phones too). If there was a huge problem with Apple exclusivity, I'd expect corporations like BofA and the like to be complaining that Apple is preventing them from offering their customers the same kind of applications that are offered on Android.
Other than some niche apps, there doesn't seem to be a real problem. If app devs really have uber ideas for applications then they should be able to build those apps on alternative platforms and the users will come. If they do build them and the users don't show up, the app obviously wasn't all that compelling in the first place.
I'm not a big Apple fan, but I recognize their right to tailor their product as they see fit. It isn't as if they are the entire mobile device market. They aren't even half of it. There are alternatives. As much as I dislike the Apple fanboys when they trot out their tired, "You aren't the target market" meme, it seems to fit in this case. Apple isn't targeting developers. They are targeting end users.
Anybody bother to check to see if the app has been pulled before providing a billion web hits to this app? No? Great! I have a feeling my app is about to be pulled too.
I disagree. The approval process is important to filter out apps that don't launch at all and malware (which they don't check right now unfortunately).
No. That's not how society works.
It may be unreasonable to expect Apple to do do anything they don't want to, but it is most certainly not unreasonable to ask.
No. That argument already commits a serious error. You own the phone. You get to decide what runs on it.
So jailbreak your phone then.
Apple's not telling you you can't run xyz on your phone. Apple's saying you can't DISTRIBUTE xyz through a store they own and operate. Should I be able to demand that Apple let me sell my fresh strawberries in their retail stores? They're really tasty...
I can see why the developers might get pissed off about this treatment, but after all, Apple does have form for capricious decisions as to what apps are permitted. The only way developers are going to get equitable treatment from Apple is to cut off their air-supply by telling them to stick it.
If I were in the business, I would be focusing my attention on the Android market. Rather than (as the submission suggests) whining that the platform is "immature" and that Android app stores are a "wild west" (though I don't really see what's wrong with the latter), it might be worth making an attempt to improve them.