Slashdot Mirror


Apple Bans Android Magazine App From App Store

recoiledsnake writes "Apple dialed its battle with Android up a notch today by banning an Android magazine app from its App Store, leaving no way for users to install the app on iPads, iPhones and iPod Touches without jailbreaking. The reason for rejection, as given by an Apple rep, was: 'You know... your magazine...It's just about Android.... we can't have that in our App Store.' The bi-monthly publication — the Android counterpart to an iPhone magazine Dixon began putting out earlier this year — launched Nov. 11. 'It's funny really because I don't think we would sell many magazines on Android through Apple App Store,' Dixon told Media Watch. 'But the question is where this is going.' This comes on the heels of Jobs lashing out at Android, calling it fragmented, and its patent attacks on Android."

17 of 574 comments (clear)

  1. Apple getting desperate? by yog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This seems like an act of desperation. Is Apple that insecure that it can't allow a stupid app like this onto its platform? What, are people going to read about Android and immediately dump their iPhones? If the iPhone is that good, Apple has nothing to worry about. If it's not competitive with Android handsets, then Apple should fix the deficiencies.

    So far the main problem with iPhone is how closed and censored the app store is, from the point of view of an Android phone user anyway.

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    1. Re:Apple getting desperate? by nametaken · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think Apple remembers what desperation feels like. ;)

    2. Re:Apple getting desperate? by stg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is a big difference between accepting ads and accepting content about your competition.

      I imagine that any Windows developer that hoped to use an iPad for e-books on Windows shouldn't be able to get them, either?

      Do you also think that Amazon should refuse to sell any Kindle e-books about iPads next?

    3. Re:Apple getting desperate? by jeffmeden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or Microsoft denying itunes or safari on Windows

      THIS-Y THIS THIS.

      iFans would shit a golden brick if Microsoft banned iTunes from Windows 7, yet they apparently have no problem rationalizing the wielding of the mighty App Store banhammer against information about (not even an ad for) someone elses platform.

      telling. very telling. Looks like I have one less reason to buy an iWhatever any time soon.

    4. Re:Apple getting desperate? by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except, no. If you want to buy or sell a new entertainment system for your car, you don't need to ask Ford for permission.

      Nobody has a problem with Apple selling their product in a state they like. The problem is with Apple trying to assert control over how people use their product after they've sold it.

    5. Re:Apple getting desperate? by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Should the government decide what products 7-11 sells?

      Irrelevant.

      Anyone can open a corner store and sell the same 3rd party items 7-11 sells. Anyone can buy the 3rd party items 7-11 sells from anywhere.

      I can't shop for iphone apps elsewhere. I can even make iphone apps and sell them directly to consumers.

      How about Best Buy? Should they be required by law to sell Sony laptops?

      Irrelevant.

      If I want a Sony laptop I can buy one from multiple places, including directly from sony.

      I can't buy the "iSony app" except from Apple. I can't even even buy it directly from Sony.

      As far as having 100% market share for iPhone apps, that is also a ridiculous statement. Sears has 100% market share for Craftsman products.

      Not a valid comparison. Craftsman is Sears own product. Apple isn't making the apps in the app store. I have no issue that the Apple App store is the only place I can buy the Apple remote app. I have no issue that I can only buy apple computers from apple authorized dealers.

      Why exactly do I need Apple authorization to buy non-Apple products?

      Should they be forced to sell third party drill bits or extension cords for their Craftsman tools?

      Of course not. But that's not the situation here. The question here is should Sears be allowed to prevent me from buying 3rd party drill bits or extension cords *somewhere else*?

    6. Re:Apple getting desperate? by adisakp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about a related industry analogy instead of a car analogy? Like for instance, what if Dell decided that on your Dell computer, you could only install applications that they approved? Trying to install an HP printer driver? No, not approved. Trying to install Microsoft Media Player? No, only Dell's MusicMatch is approved.

      How about if you bought a PS, PS2, PS3, XBOX, XBOX 360, GameCube, Wii, DS, PSP, etc. etc. and could only install applications that they approved. How about if you could only play protected music or copy protected DVD's / BluRay's on supported players without using illegal circumvention methods?

      Oh wait, that's already the world we live in.

      You see, related industry for phone apps isn't generic computer, it's treated more as a "game console" or "media consumption" device.

      Not saying that DRM / Copy-Protection / Censorship is right or wrong... just saying you're using the wrong analogy.

  2. Open Source FTW by rubypossum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This level of anti-competitive and just... asshole behavior has probably never been seen before, not even with Microsoft. How can Apple ever hope to become a serious part of community infrastructure when they display this level of disrespect for their customers? Is the fear that some bumbling iPhone user might accidentally install the Android magazine app and have a sudden flash of inspiration that iPhone is inferior? Why do we, as customers, take this? Not even Microsoft had the greedy foolishness to prohibit its competitor's software from running on their platform. Why don't we demand control of the devices that we have purchased? Lets hope that MeeGo can deliver a genuinely open phone experience. Ubuntu and Linux Mint both show how an app store could be done.

    --
    I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. - Hunter S. Thompson
    1. Re:Open Source FTW by pr100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do we, as customers, take this?

      Who's "we"? I don't have any apple products...

  3. Re:Why does this matter? by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They shouldn't be required to promote the competition, but banning the competition on your platform can get you in trouble.

    As a 100 billion dollar gorilla, they need to be careful when it comes to antitrust and perception.

    Imagine if Internet Explorer refused to load apple.com, or Microsoft refused to allow iTunes on Windows.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  4. Where's the EU? by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft gets sued for simply including it's own browser in it's OS, meanwhile Apple literally trys to prevent its users from even know a competing product exists by limiting their access to actual journalism. Where's the EU now? Where are the antitrust lawsuits? Imagine if Microsoft wouldn't allow you to go to Apples website?

  5. It's Clippy the friendly automated thought police! by HeckRuler · · Score: 5, Funny
    Hi, it looks like you're trying to access material that's specifically banned by the corporate overlords.
    Would you like help with:
    • Purging your thoughts of infidelity against your loving masters
    • Praising the environment you're allowed to work in
    • Protecting yourself against the black death, a common affliction caused by our competitors ads

    Please continue working while a black-bagger is dispatched to your cubical.

  6. Or how about if they banned iPads entirely? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can you imagine the outrage if Amazon banned their partners from selling iPads? While Amazon themselves doesn't seem to stock it, they have about 100 partners that do, and handle fulfillment for some of them. Same for the Nook, Sony reader, and so on. They certainly don't go out of their way to promote them (though if you search for them they'll show up as recommendation on the front page, along with the Kindle) but they don't ban them just because they happen to compete with a product Amazon makes.

    While I don't expect a company to promote or help a competitor, I don't expect them to be dicks either. How would people react if Windows refused to install iTunes and Safari because Apple competes with them? I imagine the whargarbl would reach critical mass in about 5 seconds, and a lawsuit would follow not long after.

  7. Re:Later on... by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's the behaviour of a small, petty person.

    Small petty people who gain power tend to become bullies.

    This describes Apple perfectly.

    --
    Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  8. There's an app for that! by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can someone enlighten me as to why a dedicated piece of standalone software is required to display words and some pictures? I thought HTML had that covered. Ohhh, or is this all about DRM? Are we Slashdot readers lamenting the fact that a piece of proprietary DRM-riddled software was rejected?

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  9. Re:Long standing policy not desperation? by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Or is it merely long standing policy? Haven't apps promoting/offering certain competing products and services been banned from day 1 of app store development? Whether this policy is right or wrong is a different question, but this app rejection does not seem to be any sort of reaction to Android's recent successes.

    Indeed it's longstanding policy.

    App rejected for menioning Android in the description (it was an Android Developer Contest finalist). Once that was removed the app got posted.

    Even on the app store guidelines it mentions:

    "Apps with metadata that mentions the name of any other mobile platform will be rejected." We're guessing this means you can't advertise your app in the App Store by saying it's also available on Android, or has been ported from BlackBerry, or whatever.

    So the question is, how was it approved in the first place?

  10. Argh (tangential rant) by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am so tired of these individuals and groups trying to replace already-long-solved problems with their own private apps. Why do I need an NPR podcast app, or an ESPN app, or a Digital Story app? I can already access all their content easily through a web browser. I can already subscribe to, and automatically download, their podcasts. There is no real benefit to me as an end user from using these apps - it actually makes the process of accessing their content more difficult, and even the most casual observer can see any purported added value content being offered is of little interest or value.

    So now these publishers want us to read their magazines and newspapers through their individual app? How is this different than a web paywall, exactly? I personally have nothing against subscriber-only web content - but if that model isn't working, why do these guys think doing the exact same thing but calling it an "app" is going to change anything?

    Why would anyone think replacing one web browser and one general program for listening to podcasts with 50+ separate apps is a good thing?

    Okay, back on topic. This rejection is wrong, and Apple should correct it ASAP.

    --
    #DeleteChrome