PDA

View Full Version : Apple Relents, Approves 'Eucalyptus' eBook App




MacRumors
May 24, 2009, 02:34 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/05/24/apple-relents-approves-eucalyptus-ebook-app/)

On Friday, we reported (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/05/22/apple-rejects-ebook-app-over-access-to-kama-sutra/) on Apple's rejection of James Montgomerie's Eucalyptus eBook application due to its ability to access "objectionable" content, namely a translation of the Kama Sutra available through Project Gutenberg's collection of free eBooks created from public domain works.

Today, Montgomerie announced on his blog (http://www.blog.montgomerie.net/hither-eucalyptus) that Apple has reconsidered its decision and approved Eucalyptus as originally submitted, not requiring a filter to prevent access to the Kama Sutra.Earlier today I received a phone call from an Apple representative. He was very complimentary about Eucalyptus. We talked about the confusion surrounding its App Store rejections, which I am happy to say is now fully resolved. He invited me to re-build and submit a version of Eucalyptus with no filters for immediate approval, and that full version is now available on the iPhone App Store (http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=312399929&mt=8).

Article Link: Apple Relents, Approves 'Eucalyptus' eBook App (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/05/24/apple-relents-approves-eucalyptus-ebook-app/)



Compile 'em all
May 24, 2009, 02:45 PM
So now the only way around the arcane review process is to get the media to pick up the story? :o

Both ways, good for the devs that worked on the app. it looks great!

QCassidy352
May 24, 2009, 02:52 PM
I'm glad that nonsense is cleared up. :) That said... I'll stick with Stanza!

steve10172
May 24, 2009, 02:55 PM
"If Jesus Himself came back to earth and turned water to wine, half of MacRumors would say 'meh, this is red. I wanted white.'"

How true is this!

Eric5h5
May 24, 2009, 03:04 PM
So now the only way around the arcane review process is to get the media to pick up the story? :o

Apparently...it's worked that way several times now.

--Eric

alchemistmuffin
May 24, 2009, 03:12 PM
actually, the best way to get around this rejection is simply resubmit the app!

Since different people review the app with each submission, you have more chance of getting it approved different people

I have a feeling, all the app rejected seemed to be based on the same person reviewing the app.

UPDATE: WOAH, $9.99???!!!!! HAVEN'T THIS PERSON THOUGHT OF CURRENT ECONOMY WHEN PRICING THE APP? LOWER IT DOWN TO $6.99 FOR FIRST COUPLE OF DAYS!

bruinsrme
May 24, 2009, 03:16 PM
When I hear of the rejections I often wonder if they have a room full of people makig $7.50 an hour to give a thumbs up or down.

Gizmotoy
May 24, 2009, 03:22 PM
Wow. I had planned to buy this when it eventually hit the store (and I knew it would, it's pretty so Apple couldn't resist), however $9.99 seems very high. I was expecting $5-6, $10 is up there. The price certainly took it from a "Must Buy" to a "Wait and See" for me. Given the high likelihood of being featured, I can't blame them, though.

parapup
May 24, 2009, 03:51 PM
Secret :apple: sauce :



#include <reject.h>
#include <hype.h>

extern int enoughBuzz;

foreach ( application, newlySubmittedApps ) {

new Thread(reject( application ));
while ( !enoughBuzz )
sleep(30);
approveApplication( application );
ASSERT(rakeInMoreSales());
}

void reject ( Application app )
{
Hype hype(0);
sendRejectionLetter( app );
while (1) {
collectHypeInfo( &hype );
if ( hype >= HYPE_THRESHOLD ) {
enoughBuzz = 1;
break;
}
}
}

MagnusVonMagnum
May 24, 2009, 03:54 PM
actually, the best way to get around this rejection is simply resubmit the app!

Since different people review the app with each submission, you have more chance of getting it approved different people

I have a feeling, all the app rejected seemed to be based on the same person reviewing the app.

UPDATE: WOAH, $9.99???!!!!! HAVEN'T THIS PERSON THOUGHT OF CURRENT ECONOMY WHEN PRICING THE APP? LOWER IT DOWN TO $6.99 FOR FIRST COUPLE OF DAYS!

$9.99? What makes this reader so great it's worth $10 when it only reader Project Gutenberg titles when you can get Stanza for FREE and it supports Gutenberg plus Fictionwise? There's no demo version so I cannot even try it out. Sorry, I'm not paying $10 for an unknown quantity that can only reader one free site's books. I'd rather offer feedback to help make Stanza better.

It seems to me if someone is going to charge $10 for a reader, it should support as many formats as possible and let you add your own titles and text files stored locally as well across the local network (after all, I might want to use it in the living room sitting it an easy chair sipping coffee). Support for MS documents and PDF files would be nice as well (e.g. imagine being able to access a tractor manual on your iPod Touch sitting on your network from the garage instead of having to print it out or bring your laptop down with you. (edit: I see Stanza for the Mac can already export your own textfiles and PDF files, even to the Kindle format and even audio MP3 format via digital voice to playback a text file as an MP3 on your iPod! I'm downloading it now instead)

--
--
Edit #2: I take some of what I said back. Stanza is not a very good ebook reader for the Mac. In fact, there doesn't seem to be any really good ones. What am I talking about? You cannot even scroll pages with a mouse wheel. The feature was requested almost a year ago and they said they were planning to add it. If it takes over a year to add a tiny feature like tying the scroll function to the mouse wheel (should have taken about 5 minutes to add it), they're not on top of their game at all. In fact, I just read Amazon bought the company that makes it out so I would imagine that's primarily to make sure it doesn't offer too many features, etc. that might compete with their Kindle product (big reason I'm against mergers and buy-outs; IT KILLS COMPETITION).

I'm also not totally crazy about the presentation options on the desktop version. It's very buggy as well. If you change to say the "dawn" desktop theme and then try to switch back to default, it does nothing unless you quit and reload the whole program. Talk about an obvious bug that should never have made it out the door. Do they even test these programs before they release them? Vertical view mode uses a horizontal scroll bar. How much sense does that make? It doesn't matter anyway since the mouse scroll doesn't work. In fact, if you scroll with the arrow keys, it makes an annoying sound out of the speakers. There is no keyboard shortcut listed in the title bar menu for turning pages quietly either.

Here's where this Eucalyptus might be worth $10. From what I can see of the pictures on the iTunes store, it allows you to directly access books from the Gutenberg project. Just search, tap, download. Stanza requires you to download it with your computer first and then transfer it over a wireless network to the iPhone. They have excuses about Apple not allowing Safari on the iPhone to redirect its output to Stanza, but that's irrelevant now that they allow internal web-kit browsers to function, which I imagine is how Eucalyptus directly searches and downloads books off the Internet.

Now that Amazon owns Stanza, I wouldn't expect ANY such features to emerge for it since they'll want to pad their Kindle browser and that's designed to try and get you to buy their Kindle hardware reader. Of course, even if Eucalyptus is a nice iPhone reader, what about a desktop one to go with it? I'd still be stuck reading HTML or using Stanza there. Adding a desktop companion Mac version would make the $10 fee a lot more palatable, as would offering support for other formats (If I want to buy a book, I have to use someone else's reader which puts me back to square one again).

Seahawk Fan
May 24, 2009, 03:55 PM
All of the Book content is supplied by Project Gutenberg.

I searched 4 authors I read on a regular basis and did not find one book.

I would prefer to have the choice to pay for a book that I want to read.

I currently have Stanza & Kindle and enjoy them. Although this is written beautifully (from the video I watched on their website). It doesn't seem to be the app for me.

DipDog3
May 24, 2009, 04:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

Talk about trying to capitalize on some free publicity.

$10 & it only reads FREE books? That's a ripoff.

fc4090
May 24, 2009, 05:09 PM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7659082&postcount=60

Fake reviews with five stars were posted with in 30 minutes of App release, and we are blaming Apple for rejection!! Wake up guys!

str1f3
May 24, 2009, 05:27 PM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7659082&postcount=60

Fake reviews with five stars were posted with in 30 minutes of App release, and we are blaming Apple for rejection!! Wake up guys!

I don't know if they're fake or not. I will say $10 is too much especially when it lacks some the features that Stanza has. It remains to be seen how much effort the developer will put into this app as the developer for Stanza did. Stanza development will probably whither on the vine because Amazon bought it.

Though Stanza is way ahead in terms of features, I think people should give it time. Stanza did not have all the abilities that it has now when it first came out. The edge that Eucalyptus has is that it has a strong foundation to build from. It's obvious the creator put a lot of work into it. Stanza's interface would have to be rebuilt from the ground up to do what Eucalyptus can do visually. Amazon will not allow Stanza to create a better app than the Kindle app and Amazon is not going to put serious effort into the Kindle app because they want you to buy a Kindle.

Eucalyptus only has a very short way to go to catch up to Stanza than Stanza does of catching up to Eucalyptus. If the developer was smart, he'd make a "Delicious Generation" Mac app and a Windows version. As has been said by a previous post, there are no good book readers for the Mac. If the developer put some elbow grease into it, he could have a great combination of apps ala Things.

samh004
May 24, 2009, 07:30 PM
I like how they talked about the "confusion surrounding its App Store rejections". Which confusion would that be, the one where Apple staffs people that don't know what they're doing to test apps?

I reckon a monkey could do about the same job, and maybe that's why.

3D-Troll
May 24, 2009, 08:29 PM
After all this commotion about this application I was ready to check it out, but not for $9.99. Not sure what I paid for Classics, but I think it was around $2.99. I do not read enough books on my iPod touch to justify this expense.

Steffen

longofest
May 24, 2009, 09:00 PM
Secret :apple: sauce :



#include <reject.h>
#include <hype.h>

extern int enoughBuzz;

foreach ( application, newlySubmittedApps ) {

new Thread(reject( application ));
while ( !enoughBuzz )
sleep(30);
approveApplication( application );
ASSERT(rakeInMoreSales());
}

void reject ( Application app )
{
Hype hype(0);
sendRejectionLetter( app );
while (1) {
collectHypeInfo( &hype );
if ( hype >= HYPE_THRESHOLD ) {
enoughBuzz = 1;
break;
}
}
}


funny.

though would be more optimized with a mutex rather than constantly sleeping and waking.

parapup
May 24, 2009, 09:09 PM
funny.

though would be more optimized with a mutex rather than constantly sleeping and waking.

Not a bad idea - after all they do need to scale to lots of application rejects and subsequently ensuing buzz ! :)

Xibalba
May 24, 2009, 09:11 PM
So now the only way around the arcane review process is to get the media to pick up the story? :o

Both ways, good for the devs that worked on the app. it looks great!

agree - cannot believe that it took this much media attention to have Apple review his complaints...even though things are corrected, there needs to be improvements in the review process (and of course the approval process as well) - esp since his emails asking for further review and explanation went unanswered...

kas23
May 24, 2009, 09:16 PM
I don't know if they're fake or not. I will say $10 is too much especially when it lacks some the features that Stanza has. It remains to be seen how much effort the developer will put into this app as the developer for Stanza did. Stanza development will probably whither on the vine because Amazon bought it.

Though Stanza is way ahead in terms of features, I think people should give it time. Stanza did not have all the abilities that it has now when it first came out. The edge that Eucalyptus has is that it has a strong foundation to build from. It's obvious the creator put a lot of work into it....

Eucalyptus only has a very short way to go to catch up to Stanza than Stanza does of catching up to Eucalyptus....

Stanza has been out for a long time and is well developed. I would say Eucalyptus has quite a ways to go in that aspect. In respect to availability of books, with the recent acquisition by Amazon, Eucalyptus will never be able to catch up to book availability of Stanza. Amazon has an eBook selection that can't be matched. As for Eucalytus readership numbers, I wish them luck trying to gain as many app owners as Stanza. That just is never going to happen with a $9.99 app trying to compete with a free app.

kas23
May 24, 2009, 09:23 PM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7659082&postcount=60

Fake reviews with five stars were posted with in 30 minutes of App release, and we are blaming Apple for rejection!! Wake up guys!

I agree. I think this should raise many eyebrows. I really wonder if their ever was a "rejection." Apple can't even respond to their own developers, they certainly aren't going to answer to the vaildity of this so-called rejection outcry. In this regard, Eucalyptus probably played their cards right as we will never know if this app was really rejected. Apple ceratinly isn't going to tell us.

Besides, what ever happened to the Apple NDA? I thought if people go shooting their mouths off they get their iPhone developer license taken away? Maybe Eucalyptus skirted the discipline of the NDA by disclosing something (a fabricated story) that never even originated from Apple's lips?

Lara F
May 24, 2009, 09:38 PM
Stanza has been out for a long time and is well developed. I would say Eucalyptus has quite a ways to go in that aspect. In respect to availability of books, with the recent acquisition by Amazon, Eucalyptus will never be able to catch up to book availability of Stanza. Amazon has an eBook selection that can't be matched.

But Amazon's eBook selection is going to go toward the Kindle app, not Stanza. At least I'd be surprised if it did, especially considering it's been nearly a year and we still don't have an official Mobipocket app that can read my handfull of DRM'd books. :mad: (Sooo grateful I mostly went with eReader while on the Palm PDA.)

str1f3
May 24, 2009, 09:57 PM
Stanza has been out for a long time and is well developed. I would say Eucalyptus has quite a ways to go in that aspect. In respect to availability of books, with the recent acquisition by Amazon, Eucalyptus will never be able to catch up to book availability of Stanza. Amazon has an eBook selection that can't be matched. As for Eucalytus readership numbers, I wish them luck trying to gain as many app owners as Stanza. That just is never going to happen with a $9.99 app trying to compete with a free app.

I'm not an apologist for the pricing of the app but Stanza does not sell Amazon books. That's what the Kindle app is for. While no one can ever have the size of books Amazon has, Stanza did a pretty good job without them. Stanza for the iPhone has not been out long and the features are far more robust now than what Stanza had initially offered. To do what Eucalyptus has done, Stanza would have to rewrite the app itself which is no easy task. Eucalyptus has an easier job to make the same deals with publishers who are always going to look towards getting the product in as many places as possible.

While the price is too high, some people have to understand the time it took for a developer to do this. I'm sure if you were the developer you'd want to be compensated for something so slick. Any book that is thrown into the app will adapt to that interface. This app must have taken a long time to develop. This was the opposite approach that Classics took and it takes forever for them to release a new book because they are essentially re-writing each book for their app. Classics at the time of release was like $2.99. Though this app is worth 10x as much, it shouldn't be priced like that.

I know people are kind of angry but the price will come down. The market will dictate the price. I'm a little peeved myself. It might even be more cool one day if Apple released a tablet. This app would work brilliantly with it. I would love it if Apple bought this developer out. It would be a nice to see them do battle with Amazon.

Seahawk Fan
May 24, 2009, 10:42 PM
...

I would love it if Apple bought this developer out. It would be a nice to see them do battle with Amazon.

Why would you love to see this happen? Amazon has the market on the e-book and book market. Apple has the market on the music.

Wouldn't it be more beneficial if Apple put their resources into what they know best and offer a solution (kindle on iPhone) for other areas of expertise?

Amazon, like Apple didn't get to where it is overnight.

Apple makes a profit on each book sold with the Kindle app and they have put no resources into it because they have no development time and don't have to negotiate terms with publishers.

gauchogolfer
May 24, 2009, 11:19 PM
Here's where this Eucalyptus might be worth $10. From what I can see of the pictures on the iTunes store, it allows you to directly access books from the Gutenberg project. Just search, tap, download. Stanza requires you to download it with your computer first and then transfer it over a wireless network to the iPhone. They have excuses about Apple not allowing Safari on the iPhone to redirect its output to Stanza, but that's irrelevant now that they allow internal web-kit browsers to function, which I imagine is how Eucalyptus directly searches and downloads books off the Internet.

Correction: you can absolutely download books directly on the iPhone using Stanza. If you look in the menu 'Online Catalog' you can get either free books from Feedbooks, Gutenberg, Random House, or buy them from Fictionwise, O'Reilly, BooksOnBoard. It works great either way.

str1f3
May 25, 2009, 12:05 AM
Why would you love to see this happen? Amazon has the market on the e-book and book market. Apple has the market on the music.

Wouldn't it be more beneficial if Apple put their resources into what they know best and offer a solution (kindle on iPhone) for other areas of expertise?

Amazon, like Apple didn't get to where it is overnight.

Apple makes a profit on each book sold with the Kindle app and they have put no resources into it because they have no development time and don't have to negotiate terms with publishers.

First off, you are wrong in thinking they make a profit. Apple makes no profit on books purchased through the Kindle app. Amazon is slick enough to take you through a browser to their website, so they can avoid paying any percentages to Apple. This is why you need an Amazon account and not an iTunes account to make a purchase.

Because Amazon has a monopoly on books, not the hardware they carry it on. If an Apple tablet came with a Eucalyptas book reading engine it would mean:

-Apple would keep it more open than Amazon does with the Kindle allowing some level of competition
-Amazon would still have to let the tablet have access to their store or Apple could cut direct direct deals with publishers (which they may do anyway). As with any other paper industry, books are also struggling, which would mean they could cut the similar deals to Amazon.
-While the Kindle may have better battery life, a color tablet would be in far more use on a college campus due to it's ability to display color and it's multimedia OSX touch browser/multimedia abilities.

kas23
May 25, 2009, 01:35 AM
First off, you are wrong in thinking they make a profit. Apple makes no profit on books purchased through the Kindle app. Amazon is slick enough to take you through a browser to their website, so they can avoid paying any percentages to Apple. This is why you need an Amazon account and not an iTunes account to make a purchase.


You are correct, as of right now. However, in-app purchasing will be coming in about 2 weeks (with the release of firmware 3.0). This is all assuming we will be able to make in-app purchasing within the Kindle App. The way it looks like right this minute is, no, we will not be able to. This is because in-app purchasing will not be allowed for free apps (and the Kindle app is currently free). Furthermore, Amazon would be brain dead to allow in-app purchasing within a Kindle app because 30% of sales via in-app purchasing will go into Apple's pocket.

kas23
May 25, 2009, 01:44 AM
I'm not an apologist for the pricing of the app but Stanza does not sell Amazon books. That's what the Kindle app is for.

This remains to be seen. Amazon owns Stanza right now. It is only a matter of time before they start selling Amazon books through it. Why else would they have purchased Lexcycle then? Just to say they own it? This was a pure bsuiness decision. They would not have spent millions of dollar on a company if it wasn't going to lead to more profit. Amazon is not going to ignore this potential revenue stream, especially when more people own the Stanza App than own the Kindle device. I give it 6 months before you can start purchasing Amazon books via Stanza.

I know people are kind of angry but the price will come down. The market will dictate the price. I'm a little peeved myself.

I wouldn't say people are angry. It's more that people are saying "WTF?" and are scratching their heads. I don't feel I'm currently losing out at all by not downloading this app. As of right now, this app offers very, very little functionality and very, very little that I can't get elsewhere. The only thing it can do is download PG it into. Big WOW. My Stanza App can already do this. Until the makers of Eucalyptus offer something that makes me envious or desire this app, I'll pass.

Compile 'em all
May 25, 2009, 01:48 AM
actually, the best way to get around this rejection is simply resubmit the app!
!

This NEVER worked for me, I have a strong feeling that if an app is rejected it is flagged in their system somehow. I have an app that was rejected 3 times, although it was approved at the end after I stripped down almost the whole core of the app :rolleyes:

str1f3
May 25, 2009, 01:54 AM
You are correct, as of right now. However, in-app purchasing will be coming in about 2 weeks (with the release of firmware 3.0). This is all assuming we will be able to make in-app purchasing within the Kindle App. The way it looks like right this minute is, no, we will not be able to. This is because in-app purchasing will not be allowed for free apps (and the Kindle app is currently free). Furthermore, Amazon would be brain dead to allow in-app purchasing within a Kindle app because 30% of sales via in-app purchasing will go into Apple's pocket.

It won't change anything. Why would Amazon suddenly give Apple 30% of all revenues of their book sales when they are already selling books through the Kindle app? They have no need for in-app purchases. In-app purchases will only affect purchases that will directly change the functionality of the app.

str1f3
May 25, 2009, 02:09 AM
This remains to be seen. Amazon owns Stanza right now. It is only a matter of time before they start selling Amazon books through it. Why else would they have purchased Lexcycle then? Just to say they own it? This was a pure bsuiness decision. They would not have spent millions of dollar on a company if it wasn't going to lead to more profit. Amazon is not going to ignore this potential revenue stream, especially when more people own the Stanza App than own the Kindle device. I give it 6 months before you can start purchasing Amazon books via Stanza.



I wouldn't say people are angry. It's more that people are saying "WTF?" and are scratching their heads. I don't feel I'm currently losing out at all by not downloading this app. As of right now, this app offers very, very little functionality and very, very little that I can't get elsewhere. The only thing it can do is download PG it into. Big WOW. My Stanza App can already do this. Until the makers of Eucalyptus offer something that makes me envious or desire this app, I'll pass.

Amazon is consolidating everything. Amazon purchased Lexcycle because they want to control every avenue of book distribution. Like I've said before, Stanza is not going to have an Amazon store. There is already another free app that Amazon offers. Amazon would have not offered a Kindle app if they could have just used Stanza. This would serve no purpose and create no new sales. In fact many people believe Amazon bought it for the sake of killing it. A free book distribution app directly conflicts with their paid approach. Other publishers such as O'Reilly Books have been using Stanza as another means of distribution and I'm sure Amazon would rather have it go through them instead. Amazon has been buying up all means of book distribution as evidence of the purchase of Audible.

Mark my words. Over the next few years (maybe less) you will slowly see support for the Stanza app for the iPhone and desktop slowly disappear.

Evangelion
May 25, 2009, 02:22 AM
Whining about app-prices never ceases to amaze me. Ten bucks is equivalent to few cups of coffee in a coffee-shop, and you guys pay that price willingly. How much do you pay for alcohol in bars and nightclubs? Yet when you are asked to pay that much for an app, you whine.

I guess what you guys want is just mediocre, dirt-cheap apps. If someone takes their time creating a refined and good app, and asks 5-10 bucks for it, you start to whine. Behavior like that is the EXACT reason that is turning the app store in to a bastion of fart-apps that cost .99. If you are only willing to pay rock-bottom prices, don't be surprised if all you get is apps that are designed and built on shoestring-budget. In fact, I'm kinda surprised that you are buying Macs, when you could get a PC for less.

Don't like the price? Fine, then don't buy it. And remember your whining about the price next time when you are waiting in a line to buy a cup of coffee in a coffee-shop.

nick9191
May 25, 2009, 02:33 AM
Whining about app-prices never ceases to amaze me. Ten bucks is equivalent to few cups of coffee in a coffee-shop, and you guys pay that price willingly. How much do you pay for alcohol in bars and nightclubs? Yet when you are asked to pay that much for an app, you whine.

I guess what you guys want is just mediocre, dirt-cheap apps. If someone takes their time creating a refined and good app, and asks 5-10 bucks for it, you start to whine. Behavior like that is the EXACT reason that is turning the app store in to a bastion of fart-apps that cost .99. If you are only willing to pay rock-bottom prices, don't be surprised if all you get is apps that are designed and built on shoestring-budget. In fact, I'm kinda surprised that you are buying Macs, when you could get a PC for less.

Don't like the price? Fine, then don't buy it. And remember your whining about the price next time when you are waiting in a line to buy a cup of coffee in a coffee-shop.
Buy that man a drink.

kas23
May 25, 2009, 02:56 AM
It won't change anything. Why would Amazon suddenly give Apple 30% of all revenues of their book sales when they are already selling books through the Kindle app? They have no need for in-app purchases. In-app purchases will only affect purchases that will directly change the functionality of the app.

I think if you re-read my post (or read it to begin with), you would see I said the exact same as your conclusion above and completely agree with this.

As for in-app purchases, they don't necessarily have to change the intrinisic function of an app. There may be in-app purchses for each of these separate "off-line maps" or in-app purchases of these travel "phrase books" or specific weather apps for X city. This is a way Apple can clear up all the clutter in the app store. We don't need hundreds of completely individual apps for each city, each name, each sports team, each bodily function, etc. I can't see why in-app purchasing wouldn't apply to eBooks either. Why have a specific publisher put out separate apps for each book they have rights to? (Heck, publishers can cut out the middleman - Amazon - totally).

kas23
May 25, 2009, 03:01 AM
Don't like the price? Fine, then don't buy it. And remember your whining about the price next time when you are waiting in a line to buy a cup of coffee in a coffee-shop.

When I go and buy a cup(s) of coffee, I know exactly what I am buying. There are zero suprises because I bought the very same cup of coffee the day before. This is not so with an app. Maybe I just value coffee's effect on body and mood much more than playing around with some developer's beta version that I'll probably never use in a few days' time. I can think of hundreds of better ways to spend my time and resources. Until they give 1-3 day trial periods for apps (as this will act as quality control), poor analogy.

In fact, I'm kinda surprised that you are buying Macs, when you could get a PC for less.


This is you only valid point, I have to give you that.

Evangelion
May 25, 2009, 03:41 AM
When I go and buy a cup(s) of coffee, I know exactly what I am buying.

You don't know what you are getting when you are buying your first cup of coffee in some new coffee-shop.

I can think of hundreds of better ways to spend my time and resources.

Buying overpriced coffee is apparently one of them.

This is you only valid point, I have to give you that.

So why DO you buy Macs, when you could get PC for less?

kas23
May 25, 2009, 04:04 AM
You don't know what you are getting when you are buying your first cup of coffee in some new coffee-shop.

I don't go to any other coffee shop though. I go to the same one each day. This is just what I choose to do.

Buying overpriced coffee is apparently one of them.

You bet it is. I take it to go. This is what I value in life, just like you buying overpriced apps. But, you don't see me complaining about your own values and spending habits, do you?


So why DO you buy Macs, when you could get PC for less?

I like the user experience Macs give me. They are a well-established company that has been delivering the consumer quality for years, in my opinion. For those reading this, try going to an Apple store and try one out and see if you value your experience enough to spend your very own money on one.

Since I answered this last question for you, answer one question for me please; who are you to tell me what I should value in life and how I should spend my money?

Compile 'em all
May 25, 2009, 04:18 AM
Whining about app-prices never ceases to amaze me. Ten bucks is equivalent to few cups of coffee in a coffee-shop, and you guys pay that price willingly. How much do you pay for alcohol in bars and nightclubs? Yet when you are asked to pay that much for an app, you whine.


I agree to some extent but people value things differently. And 10 bucks is some to people and nothing to others.

Evangelion
May 25, 2009, 05:09 AM
You bet it is. I take it to go.

you could brew your own coffee and take that with you. It would be a lot cheaper.

I like the user experience Macs give me.

So how exactly is that different when comparing a rough app to a refined, more expensive app? Sure, you can read with Stanza. Just as you can do stuff on a PC. What Macs and Eucalyptus offers is level of refinement not found in the cheaper alternative. I find it surprising that we are willing to pay hundeds of dollars extra for refinement in out computers, but we are unwilling to pay few bucks extra for refinement in apps.

The chase for rock-bottom prices will result in mediocre, unrefined apps since the developers aim to create as cheap as possible apps, as opposed as good as possible apps. We can see that in computers: Apple wants to create good computers, PC-manufacturers want to create cheap computers.

They are a well-established company that has been delivering the consumer quality for years, in my opinion. For those reading this, try going to an Apple store and try one out and see if you value your experience enough to spend your very own money on one.

I do value the user-experience, that is why I use Macs instead of a PC.

Since I answered this last question for you, answer one question for me please; who are you to tell me what I should value in life and how I should spend my money?

Go right ahead and spend your money however you want to. I just find the level of whining about App Store apps and their prices to be idiotic. we are still talking about few bucks, not hundreds of dollars. If you don't like the price, feel free to spend your money elsewhere.

I read quite a bit. If I can make that process a bit more pleasant by investing few bucks, I consider that money well spent. That few bucks is irrelevant in the long run.

Saladinos
May 25, 2009, 05:09 AM
Lord, quiet down you two!

Apple need to get this AppStore rejection mess cleared up, if only to stop the media attention.

I remember when they rejected some farting application and the media picked it up. As soon as that app was approved, it shot to number 1. No doubt developers today are more happy than anything when their apps get rejected. I sure would be.

nagromme
May 25, 2009, 10:51 AM
So now the only way around the arcane review process is to get the media to pick up the story? :o

Actually, I'd say time, rather than media attention, is what's really needed in such a clear-cut case as this. It's a big operation, and it may take them a week or two to call back. I know I've gotten a call back twice about my game (not complete/submitted yet) without needing any media attention to make it happen. It just took time for them to get back to me.

This seems to sum up the tempest in this particular teapot:

1. Developer puts in hard work on a great app

2. App gets submitted amid a flood of thousands

3. Out of those thousands that Apple evaulates, a few mistakes are occasionally made, some of them blatant mistakes while others are grey areas that Apple has been evolving and improving steadily

4. A blatant mistake is made (disallowing an eBook that other apps already access) and is very frustrating to the developer on the other end of it

5. Apple fixes their mistakes, but with all those thousands of app submissions, the process to address a disputed decision isn't quick

6. But after days have passed, Apple calls (which they'll do without any media attention needed) and resolves the problem appropriately

7. Meanwhile, much hype has appeared on the Internet suggesting that out of all those thousands of apps, mistakes are the norm and are not corrected (despite numerous past examples of hyped mistakes that WERE corrected)

8. Apple will continue to make blatant mistakes (rare out of the thousands) because it is made up of people, and will continue to correct them

9. And the "grey area" bad calls (like when they disallowed iFart and browsers) keep improving over time, as Apple continues to improve the process (which they definitely do); and unlike the blatant errors, these grey areas probably benefit from media attention

SpitzerCR
May 25, 2009, 12:26 PM
oh wow.. all that ruckus over nothing...;)

Kwill
May 25, 2009, 12:56 PM
"Please resubmit your application and charge twice a much as people are willing to pay or double the price of competition to receive expedited approval." ;)

str1f3
May 25, 2009, 01:06 PM
oh wow.. all that ruckus over nothing...;)

It's not over nothing. The fundamental argument of this thread is how much is an app worth. This has been a debate that has started since the app store first opened.

twoodcc
May 25, 2009, 01:23 PM
i really wish apple wouldn't cave like this

exodus
May 25, 2009, 01:26 PM
"If Jesus Himself came back to earth and turned water to wine, half of MacRumors would say 'meh, this is red. I wanted white.'"


They would say "Photoshopped!"

Compile 'em all
May 25, 2009, 01:33 PM
i really wish apple wouldn't cave like this

Why not? It was their fault to begin with.

MagnusVonMagnum
May 26, 2009, 12:20 AM
Correction: you can absolutely download books directly on the iPhone using Stanza. If you look in the menu 'Online Catalog' you can get either free books from Feedbooks, Gutenberg, Random House, or buy them from Fictionwise, O'Reilly, BooksOnBoard. It works great either way.

I haven't tried the iPhone app yet (haven't synced the thing yet), but I was going by the desktop application's instructions and it will NOT browse + download books. Given they are supposed to work together, I find it odd that Stanza desktop would have no features that the iPhone version has. Maybe they just don't care. They make excuses on their web site about why they haven't gotten around to wheel mouse scrolling even.

MagnusVonMagnum
May 26, 2009, 12:31 AM
Whoops, I just noticed the multi-post. I forgot I already posted recently in this thread.... Sorry.

This remains to be seen. Amazon owns Stanza right now. It is only a matter of time before they start selling Amazon books through it. Why else would they have purchased Lexcycle then? Just to say they own it? This was a pure bsuiness decision. They would not have spent millions of dollar on a company if it wasn't going to lead to more profit.

You aren't thinking very business like. Businesses buy other businesses to PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS. Sure, they'll take their talent, etc. too, but the whole point is they no longer have a competitor to Kindle in the form of Stanza. They can sit on it, let it die or add some features from it to Kindle. In short, they can do anything they want with it or nothing with it. Either way, this pushes people to depend on Amazon (at least until someone else makes a good reader). I don't like it, personally. Capitalism depends on competition and buy-outs and mergers kill competition, but that's the way it seems to go in this country these days. If Microsoft could buy Apple to get rid of them without attracting more anti-trust trouble, I'm sure they would. But in their case, they WANT limited competition (emphasis on limited; lately Apple is doing a little too well or they wouldn't be targeting them in their ads) just to say they are not an actual monopoly. In fact, that's why Bill Gates helped Apple out when they were about to go out of business. He knew it would be bad for Microsoft to be the lone commercial desktop OS in the world.

Whining about app-prices never ceases to amaze me. Ten bucks is equivalent to few cups of coffee in a coffee-shop, and you guys pay that price willingly. How much do you pay for alcohol in bars and nightclubs? Yet when you are asked to pay that much for an app, you whine.

What are you doing with this very reply if not whining about people whining? Pot meet kettle. Personaly, I'd rather hear people whine about legitimate gripes than whine about other people giving their opinion. If you don't like to read people's opinions then skip the thread or move on to the next post. Why waste your time whining yourself about people giving their opinions? Besides, how do you know what people on here spend on drinks and coffee? Did you ever even consider that some of us might not drink at all (let alone waste tons of money on alcohol at bars) or that maybe we brew coffee at home to save money and that wasting $10 on an app you can get for free is just being careless with your money. Maybe the economy would like that, but Americans save far too little as it is and all you seem to be doing is encouraging them to spend even more. And I did buy a PC at the end of the 2007 year, thank you very much. I even assembled it myself to save money. I only bought the MBP when I did last October because I got it for $600 off (quite a savings for computers that are rarely if ever on sale) due to a clearance sale as the new models came in. Thus, I got a MBP for the price of the new regular Macbook. Yes, I like good deals, not getting ripped off. I'll use the FREE app, thank you.

Besides, 99 cent apps can make people millionaires if they sell over 1.2 million copies. That's not THAT hard to do with the iPhone's popularity being what it is and it's getting easier all the time. I wonder how many more copies of Photoshop Adobe could sell (instead of everyone pirating it) if they charged $99 instead of $699. A professional can afford $699 easy, but regular users have a hard time justifying it and spare me the crap about the lite $99 crap that absolutely sucks compared to the real thing (e.g. lack of transforms). So instead Photoshop ends up being one of the top applications pirated around the world. Maybe they could sell 50x the copies if they dropped the price. We'll never know because they'll never drop it. There's enough professionals in their mind making money from it to justify those prices even if they might possibly make more money dropping it. Supply and demand doesn't always work like it should.


Don't like the price? Fine, then don't buy it. And remember your whining about the price next time when you are waiting in a line to buy a cup of coffee in a coffee-shop.

Yeah, I'll think of you whining in this thread about whining. Maybe next time you see someone give their opinion, you'll think about some people having other points of view than your own before you tell them to stop whining.

str1f3
May 26, 2009, 03:29 PM
I bought the app yesterday and I've got to say it is the best looking app in the store by a wide margin. It is visually stunning. It's clear the developer put a lot of work into this and I think it's just the beginning. Give this guy a chance to add the features that Stanza offers. It will not be that hard. As far as the price goes, it's too expensive for the features though it is worth it for the experience.

Kludge420
May 27, 2009, 07:38 AM
You are not buying the books so much as you are buying the application. You are paying for the work the developers put into making a really nice app to read books with.

If you think it's overpriced it's your right to voice that opinion as well but try to be civil; if you don't like it you don't have to buy it. Remember there are going to be things you like and others do not so would you want them attacking the things you love simply because they don't?

Now if you have bought it and it sucks then tell us that too, that's helpful, but otherwise no one really cares about anyone else's non-fact-based opinions.

guzhogi
May 29, 2009, 01:00 PM
I find it funny (but not really surprising) that Apple would reject an app because someone MAY use it to get objectionable content, but not always, yet accept apps like iFart & Soft Serve Poop Machine which are inherently gross. It's not like Eucalyptus comes with the Kama Sutra when you buy the app and shows you people having sex whenever you turn on your iPhone. What if people just get Curious George or something like that?

Bubba Satori
Jun 3, 2009, 04:51 PM
"Apple relents..." Am I sensing a pattern here ? :D

Seriously, Apple is looking as silly as Microsoft and their continual XP life support extensions.

Stop censoring apps. You're a business, not a church. :apple: