You know what's irritating?
People acting like this is new, and swallowing whole what's clearly manipulation of the media. Yes, yes... Apple controlling... very sexy story. Yum.
Kongregate. What? Yes, Kongregate. Recently Android denied the app "Kongregate", because it violated a "non-compete" clause in the market. Kongregate allowed free access to hundreds of Flash games... but let users download the games and store them on their SD card. They moved to change the app so that it did not download the games, but instead allowed users to play them from the web.
How's that related? Well, just that fact that ALL App Stores have certain types of restrictions. But, unlike what's happening here, people are misreporting this. There's this SEEMINGLY little known restriction, that Apple and Google tried to hold people to when submitting apps. No matter WHO you are... don't take credit card numbers inside the app. If you want to do a purchase inside the app, use the in-app purchase API. There is NO exclusion for magazines, or whatever. This is simply the way things are.
Time Magazine had this same fight LAST year with Apple. Oddly... many links to this stand-off seem to have evaporated in relevance. Time ended up creating a mechanism by which existing subscribers could be verified and download the content for free.
Check it out:
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/201...blem-is-trouble-for-every-magazine-publisher/
No other magazine publisher has approval sell their own iTunes app subscriptions, either. But Apple and Steve Jobs had made a point of reaching out to Time Inc. executives and editors before the iPad’s launch, and encouraged them to build digital editions for the platform.
And Time Inc. executives tell me they had been communicating with Apple throughout the spring as they developed their subscription plans, and had been told that Apple approved.
Even then, I scratched my head at the dark speculation of Apple's evil intent. Isn't this rejection part of a policy that's been in place for a while? Let's see...
Apple has TWO problems.
One that it shares with Google, one of its own making.
#1.)
CREDIT CARDS - Apps shouldn't take credit cards. This is just common sense. You don't need 700 fake banking apps eliminated from Android Marketplace to know that apps that ask for credit card information are pretty serious issues, especially if users can't confirm the information is being transmitted securely. So... as a rule... just NO. Google says this too. I've seen some exceptions, but I think its a hard, hard rules to enforce, especially when you confirm big companies who take care with sensitive data. Apple usually requires people to go through the Safari browser to communicate this data to the company.
#2.)
CONTENT RATING - Apple rates its apps for content. Apple has created parental controls. Apple wants to be able to marginally control whether someone is able to spontaneously create a porn app. This... seems like a VERY, very hard situation. With magazines that have clear policies on nudity, etc... Apple has tried to be flexible with outside content. But, what about eBooks? Even access to the Kama Sutra have gotten some apps in hot water. What about web browsers and ebook readers, Apple? Well... indeed. That's the heart of this issue.
This is a repeat of the Time Magazine mess. Kindle isn't "NEXT". That's just yellow journalism. The Kindle App doesn't DO in-app purchases at all. Apple doesn't want "their cut" more than they want "safe commerce" on the commerce process to not be violated.
Apple's not an innocent in this. They continue to have mis-queues and bottleneck issues that harm the development process. They recently tried to be more transparent about App Store guidelines.
Every story on rejection, should reference this hallmark statement from Apple last year:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/09/09statement.html
September 9, 2010
In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need.
In addition, for the first time we are publishing the App Store Review Guidelines to help developers understand how we review submitted apps. We hope it will make us more transparent and help our developers create even more successful apps for the App Store.
Yes. And they DID!
http://developer.apple.com/appstore/guidelines.html
Non-devs, can read many of these guidelines here:
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/thoughts-on-apples-new-app-store-guidelines/
11. Purchasing and currencies
11.1
Apps that unlock or enable additional features or functionality with mechanisms other than the App Store will be rejected
11.2
Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected
11.2 is a toughie, isn't it? But, iLounge's Jessie Holington wrote:
This explains the logic behind PayPal’s mobile payment library, since this is designed to be used for physical goods and services. Apps such as Kindle or Nook should also continue to be safe, since content is not purchased in the app, but rather via a web browser. Further, both Kindle and Nook content can be used outside of the application, as per section 11.3.
Recently, Apple was also criticized for not allowing charities to take money through PayPal. Stories implied Apple wanted its cut. Here's Apple's guideline:
21. Charities and contributions
Apps that include the ability to make donations to recognized charitable organizations must be free. The collection of donations must be done via a web site in Safari or an SMS
Sounds like the end of the world, doesn't it?
~ CB
