Apple Cracking Down on "Cookie Cutter" App Store Applications?

[mags631]

That news is just another reason not to write software for Apple's iGadgets.

Huh? Apple is going to raise the quality of the applications by removing what aren't really apps. If I'm a developer with real applications, then this is good news to me since now my app is even more visible to potential users.

For those who haven't read it yet, I think Paul Graham's essay "Apple's mistake" is a must-read on the topic:

http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html


Censorship and no competition are never a good thing, no matter how much you guys love Apple.

That article is not about censorship. It's more about the software development process -- the ability to quickly iterate to a working piece of code instead of having too rigid of a promotion process that requires the application to be "just right".

While this sounds good, it's just another form of control.
Control is a slippery slope

I think you mean "too much", because it's hard (for me) to think of an example where any control is a bad thing -- I would guess even in art there is some control.

In fact, I don't think Apple possesses any ability to censor developers (beyond threatening them with legal action, e.g., due to the potential revelation of trade secrets), because Apple does not own the only platform on which developers can express themselves. Apple can only control one of many viable, valid developer platforms.

Magazines publish the pieces of other authors; editors carefully select and therefore control which content is distributed to their audiences; why is this any different? If anything Apple's platform seems relatively open.

 

[Vulpinemac]

That is a definite no-no. I have two apps which don't sell tons, but trickle along at a few a day. There is no way in hell I'd want Apple to remove them. People are buying it, so it's all good for me, albheit slowly.

It sounds to me like there's a significant difference between your app and what they're trying to filter out. Apps that continue to move, however slowly, are apps that are still selling. On the other hand, a 'crude bodily noise' app is hardly likely to continue selling after its first rush. I, for one, wouldn't download the sort in the first place, and while certain members of society would, once the 'coolness' of using the app wears off, their peers tend to turn away saying, "Oh, not that old thing again."

So personally I don't think you have much to worry about--if it's still selling, it means you still have a market.

By the way, exactly what kind of apps did you make?

 

[diabolic]

For example, if the iPhone ended up being 99% of the cellphone/smart phone market, would it then be ok that Apple controls all decisions?

The legal rules would be different in that case. Anti-competitive practices aren't always illegal in every situation.

 

[Stella]

How long until your app, developer, is on the cutting board, that you thought was 'safe'?

 

[Jayomat]

If you ask me, Apple's finally realized that the Publishing industry, even when it comes to publishing software one way or another, is a serious business where you have to separate the wheat from the chaff.

As much as I hate to admit it, being a writer who's only had one short story published years ago, publishing is a matter of looking through thousands of manuscripts to find one that really catches your eye. Up to now, Apple has let pretty much anything go into the app store, but I'll tell you something, most of those apps, especially the 'rude noise' type or the 'digital business card' type rarely last beyond the first few days.

However, this has given them a database of app styles and types that now lets them look at download statistics to see what people are really willing to buy, if even for a short time. Because they're publishing digitally, they don't have the cost of producing a physical object that eventually may need to be merely tossed/recycled, but they do have the cost of maintaining the library and honestly, keeping a file of something that only 'sold' for two or three days and now languishes in ignoble obscurity is not worth the disk space it occupies. What with the announcement of the iPad, Apple has likely realized that if Apple wants to be more than 'just another app store,' they need to ensure that the apps they approve are quality products, whether they're games, tools, shops or merely entertainment.

What with the many different types of apps they already have, they now need to categorize, analyze and effectively edit the listings to present the cream of the crop. They need to do as the managing editor of any publishing house must do and try to ensure that what they publish is what their customers really want. Just as I wouldn't want to go down to the bookstore and pay $10 for something created by just any grade-school child, I don't want to go into the App Store and crawl through a pile of garbage to find that true gem of an app--the one that could let me use the iPad the way I want to use the device.

Publishing is a difficult business, no matter if it's books, movies, television or software. We've all read horrendous reviews of products in every medium and we wonder how those products ever made it to the market at all. Well, Apple appears to be trying to make sure its market has products that truly do what they say they will.

For those who haven't read it yet, I think Paul Graham's essay "Apple's mistake" is a must-read on the topic:

http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html

hits the nail on the head.

 

[azazel-]

I'd guess that most of the people bitching about this will be the developers that write these garbage apps. Just sayin'...

 

[diabolic]

Magazines publish the pieces of other authors; editors carefully select and therefore control which content is distributed to their audiences; why is this any different? If anything Apple's platform seems relatively open.

I think that's a good analogy. I also think Time needs to be forced to publish my articles every week.

 

[Daphtdazz]

Obviously to get any app on the app store you have to pay a $99 dollar membership fee, but does that mean that your app subsequently remains on the store ad infinitum, or will it expire when your yearly membership expires?

That would seem like a very obvious way for Apple to automatically vet applications; remove apps whose developers are no longer willing to pay the $99 dollar fee.

I'm all in favour of cutting out the crap anyway.

 

[RalfTheDog]

Take out the trash!

I think Apple needs three different app stores. The first would be the professional store. I would think that you would pay a $1,000 fee (or more) for submissions (refunded if rejected), Standards would be much higher. Most apps would be rejected. If your app is rejected three times it is auto submitted to the Hobby store.

The Hobby store has lower standards. Things don't need to be perfectly polished. Everything is approved as long as it is not objectionable or damaging and does not break TOS.

The web store is a list of web apps that are not porn and don't steal your credit card numbers.

 

[cmaier]

I'd guess that most of the people bitching about this will be the developers that write these garbage apps. Just sayin'...

The problem is it's a never-ending list of changing rules. Apps that have images or icons representing iPhone. Apps that stream podcasts. Apps that have dialing interfaces. Apps that support google voice. Games where the female avatar is wearing short shorts. Apps that are on-line catalogs for swimwear stores. Apps that have bobble-head representations of congresspeople. Apps that poke fun at the bank bailout. Apps that are political. Stumbler apps. And now "cookie cutter" apps.

This category might not sting, but there will be others.

 

[JAT]

hits the nail on the head.

It would be a lot easier to agree with such things if not for idiotic comments like this in the article:

The main reason there are so many iPhone apps is that so many programmers have iPhones.

 

[*LTD*]

That's right, kids, Apple's platform is closed, there is an approval process, Apple reserves the right to refuse . . . . and the whole operation is succeeding BRILLIANTLY. And there's no evidence of anything happening to the contrary anytime soon.

The sooner we all wrap our heads around this reality, the better.

 

[c.hilding]

YES!!! Please bring on the great purge! I'd LOVE to see the current 150k apps cut down to a modest 60k high quality apps (if even that many high quality apps exist).

There is NO way to break into the iPhone Store in its current state, due to how overcrowded with **** it is.

The only people that can break in are either major brands (Disney apps, etc), or people who have the money or the fame to advertise the new app to pieces. Other people will have to rely on being lucky enough that their app is featured somewhere and catches on, but even then it's usually slim pickings since the sales slow down as soon as the articles about your app start dwindling.

Therefore the current app store climate is horrible for new developers. I for one welcome the news of purges of the pure crap (or should I say, "crApps").

 

[pubwvj]

On the one hand I'm glad to see this. There is so much junk being generated that are not good apps. It is hard to sort them out.

On the other hand I prefer to see a market based system that culls the weeds.

Balance in all things.

 

[skellener]

Apple doesn't appear to be opposed to 'app generators' and templates per se, but in the last month or so it has started cracking down on basic applications that are little more than RSS feeds or glorified business cards. In short, Apple doesn't want people using native applications for things that a basic web app could accomplish.

So first Southwest and now The App Store?

Kevin Smith

Twitter and RSS Feeds. So will Kevin Smith be "banned" from the app store? I mean, it could be a web app.

Yet another lame decision from Apple.

 

[charlituna]

That news is just another reason not to write software for Apple's iGadgets.

For those who haven't read it yet, I think Paul Graham's essay "Apple's mistake" is a must-read on the topic:

http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html


Censorship and no competition are never a good thing, no matter how much you guys love Apple.

Grahams got a fair share of FUD in that article.

Also there is compet it's called Android, Windows Mobile etc. Apple isn't telling them they can't have apps stores or that folks that develop for the iphone can't do the same for other OSes.

and on the censorship, when it's app spammers and promo cheaters even the other programmers cheer. cause that gets rid of the trash.

right now Apple is walking some fine lines. some of the porn apps were pushing into obscenity law violations so they had to be removed. and so on.

eventually the issue will likely go to court and we'll see if they verify Apple's right to restrict with the Iphone OS as they currently can with the Mac OS.

Right.. If I own a book shop and choose not to sell Mein Kampf, or own a video store and choose not to sell porn, that is obviously censorship..

the naysayers don't generally recognize the App/iTunes/iBook store as a store and thus afford the same rights to choose what is sold within.

and even those that do still feel that what they want has to be allowed just like what they want in their devices must be included or said item is overpriced junk that no one should buy until the missing details are there.

 

[cmaier]

]
right now Apple is walking some fine lines. some of the porn apps were pushing into obscenity law violations so they had to be removed. and so on.

No they weren't. Not even close.

 

[RalfTheDog]

The only people that can break in are either major brands (Disney apps, etc), or people who have the money or the fame to advertise the new app to pieces. Other people will have to rely on being lucky enough that their app is featured somewhere and catches on, but even then it's usually slim pickings since the sales slow down as soon as the articles about your app start dwindling.

Learn viral marketing. Many more web pages exist than apps. You can make lots of money with a web based business. You can do the same with the App Store.

People don't find apps at the App Store, they use Google. If you have an app that teaches people how to juggle marmots, start by creating a web page for your app that is SEO for marmot juggling. Next, start posting on all the marmot juggling forums. Don't spam. Do let the marmot jugglers know who you are.

PS. Have you guys checked out my new app that tracks rumors about Apple related products? (Joke)

 

[amd60305]

Just curious, why does everyone get so riled up whenever Apple changes something with the app store and their app model?

They are free to do what they want. Don't buy their product if you don't like how it works. Want to hear of a tighter development model? Try getting your game to run on the Wii. The Nintendo Store pre-dates the app store and yet the app store has many more apps.

Who's to blame for the delays in approval?
Why the plethora of one trick ponies that developers are putting into the queue. I hardly find this to be Apple's fault. You can only streamline a process so much and then all it takes is a few people to get it to screw up.

 

[199708]

Friend last night told me about ewifi. but i cannot find this. Very useful tool, unless I'm not searching correctly?

 

[ranguvar]

Now, on-topic: Very good move imo! Apple absolutely has to crack down on "Cookie Cutter" apps. I think a two-store model would be best. Basically, one store with worthy apps. And another one for crapps. Apple decides about witch app goes where, based on clearly defined criteria.

While a sort-out system based on economic success of an app might seem tempting and easy, I do not consider it the right way to go. Unfortunately, the true value of an app is not necessarily measured by its economic success. (Take a scientific "pro" app. It can be very useful, but it might not be a huge economic success due to the very small userbase it aims at. Then take a farting app. It's useless, but appeals to the many childish ones among the iPhone and (more importantly) iPod Touch users.)

EDIT: Oh, and anyone who disagrees with Apple is free to develop for Cydia, anyway.

 

[*LTD*]

Friend last night told me about ewifi. but i cannot find this. Very useful tool, unless I'm not searching correctly?

If it uses undocumented, private APIs, it won't be there.

 

[thermodynamic]

I'm all for keeping clutter out of the App store, as long as Apple doesn't remove things that people actually want under the guise of improving user experience.

Seconded. A certain standard is fair. But if standards are met but a contrivance is made (including saying standards are not met). It's like applying for a job and you prove you do meet the qualifications they ask but then they write back and say "Insufficient qualifications". You know something smells like an unbathed bull.

That news is just another reason not to write software for Apple's iGadgets.

For those who haven't read it yet, I think Paul Graham's essay "Apple's mistake" is a must-read on the topic:

http://www.paulgraham.com/apple.html


Censorship and no competition are never a good thing, no matter how much you guys love Apple.

VERY true.

I'm still looking up the blog of an actual iPhone developer, citing what pitfalls wannabe-developers would experience. It's nowhere near as glamorous as claimed. (never mind 3-day delays when a developer updates their program; Apple wants to sift through it too. Seems a tad extreme, especially when the developer has to apologize for Apple's system while everybody is grumbling "I can't get my information!"... think a herd of unbathed bulls this time...)

In a democracy, there is no place for any corporation owning anyone (as how the link you mentioned states Apple effectively owns the user AND the developer.) But thankfully, we're a corporatist realm...

 

[OllyW]

Friend last night told me about ewifi. but i cannot find this. Very useful tool, unless I'm not searching correctly?

If it uses undocumented, private APIs, it won't be there.

It's a legit app, it's just not available in all countries.

 

[thermodynamic]

Just curious, why does everyone get so riled up whenever Apple changes something with the app store and their app model?

They are free to do what they want. Don't buy their product if you don't like how it works. Want to hear of a tighter development model? Try getting your game to run on the Wii. The Nintendo Store pre-dates the app store and yet the app store has many more apps.

Who's to blame for the delays in approval?
Why the plethora of one trick ponies that developers are putting into the queue. I hardly find this to be Apple's fault. You can only streamline a process so much and then all it takes is a few people to get it to screw up.

1. Apple's delay process includes bug fixes to existing apps. Just how strict does Apple genuinely need to be? it's a bug fix; the PocketInformant people told customers and undoubtedly Apple. The fix still took Apple days to get to.
2. Okay, nobody buy anything if we all end up being puppets for the master corporation. (then we'll see how well the economy does. As does freedom, ironically... )
3. They are free to do whatever they want, just so long as they obey the same rules our country that houses them live in. And unlike a plethora of others, ours grants a LOT of rights and privileges. Including special treatment for billion-dollar generating corporations, including getting subsidy money from we the taxpayers despite their having no financial need to. In short, government has been buying into corporations for decades, and yet the "socialism" slant was never thought of until the bailouts (same thing, different name, whatever.)