The red text is where Apple is crossing a fine line, and for many people because you as consumer should be free to make that decision yourself. Not Apple.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Cracking Down on "Cookie Cutter" App Store Applications?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I'm dumb. Products come and go all the time in all kinds of stores. The downloads happened whether the apps are ever available again or not. I'm sure they'll get to 6 billion in far less time.
Susceptibilty to advertising doesn't suggest ignorance and yes, you are implying that, and that somehow you are smarter.
I don't know because I've never read it but does the licensing terms that come with the developer's kit say anything about this? I am willing to bet that Apple has some clause in there pertaining to keeping their rights to change the rules of app removal/approval at any time, and that they can remove your app with no obligation to reimburse or otherwise compensate you. If that is the case then the onus is upon you. When you agreed to develop you agreed to those terms, and if you don't like them then it's your responsibility to stand by your guns and leave the platform. If enough people do this, the market will have spoken to Apple and they might retract on some of their decisions.
The point is that they celebrated 3 Billion downloads as showing the success of the app store, but now they are admitting that some of those downloads were perhaps not in the customer's best interest. Volume has its merits when it suits them, but now they are saying that quality is what counts. Double Think.
It is my job to keep track of tech related stuff, phones, computers, etc. I wouldn't give a banker investment advice. I wouldn't claim to know more about health issues than a doctor. But on tech related stuff, yes I will claim to have superior knowledge than someone who simply knows about iPods because everyone else has one.
Troll on, brother. Troll on.
Based on your logic, you must hate spam filters in email clients because it "censors" you from seeing everything.
Apple has no clue how many developers wont touch their platforms because of their policies.
I'm willing to bet many current developers, good and bad, will eventually leave this platform because of the uncertain way all of this is being handled and the closed nature of their business model.
Also I've talked to many college students who gave up their iPhone for an Android and all have preferred the Android.
Getting back to the subject ...
There is a point apple is trying to make here.
If you are trying to develop an App, and it does nothing that really makes it an iPhone experience, then why is it in the app store?
IE. Why are you making an iPhone app if it could really just exist as a webpage? This translates to, if you are not using any iPhone "features" then your app runs the risk of being removed. Some apps merely interact with some online database, why have the iPhone app front when you can just go to a website? or place a fav. icon?
If it takes you 6 months to develop an app that could easily be a webapp, then clearly you have other priorities than making an iPhone app.
I have no sympathy for those that attempt something and feel bewildered because they don't know what they're getting into. You are repeating the same rhetoric as the business bigwigs that invested in failing companies/startups w/o knowledge of the bigger picture.
If you don't like the tune, change the station. If nothing makes you happy, well then you are probably a really sad individual.
There is a point apple is trying to make here.
If you are trying to develop an App, and it does nothing that really makes it an iPhone experience, then why is it in the app store?
IE. Why are you making an iPhone app if it could really just exist as a webpage? This translates to, if you are not using any iPhone "features" then your app runs the risk of being removed. Some apps merely interact with some online database, why have the iPhone app front when you can just go to a website? or place a fav. icon?
If it takes you 6 months to develop an app that could easily be a webapp, then clearly you have other priorities than making an iPhone app.
I have no sympathy for those that attempt something and feel bewildered because they don't know what they're getting into. You are repeating the same rhetoric as the business bigwigs that invested in failing companies/startups w/o knowledge of the bigger picture.
If you don't like the tune, change the station. If nothing makes you happy, well then you are probably a really sad individual.
No one seems to mind that XBOX, PLAYSTATION and Wii have total control over their ecosystems.
What's the difference?
Simple way to test that.
List the killer apps on other phone platforms that aren't available on the iphone.
Such as... ?
(Granted - it won't tell you how many average developers are avoiding the platform - but who cares about average apps?)
Censorship
I absolutely cannot tolerate the hyperbole of referring to ANYTHING Apple might do as "censorship."
Apple, Inc. is a company. It is not a sovereign nation. Apple can never, ever, under any circumstances, be credibly accused of "censorship." If Apple decides to prohibit the sale of products or services through their store, they are free to do so, legally and ethically. It is a business decision made within a free market context. They've decided that the end user experience is important enough to step on the toes of a few bottom-feeder developers by insisting on a certain level of quality.
Nothing has been "censored". If those jilted developers want to make garbage for the Android platform, they are free to. If customers still want to buy/download free crappy apps, they can buy smart phones other than the iPhone and have at it. There is nothing whatsoever close to either monopolistic control of smartphone apps or "censorship." Everyone on this planet who can actually afford a smartphone has dozens, maybe hundreds, of respectable alternatives to the Apple offering.
China, however, IS a sovereign nation and DOES participate in censorship, as do many others. The citizens are preemptively prevented from accessing information that might be politically threatening to those nation's autocratic regimes. That's censorship.
What's next? Anyone ready to play the Nazi card? Sheesh.
I absolutely cannot tolerate the hyperbole of referring to ANYTHING Apple might do as "censorship."
Apple, Inc. is a company. It is not a sovereign nation. Apple can never, ever, under any circumstances, be credibly accused of "censorship." If Apple decides to prohibit the sale of products or services through their store, they are free to do so, legally and ethically. It is a business decision made within a free market context. They've decided that the end user experience is important enough to step on the toes of a few bottom-feeder developers by insisting on a certain level of quality.
Nothing has been "censored". If those jilted developers want to make garbage for the Android platform, they are free to. If customers still want to buy/download free crappy apps, they can buy smart phones other than the iPhone and have at it. There is nothing whatsoever close to either monopolistic control of smartphone apps or "censorship." Everyone on this planet who can actually afford a smartphone has dozens, maybe hundreds, of respectable alternatives to the Apple offering.
China, however, IS a sovereign nation and DOES participate in censorship, as do many others. The citizens are preemptively prevented from accessing information that might be politically threatening to those nation's autocratic regimes. That's censorship.
What's next? Anyone ready to play the Nazi card? Sheesh.
Still shows success due to popularity. Apple can happily say there is just so much on the App Store that it's now time to filter a bit. It shows volume, that's what's important. It says to the consumer "Our App Store is where the developers are", and it says to developers, "The iPhone/iPod Touch is THE platform to develop for."
It's that simple.
So... if the moderators here decided to remove anything you said in favor of Apple, you would not call that "censorship" simply because this forum is not a country?
Censorship is censorship, no matter who does it, or for a good or bad reason.
Apple, for example, is infamous for removing messages from its forums that make it look bad. When the price dropped on the first iPhone, Apple deleted literally thousands of angry posts before Jobs caved in under the pressure. That was censorship, pure and simple, trying to stop public opinion.
Despite your hyperbole, to be "censorship" it is not required that the "censor" is a government. No one is saying this is a First Amendment issue (the First Amendment, of course, applying only to government censors). While most censorship occurs by governments (because governments are uniquely situated to act as censors due to their ability to leverage legal authority to do so), censorship also is committed by media companies and publishers, and others in position to act as censors.
How about Apple focus on giving us a good AppStore experience. Currently the store is a train wreck.
And every company does it.
Every single one of them.
Some exercise more control than others, but every site is moderated in some respect and every company does what it think is best to sell its products.
In my view, that is nitpicking compared to the big picture. I don't think changing their policy is going to chase developers of "legitimate" apps away, despite the overblown point of "who knows what app could be next to get the axe." On the contrary, I'd be happier as a developer that there might be less crap for potential customers to wade through.
Anything that Apple can do to make the app store a better experience for a customer is a good thing in my opinion.
As a developer, this does two things for me.
1. Taking out the trash makes me want to get more products into the mix.
2. This makes me want to focus on quality at all cost.
This is good for those that want to develop good products. This is good for those who want to buy good products.
1. Taking out the trash makes me want to get more products into the mix.
2. This makes me want to focus on quality at all cost.
This is good for those that want to develop good products. This is good for those who want to buy good products.
The difference is anyone wanting a game for any of those systems can buy it at one of a number of stores of their choice.
If the store decides not to carry the desired game another store will most likely carry it.
Competition drives down the price and almost certainly guarantees the desired game will be at all of the stores.
Choice is good, control is bad.
Regardless of whether or not they are worth your attention (in Apple's view or anyone else's), the apps have in fact been downloaded.
And for the record, how many apps have been downloaded by other people does not influence my purchasing behavior in any significant way.
Why should consumers be able to force Apple to sell something that they do not want to?
I haven't read the article/blog, but I know it is a good thing for me.
So I disagree with your assertion that no competition/censorship is a bad thing. Given Apple they have gotten it right most of the time.
Getting rid of all these worthless spam apps is a start. I can't remember the last time I browsed through the app store to look for useful apps. It has been a long time, because the level of garbage is so high it is futile.
This is a big problem for legitimate and serious developers because then they are forced to spend money on advertising and publicity to get their potential users even aware of their applications and that should not have to be the case given the store's existence.
I receive a benefit by apple vetting programs before they are available to me. It is less work and less danger for me and my information is safer and I don't have to trust hundreds of individuals with my personal information. The positive for apple's closed system far outweigh the negatives for me and a lot of other people.
So to say that is only bad is ignorant. Something tells me that when I go read that guy's blog/article my mind will not be changed.
edit: Just read the article. Sounds like lazy programmers developers unwilling to change how they work to face the new world. Especially in terms of developing for the Apple mobile platform. That is fine because thousands of others will do the work and will adapt to how they do things to fit themselves into the process and not demand the process be changed to them.
At the end of the day a lot of users like this process, and they like apple being in the middle. So the fact that developers want to do exactly like they have always done and that is releasing bug-laden and untested software and just update it as they go along... well too bad. Us users are not a fan of that model, so telling me that exists because it is the best model is stupid. It is not the best model. It is the easiest model for the developers. It is not the best model for users.
So three cheers to the iPhone developers who work within the system to provide quality and mostly bug free apps that don't require a constant chain of minor updates to create a workable products. I have a lot of good apps that do this, so I certainly know it is possible. Big thumbs down to developers who cry because they can't just rush crap out the door as fast as possible regardless of it works or not and hope to fix it with updates every 3 days. I don't want that guy developing apps for me. He sounds lazy and sounds like he doesn't care about user experience at all.
We aren't talking about delivery of the games - the maker still decides which games it will allow to be developed.
Quality control is not a bad thing.
I wonder if Apple is going to subtract the number of now dis-approved application downloads when they report the number of total downloads next time? I suspect that if they did, with all those girly apps now gone, the total number would fall by some 60%
This question was already asked two pages ago. And started quite a debate.I wonder if Apple is going to subtract the number of now dis-approved application downloads when they report the number of total downloads next time? I suspect that if they did, with all those girly apps now gone, the total number would fall by some 60%