Apple Cracking Down on Developers Spamming the App Store With Duplicate Apps

[mj_ocasio]

I love Apple, don't get me wrong. But holy **** are they ever dumb in some regards. They brag about being the world's most profitable company, passing the trillion-dollar mark, blah blah blah. Yet they can't hire a dozen people to clean up the duplicates in their services. Apple Music has bands with the same name all appear as one band, and this article highlights a similar problem with the App Store. FFS, it would only take a small team to fix both. I cannot understand why they won't do these simple, inexpensive things. Meanwhile, "to build the Apple Watch's activity tracker, Apple built a physiology lab with 40 nurses and 10,000 participants," and yesterday I completed my stand goal while sitting down.

 

[cmaier]

Well, If there are A and B stores, what's to prevent C and beyond? Again this is an anti-trust law issue.

Essentially, Apple is playing the same "skirt the rules" game with anti-trust law that Apple developers are playing with App Store guidelines. Oh the Irony!

Apple has successfully prevented competition in the mobile software App Store business. But now this lack of competition is only hurting Apple iOS device hardware sales.

Apple did not invent Mobile software Apps, or App Stores. So what makes anyone think "someone else" cannot develop a better mouse trap (app store) than Apple?

Apple has eschewed the paid app with paid upgrade model from the very beginning because they claim it will not work. But instead Apple has implemented the "Rube Goldberg machine" of mobile software monetization in their App Store.

Ok, so what if an alternate (competitor) App Store just decided to stick with the paid app/upgrade model? Or independent developers just sold directly to customers? Neither of these distribution methods excludes Apple from running their App Store. Customers would have the choice to continue using the Apple App Store exclusively, or shop at an alternative with alternative monetization methods. If Apple's POS "Rube Goldberg machine" is the best then it will prevail. If not then Apple can compete by adding other monetization methods that work for developers and customers. But this is what competition looks like and Apple will not have it.

MEanwhile McDonalds is violating antitrust law by not allowing Burger King to sell Big Macs.

 

[Dave-Z]

You're equating spamming apps with email spam? Maybe a false equivalency, but that’s me.

The MacRumor articles I referenced were two separate things: email spam and notification spam. I did that to draw attention to the fact that Apple also spams in their own way. Not a "false equivalency" but a comparison of various methods of spam, some of which Apple finds acceptable and others they do not.

 

[I7guy]

Well, If there are A and B stores, what's to prevent C and beyond? Again this is an anti-trust law issue.

SCOTUS will rule in June and then we will find out.

Essentially, Apple is playing the same "skirt the rules" game with anti-trust law that Apple developers are playing with App Store guidelines. Oh the Irony!

Yeah, the irony of it.

Apple has successfully prevented competition in the mobile software App Store business. But now this lack of competition is only hurting Apple iOS device hardware sales.

I disagree fully with this, but it’s your opinion.

Apple did not invent Mobile software Apps, or App Stores. So what makes anyone think "someone else" cannot develop a better mouse trap (app store) than Apple?

You’re playing by their rules and scotus will rule in June as to whether a suit can proceed.

Apple has eschewed the paid app with paid upgrade model from the very beginning because they claim it will not work. But instead Apple has implemented the "Rube Goldberg machine" of mobile software monetization in their App Store.

No apple is providing a service in exchange for a fee. Nobody is forcing hardware or iOS on anybody, but again this may all change in June.

 

[az431]

More proof that Apple does nothing.

If an app on their store steals or destroys your information and you get enough press interest, then they'll consider taking it down.

That's all their customer care amounts to these days.

This seems to be proof that Apple does do something.
[doublepost=1551296390][/doublepost]

I understand where you're coming from. I'm also a developer.

Apple cannot implement a "per App" charge due to anti-trust laws. I know this sounds strange, but the key point is that a "per App" fee becomes a succinct, measurable cost for each app. Such a method would make anti-trust laws more "applicable" and increase the likelihood of legal action. Apple "gets around" anti-trust laws by only charging a nominal fee for a program membership.

The only solution is to open up the iOS platform so developers can sell directly to end users, or through other 3rd party app stores. This works on the Mac platform, so there is no technical reason iOS cannot also work this way.

There's nothing in anti-trust law that prohibits charging a developer per app submitted to the App Store, and this is the first I've heard that the membership fee is an end around anti-trust laws.

 

[developer13245]

SCOTUS will rule in June and then we will find out.

What case are they expected to rule on?

There's nothing in anti-trust law that prohibits charging a developer per app submitted to the App Store, and this is the first I've heard that the membership fee is an end around anti-trust laws.

Anti-tust laws are ancient, so admittedly they are hard to interpret.

Also, anti-trust law is not succinct like traffic laws that prohibit very specific behavior (e.g. don't exceed the posted speed limit). So their application has become a complex issue, and their enforcement relies mainly on case law precedent.

But my point is that creating a situation where the cost per product can be more definable lends itself to exposing the potential for showing lack of competition - this is the key point: If Apple ever charges a fee for every app, then they potentially put themselves in a position to justify how they arrived at that fee. Such justification is the nexus to an argument that a competitor can potentially compete and lower costs + better features, and that the lack of such competition harms consumers because Apple is charging "whatever the F they want" and thus causing harm. Apple's main strategy has been to avoid opening this "can of worms" by avoiding these discussions - BECAUSE, such discussions are similar to how anti-trust law has been enforced in the past and in turn has established precedent. This why the developer program is a trivial $99 per year. They implemented "curation" to sweep what they consider "crap apps" to the dustbin. And unless you are a "pedigreed chum" with Venture Capital support or have contacts, you are a "crap app" and will reside in the dust bin. But, your even though your "crap app" is in the dust bin, it is still allowed in the store, so you have no anti-trust legal position against Apple.... Get it? "Go by a super bowl half time TV ad if you want to promote your App, we don't care" -Apple.

Charging "whatever the F they want" to keep "riff raff" out of the store, or sending "riff raff" to a 'B' tier is the very definition of anti-competitive behavior. In free markets, customers and vendors must compete fairly so the MARKET picks winners and losers. Anit-trust laws are supposed to protect markets from harm.

Also, why $300? Why not $300,000 per app? Or $3 million? Any Venture Capital firm should be able to write those checks. At $3 million Apple would not even have to review apps because the VC firm would have already vetted the idea.
[doublepost=1551297893][/doublepost]The core operative point I'm trying to make is: Who decides what is "crap" or what to charge? Apple or the market?

 

[coolfactor]

I do find myself hesitating to search for apps because I know I'll need to sift through a pile of junk. I feel Apple needs to raise the bar.

One idea is for apps to auto-expire. If an app is not maintained with new versions, it will drop off. Maybe extend that with a reputation score — the more popular an app is, the longer its grace period becomes.

 

[daveak]

Nice to know something is finally happening. When I complained to Apple years ago I was told to take it up with the developer.

 

[cmaier]

I do find myself hesitating to search for apps because I know I'll need to sift through a pile of junk. I feel Apple needs to raise the bar.

One idea is for apps to auto-expire. If an app is not maintained with new versions, it will drop off. Maybe extend that with a reputation score — the more popular an app is, the longer its grace period becomes.

They've actually done that at least once.

 

[developer13245]

Also see:

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...store-meeting-with-select-developers.2132523/

 

[341328]

What about apps that are an empty shell pointing to download another app?

 

[cmaier]

What about apps that are an empty shell pointing to download another device?

What does it mean to download a “device?”

 

[routine_analyst]

What I'd really like to see is Apple crack down on the games in the App Store that bleed users of money by posing players within the game that actually work for the development company, players acting as credit card assassins with the purpose of getting you to outspend them with in app downloads. But, oh that's right... Apple takes a 30% cut of those profits.

These same games also happen to be the ones advertising with gameplay footage of Command & Conquer, Age of Empires, etc - when really you get into the game and it looks like 500 ads saying "download this pack."

 

[Tech198]

So the developer boat is rocking. Heading into a storm

 

[developer13245]

So the developer boat is rocking. Heading into a storm

No, the boat sunk a long time ago, despite our attempts to tell Apple they were heading into bad seas.

Basically, we were told to F-Off. Well, except when they schmoozed us as the Apple TV app store launched - but they had to make it look like they cared when they actually didn't. But hey, I got free food and drinks at their Apple TV launch developer boondoggle road show. And I only paid a dollar for my Apple TV.

 

[Tech198]

No, the boat sunk a long time ago, despite our attempts to tell Apple they were heading into bad seas.

Basically, we were told to F-Off. Well, except when they schmoozed us as the Apple TV app store launched - but they had to make it look like they cared when they actually didn't. But hey, I got free food and drinks at their Apple TV launch developer boondoggle road show. And I only paid a dollar for my Apple TV.

True,but Apple also changes their guidelines more now than previously.. That's why i said developer boat is rocking,

Developers had more freedom before as well..

So they are forcing developers more into a cage with rule changes. Its start to them becomes "weather to stay with iOS, or not" as that pathway comes closer, the more developers hate changes Apple makes.

 

[developer13245]

See my 12:02 post above, and others around that time.

The App Store is a very different entity now compared to the way it was in the beginning. As I've said before, Apple needed Developers!!, Developers!!, Developers!! in the beginning to enable the success of a new computing platform, which was the iPhone, and eventually iOS devices. They needed all the "crazies" to "crawl out of the woodwork" to bring creative, and even bizarre (think iFart) ideas to the platform to see what could be done. Most of the "think outside the box" ideas came from small independent developers because well, working in a cubicle is the exact definition of being constrained to think from within an actual box.

Once Apple had its established iOS platform, it no longer needed the "crazies" (despite their "think different" marketing that celebrates them), so they went under "the bus". But, this presented Apple with a problem: they couldn't just throw developers under an actual bus (by just kicking anyone they wanted off the app store) because doing so would actually cause anti-trust headaches. So they had to invent a way to bury undesirable apps within the app store. They came up with Curation to accomplish this.

So today Apple has created a store where apps exist within "a blob". Apple has no duty to promote any apps in their store. However, Apple has every right to promote apps they believe will increase sales of their products. I get this, but it has consequences for developers:

1. If an iOS app can possibly be seen by Apple as increasing Apple DEVICE sales, then that app has a higher likelihood of favorable treatment within their curation system. This favorability can decrease marketing costs associated with the product.
2. If an iOS app does not meet criteria #1 above, then the entire marketing costs must be considered in the app business plan.

Keep in mind NONE of this apples to apps that are NOT a product. iOS apps that only exist as a service to sell something else are just that: a service and not a software product.

 

[cmaier]

See my 12:02 post above, and others around that time.

The App Store is a very different entity now compared to the way it was in the beginning. As I've said before, Apple needed Developers!!, Developers!!, Developers!! in the beginning to enable the success of a new computing platform, which was the iPhone, and eventually iOS devices. They needed all the "crazies" to "crawl out of the woodwork" to bring creative, and even bizarre (think iFart) ideas to the platform to see what could be done. Most of the "think outside the box" ideas came from small independent developers because well, working in a cubicle is the exact definition of being constrained to think from within an actual box.

Once Apple had its established iOS platform, it no longer needed the "crazies" (despite their "think different" marketing that celebrates them), so they went under "the bus". But, this presented Apple with a problem: they couldn't just throw developers under an actual bus (by just kicking anyone they wanted off the app store) because doing so would actually cause anti-trust headaches. So they had to invent a way to bury undesirable apps within the app store. They came up with Curation to accomplish this.

So today Apple has created a store where apps exist within "a blob". Apple has no duty to promote any apps in their store. However, Apple has every right to promote apps they believe will increase sales of their products. I get this, but it has consequences for developers:

1. If an iOS app can possibly be seen by Apple as increasing Apple DEVICE sales, then that app has a higher likelihood of favorable treatment within their curation system. This favorability can decrease marketing costs associated with the product.
2. If an iOS app does not meet criteria #1 above, then the entire marketing costs must be considered in the app business plan.

Keep in mind NONE of this apples to apps that are NOT a product. iOS apps that only exist as a service to sell something else are just that: a service and not a software product.

I was one of the first 400 developers in the App Store. I’m not seeing a hell of a difference. The policies have changed, but mostly because scummy developers keep coming up with new ways to abuse the system, so Apple has responded.

 

[developer13245]

The thing is, nobody ever called Steve Jobs “Stevie,” and people don’t convert other CEO’s names to diminutives, even when they have a beef with them. So it comes across as “let’s emasculate the gay guy,” especially because so many people on here do it and they don’t do it when complaining about any other executive (and they do complain a lot).

Wait just one minute... I specifically described how Tim Cook behaved just like a Mafia Boss, then used a "diminutive" that is VERY common to the Mafia underworld. e.g. James becomes "Jimmy the butcher". I even used The Sopranos TV show to make my use of diminutive CRYSTAL CLEAR.

DON'T YOU DARE accuse me of emasculating him due to his sexuality. I did no such thing.
[doublepost=1551323458][/doublepost]

I was one of the first 400 developers in the App Store. I’m not seeing a hell of a difference. The policies have changed, but mostly because scummy developers keep coming up with new ways to abuse the system, so Apple has responded.

First 400? Ok, have you earned a full time software development salary from App Store REVENUE since being one of those first 400? Or are you working in the IT service industry and gaining a salary from sales of a non-software product?
Please answer this.
[doublepost=1551323714][/doublepost]If you don't believe removing the "sort by release date" feature was a "hell of a difference" then you've already implied you haven't earned your bread from App Store REVENUE.

 

[cmaier]

Wait just one minute... I specifically described how Tim Cook behaved just like a Mafia Boss, then used a "diminutive" that is VERY common to the Mafia underworld. e.g. James becomes "Jimmy the butcher". I even used The Sopranos TV show to make my use of diminutive CRYSTAL CLEAR.

DON'T YOU DARE accuse me of emasculating him due to his sexuality. I did no such thing.
[doublepost=1551323458][/doublepost]

First 400? Ok, have you earned a full time software development salary from App Store REVENUE since being one of those first 400? Or are you working in the IT service industry and gaining a salary from sales of a non-software product?
Please answer this.

I didn’t say YOU were doing the Timmy thing for that reason. I said it comes off that way, and I pointed out that lots of people do it only for Tim and not for any other apple executive now or in the past, including executives they don’t like, and I mention it in the hopes that people will cut it out.

As for your question, the sources of my income are not anybody’s business other than the IRS, and it’s not particularly relevant. Suffice it to say that I’ve continuously dealt with the app review team and App Store rules from the beginning, up to the current day. (I just submitted an app update today, in fact).

 

[341328]

What does it mean to download a “device?”

sorry, I edited to say app not device.

 

[developer13245]

I didn’t say YOU were doing the Timmy thing for that reason. I said it comes off that way, and I pointed out that lots of people do it only for Tim and not for any other apple executive now or in the past, including executives they don’t like, and I mention it in the hopes that people will cut it out.

As for your question, the sources of my income are not anybody’s business other than the IRS, and it’s not particularly relevant. Suffice it to say that I’ve continuously dealt with the app review team and App Store rules from the beginning, up to the current day. (I just submitted an app update today, in fact).

If it comes "off that way" to you in spite of my direct description of Mafia culture it is your problem, NOT MINE. I would suggest that you attempt to form arguments based on the issues being discussed instead of injecting irrelevant "political hot buttons" that have nothing to do with the issues - doing so only indicates you are not capable or knowledgeable of the actual issues.

How you make money in the iOS eco system is relevant. Uber can sell rides using iPhones, and Apple can sell iPhones so people can buy rides on Uber. But, this type of relationship is only an eCommerce relationship which can be accomplished on low cost commodity hardware/platforms. Apple cannot be successful as a commodity hardware vendor. Apple is party to their own demise if they cannot enable successful sales of software PRODUCTS on their App Store.

It's obvious you exist in the IT industry simply as an "overhead" cost. Your perspective is therefore limited.

 

[341328]

About 3000 apps just pointing to download another app: https://itunes.apple.com/au/developer/skoolbag-pty-ltd/id561683743#see-all/i-phonei-pad-apps

 

[cmaier]

If it comes "off that way" to you in spite of my direct description of Mafia culture it is your problem, NOT MINE. I would suggest that you attempt to form arguments based on the issues being discussed instead of injecting irrelevant "political hot buttons" that have nothing to do with the issues - doing so only indicates you are not capable or knowledgeable of the actual issues.

How you make money in the iOS eco system is relevant. Uber can sell rides using iPhones, and Apple can sell iPhones so people can buy rides on Uber. But, this type of relationship is only an eCommerce relationship which can be accomplished on low cost commodity hardware/platforms. Apple cannot be successful as a commodity hardware vendor. Apple is party to their own demise if they cannot enable successful sales of software PRODUCTS on their App Store.

It's obvious you exist in the IT industry simply as an "overhead" cost. Your perspective is therefore limited.

I have no idea what you are talking about re: my “existence in the IT industry.” I’ve been a coder for 40 years. I’ve submitted my own apps as an Indy developer to the App Store since the first day they accepted submissions, including, as I pointed out, today.

I designed CPUs for Exponential Technology (if you know anything about the history of Apple you may know something about them) as well as Sun and AMD, and those jobs involved writing code, too. Nobody has every called me mere “overhead” before.

 

[developer13245]

I have no idea what you are talking about re: my “existence in the IT industry.” I’ve been a coder for 40 years. I’ve submitted my own apps as an Indy developer to the App Store since the first day they accepted submissions, including, as I pointed out, today.

I designed CPUs for Exponential Technology (if you know anything about the history of Apple you may know something about them) as well as Sun and AMD, and those jobs involved writing code, too. Nobody has every called me mere “overhead” before.

I asked you if you've earned a full time software developer salary from App Store revenue since you were the among the "first 400" developers. This is a Yes or No question. If you cannot answer Yes, then your answer is obviously No.

If you don't believe removing the "sort by release date" feature was a "hell of a difference" then you've already implied you haven't earned your bread from App Store REVENUE.

Sure, you have earned a livelihood in from software development, but two points clearly indicate your livelihood is not affected by the covfefe that the app store has become.