Apple Invites Pulitzer Prize-Winning Cartoonist to Resubmit Rejected iPhone Application

[Brometheus]

I can't defend Apple's rejection of this app, because it doesn't make sense to me. However, I can see how Apple's approval policy can lead to unintended consequences. If we view Apple as evil, then of course we will see nothing but malevolent intent. However, if we think about how the process actually works, we should realize that some of these things are predictable. I don't work for Apple, but I expect that like any organization that employs human beings, there will be variation in judgement based on the fact people are different, and the reality that it's impossible to account for every scenario. The idea that Apple can make every prohibited type of app crystal clear does not make sense to me. There are always situations that can't be covered 100%. There are trade-offs as in all of life. Lack of flexibility always comes at a price, so you do the best you can. The reviewers at Apple are like everyone else in society. Some are mature (not necessarily meaning older) people with good insight and can make good judgements when they interpret the rules. Others try to make decisions based on an interpretation of the rules that is not based on what most of us would consider good judgment.

There are situations, such as Apple's attitude regarding Flash on the iPhone OS, when we know where the entire company stands. Sometimes we can't be sure that a decision reflects the entire company. So when people claim that "Apple" is doing something to screw someone over, sometimes it's a specific individual at Apple; someone who may not share the same perspective as the senior leaders at Apple, or even another Apple employee 10 feet away from them.

 

[Andrmgic]

They should post a policy and ****ing stick to it, no special cases or exceptions.. NONE of this "because we felt like it" ********.

They need to post EVERY SINGLE REQUIREMENT in plain language and say explicitly which of the published policies the app did not meet and give an explanation as to why.

This kind of stuff is nothing but bad press for them, especially with all of the public backpedaling they've been doing when they reject someone with the attention of the media.

Also, They should not be able to deny developers access to certain APIs in order to keep their own products more competitive. (pinch to expand for that photo app that got rejected, in-app brightness control, etc.)

If Apple can't compete on their own programming and design merits, then they shouldn't be releasing applications in the store.

 

[Darkroom]

way to stand by your principles by resubmitting

 

[ps45]

presumably the mistake to which jobs refers resides in the OTT developer licence agreement, rather than this particular instance in which those rules have been applied? i wish.

 

[wovel]

presumably the mistake to which jobs refers resides in the OTT developer licence agreement, rather than this particular instance in which those rules have been applied? i wish.

Interesting thought though. His rejection said it was for ridiculing public figures, but their policy rejects defamatory material. There is certainly a fine line, but the line most certainly exists. You can ridicule someone till the cows come home without engaging in defamation. The distinction is probably too difficult for anyone without extensive legal background to make on a regular basis and in a timely manner.

Apple should just drop the defamation clause, which may be difficult for them to do to.

 

[DavePurz]

But seriously, if I were him, I'd just say "Screw off Apple, you didn't care about me until I was famous!"

I could not agree with you more!

My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.

When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.

 

[trrosen]

They need to post EVERY SINGLE REQUIREMENT in plain language and say explicitly which of the published policies the app did not meet and give an explanation as to why.

They do and they did. But the fact is the line between ridicule and a humorous commentary is pretty fuzzy. Expecting a first tier employee to get it right 100% of the time while examining 100 other apps is silly. In fact sometimes the only difference is the reputation of the person making the statement. Fior does push the boundaries in his cartoons.

Also, They should not be able to deny developers access to certain APIs in order to keep their own products more competitive. (pinch to expand for that photo app that got rejected, in-app brightness control, etc.)

If Apple can't compete on their own programming and design merits, then they shouldn't be releasing applications in the store.

Your a moron. (see now thats ridicule) Limiting access to APIs is part of Apple's design merit. If you allow people to implement thing outside of approved APIs theres no point in having them. APIs are not created as shortcuts for developers they exist to insure compatibility, reliability and consistency. Without then it would all be DOS. If you don't like the rules just write for a platform that doesn't have any...opps sorry there aren't any. The whole point of a platform and a SDK is to give a consistent set of features and limitations thats why every environment limits some API and the usage of others. Even Android has rules, although few outside Google know them as Google has far less transparency then Apple.

PS you do realize that Apple's photo app is free and comes with the iPad right. That sort of makes they theory of them doing it to prevent competition silly doesn't it.

 

[trrosen]

I could not agree with you more!

My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.

When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.

Well good luck with that and remember MS has complete control over your WinMo phone, Google has complete control over your Android phone and Palm er... whoever buys palm has complete control over your Web OS phone.

 

[MacMyDay]

What people don't appreciate with Apple's terms is that they are there as a legal document to protect Apple. It is absolutely impossible for them to define every single situation where they would or would not approve an app, and the fact that they've admitted they made a mistake and are willing to accept this application again is only a good thing. Why people are turning around and complaining about this is quite surreal, as if you truly wanted Apple to make it crystal clear and avoid any issues, they'd be no point them having any department at all to reassess any apps and this wouldn't even be a topic.

In my companies own terms, we have to rules are unlikely to ever occur or just protecting us - but as with most companies, we're flexible enough to change them if a situation comes up. Is that now suddenly a sign of weakness? It's like in politics: if you refuse to change your mind, you're stubborn and difficult, and if you're willing to budge you're weak. You just can't win, but you'll never win when these discussions are read by people who see the first 10 replies all think the said company (regardless of who it is, cos I see it all the time with Microsoft who get painted a horribly bad picture, which I too disagree with) and are saying how awful they are.

 

[uaecasher]

Haha, and then they reject it again. Double-rejected, to the face!

Lol that would be a nice April fool joke

 

[ChazUK]

Your a moron. (see now thats ridicule)

PLEASE tell me that was intentional.

 

[Winni]

Is it me or is Apple becoming a silly caricature of its own 1984 ad?

No. They are worse than the IBM caricature that they painted back in 1984.

The good news is that Apple's iPhone OS won't be the dominating mobile platform for much longer. The sales numbers show that Android is quickly gaining momentum, and Google's marketplace is not censored at all and developers can choose whatever development tool they want to produce software for Android.

Apple will soon fall back into that little niche where they came from. And they deserve it because of their megalomaniac behavior and arrogant attitude.

History is going to repeat itself because Apple hasn't learned from their mistakes in the past. They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties. Now they will lose the mobile market to Google.

The WePad is going to ship in July. Even if it might not be as sexy as the over-hyped iPad, it is an OPEN device. And in the end, the open platform will win.

On a more personal note: I do not need and I do not want Apple to tell me what I can read or see on my device. If I want to see naked flesh, then it's none of Apple's business and they have ZERO rights to deny me that. (I'm European - we're not prude here and we prefer sex over violence.) If I want to use software that directly competes with Apple's own offers, then obviously their competition is giving me something that I like better than Apple's software products.

As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.

 

[kylos]

Interesting thought though. His rejection said it was for ridiculing public figures, but their policy rejects defamatory material. There is certainly a fine line, but the line most certainly exists. You can ridicule someone till the cows come home without engaging in defamation. The distinction is probably too difficult for anyone without extensive legal background to make on a regular basis and in a timely manner.

Apple should just drop the defamation clause, which may be difficult for them to do to.

I'd say Fiore flirts with that line often enough, Pulitzer winner or no. I don't know the legal technicalities, but I would think Apple would do themselves a favor by letting the lawyers figure out what's defamation and what isn't. I can't see how they could be held responsible for someone else's words, but I'm not a lawyer.

 

[kiljoy616]

Time for steve to get those regulation ironed out, what is objectable to some is just plain funny to others.

 

[kiljoy616]

I can't say I am a fan of Adobe Flash as I am a big supporter of an open web, but I must say that if cross-compiled apps are inferior then the customers in the app store will certainly vote with their dollars to favor the natively written apps.

You really don't know much about consumers do you. You have a lot of psychology to learn, the customer is for the most part dumb and does not vote with their dollars, if they do then you have a really bad marketing department, what a utopian believe haha.

You must remember a product of say 100 dollars is not about selling to the whole world but just a percentage of it, a good product or a bad product its all the same for marketing its about the perception. Just look around your world its full of bad and really bad products and there are still people buying them. Palm sold for years good products and then started selling crap and yet people bought, even today Palm still sells and its their Marketing that really has gone down.

Apple not only makes good things but they have a top notch marketing department.

 

[feszty]

Sad

So he won the price and apple re-invited him. But what about the other hundreds of developers who are banned from the App store with no clear explanation why they were rejected? I like this 1984 reference in the previous comments, I couldn't agree more. Looks like it is time for change.
As for the artist, he is not showing too much artistic integrity. He has been rejected on BS reasons, calling his art ridiculous, then he resubmits immediately. He should have stood up agains the AppNazi and tell them to shove their censorship up their butts.

 

[macUser2007]

Well good luck with that and remember MS has complete control over your WinMo phone, Google has complete control over your Android phone and Palm er... whoever buys palm has complete control over your Web OS phone.

Speaking of morons, you definitely appear to be one.

I used to have a couple of WinMo phones before my iPhones, and WinMo is fully customizable. MS is not trying to lock it with every minor upgrade, and there are whole open communities cooking customized ROMs.

Same for Android - OEMs can customize it, users can customize it, and Google doesn't actively try to break these customizations with every minor update.

And yes, my current 3G Ss are my last iProducts. I will continue to buy Apple monitors, iMacs and Mac Book Pros, because of their design, but I've had it with the iPhone. And I am staying away from the iPad, waiting for the Android slates,

As to the magnanimous invitation to "resubmit," Fiore should have told Jobs to go f**k himself. At the very least, the honors should be on Apple to re-review the application, not on Fiore to resubmit, hat in hand.

 

[sjo]

Speaking of morons, you definitely appear to be one.

I used to have a couple of WinMo phones before my iPhones, and WinMo is fully customizable. MS is not trying to lock it with every minor upgrade, and there are whole open communities cooking customized ROMs.

They are moving quickly into that direction with windows phone 7 and kin.

 

[str1f3]

The good news is that Apple's iPhone OS won't be the dominating mobile platform for much longer. The sales numbers show that Android is quickly gaining momentum, and Google's marketplace is not censored at all and developers can choose whatever development tool they want to produce software for Android.

Just because they went from 2.5% to 5.2% in the US means nothing. Apple is at 25%. It is a lot harder to get into the higher market. All that they've been showing is that they can take some of Palm and WM6 marketshare.

http://www.tipb.com/images/stories/2010/02/marketshare-comscore-400x282.png

Apple will soon fall back into that little niche where they came from. And they deserve it because of their megalomaniac behavior and arrogant attitude.

History is going to repeat itself because Apple hasn't learned from their mistakes in the past. They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties. Now they will lose the mobile market to Google.

Do you mean history will repeat itself like the Mac/PC wars or like the iPod? Maybe I'm missing something when you say "They lost the desktop to Microsoft because Apple refused to open their platform to third parties" because what comes to my mind is ActiveX and DirectX.

The WePad is going to ship in July. Even if it might not be as sexy as the over-hyped iPad, it is an OPEN device. And in the end, the open platform will win.

You do realize that no one is really mentioning the WePad (lol) except pretty much Germany. Go look at the current success of the iPad. If you think you can just blow up Android apps and it will be just like the iPad you're fooling yourself.

As for your Android is "OPEN" comment, I don't think you know what "open" actually means.

Is Android Evil?

1. Private branches. There are multiple, private codelines available to selected partners (typically the OEM working on an Android project) on a need-to-know basis only.

2. Closed review process. All code reviewers work for Google, meaning that Google is the only authority that can accept or reject a code submission from the community.

3. Speed of evolution. Google innovates the Android platform at a speed that’s unprecedented for the mobile industry, releasing 4 major updates (1.6 to 2.1) in 18 months. OEMs wanting to build on Android have no choice but to stay close to Google so as not to lose on new features/bug fixes released.

4. Incomplete software. The public SDK is by no means sufficient to build a handset. Key building blocks missing are radio integration, international language packs, operator packs – and of course Google’s closed source apps like Market, Gmail and GTalk.

5. Gated developer community. Android Market is the exclusive distribution and discovery channel for the 40,000+ apps created by developers; and is available to phone manufacturers on separate agreement.

6. Anti-fragmentation agreement. Little is known about the anti-fragmentation agreement signed by OHA members but we understand it’s a commitment to not release handsets which are not CTS compliant.

7. Private roadmap. The visibility offered into Android’s roadmap is pathetic. At the time of writing, the roadmap published publicly is a year out of date (Q1 2009). To get a sneak peak into the private roadmap you need Google’s blessing.

8. Android trademark. Google holds the trademark to the Android name; as a manufacturer you can only leverage on the Android branding with approval from Google.

On a more personal note: I do not need and I do not want Apple to tell me what I can read or see on my device. If I want to see naked flesh, then it's none of Apple's business and they have ZERO rights to deny me that. (I'm European - we're not prude here and we prefer sex over violence.) If I want to use software that directly competes with Apple's own offers, then obviously their competition is giving me something that I like better than Apple's software products.

As much as I like Apple's computers, I hate their entire AppStore and iPhone SDK policies with a passion.

What you want is a bigger walled garden. You are primarily to only use Google services on Android. I don't like the App Store policies but to simply put out that with Android "is all about choice" is naive. To use half the apps in the Android marketplace your phone has to be rooted (jailbroken).

Ultimately I'd like for Apple to allow third party apps to be downloaded outside of the App Store and can understand why Jobs doesn't want to offer questionable apps on iTunes.

 

[akac]

I could not agree with you more!

My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.

When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.

They have become? They have always been control freaks. That's why the platform is so good...

 

[akac]

No. They are worse than the IBM caricature that they painted back in 1984.

The good news is that Apple's iPhone OS won't be the dominating mobile platform for much longer. The sales numbers show that Android is quickly gaining momentum, and Google's marketplace is not censored at all and developers can choose whatever development tool they want to produce software for Android.

They can also produce malware (as they have) as easily. And Android is much harder to develop for. And the sales are 1/100th of the same app on iPhone.

We develop on nearly every mobile platform and the iPhone is the best for us. Not just because its fun to develop on, the APIs are great, the sales are great, but because frankly the entire thing is just a step above every other app store, platform, and company we've worked with in the last 10 years of the mobile space.

When users try to get in the midst of what developers have to deal with, they only get a very filtered view that does not encapsulate the true view.

Apple will soon fall back into that little niche where they came from. And they deserve it because of their megalomaniac behavior and arrogant attitude.

I strongly doubt it. As a mobile developer for 10 years I've got a pretty good handle of how these markets work and have been right most of the time. Android has way more major issues for devs and users to deal with than Apple. Its just that Apple's gets the press.

We develop for Android. I like Android compared to WinMobile. I like WebOS compared to WinMobile. But none of them compare to how much all of my engineers prefer developing on iPhone. And using the iPhone.

The biggest reason why Android will not overtake the iPhone in app sales is that the iPhone is consistent in its OS revisions. Android's open-ness which is a strength is also its biggest weakness. As a developer its a small nightmare to test and develop for it because of so many unknowns.

One day there may be more Android phones sold than iPhones, but app sales on the iPhone is still going to blow Android out the water.

Look at Symbian and Windows Mobile. For years Windows Mobile's smartphone software outsold their Pocket PC 10-1, yet app sales were reversed with the Pocket PC users buying software 10-1 for smartphone. Symbian app sales are nearly non-existent yet it blows every current Smartphone out of the water for unit sales.

Android's unit sales are 60k a day according to Google, yet software sales relative to iPhone shows that Android users simply don't buy apps at the same rate the iPhone users do.

 

[ChazUK]

The biggest reason why Android will not overtake the iPhone in app sales is that the iPhone is consistent in its OS revisions.

Are we not forgetting that the market for apps is going to start to fragment come OS4? With 1st gen iPhone and iPod touch owners stuck without an update and iPad owners stuck on 3.2 until "Fall", development for iPhone may start to become a pain soon if you want to maximise customer base. I'm not sure how backwards compatible an app developed for the iPhone and OS4 would be when running on the iPad if it uses API's not available on 3.2.

Then we have the potential of 3 different OS4 capable phones which may vary in features come the next gen iPhone. 3G can't multitask and will undoubtedly mis some OS4 features, the 3GS will do everything Apple has shown so far and I expect the next iPhone to have some more features over the last two.

Android's open-ness which is a strength is also its biggest weakness. As a developer its a small nightmare to test and develop for it because of so many unknowns.

Are we talking software or hardware wise here?

It must be a pain in the arse developing for Android and working out things like, does it have a trackball or D-pad, what processor & how much RAM the device has, what size screen does it have, which OS revision is it using....

So far as unified hardware goes, the iPhone has been king so far, I agree.

Have you got any Android projects currently in development?

 

[fairpro]

apple policies

don't like apple? then treat apple like an ex wife or girlfriend.

get a divorce!

then go find somebody else to vent your frustrations on.

 

[sportsfan]

Application Approvers

Are they given a formal training by apple? Even if they are, every approvers view will be slightly different.....perhaps this app was one that should have been approved from the start but was rejected by an approver who likes to abuse power?

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

don't like apple? then treat apple like an ex wife or girlfriend.

get a divorce!

then go find somebody else to vent your frustrations on.

To like Apple, you don't have to 100% agree with everything they do.