Engadget says It's time to change Apple's clearly anti-trust violating behavior

[Evev12]

I've been saying it forever and always get yelled at by a thousand fanboys when I do, but apparently Engadget's even been inspired enough to speek out about it. It's time to start getting meaningful apps approved and put a stop to Apple's crap happy app. rejecting - it's really starting to get ridiculous. At this rate we'll have nothing to look forward to but 1,000 flashlights and 400 moo applications. Read the article, dig it to get it noticed, and let's forward a copy to Steve himself at his "personal e-mail address".


http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/engadget-cares-save-us-from-apples-groundbreaking-developer-s/

 

[Small White Car]

While I agree with the overall sentiment, I find your thread title misleading.

I don't believe the article says anything about "anti-trust violating behavior." Nor should they say anything. Legally, Apple could shut down all apps tomorrow and there's nothing the government could say about it.

Again, I'm agreeing with their points, but you've made a title that puts words in their mouth. They didn't say anything about anti-trust violating or say that Apple is doing something illegal. That would be a much different charge than what it is they've issued here.

 

[bluenoise]

I agree with most of the points in the article but I am mostly troubled by something that I haven't seen mentioned, yet. That is, scaring off potential developers with such an arbitrary and heavy-handed system, more will take their collective brainpower to the other platforms, such as WinMo and Android.* This will leave the iPhone to eventually be like the Mac was in the early days: Too closed to be worth developing for. This, in turn, will lead to decreased market share and less developer support in the future. It will be a self-sustaining spiral which allows competitive platforms to catch up and pass the iPhone in terms of features and capabilities.

Ultimately, I don't really care if my next phone is an iPhone or something with more developer support. But, I really don't want my next phone to be another phone like my previous WinMo phones that lacked an elegant UI and solid features but had lots of developer support. Apple has made this mistake before and I fear they're trying to do it again. While many, including myself, felt the Mac OS was always more elegant and consistent in its user experience, the reality was there was more you could do with a Windows machine, warts and all, because it was more widely-supported by developers. Now, the differences between MacOS and Windows are slim enough that it may not matter which I choose to buy next. I suspect the same will be true in the phone marketplace.


*That point has been discussed.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

Guys, they've rejected like three applications. One was clearly against ATT terms, one was stupid and inane, and the other (podcaster) will probably be made redundant by future apple firmware releases. It's not like they rejected it foe nothing, it's pretty obvious they are going to have similar functionality soon.

 

[Small White Car]

Guys, they've rejected like three applications. One was clearly against ATT terms, one was stupid and inane, and the other (podcaster) will probably be made redundant by future apple firmware releases. It's not like they rejected it foe nothing, it's pretty obvious they are going to have similar functionality soon.

None of that is the point.

The point is that these things were rejected AFTER the developers put time and money into making them.

Now, these are pretty small apps, but let's say you're a developer with an idea that will take $250,000 and 5 months to create. Do you:

A) Write it for the iPhone, only after which you find out if you can get ANY money back whatsoever.

or do you

B) Write it for Android where you know you'll be able to put it in front of customers.

Android looks like a much safer bet! I love my iPhone and wouldn't buy a Google phone, but if I were investing my own money into a project, I'd sure go with the safer bet.

If Apple continues down this path the ONLY programs that will be written for the iPhone are ones that are cheap and quick to write. In other words, more web-styled games, but nothing really great. (If I were Slingbox I'd be putting money into an Android app before an iPhone app...who knows if they'll see any return on the iPhone version? Maybe Apple won't like it. Who know? It's like playing the lottery.)

 

[firewood]

Guys, they've rejected like three applications.

Even if they've rejected 10X more (and I've heard of a few other apps rejected before they started adding the NDA), that's still less than 1% of all apps submitted. That's megatons less than the stuff (picked up a liquidation prices) at your local discount outlet because all the big box stores (Walmart, et.al.) refused shelf space to the manufacturer.

.

 

[bluenoise]

Guys, they've rejected like three applications. One was clearly against ATT terms, one was stupid and inane, and the other (podcaster) will probably be made redundant by future apple firmware releases. It's not like they rejected it foe nothing, it's pretty obvious they are going to have similar functionality soon.

They've rejected more than that. For example, why reject Box Office and then allow it again? What functionality is obviously coming soon?

I agree that developers that develop apps that violate terms stated up-front have no reason to complain, but some of the rejected apps violated no previously-stated specific terms.

 

[milani]

The problem isn't the number of apps they've rejected, but rather the manner in which those rejections were carried out. It only takes one instance of what is perceived as authoritarian, unfair policy making on the part of Apple to dissuade developers.

 

[bluenoise]

Even if they've rejected 10X more (and I've heard of a few other apps rejected before they started adding the NDA), that's still less than 1% of all apps submitted. That's megatons less than the stuff (picked up a liquidation prices) at your local discount outlet because all the big box stores (Walmart, et.al.) refused shelf space to the manufacturer.

.

That's a good point, but I'd like to point out that the shelf space in the big stores is dedicated to products like Microsoft Office and other 'significant' products. The shelves are not filled with countless $5 games and flashlight apps. The point of the article is that there are many trite apps available and that may be because they are rather low-risk to develop, should they get rejected.

 

[Turmoil]

It's up to Apple and only Apple what they sell in thier store and how they notify folks they are not going to sell a product. The app store has a good variety of apps, I'm happy leaving Apple to run the store - I don't have enough info to get involved. I'm glad I got a great phone and a large variety of fun and useful apps to download.

 

[tobefirst ⚽️]

How come there can be so many notepad applications (which also duplicate the functionality of existing Apple applications), but not any more mail or podcasting ones? For me, it isn't just that they rejected those for duplicating functionality, it appears that they aren't consistent in doing so. That's what I don't understand.

 

[bluenoise]

How come there can be so many notepad applications (which also duplicate the functionality of existing Apple applications), but not any more mail or podcasting ones? For me, it isn't just that they rejected those for duplicating functionality, it appears that they aren't consistent in doing so. That's what I don't understand.

That's pretty much the heart of the matter: No consistency.

 

[whooleytoo]

Guys, they've rejected like three applications. One was clearly against ATT terms, one was stupid and inane, and the other (podcaster) will probably be made redundant by future apple firmware releases. It's not like they rejected it foe nothing, it's pretty obvious they are going to have similar functionality soon.

4? 4 that we know of at least, it could be a lot more since the rejections are under NDA. NetShare, I am Rich, Podcaster, MailWrangler.

That's 4 rejections in 2 months, when the iPhone developer community is just starting to ramp up. Even if the community doesn't grow that much, that still means (on average) 24 apps being rejected every year. How many Mac apps have been stopped by Apple on legal grounds in the 24 year history of the Mac?

 

[MJFlash]

EvEv12: I smell not one whiff of anti-trust sentiment in the article which you reference, nor do I sense any such actual behavior on Apple's part. If you don't like the App Store, just say so. However, blatantly claiming that you have Engadget's endorsement for your screwy theories is ludicrous.

 

[firewood]

The shelves are not filled with countless $5 games and flashlight apps.

Have you actually been in the toys and household items section of a Walmart lately?

Last I heard, the iPhone held barely 3% of the smartphone market (almost a rounding error compared to Nokia). Hardly enough for any significant anti-trust-like market distorting behaviors.

 

[bluenoise]

Have you actually been in the toys and household items section of a Walmart lately?

Hehehe...I thought were talking about the software aisles!

Last I heard, the iPhone held barely 3% of the smartphone market (almost a rounding error compared to Nokia). Hardly enough for any significant anti-trust-like market distorting behaviors.

I agree...This is not an anti-trust issue as alleged by the OP.

 

[Trip.Tucker]

None of that is the point.

The point is that these things were rejected AFTER the developers put time and money into making them.

<snip>

So friggin what? You make your product, you present the FINAL design and submit for approval. No one submits a concept alone.

 

[whooleytoo]

So friggin what? You make your product, you present the FINAL design and submit for approval. No one submits a concept alone.

You don't submit the design, final or otherwise. You submit the finished product.

 

[AquaVita]

I suspect, that like most other good and valid criticisms of the iPhone, this will get ignored by most idiot fan boys.

The bottom line is that Apple really ****ed up with the software for this device. So many missed opportunities. Android may not be much to look at right now, but it has new apps being completed nearly every day, and there's no such terrible "approval" process from apple.

Apple lost a customer(several, in taking a brief survey of my techie friends), the android platform gained one.

 

[diesel]

Apple lost a customer(several, in taking a brief survey of my techie friends), the android platform gained one.

and in the time it took you to write your post, apple probaby sold a few hundred new iphones worldwide

 

[PatrickRS]

If I were Steve, I would not want this mess to cloud my legacy.
Make it right, Steve.

 

[mcdj]

First rule of SDK Club...don't talk about SDK club.

 

[milani]

First rule of SDK Club...don't talk about SDK club.

Don't forget the second rule.

 

[Small White Car]

So friggin what? You make your product, you present the FINAL design and submit for approval. No one submits a concept alone.

So what?

I explained that in the rest of my post. Maybe you should back and respond to the argument I made instead of ignoring it and then asking me to repeat myself.

 

[firewood]

None of that is the point.

The point is that these things were rejected AFTER the developers put time and money into making them.

This is nothing new or interesting. There are no guarantees in business, or in life, that anything will sell just because someone put time and money into developing something. Most business start-ups fail. Most new restaurants go out of business. The FDA recalls entire farm crops because some other country maybe shipped something tainted. A very large number of new products never find enough retail shelf space to sell at profitable levels. That's business.

Business has its risks and rewards. As long as, for every developer that gets scr*w*d (so they feel) out of their investment, there are 2X more developers who make far more $$$ than they expected, the App store gain tons of new and innovative software development. Lots of developers like those odds.

.