Well a lot of us do not have a problem with what Apple is doing and believe it is an issue between the developers and apple and nobody else. Not me, not you, and certainly not the EFF.
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.
iPhone Developer Agreement Revealed by Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well a lot of us do not have a problem with what Apple is doing and believe it is an issue between the developers and apple and nobody else. Not me, not you, and certainly not the EFF.
Indeed
She was the Dutch version of Margaret Thatcher The succeeding commissioner is a Spanish one, Joaquín Almunia. As far as I know, he's been doing a good job, and he has even criticized a lot the economic policies taken in Spain by his own party, in power since 2004... so I think he will do a good job... but just in case... I'll send him an e-mail regarding this Apple's matter
Once again, the puritanical people-hater lurking behind every "morally upstanding" reformer. Take your "moral principles" and stick 'em where the sun don't shine.
As far as I can tell, the gigantic corporation called Google is engaging in a practice called "dumping" to lure more customers to its platform. Do you think they're doing it for charity? Why, no. But they have to pay Apple and other manufacturers for the search results they get from iPhones and Nokias and the rest that use Google for search. Any bets, will they pay the same amount to HTC? After all, they gave their OS away.
You apparently like the Google phone model. Fine. Let's have it out in competition. All the rest is a bunch of crap.
NASA's App
As a side note,
Frassanito and Associates did a lot of the graphics used in that NASA app, and their iRover Game is much better than the NASA offerings...
http://www.frassanito.com/iRover/
As a side note,
Frassanito and Associates did a lot of the graphics used in that NASA app, and their iRover Game is much better than the NASA offerings...
http://www.frassanito.com/iRover/
Apple having policies for it's app store, that develops may sign up for IF they wish to, is illegal now?
If it isn't, then what are you referring to?
Like I said, developers are making cash hand over fist. There isn't anything out of the ordinary in that agreement, anymore than there is in a car lease, a home mortgage, or even the limited warranty paperwork that comes with a computer you purchase.
They've taken their cue from the Tea Parties, it seems. Don't bother working on, say, the lack of freedom in China, or the growing danger from Russian cybergangs, etc. No, pick on Apple, because it offends the hippies at the EFF.
I'm a fan of the EFF. My comment was made in regards to this specific instance. I stand by it. The EFF should worry about saving us from things we have no control over, not agreements that are willingly entered into by developers. If you don't like it, don't sign it (and don't get a piece of the app store pie!). Welcome to life, where it isn't fair!
How would you know? They're not allowed to say otherwise.
A good test for anyone who actually defends Apple's policies on this matter. Take this article and replace "Apple" with "Microsoft". Would you still find the policies so defensible?
Not true at all. The app store approval process is famously subject to the whims of Jobs, AT&T, and individual approvers.
I am glad that is comforting to you. But you may want to rethink this:
(1) The Apple approval process *does not* prevent trojan applications from being written that may steal information from you
(2) The Apple approval process provides an *arbitrary* limit on app quality, and functionality. Meanwhile it explicitly prohibits you from buying high quality apps that Apple has decided not to allow.
(3) The Apple approval process *does not* prevent spying applications from being placed on your phone
(4) There is no reason that you could not have a one-stop shopping experience on the iPhone if Apple allowed competing app stores. Would you argue in support of a single app store for the Macintosh? If not, why is the argument for the iPhone any different?
IMO the iPhone was an improvement over every other smartphone platform out there. But it *is not* the best it can be. Do you honestly think that nobody can write a better email client than the crappy version that's on the iPhone? We won't know, because Apple won't approve competing products. Do you believe that nobody can write a better browser than Safari? We won't know, because so far Apple hasn't allowed it. It's not far-fetched to see Apple offering well-heeled developers exclusive access to certain categories of iPhone applications for the right price. And of course if it happened, we wouldn't know about it. Because the developers locked out of those categories wouldn't be allowed to talk about it.
The iPhone is a neat idea, but there is certainly room or improvement. That we won't see. Because Apple won't allow it.
I suspect that the EFF is aware of the general issue, and picks examples that will highlight the problem.
Lemme run through that with you one more time. The "globally operating corportations" have "all the power," and yet we, the trodden-upon peons have the absolute ability to determine their continued existence by choosing not to buy their products?
Yeah. Real power imbalance there, Sparky.
Oh, I'm sorry. I mistook you for a thoughtful and intelligent person. My bad.
Indeed. I sold my 3GS and my wife's 2G on eBay last month. I followed that up with an e-mail to Schiller and Jobs explaining exactly why.
And it's as simple as this - I won't support an ecosystem where a single company can dictate what applications I can or cannot run on computers that I own (mobile phones or otherwise).
So we are in the process of switching to Android phones. I will also encourage all my friends and people we know to dump iPhones and switch to Android or other open mobile platforms. My family alone spends about $3000/year on mobile electronics, so that's the money Apple will never see from me for as long as they continue with their rotten dictatorial policies.
The moment Apple attempts to exert the same level of control over their MacOS based products - I will be done with Apple for good.
If you also change "iPhone" to "XBox" you will find a very similar license. There is nothing outrageous about this license agreement. As with other agreements, if you don't like it then don't sign it.
If they didn't have anything to hide...
...then why the gag clause forbidding people to talk about it?!?!?
They want to be seen as the good guy, but they have to force people not to talk about the terms of their agreements with them? Why Apple? Why are you so concerned/afraid of people knowing the truth of how you do business with them?
It stinks to me, and is not the world I want to live in or support... I see very little in the trend of apple's actions that is ultimately good for consumers in the long run. Monopolies and monopolistic tactics aren't in consumer's best interests.
...then why the gag clause forbidding people to talk about it?!?!?
They want to be seen as the good guy, but they have to force people not to talk about the terms of their agreements with them? Why Apple? Why are you so concerned/afraid of people knowing the truth of how you do business with them?
It stinks to me, and is not the world I want to live in or support... I see very little in the trend of apple's actions that is ultimately good for consumers in the long run. Monopolies and monopolistic tactics aren't in consumer's best interests.
Thank you - you have articulated the issue at hand quite beatifully.
The computing world that Apple envisions us living in is quite chilling actually.. and it's the world where a handful of Apple execs exercise complete control over what we do with our computers (just mobile computers so far), how we use them, what applications we run on them, where we purchase our content from.. what content we are able to purchase. And what stops them from eventually extending this control to desktop products?
I am just stunned that more people don't seem to have a problem with this Stalinist world of computing that Apple envisions for them.. and they are willing to trade their freedoms for "safety from viruses", "better computing experience" or whatever other hogwash mantra Steve Jobs feeds them. Unbelievable.
Treating different companies different is the rule not the exception. It's how business works.
How would that work exactly? Isn't suing the WAY to prove that patents should not have been granted in the first place?
I know asking for proof for this statement is too much, so I'll settle for your rationale. How exactly do they stifle innovation? How exactly could you stifle innovation if you wanted to, and how does Apple do these things?
Being very good and hence competitive forces other companies to innovate to compete. Protecting their intellectual property forces out infringing copy-cat only companies and forces other companies to innovate to compete. Raising expectiations for how things are supposed to "just work" forces other companies to innovate to compete.
I think you're really complaining that Apple makes the game too hard for just anybody to participate. This means that tech isn't commoditized, there is no race to the bottom for price, and we can't buy laptops for $300 like what is happening with Windows computers.
Because it is an agreement between two parties and does not involve anyone else. There is no benefit to Apple to have to explain or rebut ignorant comments on something nobody else has any vested interest in. That is the point.
These kind of agreements are regularly kept quiet. It is in the best interest of everyone involved.
Why do you not demand that Wal-Mart release its contract details with Pepsi Cola?
Yes. Because Some of us actually have experience negotiating real business contracts between companies.
There is literally no issue here, and thus why it makes EFF look bad. They are wasting resources of their supporters on something that is not an issue and has nothing to do with what they are set up to defend/support.
There are some problems with your analogy. For one, if you lived in Russia, and you disagreed with Stalin, he would have you killed or sent to Siberia.
In this case, if you disagree with the Apple overlords' plans, you can simply buy from a competing company.
It's really that simple.
How about this for an analogy: computing with Apple is like going to Disney World. When you are there you are subject to their rules. If a vendor wants to sell you something while you are there, they have to abide by Disney's rules. If you don't like the rules, you don't have to go.
For the millions of people that visit, this seems like a tolerable arrangement. Happiest place on earth and what not. No one accuses Disney of Stalinist tendancies.
As long as Apple doesn't keep you from computing the way you want to, which you can with any Windows/Linux/ alt OS out there, then how can you complain?
I am a grown adult who is not naive to how Apple does things. Guess what: I like it this way and am willing to give them my money. If enough people agree with me, why would YOU or the EFF care so much? Why do you care how I spend my money?
You want Apple to behave a certain way, but don't. Why should they again?
Now I keep envisioning Governor Tarkin from Star Wars. Maybe Steve Jobs is the Emperor.
Aaaand we have a pair of winners! Having signed contracts before and knowing people who have signed more complex and more heavier contracts, its standard procedure to have non disclosure agreements in business transactions. If there is money involved (like a developer distribution agreement) the details of such agreements are almost never disclosed. If you reject the contract, you dont get to take it home with you to publish on the internet. The drawn up contract is the property of the person/company who wrote it initially. As such, they get to control the details of it.
Sure contracts have exceptions, such as blatantly illegal clauses. However contracts that are of limited negotiation value (take it or leave it), heavily biased to one party (like the owner - Apple), and contain privacy clauses (NDAs) are perfectly legal and violate no laws. Of you do not wish to partake in such a contract, you are welcome to move on to someone else.
If you have any respect for contract law, or have any understanding how formal business agreements work, none of the above should come to any surprise to anyone. This to me is non-news. We all knew that the developer contract was going to be restrictive, one sided, and secretive. Looks like we are right.