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.
Phil Schiller Addresses More App Store Concerns
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why is it that anyone is even listening to this guy whining when he doesn't even make apps for the iPhone????
There are hundreds of developers who have made thousands of apps who don't seem to have a problem. Yet its the handful of busybodies and non iPhone developers who we hear bitching and moaning.
There are hundreds of developers who have made thousands of apps who don't seem to have a problem. Yet its the handful of busybodies and non iPhone developers who we hear bitching and moaning.
Well...
Well both sides of this little dispute makes valid points. I can see how it can make no sense that Apple incorperated parental controls on the iPhone OS and is not fully enforcing the purpose behind it. This developer is also over-reacting. Yes, you want to get your material out there to the world for all of us to enjoy and use, but the meltdown was not necessary. A lot of developers want to post some material that is borderline to what Apple said from the introduction of the App Store. Apple is probably working on a way to make everyone happy and maybe even seeing if they can lift some of the restrictions off the iPhone by inventing a way that younger users of the iPhone aren't exposed to the material that older users can observe, such as implementing age verification from the initial setup of the iPhone and the software determining what is the proper parental control settings. The iPhone is definetly the platform to develop for being that it is highly versatile. So Apple, love ya but do something to make these people stop complaining and to the developer, I hear you but tone it down man. Take a chill pill.
Well both sides of this little dispute makes valid points. I can see how it can make no sense that Apple incorperated parental controls on the iPhone OS and is not fully enforcing the purpose behind it. This developer is also over-reacting. Yes, you want to get your material out there to the world for all of us to enjoy and use, but the meltdown was not necessary. A lot of developers want to post some material that is borderline to what Apple said from the introduction of the App Store. Apple is probably working on a way to make everyone happy and maybe even seeing if they can lift some of the restrictions off the iPhone by inventing a way that younger users of the iPhone aren't exposed to the material that older users can observe, such as implementing age verification from the initial setup of the iPhone and the software determining what is the proper parental control settings. The iPhone is definetly the platform to develop for being that it is highly versatile. So Apple, love ya but do something to make these people stop complaining and to the developer, I hear you but tone it down man. Take a chill pill.
I am neither a busybody nor a non-iPhone developer (i.e. I am an iPhone developer), and I can tell you that this paragraph from his letter:
perfectly spells out what is without a doubt the most excruciatingly frustrating thing about being an iPhone developer.
Everything I write I release as Open Source. Try it. I have a day job where I write software for other people. It I'm working on my own time I want to work on something I want to work on.
Almost no one will ever make money on iPhone Apps. OK a few will but it is like paying the lottery. You have a very low chance of making a lot of money but most people who play will loose. The App store is set up that way the prices are push to the minimum and if youdo write soething good, some one else will copy it and sell it for less. It is best to just treat it as a hobby and use either the GNU or BSD licenses for your work
Frank isn't a developer either and yet speaks with the outrage of someone who was.
as for the transparency issue, I highly doubt that the terms and conditions to enroll in the developers program don't include some of the details about what you can and can't do.
tell that to the parents that want to use control features.
in the end that's the only folks affected by the ratings -- the kids with those parents. if you don't have PC on, you won't notice
Because the creator of the email retains the copyright and has to give permission before it can be published in full. If you have not signed any paperwork about privacy (NDA etc) you can talk about the overall content and excerpt small amounts for publication under fair use clause. It's doubtful Apple could recover any money if they sued since the letter was of no commercial value but it's still good practice to get permission first especially if you want an to continue with a good relationship.
All very true.
But, the App Store is now very, very crowded, so there's no guarantee that the "price it cheap and sell a hatload" model will work, even with a good game. There are a lot of good, cheap games out there that few people are buying.
The result in unrealistic expectation from iPhone gamers. They want a great game for 99c, with tech support, and regular updates. And they're being "ripped off" if they don't get it. I don't understand people who'll pay 3 euros for a Latte which is gone in 10 minutes, but are hesitant to pay 79 (euro) cents for a game they might get dozens of hours of use from.
I think what will ultimately happen is there will be a 'correction' in the App Store market, large gaming studios will start to dominate with AAA games at premium prices. A few smaller developers will thrive by being innovative and cheap, the rest will either fall away or continue to make simpler, free games.
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A400 Safari/528.16)
At least it seems like Apple us listening. They may not be acting quickly but they are listening.
At least it seems like Apple us listening. They may not be acting quickly but they are listening.
goes both ways, there are some folks that are bashing Apple with no clue what is in the agreement. Steven Frank, aka "I'm not an iphone developer" could be one of them.
well there has been more than one. but this one is getting huge press. and possibly because Google had the cajones to make sure folks like the FTC and FCC heard about it and the implications
do you understand that they get 1000s of apps a week to approve and probably are not a team of hundreds doing it. it is going to take time. get over it
every other company out there does or at some time has had an exclusive product/carrier contract (including several existing right now like the Pre, the Instinct etc) and folks are only pissed that Apple did this.
because he's a VP for Marketing and not the COO who has knowledge of all facets of the company
1. there is no rule against it
2. one source, aka their approval, means they can test the software, they control the installer etc and thus be able to hopefully prevent issues that would damage your phone.
The issue is less with the amount of time it can take than it is with the lack of order and consistency. For example, suppose you have app A and app B that are basically identical in complexity and/or functionality. App A is submitted on June 1st and B is submitted on June 15th. App B might be approved in a week on June 22nd while App A doesn't get approved until August 1...or October 1st...or not at all.
Well I still think people like you are foolish. Oh, and I am a developer, I have paid my dues (want to see my bank statement?), and I guess I understand the development terms enough to not get rejected. So do yourself a favor and get off your "I'm a developer, I paid $100, hear me roar" soapbox please.
I'm also a successful iPhone developer, and I thought I had the development terms figured out too.
However, the latest update to my app was rejected because the reviewer claimed that I used an Apple-trademarked image. Of course I'm not stupid enough to actually do that, and all of my icons were purchased from a reputable stock icon house. The reviewer sent a screen shot of the app where the offending icon supposedly is. The problem is that there are 7 icons on that screen, and the reviewer never said which one he thought the problem is. Two emails requesting clarification came back with a one-line response of please resubmit the app and we'll contact you if there is a problem. So I had to guess which image it was and change that one...that was over a week ago already so I probably guessed wrong and will have to wait yet another week to potentially get this update approved. Did I also mention that all of these icons have been in the app for over 4 months now without any complaints from Apple?
The moral of the story is just because you think you have the reviewing system figured out doesn't mean you can't get temporarily screwed by it.
This is true. Sadly, the potential for human error is introduced into the equation every time. Can't really avoid that. When you have the sheer volume of apps to look at like Apple does, every now and then someone (like you) will run into a roadblock. And for an operation that size, it can sometimes be hard to get an absolute detailed response back because of the volume of work to be reviewed. The nature of the beast I guess.
Actually the main difference between Apple and all these companies is that they have APP stores that you can download from, BUT they also allow you to install OTA from any company you see fit. That freedom of choice is key.
This is true, and to be honest the two emails I sent were less intended to get an actual response as they were to hopefully nudge my update through a little faster (and were successful at neither). It seems like the few times I have had updates rejected, they are always for things that have existed in the app for months rather than whatever it was I just added. This is also super annoying.
My opinion is that Apple should charge more for the developer program with the goal of being able to provide better service. I'd pay an extra $100/year if it meant my reviewers could type one extra sentence in their rejections so I actually know what the problem was.
BBC Nervous About iPhone Development
"With recent App Store rejections brewing up more controversy behind Apple's crazy policies with the App Store, it's causing even more damage by making potential developers reluctant to develop for the iPhone OS platform.
Despite having a few iPhone apps already in the App Store, including Radio Times and Lonely Planet, it seems that BBC is now reluctant to continue to commit to iPhone app development. According to a new report, it seems that due to the terms and conditions set forth for developers of the App Store, the BBC to be hesitant about going any further. It seems that Apple's wording would expose the BBC to 'unlimited liability,' according to iPodNN.
Specifically, it seems that developers have to take responsibility for "any and all claims, suits, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses arising from or attributable to the licensed applications." According to iPodNN, it seems that the BBC is still going to negotiate with Apple about the terms. "
http://www.maclife.com/article/news/apple_keeping_potential_developers_and_their_apps_bay
"With recent App Store rejections brewing up more controversy behind Apple's crazy policies with the App Store, it's causing even more damage by making potential developers reluctant to develop for the iPhone OS platform.
Despite having a few iPhone apps already in the App Store, including Radio Times and Lonely Planet, it seems that BBC is now reluctant to continue to commit to iPhone app development. According to a new report, it seems that due to the terms and conditions set forth for developers of the App Store, the BBC to be hesitant about going any further. It seems that Apple's wording would expose the BBC to 'unlimited liability,' according to iPodNN.
Specifically, it seems that developers have to take responsibility for "any and all claims, suits, liabilities, losses, damages, costs and expenses arising from or attributable to the licensed applications." According to iPodNN, it seems that the BBC is still going to negotiate with Apple about the terms. "
http://www.maclife.com/article/news/apple_keeping_potential_developers_and_their_apps_bay
If you made it, you are responsible for it. I don't really see this as a problem. If you sell a baby product in a toy store that has safety issues, or injures the child due to your manufacturing, it's your responsibility, not the toy store. If you make an app and have illegally used copyright material, you should be responsible.
Let's be reasonable people.
Ahh, the part everybody seems to ignore.
Basically, they need to make a few tweaks to deal with the fringe cases. But they do need to make the tweaks.
No, I agree with him. It does need to be reshaped, to an isosceles triangle.
And yellow. It desperately needs to be yellow.
If Apple did that, they definitely would have the biggest mobile app store on the internet... Oh. Wait..
re: iPhone concerns
The app store may be toxic as the author writes...the iPhone itself is toxic, containing numerous highly poisonous chemicals. Just another good reason to boycott the iPhone.
And Apple continues to sponsor Fox News which has proven to be a highly dishonest destructive force in the US and the world. Apple, while making very cool products, has lost it's moral compass.
The app store may be toxic as the author writes...the iPhone itself is toxic, containing numerous highly poisonous chemicals. Just another good reason to boycott the iPhone.
And Apple continues to sponsor Fox News which has proven to be a highly dishonest destructive force in the US and the world. Apple, while making very cool products, has lost it's moral compass.
