The Rotten Apple

gosabres1984

macrumors regular
Original poster
May 9, 2010
102
0
Charlotte, NC
Why does Apple restrict certain apps from the app store that Cydia and Rock have? Now, don't get me wrong I can understand apps like MY3G and MYWI, but what about "non-evil" apps like BiteSMS, Quick Reply SMS, SB Settings, Infinifolders, ect.

What in God's name does Apple have against these apps? They don't have any type of copyright infringements or mess with Apple's TOS....so what do you think the real deal is?

In my opinion, having an option to send a text message at a scheduled time and quick reply to a text message without closing any app I'm in, is something that Apple would WANT to extend to their customers.
 

Statusnone88

macrumors 68000
Jun 19, 2010
1,522
752
Why does Apple restrict certain apps from the app store that Cydia and Rock have? Now, don't get me wrong I can understand apps like MY3G and MYWI, but what about "non-evil" apps like BiteSMS, Quick Reply SMS, SB Settings, Infinifolders, ect.

What in God's name does Apple have against these apps? They don't have any type of copyright infringements or mess with Apple's TOS....so what do you think the real deal is?

In my opinion, having an option to send a text message at a scheduled time and quick reply to a text message without closing any app I'm in, is something that Apple would WANT to extend to their customers.

Welcome to Apple? It's been like this since the beginning, friend.
 

IronLogik

macrumors 6502
Jun 15, 2009
377
0
Ok. So let's go out on a limb here and maybe give some details that may be over people's heads but maybe they'll also learn something.

Apple has some rules that need to be followed for apps to be allowed on the app store. One of those rules is to not use private APIs.

What's an API? It stands for Application Programming Interface. It typically refers to a set of functions or classes that programs can call to do something. Such as drawing a button on the screen, or writing data to a file. These are highly reusable codes provided by Apple so that developers can leverage them to create applications faster.

There exist two types of API calls. Public and Private. Public are usable by anyone. Private are those that are only usable by Apple.

Here's the kicker... Why are they only usable by Apple you ask? Because the calls or underlying calls could still be in flux. In other words, it hasn't been finalized. It could change. It could change in the next major version, it could change in a bug fix release, it could never be changed at all.

Why does this matter? They could add functionality to an API call. API calls are strictly typed. Typically meaning that if something changes then other applications calling those APIs could break. This means an App crashes, if they call some of the deeper private APIs this could mean your phone crashes or it kills a particular important service on your phone... such that you never receive phone calls or the internet breaks or something major like that.

How can some of this be corrected? Apple has an amazingly awesome bug website. It's called Radar internally and is where Apple tracks all bugs. But not just "bugs" also Feature Requests. If a developer really really wants access to a particular API and can provide valid reasons for it they can put in a bug stating why. Other developers can jump on board and vote. This adds up. The more people interested the more likely (to some extent) a feature or API might be finalized or created.

I suspect we'll see some of these apps allowed into the App store once the API's that they call are finalized... if ever.

Does this make more sense?

They basically don't want people calling things that they shouldn't be calling because they could crash your phone. To provide users with the best service they can not allowing these apps into the App store means the phone will remain stable, or at least more stable than they would be should they be allowed in.
 

saving107

macrumors 603
Oct 14, 2007
6,376
14
San Jose, Ca
IronLogik, thank you for that perfect explanation. This is also why every time Apple issues an update it breaks the Jailbrake apps.
 

brayhite

macrumors 6502a
Jun 21, 2010
873
0
N. Kentucky
If I'm not mistaken, it's because functions like that allow access to more core processes, allowing apps to have more control over certain aspects of the iOS than Apple would prefer to allow, mostly for every reason that's bad to have the Android OS. That last bit sounds a little fanboy-ish, but that was one of the reasons I chose an iPhone over the latest Android phone, because I prefer to have apps that have been (mostly) thorough reviewed and released and aren't going to potentially harm/brick my phone.
 

benflick

macrumors 68020
Jul 11, 2008
2,148
0
Cincinnati, Ohio
People at MR have been wanting a Quick-reply text option since 2.0. Multitasking isn't the same, like if your playing a game and you get a text, depending on the game, you have to start all over.
Mark my words, one of the great new features on iOS 5 is going to be quick reply.
 

WiiDSmoker

macrumors 65816
Sep 15, 2009
1,294
1,255
Hermitage, TN
People at MR have been wanting a Quick-reply text option since 2.0. Multitasking isn't the same, like if your playing a game and you get a text, depending on the game, you have to start all over.
Mark my words, one of the great new features on iOS 5 is going to be quick reply.
And Apple will say it's not doable on a 3G/3GS
 

Robby C

macrumors regular
Jul 11, 2008
147
0
Atlanta
IronLogik that was one of the best explanations/posts I've ever read on this website. Thank you for that. :)
-Rob
 

maturola

macrumors 68040
Oct 29, 2007
3,863
1
Atlanta, GA
It's all about money and control.

They get revenue sharing from Carriers, their app must be the best and no app that duplicate a build in app will be accepted
 

Knowimagination

macrumors 68020
Apr 6, 2010
2,042
905
I could have sworn that in the iOS 4 preview keynote SJ mentioned API's for in app texting. Too tired to try and find it right now, but I may be crazy.
 

kdarling

macrumors P6
If I'm not mistaken, it's because functions like that allow access to more core processes, allowing apps to have more control over certain aspects of the iOS than Apple would prefer to allow, mostly for every reason that's bad to have the Android OS.
The first part of that can be true, but the Android reference is not.

That last bit sounds a little fanboy-ish, but that was one of the reasons I chose an iPhone over the latest Android phone, because I prefer to have apps that have been (mostly) thorough reviewed and released and aren't going to potentially harm/brick my phone.
Yes it does sound fanboyish, because it repeats their myths.

Code access

If anything, Android apps, being written in interpreted Java, are far, far less likely to be able to harm a phone.

iPhone apps compile instead to native code and are thus able to more easily exploit low level holes. (See almost any month of the iPhone's existence for examples that were used for jailbreaking or were fixed.)

Permissions

Android apps have to declare what info or controls they wish to access, and the user is informed of those during installation. So if you saw a calculator app asking for access to your contacts info, you could decide not to install it.

Interestingly, a security firm found that a greater percentage of iPhone apps than Android apps, access contact info... many with no reason to. They could be selling that info to third parties and we'd never know it.

Shady Apps

Researchers have found that there are apps on both systems that are sending data. An iPhone tip calculator was found to be sending out the owner's Facebook birthday along with other personal info.

I'm not even going to get into the obvious myth of Apple's quickie store censorship process somehow guaranteeing the discovery of malicious apps.

Registration Helps More

In both the iPhone and Android's (and RIM's) case, though, the biggest key to security is that each app is signed by a registered developer. Not foolproof of course, but it keeps the riff-raff out.
 

JediZenMaster

Suspended
Mar 28, 2010
2,180
655
Seattle
And Apple will say it's not doable on a 3G/3GS
Because somethings can't simply be supported on older hardware. For example the wallpapers which on a jailbroken 3G was reported by some people to cause the phone to home screen to stutter when switching home screens.

Sure it could have been supported but it would have been a less than perfect experience and Apple doesn't want to have features on a device that can barely support it. They want to make sure that the user experience isn't compromised Antennagate not withstanding.
 

vizkiz

macrumors 6502a
Jul 22, 2008
875
0
Long Island, NY
I could have sworn that in the iOS 4 preview keynote SJ mentioned API's for in app texting. Too tired to try and find it right now, but I may be crazy.
You're right. I distinctly remember this as well. What happened to it?
It is not for replying to txts. It's like in-app email for quickly sending a recommendation for an app, or a challenge in a game.

Of course, if you want to reply to a txt, you'd be able to use the in-app txting and delete the automatically inserted info and put in whatever you want. Sort of a makeshift quick reply feature (if you have txt preview on so you can read it when received).
 

maturola

macrumors 68040
Oct 29, 2007
3,863
1
Atlanta, GA
Most of the apps that Apple puts out in the AppStore are horrible
I would not say "most" but I agree that there are a lot, however you have to give it to some developers, there are some amazing app on the app store. Some very entertaining and additive games. I was mostly refering to build in apps, I hate that they don't allow Dilers, Google voice, more feature rich SMS apps (BiteSMS), Google Navegation, etc.
 

IronLogik

macrumors 6502
Jun 15, 2009
377
0
I would not say "most" but I agree that there are a lot, however you have to give it to some developers, there are some amazing app on the app store. Some very entertaining and additive games. I was mostly refering to build in apps, I hate that they don't allow Dilers, Google voice, more feature rich SMS apps (BiteSMS), Google Navegation, etc.
To be honest with you. I've found better ways around the Google Voice issue and prefer the way I'm doing it now to an app built specifically for Google Voice. I had a Nexus One and used the GV app... eh... I wasn't impressed. Sold the Nexus One, ordered an iPhone 4.

As far as SMS quick reply goes. I'm sure it's on the list of things to allow for. I can see it being invoked by clicking "View" for some applications when a Push Notification is received. The issue here is finding a way to allow the application that isn't running in the background to run some code. It'll be another step in the multi-tasking area when they figure out a way to do this.

I don't think Apple wants to say no to anything at this point. Their goal since the release of iPhone OS 2.0 was to make the single best mobile programming platform available. They've got it and they continue to improve it with each release. Compared to Android's development environment and Android's API, Apple has them killed.

We'll see a lot more coming I'm sure when iOS 4 is released for the iPad. I suspect it'll be a pretty big leap forward from what we're seeing on the iPhone. It won't just be a parity release, it'll have more. I also think iOS 4.x will be around a tad longer than 3.x was. In other words, we may not see an iOS 5 announcement in March/April next year, it probably won't happen until fall.
 

Jare

macrumors 65816
Jun 17, 2010
1,190
1
Canada
Why does Apple restrict certain apps from the app store that Cydia and Rock have? Now, don't get me wrong I can understand apps like MY3G and MYWI, but what about "non-evil" apps like BiteSMS, Quick Reply SMS, SB Settings, Infinifolders, ect.

What in God's name does Apple have against these apps? They don't have any type of copyright infringements or mess with Apple's TOS....so what do you think the real deal is?

In my opinion, having an option to send a text message at a scheduled time and quick reply to a text message without closing any app I'm in, is something that Apple would WANT to extend to their customers.
Apple doesn't want unauthorized software on the iPhone. Cydia and Rock are nice and I appreciate everything the JB community does but I cannot justify ever jailbreaking. I don't need a single thing from the JB at this time and unless I justify re-buying my iPad 3G then they only thing I'd ever JB for is MyWi, and even then I might still not.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.