It's no secret that I'm not a fan of Apple's App Store being the sole provider of software for the iPhone. I discussed this at length in One Little Article, but the complaint boils down to this: I believe Apple having complete and sole control of what software users can install is bad for customers, bad for developers, and likely even bad for Apple itself. For my part, I'm hoping that software installation will open up, thus allowing Apple to be as restrictive as they like with their (no longer exclusive) App Store.
After a month with the App Store, others are beginning to raise concerns. Jason Kottke makes the point that Apple shouldn't be the arbiter of taste in the App Store, even for an application as dumb as I Am Rich. Bloggers around the web are rightfully up in arms about the unclear state of NetShare, which has disappeared, reappeared, and disappeared seemingly for good from the App Store. And Inside iPhone's own Erica Sadun discusses the often-arbitrary App Store review process, over at TUAW.
By making the App Store the only way to get software on the iPhone, Apple has created a very sticky situation for themselves. If they're overly restrictive in what they allow, jailbreaking will grow more attractive, to allow users to get software that they otherwise couldn't. Monopoly concerns could also arise eventually as well. But being too lax allows in all manners of stupid software, such as I Am Rich, presenting a poor face to the public.
Either way, Apple doesn't seem to be able to handle the number of submissions they're receiving currently. This is resulting in both long periods before developers can get new and updated applications into the store, as well as applications being approved and then later pulled.
We don't know exactly why NetShare has been pulled, nor BoxOffice, nor even I Am Rich. We also don't know what applications have failed to ever make it into the App Store - these will obviously get far less publicity, if any. Unfortunately, the lack of transparency in this whole process is just one more problem for developers, users, and Apple alike.
Will this backlash change things? I certainly hope so. We'll see if Apple is forced, by public outcry, to provide more information on why applications are being removed. For that matter, we'll see if Apple continues to remove applications, gets smarter about never allowing them into the store at all, or opens up and stops restricting anything. The current state of affairs is less than ideal for all parties involved.
©2009, O'Reilly Media, Inc. (707) 827-7000 / (800) 998-9938 All trademarks and registered trademarks appearing on oreilly.com are the property of their respective owners. |
About O'Reilly
Academic Solutions Authors Contacts Customer Service Jobs Newsletters O'Reilly Labs Press Room Privacy Policy RSS Feeds Terms of Service User Groups Writing for O'Reilly |
Content Archive Business Technology Computer Technology Microsoft Mobile Network Operating System Digital Photography Programming Software Web Web Design |
More O'Reilly Sites
O'Reilly Radar Ignite Tools of Change for Publishing Digital Media Inside iPhone O'Reilly FYI makezine.com craftzine.com hackszine.com perl.com xml.com Partner Sites InsideRIA java.net O'Reilly Insights on Forbes.com |
Let see when Steve Jobs told you to learn Javascript and write that next great web app for iphone. What did you say then?
You got your panties in a bunch crying for something that you knew you were not about to get. bitch bitch bitch.
When AT&T does not allow tethering according to the agreement then why the hell do you need to know. BoxOffice developer has already changed the name of the app so you can guess what the problem was. You missed the PhoneSabber being pull out. May be you are going to complain to George Lucas for fair use.
When has Apple been transparent? What a laugh.
Oreilly just needs to close this blog for wasting everyones time.
NDA is not going to end.
> When AT&T does not allow tethering according to the
> agreement then why the hell do you need to know.
Perhaps because not everyone who owns an iPhone uses AT&T (there are whole different countries outside of the United States, did you know?). And even if you do use AT&T, it's questionable whether Apple should enforce the contract for AT&T.
I have to agree to LKM. I am very new to the Apple world (less than a year) and having walked a long way from Windows via several Linux distributions I was really shocked to see how ignorant Apple can be when it comes to driving innovation by sharing knowledge.
I am one of those new devs, who are completely new to iPhone and Apple. Technologically speaking they have a quite interesting system with a lot of capabilities, but they really suck when it comes to politics.
Their NDA is not good for anybody. Neither for developers, who are prevented from sharing knowledge and thereby avoiding mistakes, nor for customers, who keep seeing rather premature software in App Store, nor for Apple, whose QA have to deal with a crowd of newbie devs make all the same mistakes just because the couldn't communicate.
Dude, do you have the same complaints about Verizon, ATT, and others who force you to use their garbage? The entire cell industry is anything but open. Slag it onto Apple if you want, but the problem is the mobile industry and open systems have long been mutually exclusive.
App Store backlash? Ha maybe in the echo chamber.. but much like open source software itself, for most people.. it's completely meaningless.
I have several friends and family members who own iphones. They are more "typical" users. They love the maps, the ipod and the phone functions. Its already more than any phone they have ever owned does. They never update their phone software.. and after a week of bugging them to update their phone to the 2.0 software they finally did.... and have yet to download any apps. They really can't see why they would need to. The phone already does everything they want.
backlash? yeah - maybe in the geek blogosphere ...
the average iphone user isn't interested in that nda-apples-so-evil-thingy. they just want apps ...
so please stop writing blogposts that let look you like a pathetic fool.
bloody hell: I certainly don't follow your point here - when we were told that web apps were the way to go, we expressed our displeasure. Nine months later, we have a true SDK, with real application development. I won't say that this was directly related to developer outcry, but it certainly helped.
AT&T may not allow tethering, but other carriers do. For that matter, is it Apple's job to prevent customers from doing this, or is it on AT&T?
Apple may rarely be open and transparent, but we can still desire it.
LKM: Just so.
er4z0r: That's an interesting point - for developers coming from other platforms, this is likely not the best first impression.
Jeeve Stobs: Indeed - the iPhone is a better device in terms of development than many other phones. But when compared to smartphones? Blackberry, Palm, and Windows Mobile are all far more open than the iPhone.
jbella: Indeed - the default iPhone is a great phone. But I think the numbers show that downloading software is a very common activity. See this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121842341491928977.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
60 million downloads in a month, with somewhere between 7-10 million iPhones out there.
tommekk: Thanks for your constructive criticism. It's very helpful.
I have to agree with Mr. Kottke, I don't need Apple to be my tastemaster. I agree with the article and hope the store opens up. And I'm just a "normal" iPhone user who wants to be sure I can get any apps that might be out there, not subject to Apple's whims.
If you don't like the blog, why read it? This article sure seems on topic to me so what's with the bitching?
1984... the sledgehammer... big brother's screen breaking...
Apple Computers...
Apple Inc. has forgotten the legacy. It is all about control now. We are all listening and on that great big screen now we see the face of Steven Paul Jobs...
1984 will never come back again and we may want to remember that 2010 will be when Apple is free of the contract with ATT.
I am surprised that my iPhone is limited to the applications that some dude approves of whether I should own and use. Heck no. I want to install and use what I want not what Mr. S. J wants. Developers are no fools to create apps that will kill the iPhone. As a developer I love my Mac to ever create an app that would put a death knell on my preferred platform. The independent developers have much better apps which do more and are free than other being sold for a price at the App store. Just because I am obliged by a contract (other than Apple and ATT - corporate user), I am not able to jailbreak my phone.
Have you all ever tried to optimally use your iPhone battery based on Apple's recommendation? You should switch off 3G / WiFi / push etc when not needed. Funny that all these are available in Settings "but" at different levels within Settings. Compare that with BossPrefs.
Have you tried to execute vi with TouchTerm? It is more than pathetic and I am stupid to have paid for the app. MobilTerminal (again a great free app (opensource)) does more than all ssh apps put together.
I could go on but I am sure that people do not realize that the iPhone is not just a phone. My motorola rizr was nothing but a phone. iPhone is a child of Apple and Apple is killing it by being over protective. I understand that Apple is obelized to the tele operators like ATT, VodaPhone, T-mobile, Bharati, Rogers etc. but Apple has the choice to launch the iPhone at a much higher price without a tie up. I will pay to the excess of $700 without a contract today so that I do not have to live with the limitations that Apple has implied on my choices due to the enemy it sleeps with.