Another week, another app (email client MailWrangler) is banned from the App Store for the reason that it is too close to something Apple installs on the device by default, its mail client.
This is madness on Apple’s part.
What is Apple trying to achieve? It already has the profit from people buying iPhones. It already rakes in millions from people buying App Store apps. What possible benefit is there for Apple in forcing users to stick with Apple’s own mail client?
Let’s go back in time a bit and look at the glory days of the Palm platform. In the late 90s, Palm was riding high and the web was festooned with Palm applications. Dozens of web sites sprang up to help people distribute their apps. There was a thriving market in both the shareware and freeware markets.
Now imagine that Palm had imposed restrictions on what apps could be sold. Imagine it had never allowed any mail clients, other than its own?
If that had happened, I wouldn’t be using a phrase like “glory days” in this post at all. If Palm had laid down rules like that, it would have been quickly wiped away by competitors that didn’t.
It seems that Apple doesn’t just want to own (and take a 30% cut from) the distribution system for iPhone apps; it also wishes to “own” certain areas of software development. Its actions in recent weeks demonstrate that it wishes to own podcast distribution and now email.
Let’s imagine, for a moment, that the App Store management took the enlightened step and allows these banned apps (Podcaster and MailWrangler) into the store: what would be the consequences? Well, for starters: sales. The developers of those apps would get some reward for the time they have invested in them, and Apple would take its 30%.
Would millions of users suddenly stop using Apple’s own Mail and iPod apps? Would millions more be “confused” about the differences between the supplied software and the third party apps? I don’t think so.
If it is indeed Apple’s policy to “own” email and podcast distribution (and who knows what else?) on the iPhone, then it is a misguided one.
It’s misguided because it deprives users of choice, it deprives developers of motivation to develop, and it leaves the vast majority of iPhone users staring at the “What’s new” page in the App Store, and wondering if there will ever be an end to the tip calculators.
©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 |
I think Apple has a very clear vested interest in maintaining controll of these areas of functionality.
Soon all iPods will have iPhone/Touch capabilities and will therefore be able to run AppStore apps. When that happens, an Apple competitor such as Amazon could come out with a competing product, such as a new generation of Kindle and an iPhone application that duplicates it's features. All of a sudden Applie's controll of the iPod market through iTunes would be broken. If they allow a podcast downloader, or a jukebox, why not a music downloader that buys from Amazon instead of Apple?
This isn't a careless move by Apple, it's vital to maintaining controll of the platform. Of course that's not in the best interests of consumers, but it is clearly in theirs.
It's kind of ironic that you used the phrase glory days. It kind of implies Palms failure in the market in spite of the fact that there was a "thriving market in both the shareware and freeware markets". Where is Palm today? It's a has been. It's glory days are over.
Many people posited the same argument about the restrictive iPod/iTunes environment which so far has been a smashing success.
Mail is free. Itunes and podcasts are free. I think there is more to this than simply competition against apple's own free apps. s
I like the perspective of the previous comments. I think expecting Apple to allow developers to add applications that duplicate core functionality of their iPhone is not a good idea.
While the iPhone has a computer inside it, its a consumer device, not a handheld computing device. Wait one more day, and you can have your open source phone/handheld computer. Then you can develop any type of application you desire.
Mobileme! Apple is afraid that better mail apps that better utilize gmail will cannibalize the mobileme initiative. Apple is building this into many of their software packages and constantly pestering people with it.
I think the biggest issue here is that Apple doesn't make it clear in its agreements with developers what areas it wants them to steer clear of. It's immoral of Apple to allow developers to spend time and money on the assumption that Apple will basically be fair, and then reject apps in what appears to be a capricious way.