DISQUS

Henri Asseily · 4 months ago

I develop apps on the iPhone (all free, all open source). I have 2 apps currently available on the app store. They leverage various APIs (http and dns), using the great iPhone UI to be even better than desktop apps.
That's for the good part. Now the bad part: The 2 apps have no pornography or VoIP in them, but they've been rejected 7 times in total before being approved.
The rejections were 1/4 technical issues on my end, 3/4 reviewer incompetence. Even more frustrating, while one of my apps was being reviewed for the 3rd time, someone compiled the original source code, submitted it and got it approved the first time around.

All this to say that I've got some experience with this. My views are as follows:
+ iPhone UI is brilliant, and the SDK is impressive
+ iPhone changed the rules of the mobile business, and everyone wins. It broke the carrier control over the phone
- As it stands, the app store is going to obliterate innovation. It must be overhauled. Badly.
- Android will ultimately be a powerful contender to iPhone because Android breaks manufacturer control over the phone as well

=> Apple WILL change the way it handles app approvals, etc... just like it got rid of Fairplay after it crushed the market into submission. The biggest thing was breaking the carrier control over the phone. Now that this is done, we'll see significant changes to Apple's policies, or we won't. If we don't, it'll ultimately be the death of the app store.

Etienne Schmidt · 4 months ago

You are mistaking things. The camera is the only thing on the iPhone that really sucks. Yet, you say it is really nice. IM also isn't of much use as long as it has to stay in the foreground. Doesn't make sense on the iPhone yet. You say "the IM is okay". So, I am not sure where you are coming from in the first place. Then, you say, Apple made the App store the way it is now to "control the internet", which is "ugly but uncontrolled". I for one, am really happy that Apple at least has some kind of control over the applications available for the iPhone. I wish it executed it's control even more - as someone who used Symbian-based phones and Blackberries for a long time, the one thing that struck me as the worst about these were the poor quality of 3rd party software available. Most of the stuff, as many people will admit, was unusable crap dreamt up by worldless IT-Nerds in their sticky basements. Even the vendor-supplied applications like mail, calendars, browsers were god-awful. I will make an exception for Blackberry Email, which at least was usable due to push and a good keyboard (which, in turn, is hardware). I never had a pleasurable experience using a Symbian-based phone or a Blackberry.

So, Steve Jobs did the right thing by making the App development for the iPhone a closed shop. It could be even more restrictive and quality-controlled for my taste. But, the way it is now, the iPhone is the first phone I ever had which I enjoy using, and enjoy browsing for 3rd party apps. There is some quality stuff out there, which would never have seen the light of day without the iPhone and the App store.

You are basing your assessment on wrong precognitions anyway: "The iPhone should have run the same software as the Macintosh. When I first heard about it, I misunderstood and thought I'd be able to write Frontier scripts that ran both on my desktop and the phone." You say it yourself - you misunderstood something, but still, you are blaming Apple for not filling your unrealistic expectations, which, quite frankly, makes me wonder how you got to where you are today.

KBCraig · 4 months ago

The App Store is full of approved apps that are "unusable crap dreamt up by worldless IT-Nerds in their sticky basements". Obviously, the approval process has nothing to dow ith whether or not an app is good, or even fully functional.

Joshua Ochs · 4 months ago

Except that Apple isn't basing most rejections on quality control - there are a LOT of crappy iPhone apps. They *are* rejecting numerous apps that they have "subjective" objections to - a book reading app accessing the Kama Sutra. A licensed Commodore 64 emulator. Any app with a standard web view getting a 17+ rating, and then not allowing promo codes for such apps. The silly (although likely AT&T driven) Google Voice debacle.

Some of these have been fixed, but only through lots of needless public screaming and bad press, and that's a horrid way to run a business.

Etienne Schmidt · 4 months ago

Apple has every right to have a subjective opinion about applications. Isn't it great that the iPhone has no pr0n apps? I would hate to see the iPhone become just another porn browser. Right now, when you use an iPhone, girls will not see you as "that creepy computer nerd", which they do once you produce your geeky other-brand Smartphone (like the HTC). That is just one, less important reason though.

If Apple rejected an iPhone book viewer because it had access to the Kamasutra, I guess that is also wrong and will be corrected one day. But one thing still stands - if you don't like Apple's policies, don't get involved with their products, don't develop for their platforms. Go code a Kamasutra-only eBook reader for Symbian or Blackberry, and see if your application can turn the worldwide smartphone-buying tide towards those platforms.

My point is - the iPhone doesn't need an app that accesses the Kamasutra. You can't on the one hand say "there are a LOT of crappy iPhone apps" and then blame Apple to ban the Kamasutra (what a crappy idea anyway).

The iPhone isn't a very good eBook viewer anyway, so I guess Apple is reluctant to have a lot of book Apps in the App Store because those usually don't add any value, with 1-2 exceptions.

I am not an App developer, but if I ever become one, I guess my App would not be rejected for such reasons as I would *first* make up my mind about what App would be a useful addition, and not go ahead and try to force the n-th Kamasutra-viewer into the App store, then log onto forae and whine about the rejection.

You had that coming.

Joe Mac Stevens · 4 months ago

This Apple backlash is getting ridiculos now. I admit that some of these App store rejections have been madening and downright silly, but it is no reason to suggest the IPhone is a failed platform. There are a lot of amazing apps in there. Furthermore, there is no distributon system for mobiles as polished as the App Store, at least for customers. I think Apple is doing an excellent job with the App Store, it's not perfect however, if they didn't distribute through iTunes and handle all of the processing people would not have downloaded a billion apps. Tech savvy people would be downloading stuff , the rest would think it was too complicatred and untrustworthy. Like people whom still use IE. There is a price to pay for that kind of service and part of it is the approval process, it could be a lot better, but at least I know when I download an app it will not be a virus and should work reasonably well. Anyway, have fun developing for Android, Win Mo and the Pre.

jupitervictor · 4 months ago

I think a key reason for the restrictions i.t.o. development on the iPhone is the way Apple manages the user experience. This is for very good reason. You simply can't have the same level of experience just using the web on the phone, and running just any application on the limited hardware also leads to problems.

Apple tried, with their first incarnations of the phone, to focus on web, but, the fact is that ubiquitous connectivity is not quite a reality, severely limiting the possibilities with this approach. People have high expectations as to the reliability of a phone, and allowing anything to run on this platform makes this infinitely harder to manage.

I think Apple is making good choices for its consumers most of the time. This does not mean you can't highlight real issues, such as senseless App rejections. In order to do that with real credibility though, you should at least show that you have some understanding as to what this product is really about.

lapilofu · 4 months ago

Not sure what your definition of "useless" is. I use my Mac and iPod Touch everyday, pretty much every hour, not just because they're pretty.

Bryce Roney · 4 months ago

I have to disagree with you Dave. I don't know an iPhone, but I do own - and use it reguarly - an iPod touch.

In terms of the app ecosystem, I think that there are some fantastic applications out there that really embrace the iPhone OS's capabilities: the fantastic, powerful games; the communication tools like Facebook, the myriad of Twitter apps and the I.M. apps; and the utilites that provide easy access to things like unit conversion and car mileage tracking.

Does Apple have a long way to come in terms of providing a more conducive environment for developers? Most certainly, yes.

Should Apple allow a total free for all in terms of what users can put on their phones? Most definitely not. The iPhone's interface is much more limited thatn that of a regular Mac, plus there are the issues of integrating with the mobile phone network. Should Apple, for example, allow an SMS spamming app to be installed on their phones? No.

If you are so convicted that you should be able to do what you want, when you want, with your mobile phone – may I suggest that you move over to the Android platform? It may not be perfect, however it is a lot less proprietary than Apple's offerings.

stwf · 4 months ago

Of course this is the same old problem. The problems that drive developers to tears are meaningless to 99% of the user base. Just like OpenSource vs Closed. Users don;t care, and when they eventually get bitten by it, they still don't care.

The iPhone is the biggest tech item on the planet, and after having the last Biggest Thing in the iPod one would think you would figure that out. I know tons of people who have iPhones and love them, it was such a huge improvement over their old phones they love the iPhones and will never look back.

Useless, thats just ridiculous I get weather radar, pitch by pitch basbeall, slingplayer, my stock quotes, backgammon and bedazzled, my music, and exercise tracker, decent camera, I can log into work and restart a server, or VPN to home and watch a movie off my server, and its a phone! and I think it works fine.... Its the coolest and most useful device I could ever imagine.

James Wu · 4 months ago

Useless is in the eye of the beholder...

jd · 4 months ago

Hi Dave,

With regard to your point about the Google Voice issue being a mess:

With all the shortcomings in the functionality of the App Store, approval processes etc, it's important to keep things in context. People tend to forget that it's a phone. iPhone. A phone with a great OS powering it, but a phone nonetheless. It is not subject to the same set of rules as a desktop computer or other internet appliance. It is built to be connected and operate on a telecommunications provider's network which the company built up and paid for, and charges a fee to its customers in exchange for using. Their network is not our network.

At this stage their networks are not as robust as the internet, and they don't want them messed up, as it's a severe inconvenience for people when that happens. So if you want to get on their networks, it is only fair to think that they have some control over how it is used - hence I understand the need for some form of app approval process. With regard to protectionist strategies, some are right, some are wrong, but I struggle to comprehend how anybody on this planet can think for a moment that it would be OK for a third party to develop an app that competes directly with the network provider we are with, and then uses their data network to bypass them and cut them out of revenue.

When determining price structure for your iPhone bill, AT&T may have worked out how much the services you receive costs them, worked out the average extra that high users will spend above the base rate, and found the monthly selling price that gave them a normal profit. I doubt that AT&T makes much, if any money off a user who uses up completely the bundled calls, SMS's, huge amounts of data, and spends no more. Much of the model depends on the multitude of users who use only a fraction of their allowances, and the users who spend more than the minimum each month.

The intended purpose of the unlimited data was not a facility for apps like Google Voice and Skype to further their developers' own business in the same field, and I can understand that. It's not unreasonable. The iPhone is a phone. Not a regular, run-of-the-mill, internet appliance. AT&T needs to receive revenue to pay for the infrastructure invested in their network. That investment relied on capitalized revenue streams going into the future. That's the deal, and we have to choose to either use them, or don't.

Consider you built a theme park, where visitors pay for each ride. You have a roller-coaster - the main attraction - and a couple of other smaller rides. In order to make the place more diverse, more interesting and to make some more cash, you lease out small plots within the park to 'one man band' owner-operators of smaller rides/attractions. It turns out that one of the owner-operators who was positioned beside the main attraction, was selling backdoor tickets to ride the roller-coaster at a fraction of the price, and paying you nothing for use of the roller-coaster. Unfair, no? Apps like Skype or Google Voice achieve a similar thing.

Whether or not the telco is inefficient, is making money hand over fist, or charges exorbitant rates is another issue, but I can understand any company wanting to take similar action in a similar scenario.

ato2 · 4 months ago

"The only platform that really works is a platform with no platform vendor, and that's the Internet. Permalink to this paragraph"

Have you already forgotten the days when IE/win had more than 95% market share? The Internet used to have a vendor and it's name was Microsoft and nothing but Microsoft. That was untill Firefox took back the web in 2004, just 5 years ago. It's *only* thanks to all the people voluntarely working on Firefox that you can use whatever browser you want with whatever webapp you want to write or read this blog. I wish people would show just a little bit more gratitude :(

kikocherman · 4 months ago

You and Arrington are obviously in the Silicon Alley bubble. There has been no customer complaints, but one million bloggers are talking about it.

Only a few apps are blocked by the App Store, and most developers and most users are happy.

h0h0h0 · 4 months ago

That's not quite the point he is making.

bsoist · 4 months ago

Not "quite" the point - it is very far off the point actually.

pillguy · 4 months ago

The iPhone platform is the most revolutionary device since the PC in my opinion. I have never used a device to the extent I use the iPhone, and I have owned most flavors of phone, computer and music device on the planet. I do not agree with Apple censoring the Google Voice App, but my guess is that they will allow it after all the negative press. I expect ATT begged them to remove it, and they complied. For the past year the App store has been one of the most interesting revolutions I have seen.

eas · 4 months ago

I don't think Winer, Arrington, or any of those bloggers are getting their iPhone and service for free. That is to say, they are customers too. You think their opinions should be discarded though.

dave · 4 months ago

I edited your comment to correct the spelling of my name.

And I don't get my iPhone for free, or any of my computer hardware.

I pay like everyone else.

jbella · 4 months ago

I think kikocherman does have a point though. You say the App Store is broken as a platform, but all my non-techie friends are in absolute LOVE with their iPhone. You have to understand how bizzare this is . These are people who only a year or two ago were still using Motorolla Razr phones that they got for free. These people never so much as sent a text message before, and now they have iphones, and they are checking their facebook, browsing the web, and getting directions from it. They are playing games, IMing friends, looking up restaurants on Yelp. Most importantly.. these are people who never loved their phones before.. but when one of them recently had their phone break, they were literally counting down the hours until they could get the phone replaced. Kikocherman has a valid point in that we live in a world where we can get outraged that certain software gets rejected, and Apple seems to unfairly wield too much power over what shows up on the phone. But most people don't really care. Open source software and platforms mean nothing to them. I believe Apple is successful because they always keep these people in mind when they create a platform. It makes us nerds mad.. but my mom loves her iPhone.. and thats extraordinary.

jamie palmer · 4 months ago

"Next to it is an iPhone, which I use only as a phone, an IM device and a communicating camera. It sucks as a phone. The IM is okay and the camera is really nice. But as a platform it's a complete total disappointment. "

Ummm...compared to what?

dave · 4 months ago

The Internet. It's right there Jamie, a couple of paragraphs above. "The only platform that really works is a platform with no platform vendor, and that's the Internet."

Ben K · 4 months ago

The internet is not a "platform", it's a network of interconnected networks. If you want to talk about platforms, talk about what you're plugging into that network, and what hardware/software you're actually developing for.

dave · 4 months ago

I'm plugging HTTP into the Internet.

http://www.scripting.com/davenet/1995/08/22/wha...

It's a platform -- I can build apps for it and it has APIs. What else do you look for in a platform?

And while you're at it -- how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? :-)

jamie palmer · 4 months ago

The internet is a network. It's not a platform. On the internet are services . When I access services on the Internet, I use various platforms -- one of which is the iPhone. Some platforms are better for accessing these services than others. I think when you say "the Internet" -- you mean "the Browser". I like the browser as a platform too. AJAX, JavaScript and now HTML 5.0 have done wonders for the browser as a platform. Adobe AIR is kinda cool. But applications built in the browser just don't compare to a well done native application on the Mac or on the iPhone. When built properly, native applications on these platforms are faster and provide a richer user experience than "the Browser".

The iPhone is a mobile platform that is very good at accessing services on the Internet. Out of the box, it has arguably the best mobile Internet browser in its class. Blackberry users who haven't actually tried the iPhone's touch keyboard will probably argue that it isn't the best platform for email services -- but those of us who have tried both know better.

The iPhone SDK/AppStore is not perfect -- but its only a year old. But in that year, look what it has done to the other so called "mobile platforms"? They were left in the dust and are all trying to re-invent themselves to mimic what Apple has done with the iPhone.

So when I asked: "compared to what" -- I was referring to what other mobile platform.

h0h0h0 · 4 months ago

Being able to develop for a platform without having the approval f a company. There has never been, historically, a closed software market that succeeded to the level than an open software market succeeds.

To support the closed software model is to support and nurture, what in the end, is obsolete. UNfortunately it has the biggest head start in the market. Do not confuse that with ultimate success.

panamajack · 4 months ago

The iPhones crappy camera's only saving grace is the software platform built around it. The software platform and it's associated internet connectivity is what makes it useful at all, transforming it into a much more useful camera than the technically more component cameras on other smartphones like the N97.

malatmals · 4 months ago

another case of the underdog becoming the overlord, as far as phones ya i'm afraid i'm going to wind up looking toward the next underdog (webOS or android) look where the last overlord wound up - i don't even know what microsoft calls their phone os...

MGZ · 4 months ago

If the App Store is a failure, a dead-end, etc., all I can say is I'd love to create a failure just like it.

We get it. You're a free software lover, and it will never meet your criteria for a great platform.

But it is most definitely a successful platform, THE most successful developer program for mobile phones to date, and only occasionally infuriating.

Would it be better if it was wide open? I have no idea. Would the seamless user experience be what it is today? No way. That is the trade off. As with any Apple product, you are trading total freedom for "it just works."

There are good and bad aspects of that, but many people accept the trade off because we like the good parts.

That doesn't mean I didn't complain to Apple at several parts of the company when I heard how the Google Voice devs were treated, but am I going to jump ship? To where? Android? Pre? Give me a break... I'd rather have a glass of water in Hell than a pitcher of water on Earth. Or maybe I said that wrong? ;-)

Jason · 4 months ago

The iPhone wasn't originally intended to run 3rd party applications. The idea was that the browser would be the only runtime but user demand forced apple to allow 3rd parties to develop native applications. It was users rather than apple that wanted the applications.

Mark Damon Hughes · 4 months ago

I'm an iPhone dev, & annoyed at the store policies. But you're 100% wrong. iPhone apps are the furthest thing from useless.
There's no comparison between a webapp & a real native app. Apple won't let you put Frontier on the iPhone (nor should you)…
…but you can't compare dragging out a laptop & using a browser to having a real app on a hand-sized device in your pocket.

howardweaver · 4 months ago

I'd like to throw a different monkey wrench in here.

I think it's wrong to suggest that design is only about pretty vs ugly. Design isn't the skin; design is how something works.

The internet is a wondrous platform for Dave, and for users like him its design is beautiful. Its a moderately good platform for people like me. For a huge percentage of its users and potential users, it's no platform at all.

Elegance isn't skin deep. Things that work well without intimate knowledge are tools leveraging the capacity of those who use them, and couldn't/wouldn't duplicate their outputs without them.

Design matters.

abusedIDeveloper · 4 months ago

I'm torn. Because I can create experiences with native development not possible with just internet. And the iphone/ipod touch is a beautiful platform, technically.

But so far it is just be a tease... like looking through the glass at the beautiful people in an upscale restaurant. I can see it and taste it and dream it. But my actual app? App review purgatory. A system of control that would make a Soviet bureaucrat proud.

Still torn because... it was the best platform for what I built... and what I built isn't possible without native code (although there are a few other platforms that allow native code... like, say, Windows, Mac.)

It's hard to ignore what would be possible if Apple limited it's rejections to actual harm to the device or the network. If wishes were horses...

And to the happy iphone users that think Dave is just a whiny insider: Guys like Dave invent the future. Your iphone may be the future today, but it won't be tomorrow if Apple chases them away. We already have our first killer mobile app (Google Voice) BANNED from the iphone. That doesn't even begin to count all the ideas that will never be started. Innovation isn't going to happen when the first question is "But will apple approve?"

And oh the irony: Think of the 1984 commercial. It sickens me to realize that Apple.... APPLE... is becoming big brother. Banning apps that "duplicate existing functionality." Because there is only one right way to do something.... It's more depressing than the economy. For years Apple kept IBM and MS honest. Now who will throw the hammer and keep Apple honest?

Kendall · 4 months ago

Your whole argument completely ignores the fact you can jailbreak - and download apps Apple never approved, just like the Mac.

To say the iPhone platform is a failure "compared to the internet", when in fact it is simply an offshoot of and highly intertwined with the internet, is to me absurd. Most apps are just a very rich UI backing a complex back end, of the kind you'd find elsewhere on the internet... or else the output of the app is destined for the larger world around us.

The App Store is but one apple controlled filtered rich view of the internet. But it is not the only view, and it's never been true that putting a better looking UI on something necessarily makes it less useful.

mjc · 4 months ago

RE: Jailbreak.

I helped develop iPHUC, but I still think you're wrong on this one. on the mac you can download any .app from the internet (zipped, but auto unzip when it's finished) and double click it - functionality built in to the OS. jailbreaking is significantly more difficult and requires third party tools, plus it has to be re-done every update.

Face it, modifying the firmware is a hack. We should not *need* to jailbreak just to use apps that push the system beyond where apple is comfortable taking it.

webinfront · 4 months ago

I agree with the sentiment here, but people getting upset about the google voice situation is somewhat ironic. People claim about ham fisted Apple is in the situation, and how the App Store is to closed. Well, Google voice is probably a crappy argument for that. Talk about exclusivity. The average person can't get access to it, you can't even by access to it. You have to be deemed good enough to use it. So people who complain that one walled garden won't play well with another walled off world is pretty damn ridiculous and not likely to garner much in the way of sympathy for the little people of the world.

There are great examples of App Story silliness and Google Voice isn't one of them.

Tim Yates · 4 months ago

As much as Steve Jobs didn't want 1984 to be like 1984, he's pretty hellbent on trying to make sure 2009 is 1984. We have come a long way from the Homebrew Computer Club and Pirate flags?

davidtemkin · 4 months ago

I can see how the iPhone undermines two of your ideological obsessions. Viewed through the lens of:

* "all computing devices should be a PC/Mac! with PC software and a PC UI! That's what's so great about netbooks! people get to run all of their PC software -- that's what everyone wants" But the iPhone redefined the PC's APIs and UI to be in accordance with its form factor and use case. How dare they? Worse yet, how dare they succeed in the mass market?

* "platforms should have no vendor. platform vendor=bad. standards committee=good" Or, perhaps it's OK if you personally define a platform/format/API/distribution system; but no one else can, otherwise they're an oppressor, keeping down the Little Guy Developer.

The true absurdity of this posting though, is where you say that the iPhone App Store "can't work". How does something that not only "works", but is leading the way for the rest of the industry get defined as not working? And on what basis do you define iPhone development as a "dead-end skill"? It's sure paying a lot of developers' bills now.

Frankly anyone objectively on the side of the "little guy" developer ought to be cheering the iPhone along.

There's a difference between ideological non-compliance with an idiosyncratic viewpoint and "not working". It seems you're too burdened by your history (all of those "loops", your problems dealing with Apple in the '90s) to view the iPhone and its ecosystem clearly. It may not be perfect, but it's succeeding, it offers a lot of developers a lot of opportunity, and it has opened a whole new category of consumer software by making mobile "apps" mainstream.

"Openness" isn't everything.

AndrewBurton · 4 months ago

Dave can defend himself, so I'm not going to try. I am going to step up and defend Netbooks.

"Openness" isn't everything.

No it's not, which is why Windows XP is such a nice platform for Netbooks. Openness isn't everything, utility is.