Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:01 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Over the past few days, we've seen yet another rollercoaster ride in Apple's App Store. The fully licensed Commodore 64 emulator, which was rejected earlier this year, was admitted into the App Store yesterday, only to be removed this morning. This tug of war between Apple and its 3rd party developers is getting a bit old, so let's take a look at a company that treats its 3rd party developers right: Palm.
Order by: Score:
v Okay
by jonharrr on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:10 UTC
RE: Okay
by GiantTalkingCow on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:24 UTC in reply to "Okay"
GiantTalkingCow Member since:
2009-01-27

It's perfectly justified. The way that Apple treats its App Store developers is a travesty (and by extension its customers, controlling what they may or may not put on hardware that they own), and the company deserves to be called out on it.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Okay
by Tony Swash on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Okay"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

As far as I can see the App store system had been wildly successful. Its produced a vast library of apps for the iPhone, many free and the rest at prices at a fraction of those previously charged for software. Its revitalised the home brew software development model and allowed a huge number of new developers to actually make money from writing software by neatly bypassing the previous distribution systems which were so riddled by piracy that it was killing small scale software development.

Meanwhile every other operator on the planet is trying to emulate Apple's success and develop app store clones.

The problem for all the competitors is that the operating system on the iPhone, OS X, along with the Mac/iPhone development tools is so mature and powerful that everything else seems (and is) second rate.

Why should Apple learn anything from Palm when the Palm model has produced and sold a minute fraction of the number of apps for end users? Why adopt anything thats less successful?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Okay
by WereCatf on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Okay"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Why should Apple learn anything from Palm when the Palm model has produced and sold a minute fraction of the number of apps for end users? Why adopt anything thats less successful?

You do realise the Apple App Store has been available for a lot longer time? Of course it is more popular and well-known. And you're missing the whole point of the article: developers are being restricted in various kinds of absolutely bogus ways, just so Apple can control everything.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Okay
by Tony Swash on Tue 8th Sep 2009 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

OK the Apple store has been around longer - here's my prediction in a years time the Apple store will still be way ahead, Palm will never catch up - this is partly because the software platform and tools of the iPhone are so much better and partly because the iPhone will always outsell the Palm phones by a very large margin and will therefore be a much more attractive platform for developers.

Developers are not restricted by Apple's "bogus restrictions" - they they just have to fit into the model that Apple had decided on for its iPhone, its their product they can structure their offering to the consumer pretty much in any way they want. The smart phone market is not a monopoly and there are plenty of competing phones. If consumers or developers don't like what Apple offers they can use an alternative. As I said the model chosen by Apple, the App store, is wildly successful and is hugely popular with consumers (1.5 billion plus sales of apps) and developers (65000 plus apps) - why on earth would they want to change it? Certainly not because of the whining of a bunch of (in economic terms) pretty marginal hobbyists and technical tinkerers, and certainly not so as to emulate a less successful product (the Palm Pre).

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Okay
by BallmerKnowsBest on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

As I said the model chosen by Apple, the App store, is wildly successful and is hugely popular with consumers (1.5 billion plus sales of apps) and developers (65000 plus apps) - why on earth would they want to change it? Certainly not because of the whining of a bunch of (in economic terms) pretty marginal hobbyists and technical tinkerers, and certainly not so as to emulate a less successful product (the Palm Pre).


So the quality of a product is determined by how successful it is? I guess that means that Windows is MUCH higher quality than OS X - about 90% higher quality.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Okay
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:35 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Okay"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

It is interesting how success is not an argument for quality when comparing Windows to Mac OS X, but it is an argument when comparing the App Store to competing efforts.

Reply Score: 7

RE[4]: Okay
by jonharrr on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
jonharrr Member since:
2009-09-08

It is interesting how success is not an argument for quality when comparing Windows to Mac OS X, but it is an argument when comparing the App Store to competing efforts.


You have any facts to support that bogus claim?

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: Okay
by Soulbender on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You just have to read selected previous posts on osnews to see that wonderful logic at work. Nowhere near as bogus as Apple's App Store policies.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Okay
by BallmerKnowsBest on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

You have any facts to support that bogus claim?


Do YOU have any facts to support your bogus claim that his claim is a bogus claim?!?!?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Okay
by lurch_mojoff on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
lurch_mojoff Member since:
2007-05-12

OK, f--k success. How about customer satisfaction [ http://www.jdpower.com/telecom/ratings/wireless-consumer-smartphone...) ] then? Is that a good enough argument for you?

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Okay
by Kroc on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Satisfaction is a different thing compared to base freedoms. The developers are being treated like second-class citizens but the customers are perfectly satisfied. To take the 1960's America allegory: 'everything was just dandy for the white people, especially with those blacks in the right place where they belonged'.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Okay
by godawful on Tue 8th Sep 2009 19:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Okay"
godawful Member since:
2005-06-29

yes, just like that.. except nothing at all like segregation.

When people get in bed with Apple they know exactly what to expect.. it's not like this is suddenly some new behavior of Apple after years of being completely open and none interfering. In this app, there was a secret way to access the BASIC interpreter which is a no-no by Apple's rules.
If people don't like this, they are free to get a different phone, or use a different character.
Now, people may think "hey I bought this phone, I should be able to do whatever I want with it!".. That is an entirely different argument though, and my understanding, is different in different countries and laws and what have you.

But to have continued shock and outrage over apple doing something not friendly to it's customers or developers is nothing new, but you know why people put up with it? because they are satisfied with the user experience, and developers are lured by the millions of paying customers and the hope of getting a piece of that money pie.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Okay
by BallmerKnowsBest on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

OK, f--k success. How about customer satisfaction [ http://www.jdpower.com/telecom/ratings/wireless-consumer-smartphone...) ] then? Is that a good enough argument for you?


Two words: cognitive dissonance.

"It's shiny and I paid a lot of money for it, so it must be good! Because the only other possibility is that I'm a twit with more money than sense."

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Okay
by dragossh on Tue 8th Sep 2009 20:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

It is interesting how success is not an argument for quality when comparing Windows to Mac OS X, but it is an argument when comparing the App Store to competing efforts.


That comes straight from Apple. They compared the Palm app store (which was about 1 month old I think) with their App Store (which was 2 years old). Of course Apple fanboys will use the same kind of logic when comparing different products.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Okay
by BallmerKnowsBest on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:17 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

That comes straight from Apple. They compared the Palm app store (which was about 1 month old I think) with their App Store (which was 2 years old). Of course Apple fanboys will use the same kind of logic when comparing different products.


I think you're giving Apple fanboys too much credit - there's no logical thought process going on, they're just blindly regurgitating Apple marketing copy/talking points.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Okay
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Okay"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Because having a big market share doesn't mean you can't learn form anyone else.

If your premise is that the dominant market leader is always correct with everything they do, then you'd agree that windows 98 was not in need of any improvements. And it was a mistake for them to introduce stupid features like "security" and "stability" into the OS, as others had done with little impact on their market share or profitability.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Okay - Nokia
by jabbotts on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Okay"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

We'll see how second rate it is with Nokia's new device. The previous Maemo verisons where ahead of the game while allowing third party developers freedom to build through the official repositories or there own hosting sites. Maemo5 on the new hardware looks to put the other's back in place yet again. I'll take a true full Linux distribution and freedom to install any available apps or cross-compile my own choices from Debian's inventory any day.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Okay
by Kroc on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:31 UTC in reply to "Okay"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Should you be blaming us for Apple shooting itself in the foot, and reloading?

How Apple—nay, whatever company doing the same; I don’t care—are treating users and developers is despicable.

To quote Joe Hewitt:

If you think that all apps should be held prisoner by Apple until proven safe, you should also be able to convince yourself that this is how the web should work. Perhaps I am just spoiled by my many years of web development. The next time I create a web app I will probably feel a little guilty when I upload the files to my web server, knowing that I didn't have to ask the web police to review the app first to make sure I wasn't evil.
via http://joehewitt.com/post/innocent-until-proven-guilty/

The staff here all own Macs of some kind, some several. We devoted a whole podcast to Apple where we discussed our history with the company and the situation they find themselves in now.

How it stands though is that we’re not anti-Apple; we are anti- anti-consumer and Apple’s AppStore policies are unacceptable to all those who love the art of technology. It is indefensible, and I don’t care if it’s Apple or Microsoft—AppStores and gatekeepers are like the Compuserves and AOLs of the time. Walled gardens that will be pulled down by a more open system.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Okay
by jasutton on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:37 UTC in reply to "Okay"
jasutton Member since:
2006-03-28

This opinion isn't so much anti-Apple as it is just being plain truthful. The big-media outlets fall all over themselves to praise Apple, even when Apple does something incredibly dumb. In the last 5 years of the iPod/iPhone's popularity , Apple has shown consistently that they will sacrifice usability and user/developer freedom in order to artificially increase their bottom line. If any other major player in the industry pulled this crap, the story would be on the front-page of every tech site, but because it's Apple, they get a pass...every time.

In general, the big-media likes Apple. Why? First, I think it's because they're seen as the Anti-Microsoft: the David who has slain the great Goliath of the software world (even though they haven't really done any such of a thing). Second, Apple is popular amongst the younger population, and positive reviews of Apple products and services may increase readership from that segment of the news-reading population (thereby increasing ad revenue). People like reading good reviews of the companies they already buy from; it's a confirmation of a consumer's great prowess at the cash register.

In short, OSNews can only be viewed as anti-Apple if viewed relative to other news outlet's pro-Apple coverage of events. This is similar to how Fox News looks incredibly conservative relative to the big-media's liberal slant...I'm not saying Fox's coverage is completely fair, but it's no more slanted than other news organizations; It just slanted the other direction. ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Okay
by kragil on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:05 UTC in reply to "Okay"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

This is one of the best things Thom has written PERIOD.
It is just facts IMNSHO.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Okay
by jonharrr on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Okay"
jonharrr Member since:
2009-09-08

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

This is one of the best things Thom has written PERIOD.


That doesn't say much. My personal opinion is that OSN's quality dropped significantly with his arrival. Where are the insightful articles? Interesting interviews? Lenghty pieces on alternativ OS's? Mostly gone.

It is just facts IMNSHO.


Show me the facts.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Okay
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Okay"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Where are the insightful articles? Interesting interviews? Lenghty pieces on alternativ OS's? Mostly gone.


How many have you submitted?

Reply Score: 1

v RE[4]: Okay
by jonharrr on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
v RE[5]: Okay
by jonharrr on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:04 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Okay"
RE[4]: Okay
by pandronic on Tue 8th Sep 2009 19:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Okay"
pandronic Member since:
2006-05-18

Although I don't have anything personally with you and in fact enjoy your pieces and OSN articles in general I don't like this attitude.

We don't share ad revenue. I come here to be entertained and I'll offer you in return my page views and clicks (yes, adblock is disabled on this site). Why should I contribute to YOUR site?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Okay
by theTSF on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:48 UTC in reply to "Okay"
theTSF Member since:
2005-09-27

I am a big Apple fan... however I dislike this gate keeper by Apple. There are a lot of good ideas for Apps. However a lot of people will not make iPhone apps as it is to risky for business. Even if your App is free. If you are a company and wants to release an App for Free. However Apple says No. You lost your development time and money. If Apple is going to be the Gatekeeper then they need another way to install apps on iPhone. Much like how in iTunes you can install music not bought from iTunes. Heck put warnings all of them that it isn't a trusted app. But let us run them.

Reply Score: 3

A counterpoint
by galvanash on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:39 UTC
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

I agree with the sentiment of this article for the most part. Publishing iPhone apps seems a bit like publishing books in Nazi Germany...

However, the comparison with Palm is apples and oranges - particular with the app in question. The Pre SDK is for building what are basically web apps, and well thats it really. A C64 emulator is simply impossible to write on the Pre at this time. Their SDK is more or less the equivalent of the original iPhone SDK, prior to the introduction of native apps. There is no native code SDK, or even Java for that matter. That might change in the future, but it is a bit early to say how Palm will handle those types if apps, if they ever do.

That is not to say that Palm would be as draconian as Apple under the same circumstances, just that you can't logically say they wouldn't be either...

Reply Score: 7

Come on Apple!
by ebasconp on Tue 8th Sep 2009 15:55 UTC
ebasconp
Member since:
2006-05-09

I do not understand the inconsistency in the "openness" inside Apple products!

Its MacOS X is a very open Unix with several parts: (CUPS, WebKit, Darwin and more) open sourced; I can do whatever I want with my MacBook and I can compile, write, do, install, uninstall and execute whatever I want in my MacOSX, and that's why I like it...

but, in the other side, iPhone is a ridiculously closed environment [paradoxically based on the same OS one]...

maybe giving technology to scared monkeys [AppStore managers] was not a wise decision.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Come on Apple!
by Erunno on Tue 8th Sep 2009 19:17 UTC in reply to "Come on Apple!"
Erunno Member since:
2007-06-22

WebKit is based on KHTML which itself has always been licensed under the LGPL. Since Apple does not own the copyright for KHTML they had no choice but to release the sources (or at least the code changes).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Come on Apple!
by ebasconp on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Come on Apple!"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

You're right, but that does not remove the merit of giving things opensource [in one hand]...

The problem is the other hand, the hand that is keeping the iPhone.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Come on Apple!
by Stratoukos on Tue 8th Sep 2009 23:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Come on Apple!"
Stratoukos Member since:
2009-02-11

WebKit isn't Apple's only open source project. Darwin is based on the FreeBSD kernel witch is licensed under the BSD license. That means that Apple wasn't forced to open Darwin's code, but they did so nevertheless. Apple's other recent significant contributions include LLVM, clang and openCL (not an open source implementation but an open spec). Also, as far as I know, they regulary contribute to other open source projects that they use in OS X.

Reply Score: 2

Popularity maybe?
by Buck on Tue 8th Sep 2009 16:11 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

Palm is not that popular. Certainly not as popular as the iPhone which commands a very large share of smartphone market. Let's see if Palm ever reaches a comparable level of popularity and if no problems arise. Until then you cannot really compare those.

Reply Score: 4

extraordinary
by alcibiades on Tue 8th Sep 2009 16:13 UTC
alcibiades
Member since:
2005-10-12

It is perfectly extraordinary, isn't it? Here we have a basic interpreter, something anyone might feel like having for a variety of reasons, mostly perfectly legitimate. Apple decides that you may not have that because it is capable of misuse to infringe copyright. So it bans it. Like, how many other perfectly lawful things will it ban because they may be misused? Cameras, because they could be used in espionage?

They are completely mad these guys.

Reply Score: 4

WTF?
by Soulbender on Tue 8th Sep 2009 16:36 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

Apple has pulled the C64 Application from their store as it was discovered by some users that it was possible to enable the Basic program through the interface.


Uhm...so what? Why would that be a problem? What am i missing?

Reply Score: 2

RE: WTF?
by fretinator on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:24 UTC in reply to "WTF?"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

"Apple has pulled the C64 Application from their store as it was discovered by some users that it was possible to enable the Basic program through the interface.
Uhm...so what? Why would that be a problem? What am i missing? "

Well, since you do not own the iPhone, they have stringent requirement on what they will legally allow to run on the device. One of the big crimes you can committ is to run an interpreter (e.g., the Basic Interpreter), or a virtual machine. Really, it's just plain nice that they let us use the iPhone at all.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: WTF?
by sbergman27 on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:28 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Well, since you do not own the iPhone, they have stringent requirement on what they will legally allow to run on the device.

And besides, all the C64 IP is owned by The SCO Group. ;-)

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: WTF?
by Kroc on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: WTF?"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Who are in cahoots with Microsoft with a secret agenda to bring down the FSF using Chinese military hackers backed by the KGB. This elite team has Apple in their sights as the Commodore 64 was actually a clever FBI scheme to get surveillance equipment into every American's home, and AT&T (the good guys) don't want this surveillance emulated on the iPhone for the protection of honest citizens.

Shimples! *squeek*

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: WTF?
by Soulbender on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:45 UTC in reply to "RE: WTF?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

One of the big crimes you can committ is to run an interpreter (e.g., the Basic Interpreter), or a virtual machine.


That doesn't make sense in any way whatsoever. What could you possibly to with C64 BASIC that would be bad or evil or whatever the hell this inane policy is about?
I'm guessing this is might be a case of "hey now, this is the policy and we will blindly apply it even where it makes no sense at all" school of decision making.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:31 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Because a BASIC interpreter (without the ability to load or save) for an 8-bit micro from 1982 is going to bring your media empire down?

This is truly the Ning Nang Nong, where the cows go bong! and the monkeys all say boo! Utter madness, it won't hold up.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Kroc
by apoclypse on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

No, but if you let one in, you have to let the others. Which opens the door for flash, Appel is currently fightign tooth and nail no to have to put flash on the iPhone and I'm right there with them even if it means I can;t have a c64 emulator in my pocket.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Glynser on Wed 9th Sep 2009 07:40 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Glynser Member since:
2007-11-29

With a working BASIC interpreter you can run every machine language program you like. Most games or programs for the C64 are written in machine language, but use one BASIC line to run them. If you type list, you mostly see the following:

10 REM *** THE NAME OF THE GAME ***
20 SYS 49152

Line 20 runs the game from memory address $C000. So, it would be possible to download lots of C64 games from the net (illegally) or code your own stuff and run it. Which would be a way to bypass the AppStore completely. And even if C64 programs might not be the best selling ones, it would still be a matter of principle, because every VM, no matter if it emulates a C64 or if it runs Java or .NET programs, would be a way to run non-approved applications.

Reply Score: 1

tyrione
Member since:
2005-11-21

The dweeb was quoted several times about getting approval that there was ways to reactivate the interpreter. To expect that to continue as an approved application is mix of arrogance and ignorance.

Don't write your eclectic application on the platform if you want the interpreter active to it's users.

But oh wait! You want to make money and this platform makes a lot of devs money.

Then write it to the standards and if you don't like all the standards work with Apple to expand them.

That's what every OS goes through.

Reply Score: 0

WebOS <-> BewOS
by v_bobok on Tue 8th Sep 2009 17:52 UTC
v_bobok
Member since:
2008-08-01

They got all the BeOS 5.1/BeIA/Be inc. awesome stuff just only to bury it deep (so deep, my dear) and deliver just yet another castrato Linux version for their devices.

Whom you called Inglourious Basterds? No, this is not Brad Pitt gang. It's Palm(Source). What a MFs...

Reply Score: 1

If so many developers hate this...
by darknexus on Tue 8th Sep 2009 18:21 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

Why exactly do they still develop for the iPhone even while railing against it? Oh, that's right, they want to make quick money. Apple is counting on that. You app devs want it to change? Stop developing for a while, stand to a principal, and if enough of you stop developing for it the app store will collapse. It's the same idea as voting with your wallet, except it's vote with your time. Write for Android, Symbian, Palm Pre, even Windows Mobile... whatever the hell you want and let the iPhone fall. If enough developers fall by the wayside or better yet start embracing other platforms you can bet Apple will change, but until then they're going to rely on your wants to make a quick buck so they can continue to treat you like crap and you'll be powerless to do anything. This isn't difficult logic.

Reply Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

It's the same idea as voting with your wallet, except it's vote with your time. Write for Android, Symbian, Palm Pre, even Windows Mobile...


Or better yet, write for Maemo. You can code in Qt and ship your applications on desktop Linux (and Windows) as well.

Basically, the iPhone developers have no justification for their complaints. If you accept being treated like a dog, it may be nature's way of saying you have it coming.

Edited 2009-09-08 18:32 UTC

Reply Score: 2

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Hmm I'm no fan of QT right now but I agree with you. Still, how many people use maemo as compared to the others named, especially Symbian and WM? But by all means, if Maemo is your thing, write apps for it. I'd even go a bit further and, if developers are doing this, send a nice little email to Apple every time you write an app for a phone that isn't theres, continuously voicing the reasons why. If enough people stand up and say no more bending over, Apple will have to listen else lose a lot of money.

Reply Score: 2

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Still, how many people use maemo as compared to the others named, especially Symbian and WM?


Not many yet, because the first Maemo phone ever (n900) will become available for purchase on october. Symbian development has the problem that it's very hard to get started (or do in the first place - I've done it for 5 years), so I don't see many iPhone programmers jumping ship to it. It's also much less open than Maemo.

Reply Score: 2

tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

Why exactly do they still develop for the iPhone even while railing against it? Oh, that's right, they want to make quick money. Apple is counting on that. You app devs want it to change? Stop developing for a while, stand to a principal, and if enough of you stop developing for it the app store will collapse. It's the same idea as voting with your wallet, except it's vote with your time. Write for Android, Symbian, Palm Pre, even Windows Mobile... whatever the hell you want and let the iPhone fall. If enough developers fall by the wayside or better yet start embracing other platforms you can bet Apple will change, but until then they're going to rely on your wants to make a quick buck so they can continue to treat you like crap and you'll be powerless to do anything. This isn't difficult logic.


Solidarity, I tell ya!

Stop making money and protest by investing time in a platform that isn't going to make you money. You'll feel vindicated, I tell ya!

Reply Score: 1

polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

Why exactly do they still develop for the iPhone even while railing against it? Oh, that's right, they want to make quick money. Apple is counting on that. You app devs want it to change? Stop developing for a while, stand to a principal, and if enough of you stop developing for it the app store will collapse. It's the same idea as voting with your wallet, except it's vote with your time. Write for Android, Symbian, Palm Pre, even Windows Mobile... whatever the hell you want and let the iPhone fall. If enough developers fall by the wayside or better yet start embracing other platforms you can bet Apple will change, but until then they're going to rely on your wants to make a quick buck so they can continue to treat you like crap and you'll be powerless to do anything. This isn't difficult logic.


No, it's much easier to complain about it constantly, and write "news" articles about it.

Honestly, I don't get what all the fuss is about. You don't like how Apple treats the devs? Don't buy an iPhone. A dev yourself? Don't code for it. Vote with your dollar, vote with your principles. If enough people agree with you, Apple will change or die.

After all these years I would have assumed it was clear Apple doesn't care about "news" articles written about it.

I guess I wouldn't be posting this if it was the umpteenth news article about it this month already.

And as for the "if we don't like it, contribute something" attitude, we're not getting paid for it, so why should we? It's kind of a petty attitude to take with readers that are voicing their opinion on the quality of articles here.

If we start contributing articles, do we begin getting a cut of any surplus ad revenue (beyond the cost of the site of course)?

Edited 2009-09-08 20:34 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Comment by dragossh
by dragossh on Tue 8th Sep 2009 20:48 UTC
dragossh
Member since:
2008-12-16

I was an iPhone user. When the App Store appeared, I never imagined that it would be the laughing stock of the tech industry.

This year I bought an HTC Hero and it feels so great to have a phone that's yours and can multitask. I can install whatever apps I want, from where I want, I can download everything on my SD card, I can play NES games, I can view Flash videos, I can have it check RSS feeds, Twitter, mail every 30 minutes, and remote control my computer. What's so great about it, since iPhone can do all that too? Well, I can do all that without closing an app, and the battery lasts a day. I'm also not worried that an approver might have a bad day and reject something I'd like to have on my device.

After trying Android I would never go back to an iPhone. It's so limited that it's laughable. And don't tell me about jailbreaking, since that can help me bring cell towers down.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by dragossh
by polaris20 on Tue 8th Sep 2009 21:30 UTC in reply to "Comment by dragossh"
polaris20 Member since:
2005-07-06

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You weren't happy with Apple, so you switched. This is what you should be doing if you're not happy with Apple (or any other company who's policies/products/services you don't agree with).
If enough people agree with you, then Apple is in trouble, and rightly so. They're not meeting the needs of the people that support the product and buy the product.
Until then, we've got a bunch of developers who bitch about the process while still making a very good buck off of the App Store, and a ton of users who, despite the weird refusals of certain apps, still find the iPhone very functional.
Don't complain about it. Do something about it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by dragossh
by dragossh on Tue 8th Sep 2009 22:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by dragossh"
dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

It's the apps problem. For example, Android doesn't have the same amount of (high quality) apps that are on the iPhone.

There is also the marketing. Apple has commercials all over the place and you might think every other handset sucks if you were to listen to them. Joe will buy an iPhone because it has that cool fart app. Combine that with a very good development environment and where do you think developers will go?

Reply Score: 1

Your perspective is based...
by mrhasbean on Tue 8th Sep 2009 22:02 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

...on what country you're from and how mobile phone plans work in those countries. Personally I would dread the thought of an home grown app that hasn't been externally scrutinized being installed on my child's iPhone - or my own for that matter - because if that app is badly behaved in my country I could be holding the can for a $20000 phone bill. This is also the thing that makes it a completely different scenario to developing for a personal computer. As your article mentions, anyone can install anything on the Pre, so what's to stop a teen installing something that's going to wrack up that sort of bill unbeknownst to them? Or worse to open the phone and it's private contents up to hacking and / or identity theft?

I agree that the approval system for iPhone apps needs some work, but that doesn't mean its a bad model, and it provides plenty of opportunities for those who want to distribute free apps.

Apple need to improve the system and be more consistent with their rulings - which is somewhat difficult but not impossible, purely because of the number of apps they are testing - but I think Palm also need to revisit their model, because doing what seems to be the most popular thing isn't always doing the right thing...

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Stratoukos
by Stratoukos on Tue 8th Sep 2009 23:22 UTC
Stratoukos
Member since:
2009-02-11

I want to point out two things.

First of all, Apple is selling iPhones and apps for them like there is no tomorrow. The Pre on the other hand is selling much lower than Palm's expectations. I don't see any reason Apple should learn anything from Palm.

As for the C64 emulator it was rightfully pulled from the App Store. The SDK agreement states that apps cannot run arbitary code. You can argue about whether that clause should exist, but you can't accuse Apple for enforcing it.

The developer has now removed the BASIC interpreter and resubmited the app. If it was a simple mistake then I think that the app should be approved rather quickly. But if the developers tried to hide the interpreter they should have their asses handed to them since they clearly violated the agreement.

Reply Score: 1

Haha - This whole debate is awesome!
by hankheathen on Wed 9th Sep 2009 05:21 UTC
hankheathen
Member since:
2009-05-13

I love reading OSNews commentators debating low-rent opinion pieces like Thom's. It's like listening to autistic fleas arguing ownership over someone else's dog.

Tony Swash is a little more polite I guess, with:

"pretty marginal hobbyists and technical tinkerers"

Seriously - Prior to the advent of the AppStore, do any of you people even remember the experience of trying to purchase content/apps via your phone, smart or otherwise?

It was garbage - really bad smelling, expensive garbage.

And now? Well as a consumer, I'm glad that one of the chief complaints that can legitimately be levelled at the AppStore is that the approval process for new apps is occasionally inconsistent and sometimes even unfair.

I have a feeling that Palm would kill for THAT to be the chief problem with its offering.

Also, Thom please! For the love of the Gods - post something worthwhile. When I read the title "What Apple Can Learn from Palm", all I could think of was "Ummm... Copy a Competitor's Business Model 2 Years 2 Late."

Reply Score: 2

andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

Very good post. Witty and insightful at the same time.

I admit though that I am one of the - perhaps few - who will be leaving my iphone behind in October. I think its a case of what Apple did well is no longer relevant and all I see are the limitations now. And by limitations I do not mean not being able to install a basic interpreter. I am talking more about utility/functionality.

Reply Score: 2

hankheathen Member since:
2009-05-13

Thank you.

It's a pain when a fairly expensive piece of kit ultimately doesn't meet your requirements. Despite the public perception (spurred by marketing and media hype), the iPhone isn't for anyone

I hope your next phone is better suited to your needs - if it's any consolation you'll probably get some reasonable coin back if you sell your iPhone.

Reply Score: 1