11-23-2009, 09:51 AM

If you haven't read Paul Graham's essay, Apple's Mistake, take a couple minutes to read it.

11-23-2009, 11:24 AM

This is a classic case of the free thinking individual butting heads with the established bureaucracy. No matter how "green" or "hip" or "liberal" a company the size of Apple is, it will be a bureaucracy by necessity. Apple should do something to streamline their approval process, but the day will never come when developers will be allowed to simply add their revisions to the product without Apple's review and blessing. And, if I were Apple, I wouldn't allow that to happen either.

11-23-2009, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by VegasGeorge

This is a classic case of the free thinking individual butting heads with the established bureaucracy. No matter how "green" or "hip" or "liberal" a company the size of Apple is, it will be a bureaucracy by necessity. Apple should do something to streamline their approval process, but the day will never come when developers will be allowed to simply add their revisions to the product without Apple's review and blessing. And, if I were Apple, I wouldn't allow that to happen either.

Really? So you'd be happier to sell software that's broken because of some unforseen bug and wait 8 weeks to release the working fix instead of having customers be able to update it imediately? You'd be happy to receive complaints about that and people that want their money back because the software doesn't work as advertised? I mean, you'd be losing money too at that point.

The App store is horribly broken. Google Voice doesn't get approved as well as other useful apps that Apple claims have functions similar to other software in their line up (one they were talking about itunes, and not an actual iphone app) when in fact, it's different and new; yet I can download apps like "Latina Bikini Fart"? That's really going to help them to target the professional market, that's for sure.

11-23-2009, 12:46 PM

I have to totally agree with that "free thinking butthead". Guess I don't like my soup spoon fed to me either. Especially when the cost is coming out of my pockets to support a company whom is trying to send a message to their target market, to the tune of "think different, be different", when in reality, it's just marketing hype.

It really is a catch 22, and a sad one at that. Apple has some brilliant devs and engineers working for them, and when they weren't as popular as they are now, they even tried to make themselves a lot more friendly to the average Joe whom held a good job. (Cuz let's face it, Apple PC's have never sold cheap products on average)

It seems as though their britches have become a bit pinched in the sack, and I hope they're not heading down that road as forecasted in that blog. But if you look at things from a dev's POV, the article totally rings true. And without the support of software devs, there IS no Apple at this point. Hardware be darned. Their OS and API's are what is pushing them to the forefront of everything now days. And this all leads down to the consumers at some point.

The app store really is a sad joke, IMO, especially compared to what apps exist with ICY or Cydia for JB phones. I mean really.. how is it exactly, that Apple doesn't curtail the amount of absolutely redundant and useless apps out there ? If Apple essentially "owns" the rights to everything a developer does, they essentially "own" the developer, right ? So if that's true, then how is it that having not only one, but MANY apps which do the same thing, don't exactly fall in line with the logic they're using to boot Google Voice and such ?

We all know the answer, it was a rhetorical question.

I enjoyed that blog, thank you.

Doug

11-23-2009, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by VegasGeorge

And, if I were Apple, I wouldn't allow that to happen either.

I dunno... it seems like the primary complaint is that devs aren't able to rapidly release updates. To me, those shouldn't even go through a submission process. They should just be checked for stability and then fast-tracked into implementation. As long as there is a certain understanding that the primary mission of the app remains unchanged and the app is stable, why should Apple care?

11-23-2009, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Doug b

I
The app store really is a sad joke, IMO, especially compared to what apps exist with ICY or Cydia for JB phones.

I didn't disagree with you until that statement. My personal experience with JB my iPhone was less than satisfactory and I attribute it to unstable Apps that were not ready for prime time and no real configuration control for the process. Apple may be draconian in many ways, but at least you always know the Apps will work with you hardware.

There can be lots of Apps for JB phones, but if they run like crap on even a small percentage of phones, the whole process is, IMHO, far more broken than the Apps store. I'm willing to trade stability and reliability for customization and being on the "cutting edge". Then again, I'm not a Dev and if the process is as broken as many claim the Devs will leave in droves and Apple will have to rething their policy. SO far, that's not happening.

11-23-2009, 01:54 PM

I should have made this thread a poll! I've been considering learning how to write iPhone apps, but the more I read about this stuff the less inclined I am. I don't expect any corp. to behave as if the customers were their best buds, but Apple seems to be going more and more the other direction and acting as if it's stake holders are its enemies...strange.



@baggss nice sig...I don't know how many times I tried using Twitter and quit, but I recently started using Twitteriffic and have finally found it useful for posting content related stuff (mostly Mac related)...I think the biggest problem with Twitter is when people use it for narcissistic info...like anyone wants to know "I'm standing in line at the grocery."

Here is a Business Week interview of Schiller on the topic: Apple's Schiller Defends iPhone App Approval Process - BusinessWeek

Here is theAppleBlog's response:
Apple Speaks: Schiller Defends App Store Approval Process

11-23-2009, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by ArrowJ

@baggss nice sig...I don't know how many times I tried using Twitter and quit, but I recently started using Twitteriffic and have finally found it useful for posting content related stuff (mostly Mac related)...I think the biggest problem with Twitter is when people use it for narcissistic info...like anyone wants to know "I'm standing in line at the grocery."

Yep. I actually subscribe to several sports teams since I can get game scores sent to me via text message from twitter, but I never post anything anymore. The narcissistic reporting what you are doing every second aspect of it annoys me. Like I care what you are doing every second people....

11-23-2009, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

Really? So you'd be happier to sell software that's broken because of some unforseen bug and wait 8 weeks to release the working fix instead of having customers be able to update it imediately? .

If my choice is to either have that fix tested or not.. you betcha.. you'd be surprised how often fix content breaks other things.. like it or not, version control exists for a reason.. and on something as complicated as an OS (for instance) it's crucial... or NOTHING would work worth a ****. Course, I'm sitting in a lab right now, running regression testing against fix content

11-24-2009, 12:18 AM

I read the article and I think the author is a little on the side of doomsday prophecisor but he does make some really good points. I think like many people here do that 3rd party developers are the heart of any system. Be it a nintendo or Mac or phone or a pocket calculator with games.

And I agree with Doug b and his post. If you anienate the developers they might stop making their software compatable with your system. And a system with a small catalogue of software/games never really sells well. I think Apple's SDK and the ease to make apps is really a strp in the right direction. Then they shoot themselves in the foot by making it so hard for legitimate developers to get their apps on the app store. So good apps find it hard to get on and crap like "Latina Bikini Fart" makes it on there with no hassles. Not exactly fair to me.

But I can see what Apple is trying to do here. I don't think they are worried too much with the content on the app store. Only that it does not overtake a future Apple idea and that the App actually works on your computer. I know as many have said new patches to apps can fix as many things as they break that's why they need a lot of testing. And that's why Apple is harsh on patch updates to App store apps. Apple is known for their products just working. Well for the most part. And if half your app store apps suddenly get a whole load of updates that break the apps cause Apple was not strigent on it's checks and the developer was not perfect with his beta testing of the new patches, people would complain. Oh they'd not boame XX company for the broken app. Nooo, they'd be like stupid Apple half the app updates I downloaded do not work.

I can see how Apple is running this. They want every app store app to work perfectly. But too they need to cut the red tape. To allow apps on there easily or it might stifle creativety of these developers.

Lastly George Lucas the film maker said once something like "I became the monster I never wanted to be". That was based on he left the major movie companies back in the days cause he thought they were nasty dictatators. And like 20 years later he was like wtf?? my companies are just as huge now and they are doing the same prectices as the big companies of old I tried to distance myself from.

This relates to Apple as they want to be known as they likewise tried to be different to the rest of the IT industry. They just have to watch they don't become just like the ones they originally tried to distance themaelves from.

11-26-2009, 05:19 PM

Like so many, I've read the stories & blogs, including the linked one. My conclusion is that having only one outlet for iPhone apps is the largest problem.

What I'd like to see is an open market just like we have for software we buy for our Macs. Developers could still use the App Store, but could use other means of distribution too if desired, or required due to an App Store rejection or indefinite hold. Users could limit them selfs to the App Store if they wanted. An open market gives great flexibility to both developers and users.

I suspect cell providers would be against an open market because apps that would challenge their network would be released, since the filter of the App Store would be removed. They'd have to come up with techniques to stop that abuse and/or new pricing plans too. AT&T is already suffering from all the web browsing via the iPhone. Can you imagine AT&Ts network with such apps available.

I wonder sometimes why Apple took on the Big Brother role via an app store. Is their cut, after expenses the reason, or was there other reasons to place them selfs in the precarious position.

The vocal developers who have been complaining have displayed legitimate complaints. Getting this dirty laundry out helps both the developers and users.

The rules aren't always clear and the reviewers clearly are executing the rules unevenly. Also, Apple shouldn't reject applications because they may confuse users or they may duplicate an iPhone app. For developers these things can be a nightmare.

I'm surprised we haven't seen many users complain about the App Store. Rejections due to possible confusion to the user or duplicate process should be unacceptable to the end user. The user should be allowed to judge this for them selfs as they do with their computer software. Perhaps the bigger user issue is that they do not receive bug fixes in a timely manner. The developer receives all the complaints while Apple is the slow gate keeper who often is the one that should be blamed for the delivery delay.

Open market: good for developers and users.

Big Brother: always has bad consequences.

11-26-2009, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by xstep

Like so many, I've read the stories & blogs, including the linked one. My conclusion is that having only one outlet for iPhone apps is the largest problem.

While I agree that the Devs may have issues and the system could probably be better, I don't agree with you assessment overall.

1) There already is an open-market for Apps that Apple doesn't control. Jailbreak your iPhone and have a ball. Doing this leads to instability and security issues on the phone itself. The latest worm working it's way through iPhones worldwide is an example. When I JB my phone, stability sucked. There is choice for both users and devs, it's free, easy and can do lots of cool things. That leads me to the next point...

2) Configuration control. Prior to owning an iPhone I owned a Palm based smart phone from Verizon. Great phone but finding Apps that worked on my phone was a nightmare. There was no configuration control and some apps would bring the phone to a screeching halt (ala #1 above). Some Apps only works on some hardware, regardless of the OS version, some only worked on some OS versions regardless of the hardware and documentation was often missing, poorly written or just downright wrong. I have heard stories of the same issues existing in the Windows Mobile world, but have no experience.

Yes, Apple is a bit draconian but if it means ALL of the Apps will run on ALL of the phones and everything is well documented, I'm willing to live with it. If not, I can always JB my phone again (and live with the consequences) or switch to another phone. In the end, I don't see Apple loosening control and I think if they did things would get much, much worse.

11-26-2009, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by xstep

...What I'd like to see is an open market just like we have for software we buy for our Macs...An open market gives great flexibility to both developers and users...I'm surprised we haven't seen many users complain about the App Store...The user should be allowed to judge this for them selves as they do with their computer software. Perhaps the bigger user issue is that they do not receive bug fixes in a timely manner. The developer receives all the complaints while Apple is the slow gate keeper who often is the one that should be blamed for the delivery delay.

Open market: good for developers and users.

Big Brother: always has bad consequences.

Great stuff!!

Yes, Apple is a bit draconian...

understatment

...but if (insert assertion here)...I'm willing to live with it...

That statement is at the root of much of what plagues the world today

11-26-2009, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by baggss

While I agree that the Devs may have issues and the system could probably be better, I don't agree with you assessment overall.

Jailbreaking is not the option I think people should have to resort to. As seen in the last week, when people who jailbreak their phones don't know what they are doing, they could leave a back door open. In this case it was login passwords. And who is to say that at least some of the instability you have seen isn't due to the jailbreaking action it self. Perhaps those apps would work fine on an un-jailbroken phones. I'd like to see some developer stories on this issue.

Configuration control comes in many forms. I have an iPod touch which can't run some iPhone apps, at least without upgrading the OS to 3.x. It isn't the cost of the upgrade that is holding me back, for now, but the stories of poor wireless performance.

I wish I could find the link. In the last week or so, a developer described that their app was rejected because it used an unauthorized framework. The issue was that they did do the code checking to avoid that framework on non-3.x devices where it was unauthorized to use, but allowed their code to use it on 3.x devices where appropriate. Apples automated tools only recognized that the code was being used in an app that could run on the older OS. So here, Apple's configuration control broke when it improperly rejected something because of the differences between OS's.

I can control my Macs fine, so what makes Apple think I can't control my iDevice? If something causes an instability, I'll remove it, and then give it a scathing review.

Apple has been good, so far, about keeping the iPhone to a standard where the phones are close enough (virtually identical) that the developer can code to all models, within the OS spec they are using. The developers only have to test for what hardware might not be available to their app. The problem with the other phone manufacturers is that they fragmented their own lines in such ugly ways that developers couldn't easily adapt, or keep up. Also, the carriers controlled the phone OS releases, didnt' they, via their customizations. The picture was confusing before the iPhone. We'll see how well Apple does in the long run. The simple act of changing the screen resolution can rock the apple cart.

I believe that the cream of apps will rise to the top and apps that cause issues will disappear. There may be cases where people will put up with a poor app because they want its unique feature, but that is the exception. I'd rather have the choice, than let one source make that and other choices for me.

11-26-2009, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by xstep

I'd rather have the choice, than let one source make that and other choices for me.

Well, there are lots of other smart phones on market. Maybe it's time you went shopping. If you don't like how the whole iPhone/iTouch process is run, then take your using, and more importantly your money, elsewhere. Otherwise it's just whining.