Why I’m not developing iPhone applications
Posted on September 12, 2008 by Brian Webster
Filed Under Development | 4 Comments
When the iPhone SDK was announced earlier this year, I downloaded it right away and was very excited to see all the potential stuff that could be done. That initial excitement has slowly given way to the full realization of the terms dictated by Apple for distributing apps.
The first restriction is, of course, that you must distribute your application through Apple’s App Store and iTunes, and Apple gets a 30% cut for their efforts. That part actually isn’t totally bad, since you do get a lot of benefit for being listed on the store without having to deal with any of the setup or maintenance. Sole distribution through iTunes helps with the integration that gives the iPhone such a good user experience, and 30% isn’t an unreasonable cut for Apple to earn on each sale.
The real problem though is the fact that Apple is the sole arbiter of what applications get accepted and rejected from being listed on the App Store. This would be somewhat bad if there were a concrete set of guidelines that said what was and wasn’t acceptable for inclusion. There are some rules outlined in the SDK agreement, but there are apparently also a lot of other “unwritten” rules that are governing Apple’s decision on whether to accept a specific application. Apps have been denied/pulled for UI compliance reasons, for resource usage, for “taste” (e.g. the “Pull My Finger” app), and for no particular reason other than some vague assertion of “usefulness” (e.g. the “I Am Rich” app which cost $999 and did nothing).
The latest app to be rejected takes things over the top, though. Podcaster, an iPhone app designed by Almerica, was rejected by Apple because it “duplicates the functionality of the Podcast section of iTunes”. Forget the fact that this isn’t even functionality that’s only on the desktop application, iTunes. What Apple’s saying here is that they can claim exclusive rights to ship applications for certain domains of functionality, and reject any third party application that tries to compete in that area.
Want to make an e-mail application for the iPhone? Too bad! Apple’s already got one, so you can’t duplicate that functionality. Music player? Nope, sorry, can’t do that either. Or what if, for example, you already have an application selling on the App Store, and then in a software update, Apple decides they want to offer similar functionality. Can they then boot your app from the store, since it’s duplicating what Apple’s done? And what does this do for the power of competition among iPhone applications? It’s a very chilling effect.
Now, it’s perfectly possible that this was a one-time screw up by one Apple reviewer. I really really hope it is, and that Apple clears this up as soon as possible. But regardless of what happens in this specific instance, the real problem here is that there is no clear and definitive list of rules for what will and won’t be accepted to the App Store. Even internally, Apple doesn’t seem to have one, since some apps are rejected for a particular reason, while other apps are accepted that could have just as easily been rejected for the same “offense”.
Before I even think of sinking time into developing an iPhone application, Apple needs to come out with a published (at least to developers who agreed to the SDK terms, if not fully public), detailed description of what criteria an application has to meet to be included in the App Store. Then, of course, they need to apply those guidelines consistently across all applications submitted for approval. Neither of these things is even close to being done now, and I for one am not going to invest time in developing an application without knowing beforehand whether I’ll even be able to sell the damn thing.
Comments
4 Responses to “Why I’m not developing iPhone applications”
RSS 2.0
I agree with you 99% (Probably 100%, actually, but I never agree to absolutes.
When I saw the number of overlapping features in list making apps on the App Store, I breathed a sigh of relief. It looked like one of my fears, that Apple would dictate which apps in a category were worthy, wouldn’t be realized.
The example I give is Zenbe Lists. I use it for grocery lists, not because it’s the best tool for that task, but because I need quick easy sync with my wife. If somebody came out with a mediocre grocery list app with fast sync, even if we could agree that in every other way it was inferior to what was already at the store, I would probably use it for that feature alone. There does not exist a single global objective ordered list of software quality.
So, I was hopeful when I saw redundancy.
When I heard about apps being rejected for silly stuff like using vibration where it shouldn’t have been used, I was a bit concerned. But that seemed like it would get fixed.
NetShare worried me a lot, but it still seemed like it was a potential special case that Apple had not thought about people doing.
“I am rich” is what really scared me. It fit into the “I know it when I see it” category. That’s not the standard that is acceptable to me for the App Store. If Apple had issued a statement saying, essentially, “While we know that ‘I Am Rich’ is not malicious, it is a ridiculous app that is just trying to prove a point” or something that implied that they thought this was a special case, I would’ve felt a bit better.
Rejecting a podcasting app because iTunes does podcasting is damned near my precise fear of what was going to happen. Fuzzy, ill-defined, and with *zero* communication from Apple about it.
An anonymous poster on the original article claimed that Apple had rejected another podcasting app earlier.
So, if this guy hadn’t gone public and gotten publicity…every few weeks a well-meaning developer will submit a kick-ass podcasting app to Apple, only to have it rejected.
Apple *needs* to communicate these rules. They need to provide examples of what they won’t approve.
Actually, what they need to do is stop acting as the sole and exclusive gatekeeper to iPhone apps. Apple has had a reputation for so many years of being a gatekeeper and preventing third party development…because, you know, obviously there would’ve been millions of people making NuBus expansion cards if Apple had just said it was OK…
This behaviour is, IMHO, going to become a significant barrier to them increasing their market share. It provides ammunition to the old canard that Apple has to approve third party apps on the Mac. I heard somebody say that even this year…
[...] (2008-09-13): More from Fraser Speirs, Brian Webster, John Gruber, and Paul [...]
Actually…Apple doesn’t have to or need to publish anything. It’s their platform and they can do as they please. There seems to be enough apps being developed anyway. I as a customer/user have more choice one click away than on any other mobile platform. Do I need more email apps. browsers, phone apps. on the iPhone..not really. I’d rather have one of each that is really good and stable. This is after a phone first and foremost and I can’t have it crash while calling 911. So I’m pretty ok with Apple keeping a real tight control on what gets installed and that the quality is maintained so I have a problem free experience. I’m even ok with the remote switch should a app start behaving badly.
Now that you don’t spend time on iPhone Dev., when will we see an update of PowerTunes that supports Applications;-)
/Mikael
[...] Don’t take my word for it (I’m not a coder) – take a look at this interesting blog entry by coder Brian [...]