Curate or commandant? Apple App Store debate grows

Jonny Evans
|
September 25, 2008
|
Share

Apple's culture of secrecy and control around iPhone development may mean we now have a series of University courses preparing to spring up to train new developers - but continues to thwart more informal means to bring knowledge to the developer community - there's not even a book - but there was going to be.

Publisher Pragmatic Programmers has a complete book on iPhone development ready and waiting. The title will be a huge boost to many iPhone developers, particularly one-person shops who crave a little help in what they are trying to do. The title seems likely to be very successful - except it will never make it to print.

Why?

Here's why - and Apple's culture of secrecy and control around the iPhone is squarely to blame, as the publishers explain (and thanks to John Gruber for the eagle eyes)...

"We’ve had the iPhone book ready to go beta for some months, but were prevented from publishing it because of the iPhone SDK’s Non-Disclosure Agreement (which affects all publishers regarding this material, regardless of whether the reader is a member of the ADC or not).

"Normally, pre-release NDA’s such as this one are lifted when the product finally ships. We expected that this NDA would be lifted when the iPhone 2.0 software shipped, but it wasn’t. The September announcement came and went, and still the NDA remains in place.

"It now appears that Apple does not intend to lift the NDA any time soon. Regrettably, this means we are pulling our iPhone book out of production. But all is not lost: we are actively looking at alternative ways of getting this content to you. It probably won’t happen anytime soon, but know that we are doing what we can."

This news is only going to add to the huge furore surrounding the way Apple has recently begun rejecting applications with ever-increasing enthusiasm. Seems an application only has to slightly duplicate one of Apple's core functions for a rejection to take place. And that's annoying many developers, as clearly described in Jason Snell's report here. 

Delicious Monster developer, Will Shipley, believes Apple needs to remove its control over shipping apps - beyond ensuring security, protecting against scams and preventing illegal content - he argues that the market should decide which apps succeed or fail. And developer Brent Simmons says Apple's insistence on maintaining control is "a mistake," calling the behaviour "definitely beneath the company".

There's another complaint: Developers have been complaining that the terms of the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) Apple demands they keep to are so onerous they can't even properly discuss what they are working on between different dev firms - even when developers concerned have all signed that NDA. The situation seems to be becoming ever more frustrating, driving some developers to quit iPhone and shift to Android.

And that is no good thing.

Should Apple open up here? Is it taking a wrong path? And sure, we know there's lots of money to be made in App development, but is Apple over-playing its custodial role? Is it acting as a curate of opportunity, or a camp commandant of discipline and control? Choose your position in our poll, or spare your few cents worth in comments below....

 

 

Comments (18)

Luis Alejandro Masanti (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 7:03am

Apple success, IMO, is greatly based in its behaviour... including secrecy, demential control and all the stuff that is using in the App Store...

So, at least from Apple's point of view, they had good experiencial reasons (past successes) to follow this path.

As a blessing to all bloggers, Google Market will show if full freedom is really better than Apple's excrucianting control freak behaviour.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 7:28am

Well said.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 7:49am

¿Curate? Perhaps you mean curator.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 8:44am

A retailer represents products as their own. They are responsible for the sale, and they are obligated to support the sold product.

If I buy a TV from Best Buy, and it breaks, Best Buy is on the hook, even if Best Buy claims that "all sales are final" and "warranties are only handled by the manufacturer".

Therefore, Apple has an OBLIGATION to make sure that the products sold by THEIR store are of high enough quality to be sold. If Apple disagrees, Apple should most certainly decide not to carry such a product - in the same way that Best Buy doesn't have to sell every TV that a manufacturer makes.

Should Apple liberalize their store? Yes. But not without adding reasonable controls, manual or automated, that guarantee quality.

BSM (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 9:00am

We were in the middle of of developing a customer management app that can interact with your website/store but we halted development when we heard they are refusing apps that does similar functions. We do not want to wast our time and energy on a platform/product that is governed with communism. So we are also looking to Android for a free range if apps we will be making.

Fat Phil (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 9:58am

It's weird, and a little discomforting.

They must believe that there's a justifiable reason to put themselves into such a visible (and dangerously negative) position - either they didn't think it would kick up such a storm, or their reasons are well founded.

Curious times.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 10:20am

"We do not want to wast our time and energy on a platform/product that is governed with communism"
I think you mean "We do not want to waste our time and energy on a product that we can't make money off for sure".
Use common sense when writing your applications (would you sell a product that cuts into your own market?)
And why would you sell 10 applications that do the exact same thing? With that Apple is helping those programmers who came up with an idea first (innovation) by not accepting copycats who figured they can make a fast buck by selling the same application. I am pretty sure that if your application is more that just a "copy" (you know, like having one of a kind features or beeing better than the original) Apple has no problems releasing it. See it as a patent model, first come, first serve. That's not communism as far as I know! And don't forget. Apple helps you selling your application in a store accessed by ALL iPhone users (that means ALL YOUR POSSIBLE CUSTOMERS) even on the first page on the day of your release!!! What other store gives you that?
Don't try to bite the hand that feeds you! They are cleaning up the store (something they should have done right from the beginning) and they have all the rights to do so.
One thing I learned is that nothing in life is for sure. So, take the risk for once! Think different! =)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 10:31am

Apple are not simply rejecting applications when there are 10 of them, you only need to look at the store to see that. Nor are they rejecting thenm based on quality - again, look at the store. They're rejecting them based on some set of undefined rules - the one rule we *do* know about is if apple might sometime in the future maybe want to do something similar, they reject it. The other rules we have no clue about.

I can well understand not wanting to develop for iphone with the prospect of random and unexplained rejection hanging over you - our own company has just shelved an iphone project for similar reasons... the development cost of an app during its lifetime can easily be tens of thousands. Only an insane company would develop for the iphone when the entire project could be thrown in the toilet at the whim of apple.

ViewRoyal (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 10:49am

I can understand the publisher's and developers' frustration with Apple's NDA. I don't work at Apple, so I don't know the reasons for this much secrecy. It does seem a bit odd that Apple does allow other publications for developers of Mac OS X, but not for the iPhone version of Mac OS X.

As a consumer of Apple products though, I imagine that this NDA is there for a good reason (even if Apple hasn't articulated it yet). If, for example, the information that developers are privy to could be used by hackers to cause problems for iPhone users... then that would be a very good reason for this secrecy.

Regarding Apple's review what applications get included on the App Store, I'm very happy that they are doing this. If there was no control at all, there would be many CrappApps (registered trade mark ;-) and useless wastes of money like the "I Am Rich" app.

People seem to be up in arms about Apple controlling what goes on it's own App Store. How many stores, either real stores or Web stores, do you know of that allow anyone to sell anything they want to without reviewing and approving those items? None... except supposedly the Android store... and we'll see how that turns out whenever it goes online.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 12:58pm

Your argumentation is false:
1. There is nothing preventing hackers from getting the SDK and the documentation.
2. There are CrappApps and useless wastes of money in the store anyway.
3. Other stores, either real stores or Web stores, use predictable rules for rejection.
4. If Apple rejects you product there is no competing store you can sell it in.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 1:20pm

http://www.iphonesavior.com/2008/09/rumor-first-mac.html

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 4:28pm

This is a really informative and interesting web site, but the constant whining about this issue is really starting to turn me off. One or two articles are importannt, but it seems every day I hear something about how badly apple is treating developers. And yes I agree their practices are destructive, but enough already. They're not listening, they never did, leave it alone.

If you're not happy, move on to a different platform or client base. That is the only way Apple will listen, if all developers vote with their action away from them and towards another platform.

But please stop this incessant whining; you're sounding like children.

I'm a Windows developer who uses 100% mac hardware (I guess I'm a bit of an Apple fanboy). But I work, where there is work; and there has never been any benefit about complaining about a client or platform.

beez1717 (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 4:46pm

Apple has the NDA Becasue they didn't want an app store in the first place.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 7:20pm

I'm still waiting for an even remotely convincing argument for why restriciting discussion of the SDK hinders responsible application development. Take X-Plane, a well-documented success. They were invited to Apple's headquarters. How are the unknown x-planes of tomorrow supposed to happen if they are not able to collaborate with the larger development community. I worry greatly that Android's openness will leave Apple in the dust. Google already made a better web browser with Apple's own webkit. Where are all the Linux viruses? There aren't any because of the open community. Apple has been sucking at the teat of open source for many years now--why is it being so hypocritical?

Sean (not verified) | September 25, 2008 - 7:48pm

Apple (and I) live in a society where the basic assumption is the absolute right of the individual to do what he wants with what is his. I let people into my house on a case by case basis, depending on what suits me. Apple lets people into its App Store on a case by case basis, depending on what suits them. Standing on the sidewalk outside my house with a sign, screaming insults might impress an uninformed passerby to believe ill of me, but if the police become involved its you who are going to jail. You have no more right to a spot in the App store than to sleep on my couch, however unfair you think I or Apple may be. All the rest is just pointless second guessing and hand wringing by the rejected and their sympathizers.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | September 26, 2008 - 3:36am

Your argument is false. From your analogy Apple...
1. asks you if you would like to build some furniture...
2. to put it up for sale in their house...
3. tells you that they wont accept designs that are illegal, pornographic or offensive...
4. lend you all the tools you need...
5. so you can spend hour, weeks and months on you project...
6. Only to be rejected for reasons other that those given at the start of the project.

You may be absolutely correct that I do not have the right to a spot in the Apple house. But telling people one thing and then changing your mind based on arbitrary and hidden rules and interpretations has a tendency to disappoint, upset and annoy people.

I'm laughing (not verified) | September 26, 2008 - 4:12pm

Problems with the captcha?

wowgolds987 (not verified) | December 11, 2008 - 11:51pm

Good News! Now buy wow gold from mmoinn.com, you can save huge expenditures of more wow power leveling , as soon as possible to buy wow gold !