[Macalways]

Why the hystrionics?

130 posts so far.

Approximately 64 posters. 38 commented once. 26 multiple times. 4 hinted that they are developers. Only one declare himself to be developing an iPhone app.

Certainly, there is no evidence here to support that developers are being driven away as many are postulating here.

A lot of misinformation and misunderstanding being posted. Certainly, nobody has supported or can provided any concrete evidence other than anecdotal hearsay of three rejected apps.

Lets look at another possibility. Apple has from the beginning, i.e., from the launch of the SDK, raised concern about apps that could adversely affect bandwidth. Obviously, they have convinced carriers that they would ensure that the iPhone would not overload their 3G systems and carriers used that assurance in formulating their service plans and charges of such.

One of Apple's answer, as we know, was the incorporation of Wi-Fi in the iPhone and iPod Touch, and another, was not to allow large full file transfers such as videos and podcasts over a carriers network, but via Wi-Fi and/or direct sync via iTunes.

Podcaster did not comply with what Apple itself would not allow its own software to do.

It is interesting the reaction outside the US when most carriers announced that they were not going to provide unlimited data for the iPhone 3G as AT&T was doing or going to do. Hundreds of postings, not only from abroad, but even in the US, appeared on how carriers and Apple were ripping users off, even though AT&T had reported that their US customers had only transferred an average of 100MBs a month on their iPhones in the first year.

For sure, this must have played on Apple's mind. And maybe it influenced the formulation of Apple's iPhone SDK licensing policy. As such, once the fog dissipates, data transfers such as Podcaster was attempting may open up.

And maybe not. Afterall, it is still Apple's legitimate right to set the rules. We may have right to call them on it, but not the right to unilaterally demand it. Certainly, not with the threatening atmosphere that some have spewed here. To continue such strategies may culminate in a future article, namely, "Don't drive Mac enthusiasts away, Macworld."

[Kontra]

> My point here is that Apple can say: No programs that do the following: download and manage podcasts; allow alternative music purchasing with or without DRM from a store; offer video playback capability; allow photo-editing; etc.
[/quote]

Let's make this simple, so that even a child can understand: Apple puts into writing "a
definitive list of product types and characteristics" as you demand.
One of those on the list, say, is a turn-by-turn GPS app, with
"definitivecharacteristics " described as you demand. What exactly is
Macworld and The Street, ZDNet, cnet and Google Finance groups are
going to blabber about the same day? Apple is about to introduce a
turn-by-turn GPS app! Pictures at 11! There's zero doubt about this.
When that mythical app isn't delivered soon, TheStreet and Barron's
goons will try to take down AAPL with reports of delay, problems and
other manner of hysteria. I'm sure a few shareholders migh even try to
sue Apple for the non-delivery or misrepresentation. Who needs any of
this!

> And none of this handicaps them, and it makes it predictable for developers.
[/quote]

You're confusing the Microsoft enterprise ecosystem with Apple's. If you want "predictability" and eventual delays you're on the wrong platform to begin with.

> If Apple can't communicate this under NDA to its smartest partners, then what good is the iPhone developer program?
[/quote]
Ask the developers of 100,000,000 apps downloaded.

[Glenn_Fleishman]

Kontra said:

One of those on the list, say, is a turn-by-turn GPS app, with
"definitivecharacteristics " described as you demand. What exactly is
Macworld and The Street, ZDNet, cnet and Google Finance groups are
going to blabber about the same day?

If the NDA is broken. If Apple reveals that much information. If, in fact, Apple hadn't already essentially disallowed turn-by-turn GPS applications, although TomTom says they're negotiating on this point.

Quote

Who needs any of
this!

I would like to welcome Artie McStrawman to the conversation. It's been so long since I've heard from him.

Quote

> If Apple can't communicate this under NDA to its smartest partners, then what good is the iPhone developer program?
Ask the developers of 100,000,000 apps downloaded.

Yes, 100 million flashlights can't be wrong.

[Kontra]

> If the NDA is broken.
[/quote]

"If"? What you're proposing is for Apple to expose itself on any and all
product categories for a mobile platform, and hope the NDA is not
broken. AND keep amending that agreement on (what could become) a
weekly basis, as new product plans continually emerge. You really think
this is teneable for a company like Apple? I'd love to see you argue
that with Jobs

> If Apple reveals that much information.
[/quote]

So, on the one hand you're browbeating Apple for not providing "a definitive list of product types and characteristics" and, on the other, you're not even convinced that Apple would ever reveal that much information. I guess Apple could never win. Well, thank you for proving my point.

> If, in fact, Apple hadn't already essentially disallowed turn-by-turn GPS applications, although TomTom says they're negotiating on this point.
[/quote]

Wow, what a concept. Actual developer having non-public negotiations with Apple. You mean that is actually possible? Imagine that!

> I would like to welcome Artie McStrawman to the conversation. It's been so long since I've heard from him.
[/quote]

Well, thank you kindly Mr. Scarecrow.

> Yes, 100 million flashlights can't be wrong.
[/quote]
If you need to denigrate thousands of (successful) iPhone developers, go right ahead.

[Macalways]

{quote}Yes, 100 million flashlights can't be wrong.{quote}

Now there is an excellent example of non-bias writing by one who sounds like he got his degree in communications-journalism at the University of Idaho.

[Glenn_Fleishman]

Kontra said:

> > If Apple reveals that much information. So, on the one hand you're browbeating Apple for not providing "a definitive list of product types and characteristics" and, on the other, you're not even convinced that Apple would ever reveal that much information. I guess Apple could never win. Well, thank you for proving my point.

Now you're just purposely not listening any more.

> Yes, 100 million flashlights can't be wrong.

Quote

> > If you need to denigrate thousands of (successful) iPhone developers, go right ahead.

I think it's been well said earlier that the vast majority of development that's turned into released applications to date was performed by developers who believed that Apple would apply a fair and consistent standard of evaluation. A program released yesterday (whether another flashlight or a $500 CRM client application) has been in development for weeks or months and in queue for release for likely weeks before the latest firestorm hit.

Fundamentally, we're still at the same point. Developers of interesting products beyond one-trick wonders and simple utilities that aren't at a scale that Apple is willing to negotiate with directly (like TomTom, if that is happening) will not be able to motivate themselves or convince senior management to commit the resources to write software for a platform that has a giant, inconsistent veto button attached.

[Glenn_Fleishman]

Macalways said:

> Yes, 100 million flashlights can't be wrong.Now there is an excellent example of non-bias writing by one who sounds like he got his degree in communications-journalism at the University of Idaho.

This forum sometimes cracks me up!

This is my opinion, freely expressed, not reporting.

I have no degree in journalism, thank you. I was an art major at Yale. What, are you indirectly insulting Sarah Palin? Have you no decency?

And the art of satire through hyperbole (I'm sure there's a Latin or Greek term for that that's more specific) has apparently died in the heart of 100 supernovas.

There's actually a lot of great iPhone software out there. I've installed about 15+ applications myself, some free, some from $1 to $15, and I'm happy with most of it.

100 million downloads has nothing to do with developers being happy about the future of the platform, nor the actual interest in applications for which people pay. We don't know what percentage are paid. We don't know if there are more than a handful of small developers making real bank. And developers are clearly stating that Apple's accidental FUD will affect their development plans.

[Kontra]

Glenn_Fleishman said:

> a platform that has a giant, inconsistent veto button attached.
>

>

Well, Mr Scarecrow, I would be worried if there was no veto button, as that would indicate Apple was not doing its job as the curator of its own platform. As to "inconsistent" (and other irresponsible adjectives like "draconian," "giant," etc) that's obviously your spin on it.

Some people perform unnatural mental gymnastics and immediately jump to the conclusion that this is the beginning of the end, and that Apple is about to introduce mandatory code signing on Mac OS X.

If you think that the company that came up with the iPhone is this stupid, then you'll just have to wait for the day when you can jump up and celebrate your I-told-you-so.

[Glenn_Fleishman]

Kontra said:

> {quote:title=Glenn_Fleishman wrote:}{quote}
> > a platform that has a giant, inconsistent veto button attached.
Well, Mr Scarecrow, I would be worried if there was no veto button, as that would indicate Apple was not doing its job as the curator of its own platform. As to "inconsistent" (and other irresponsible adjectives like "draconian," "giant," etc) that's obviously your spin on it.

Again, you misconstrue what I'm saying to make your point: there's no reason Apple can't have a consistent policy; I didn't say there shouldn't be a veto button; etc.

Since conversation is over, I will stop feeding the trolls.

I never said anything like what you're saying I said about code signing, etc., so I have nothing to future-crow about. All I've been representing here is the reality that the iPhone will lose good software unless Apple has a better evaluation policy.

I will be happy to crow when Apple announces a better evaluation policy, as I expect they will.

[Macalways]

Make up your mind!

{quote}100 million downloads has nothing to do with developers being happy about the future of the platform, nor the actual interest in applications for which people pay.quote}

True. However, I haven't seen or heard of the deluge of discontent that one would expect from a 100 million flashlight holders.

{quote}We don't know what percentage are paid. {quote}

True. But are you implying that most aren't. in either case, it is none of our businesses.

{quote} We don't know if there are more than a handful of small developers making real bank.{quote}

We also don't know if there are more than a handful of small developers, except those that are giving them away, or don't really care, that aren't making real bank. Again, only they and the IRS has any need to know.

{quote}And developers are clearly stating that Apple's accidental FUD will affect their development plans.{quote}

So far two in this forum and a couple of others who have supposedly stated anecdotally, elsewhere and are the being repeatedly cited over and over again. Out of, what 5 plus thousand you paint with a brush of 5 hairs?

In any event, your reference to 100 million flashlights was a cheap shop in any language.

And you claimed that you were a tech journalist. Not me.

[felinawi]

...and for the other side of the story... with insight and thoughts as to why has Apple made the decisions it has:

http://www.roughlydr...-disaster-myth/

-- LInk edited to direct to original Roughly Drafted article.

[Kontra]

bq. "Kontra, it's the "Apple must be right" fansboys like you that really turn people off."
If you start name calling because it's your last refuge, then I'll call you an Apple-hater and we'll be done.
bq. "You have no idea what Apple's plans were, either."
And precisely because of that I am not jumping up and down telling everyone how incompetent or evil Apple must be.
bq. "Apple said back in June of 2007 that web apps were the approved method of delivering applications to users, and that they wouldn't release an SDK."
Once again, you're simply making up stuff. Apple said nothing of the sort. They sure introduced the notion of browser-based apps (which remains a great idea that could likely cover more than half the native apps at the Store, especially after the next HTML5 iteration of WebKit soon), but Apple did not categorically say they'd never release an SDK.
bq. "Why do you assume you know for a fact that they were always planning on releasing an SDK?"
I'm not the one assuming it one way or another. I go by what Apple actually said, not by conjuring up unsubstantiated assumptions.
bq. "How is giving developers clear guidance as to what applications are and aren't allowed diluting its brand equity?"
Because on our planet, things aren't as black and white as you imagine: judgements have to be made. Apple doesn't want the iPhone to become a cesspool of two-bit Java/Win apps like you see on other platforms. How exactly can it possibly provide a "definitive" catalog of what's "frivilous," for example, to cover all bases?
bq. "If not, why is it any different if they allow the same with my iPhone?"
Geez. Mac OS X is a decade old, mature general-computing PC platform. The iPhone App Store is a three-month old, limited mobile device in a fiercely competitive, emerging market? Apple has to establish it first, before it can do anything creative with it.
Like I said, had Apple listened to the deafening chorus of people like you a few years back while it was trying to establish the iPod/iTunes Store and "opened" it up to Microsoft, Real, Sony, etc., there would certainly be no iPhone or likely Apple Inc, today.

Chew on this: Apple is not going to commit hara kiri because some people would like a chance to exploit the platform at the expense of Apple's long-term interests.
If, for example, Apple doesn't think Flash is good for the iPhone platform for strategic reasons (as I argued here), Flash is not going to be on it, at least until Apple and Adobe reach a corporate deal. That's how real life works. And guess what, Apple is not going spell it out in writing that for strategic reasons it's not allowing Flash. If you think that's going to change, dream on.

[Kontra]

KPO said:

Apologists will see some sort of long-range "strategy" with each change in tactics. I see a company doing its best to respond to consumer demand.

This is the most egregious conflation yet of consumers vs. a handful of alleged, anonymous developers. Hopefully you can appreciate the difference between the two.

[heisetax]

How can this porn thing really be an issue if one is able to download the junk on ones laptop or desktop & simply transfer it to their iPod Touch or iPhone. How hard can that be. Subjects like this has to be handled at home starting with the parents & then instilling trust & those values in their children.

Here I thought that the pron sights were getting enough business because I rarely recive those unsollicted porn emails anymore.