Apple's App Store approval process gets partially automated

Why aren't these apps open like the internet itself is? Who's deciding this censorship and I'm not talking the data hogging ones? If you clog your phone up because it's a guzzler then it's your responsibility to delete the app but to censor them for other reasons is just so wrong.

So people don't put malicious code into them. You can download any app from the store and feel safe about it, if it was open to all you can guarantee there would be tons of people tiring to steal info from phones.

Ok but then why the obvious censorship for politically and sexually "incorrect" apps?

I believe that is Apple wanting to be neutral political and considered family friendly.
Agree with that or not Apple is free to do so as that it is their store to sell from.

No different then if you owned a shop and didn't want to sell Porn Mags.


However if the government stepped in a said you cant sell that in your shop if you wanted to or Apple same thing, then I would be 100% on your side.

I don't know if censorship is the right word to describe what Apple is doing.
Censorship has the connotation of government action and related to public (government controlled things.)

Understood. I still think there's fine line to decide what is acceptable or not and eventually there should be other options to buy apps elsewhere as the device is yours not Apple's. I'm not restricted to buy movies only from iTunes for my Mac- same thing. This is also the same problem with AppleTV except in that case the device itself sucks.

No necessarily so. WalMArt censors lyrics on what can be sold on CDs in their stores- same thing. Apple is censoring content as well here- there can be no denying it.

True, but unedited still exist and its one's choice to get the normal version some other place. As long as there is no government interference. itunes sell both, and on some songs I like the radio edit, I don't need to hear cussing all the time.

Apple is choosing what content to have available.
And again in a open market, if its not something your willing to live with don't buy the product. If say the somehow blocked the internet to not allow you on certain sites, I would not have a iphone, but not selling porn apps does not stop me from making choices.

Because there are millions of 'do-gooders' out there who would just love to collect their 15 minutes by pouncing on Apple's very prominent name. Heck, even Greenpeace couldn't help itself. Just think of all those guardians of morality waiting for their moment in the spotlight.

I know with all the digital rights rules that have been created in the last few years it is a nightmare. Its total restricting. I will concede that point, if people choose to install programs from a non apps store source they should be allowed too, especially after the 2 year period, since before then it kinda is joint ownership between the user and ATT.

Well you can't really go to porn sites cause they mostly utilize flash anyway- but that's another story.

Hey!!! Business opportunity for you!!!
See Apple just kept the market open!

My biggest hope is for them to allow iphone App development on windows. I would be on that quick!

It's wrong because under the apple agreement we indicated that we would only use published API calls. This is in no way about censorship or data hogging, not sure where that came from. It's about Apple more efficiently and effectively enforcing the rules of the game.

Really? Then what is this? http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...litical_caric/

Stop right there. Is there a license/EULA attached to iPhone usage?

Why aren't the developers testing their apps in the first place? Why make Apple do all the QA? It's incredibly short sighted of the developers to be complaining that Apple is taking too long to approve Apps. If the developers did more QA, or even outsourced their QA and testing, maybe the approval process at Apple wouldn't be so backed up?

If Apple was certifying Apps rather than doing a deep QA/Testing dive the whole process would move much more quickly and the backlog would not exist.

Everyone is trying to make a quick buck and avoid absorbing the cost and responsibility that comes with application development on something that is essentially an enterprise platform. Apple is trying to ensure quality on their platform and protect the user community. All the developers are doing is throwing a temper tantrum because they aren't making the $$$ they thought they would be making right NOW.

If the developers really want the approval process to move along more quickly they are going to have to assume the responsibility and cost for testing their products. Until they stop trying to be cowboys and code wranglers and man up to the challenge of earning the cash they have already counted they will have to suffer the consequences of their, and every other shoddy half bit developers, poor appreciation for the application development lifecycle.

Im sure some apps will fall through the cracks as usual, but this is a very good thing. Im noticing updates are less frequent than they used to be for many apps. Either its being held up and/or the developers are doing more between updates to avoid waiting for the approval to take place.

I know the Facebook developer passed the reigns to another due to being annoyed with Apple but it seems others, like Gameloft, are unhappy with Android as a successful platform. Gamelift says it cant make money from Android and that the iPhone development now accounts for 13% of their business. I suppose if people werent talking about Apples App Store then there would be a reason for Apple to worry. I dont see them doing anything but trying to speed up the process, not necessarily make it better.



Most are testing them. Usually they are not being approved for instability issues, not for the other things that make the blogosphere. I see nothing wrong with developers wanting to know what Apple is specifically looking for and for the use of this app to check it against their own. The only caveat is would having this app allow shady developers learn how to trick Apples automated procedure, thus making it pointless?


PS: Korexz is the only post as of this writing that actually addressed the topic at hand. It was either AIs Irritable Bowelboy or people replying to him. It really just ruins these threads. You simply cant argue with someone who will say that Apples apps suck out of one corner of their mouth and then say Apple shouldnt verify that apps work, have trojans, etc. out of the other side of their mouth.

Don't forget it also gives Apple a competitive advantage with their own apps as they can essentially utilize functionality that everyone else cant. Bit like what Microsoft used to do with Windows. Not that they really need to as they just ban every app that could be a competitor.


Why don't you just install Mac on a virtual machine in windows or as a native install on a PC. Given the huge number of developers that have turned up for iPhone development, compared to the number of actual Mac developers, I can't believe that many went out and actually bought a Mac.


You do realize you just quoted someone saying they wanted a copy of the software Apple uses to scan the apps so they could test themselves. How else can they test that all the names they've used to name something in their program isn't the same as an unpublished api that they don't know about!

I just thought about an issue: I've got MY iPod/iPhone, I've developed MY application with regards of all Apple's rules and restrictions and... I simply can't run MY OWN application on MY OWN iPod/iPhone.

Sure you can. How do you think developers test their apps before submitting them. You just offer it to the masses to use without getting Apples approval.

Wow. Stop the presses. A developer thinks there is a problem with Apple's app store?

I don't think the developers will ever be happy until Steve Jobs personally kisses their toes before each submission.

Wow. What makes you immediately "go there?"

Not everyone has nefarious motives you know. There's no evidence that Apple has ever done this or ever intends to.

If Apple's tool checked the type of the object the method is being called on, then surely problem solved?

Integrating the private API checking tools into XCode would make sense as a logical next step.

Flag up the issue as the code is written.

Yes, I can. Just paying $99 every year. $99 per year for running MY OWN application on MY OWN iPod/iPhone.

It is one thing for apple to want to control what is sold on their app store platform, but I believe it is wrong for them to dictate that one can't sell their apps directly. I am personally surprised that no one brought a court case for locking the device to such an extant that developers have to give 30% to apple for their hard work. This might have been fine initially when there wasn't 100.000 app and some cashed so nicely that they couldn't complain, but seriously.
First one couldn't install OSX on any other product that Apple expensive hardware.
Then one couldn't transfer his purchased music to any other non itunes device, without a hack.
Now one can't sell their iApp without going through Apple store.
What is next is the question?
Developers can't sell their software without giving money to Apple.
There is no doubt that Apple is following the trend of the neo con/fascist, where one can't do anything freely without becoming a criminal.
So much for being politically neutral. I think they are a bit hypocrites on this one.

This is a misconception. Censorship is just censorship, there is no implication of government anything, although governments do censor more than most parties.

Also, while I think teckstud's call for totally open distribution is terribly naive, I think he's right that there is no reason for Apple to censor "adult" apps or play social gatekeeper in any way given that the store has built in parental controls.

It's basically dishonest and two-faced of Apple to say on the one hand that they are going to mark al the apps that are "for adults" and then at the same time censor apps for content like boobies or swastikas. That's totally fascist really and it can't really be said that there is any logical argument to support it.

Why not?

Err background apps, and I don't accept the crap that its to stop the phone slowing down. People mange multiple programs on a PC perfectly fine and realize that when it starts to slow you need to close some stuff. Also wouldn't be particularly hard to give users a display so they can see which apps are hogging the memory and processor.

Mail can receive emails, but Skype cant recieve messages.
iPOD can play when you exit it, yet Last FM has to stop if you ever want to do anything else, like use your phone while listening to music.

So correct me if Im wrong but isn't that a frickin huge piece of functionality that Apple apps can use but everyone else's cant?



See his other post. To copy your own app, onto your own iPhone, from your own Mac, using your own cable, with everything plugged into your own power supply, located in your own home, using your own time and potentially not even using Xcode to write the app but someone else's somehow means you have to pay Apple $99 a year for the privilege to do so.

Then jailbreak your phone and youre good to go. If you can create an app with Xcode then you can easily figure out how create a jailbroken app. Youre not breaking any laws as far as I can tell.



Im guessing the iPhone is your first smartphone. Its been discussed ad nauseam, but the 30% isnt jut Apple skimming off the top and its a lot lower than most other mobile app stores before it charged for a similar service. Ill look them up later and see if theyve altered their rates since the App Store arrived.


How does the number products sold in a store dictate that a store should low their prices. Dont expect them to lower this non-excessive fee until there is competing store doing better with lower rates.


Then dont buy a Mac. Apple creates their software to sell their HW. That is their business model. You are not entitled to running Mac OS X on any HW you choose nor required to purchase anything from Apple if you dont want to. Free market FTW!


iTunes runs on nearly every PC in the world so that isnt a problem. iTunes has the first and only option to legally remove DRM from audio as dictated from RIAA. Also, iTunes Store music hasnt DRM for awhile now. Most importantly, if you dont like quality and/or restrictions of a store you dont have to buy from them. Nothing stops you from buy Amazon music, CDs, etc.


Nope, but that is their choice. You dont have to support their business model if you dont like it.


I guess I should have read this part first. What a fraking nut! Against paragraphs and a free market. I suggest supporting the Motorola Droid. Long live the Peoples App Phone.



Their process seems very disjointed. They have apps that access risqué images of women but then can other apps. The apps dont actually have the files on them which i guess shifts any liability but its a silly stance. Put up proper parental controls and just keep anything harmful or illegal out of the store. Nothing more; nothing less.



So when I press the Home Button on the iPhone the app should just run in the background. How many apps could that potentially be in a very short time? Do I really need WeatherBug running constantly in the background. Is the foreground app so unimportant that the background app should be allowed to suck as much CPU cycles and RAM that it chooses to? How about the fact the first two iPhones barely had enough RAM to run the basics? That the iPod app running while trying to use Safari with tabs would make the page I was just on reload because there wasnt enough RAM to hold the page? How about the slowdowns that occurred from


Theres an app for that.


Its Apples apps. They have created them and tested them. Their developers know exactly how much resources they use while running in the background. Other developers, not so much. Instead of complaining Ive found solutions. Ive been running Backgrounder since it launched. Not all apps are created equal. Start Google Earth and SkyVoyager, then push it to the background while trying to use your iPod, get mail, and use Safari. Not a good experience.

Apple is creating a consumer device for the average person. They have taken a market segment that was primarily for geeky virgins and hardcore business users and made it popular for the average person.

Id wager that Apple will likely include background app support in v4.0. That it will be available for the 3GS and beyond, but not for the original and 3G for the reasons stated above. The best method I can think of is to make it work like the Push Notifications in Settings. Meaning, they will create Background App API and leave it up to the developer to choose which apps are capable of running in the background and what services will work in the background. Its simply stupid to have most apps run in the background just like its stupid for most apps to have Push Notifications, but there are certainly some that greatly benefit from it.

There are 3 ways to run an application on iPhone/iPod:
1. Download it through App Store
2. Sign for Developer program and pay $99 per year
3. Jailbrake your iPhone/iPod - it's still hard to do with the latest Apple firmware and I'm not sure if warranty covers the phone after that.

Stop asking Why. Go write an application for the iPhone, learn ObjC, Cocoa and follow the dev site listings for answers you'd expect under NDA.

Really? You signed up to register as a ADC dev, signed an NDA and developed an iPhone/iPod Touch application and you're asking how come you can't run your own App directly in the wild without going through the Appstore?

Stop fantasizing and throwing out baseless hypothetical scenarios as if the NDA and Developer license boundaries don't exist, on an operating system you only have a license to use, under terms you agreed to when you purchased the damn product.

Psystar is done. Get over it.

Go run Linux on the system, develop your own API Frameworks, run-time, etc., that will run under Linux and install on the system [assuming you have Linux capably running on the iPhone/iPod Touch] to your heart's content.

Very true, I agree there. A no brainer really...

On the iPhone, Warn the developer that you will be rejected if you use Private API, But on OS X, just Warn about it, and say "use at your own risk, your app may break in a later OS X release or update"

Incidentally, I do not own a smart phone (i think). In fact I have asked my service provider to disable browsing/email capabilities. If people can't wait for me to be the front of a computer to reply to them, then I don't really want to deal with them. What is all this rush rush business now days. Not everybody has the ability take decision on the spot. This just a recipe for disaster. As for commission 1h before the job deadline, I am against it too. It just shows that people are disorganized. My peace is more important than their money. If I wanted to be in the rat race, i would be. But no thanks


Your are off my topic. It isn't about prices, it is about exclusive distribution. A model copied from the entertainment industry. What I was trying to say, was that it is easy to have your product visible in a small outlet, but this become more difficult if you have 100 competitors on the same shelf. So the initial surge in sale might be something of the past. As for a competitor shop selling iApp, I though this was against the laws... established by Apple.
It is like saying: you can buy my paint/canvases/brushes, and can sell your paintings only through me. If I don't like your painting, you can't sell it at all.


I don't buy music download. I don't think it is/was fair that one who had already purchased on iTunes, then had to pay once more just to get the music they had already purchased, DMR free.
I do not purchase music online because, unlike software if you have a major crash, you have to purchase it again. I know you are going to tell me to back up. But if I add the cost of a hard drive to the cost of the music/movies, then this is all adds up. I stick to CDs until their system change.


I don't, as you might have understood by now lol.

You can burn songs from iTunes onto a CD if you want.

My CD's joined the boxes of video tapes, cassette tapes and vinyl stored in my garage.

The world changes and nothing is going to stop that.

It's kind of amazing the amount of complaints about everything Apple does with the iPhone and the dev situation. People want instant response. They feel waiting 9 days, or 10 days, or 14 days is unacceptable. Wow. What world do they live in? Ever try resolving a discrepancy with your insurance company and your Dr.? And in this case if Apple does a good job, and your App is posted, and is popular you stand to make a nice living from your efforts.
Next people want to install anything they write and sell it anyway they can. Up to 3 years ago no cell phone in the world could do anything even close to what you can on the iPhone. Ugly little Java games, symbian hurt.
Then the crying about apps being rejected. Even though from what I follow most of the time a minor correction or just resubmitting gets an inoffensive app (one that doesn't obviously break the dev agreement) OK'd. And yes, anything that uses people will have subjective decisiosn that we don't all agree with.
From all the complaining I imagine there won't be any developers left in a few weeks...oh wait, more come in every day.

Try to imagine you spent substantial $$$ to make your application and now you have to wait extra 14 days, or 3 months or whatever before you hear if you are in the wild to start getting some money back before you break even, or your investment goes straight through the toilet. Apple's screening is inconsistent and there are quite a few really strange cases.

If there is alternate way how to sell applications, I bet not that many developers would complain.

Obviously you don't know what you are talking about. It is one thing to get the ADC account, get the iPhone SDK and all the doc and develop the application. Then if you actually want to try it on your own device, you are out of luck and have to fork out $99 a year for this to happen. This is what the original post complained about. Add my vote, it is strange business model by Apple.