Once again, EFF decides it doesn't like Apple's business model. Yawn.
Apple INSISTS on dominating the market for iPhones. And iMacs and so on as well! OMG!
Apple makes its software and its hardware. That way, it can control the entire experience. If you don't like that model, get an Android.
No, says the EFF. You must jailbreak your phone to be free, and thus expose your horrible iPhone, which no-one free and good would want, to the one bona fide trojan yet found on the iPhone!
And by pulling the boobs apps, they are taking away your freedom! Yes, if you don't know what a boob looks like, and you think a "developer" should be able to sell you 4 pictures of boobs that are freely available on the Safari browser -- and more -- or else be accused of "censorship".
I took my Google Voice account, pulled a few maneuvers that Google told me about, and voila! I have Google Voice on my desktop. Why not my regular app? Because Steve said it was substituting its address book, recent calls and messages for AT&Ts, etc. But all those features are right there, in glorious HTML 5! What vile censorship! Why shouldn't Google be allowed to rewrite the interface? Steve = Stalin!
You know, they're accusing Apple of monopolistic behavior, but they don't have a monopoly. I agree, this business model is not for everyone. But if anyone has a *potential* monopoly, it's Android, which has gone for the very model that led to the Windows monopoly: we write the OS, you make the hardware to comply. Sure, it's open and all. We take the money that comes to us through the ads! And all your data is belong to us!
But if we find you misusing Google, we will ban you for life. Now that's a monopoly. If you can't Google, you're screwed.
This topic is just so worn out it's pathetic. Get it through your thick skulls that Apple (and any other company) is free to do what their want to their products. Other companies have similar draconian legalese in their contracts too. Whether it is enforceable or not is for the courts to decide.
The EFF's ego has been getting a bit inflated for a while now. They are just losing credibility in my view.
Last time I checked, there were other phones that developers can work on. You want to create iPhone apps? Well, you got to play by their rules. No anarchy or democracy allowed. You folks honestly, truly need to get over it and move on.
Apple is a corporation. Not a government. Their products are not covered by the "We the People" clause.
The tens of millions of iPhone consumers don't seem to have a problem with it. Oh wait, that's because only the tech-heads that make up a very small and vocal minority, and have big delicate egos are the one's kicking and screaming. My bad.
Developers, including government agencies such as NASA, cannot make public statements about the iPhone OS developer agreement.
Is this really any different than a million other agreements.
Quote:
Applications created through the development kit can be sold on the App Store only.
that's the purpose of the kit so what's the big issue.
Quote:
The iPhone OS cannot be reverse engineered, and the foundation asserts this even applies to methods that courts have recognized as fair use.
the whole fair use bit was in regards to RE when you couldn't get the needed info any other way. But Apple provides developers with the information. So again, what's the issue
Quote:
Apple can remove an application at any time. In 2008, a researcher discovered a "kill switch" in the iPhone software that would allow the company to remotely deactivate an application.
again, not uncommon. Amazon had it and used it. If Apple were to use it to deactivate an application that was some kind of banking info stealing trojan they would be applauded.
Quote:
No matter what, Apple is never liable to a developer for more than $50 in damages.
do they have to be liable for any? legally? If not, then what's the big deal.
What they are complaining about is how to get applications to a single platform. The "out" for Apple is that it does not prevent the developer from developing the same application for other platforms. A product manufacturer is free to control how other products are applied to its own platform so long as they are not preventing someone from providing the product on rival platforms Then the user has a choice as to which platform they select in order to have use of that application. I can use Google Maps on a mobile phone, on a desktop or laptop, etc, etc. I can use Photoshop on a Mac or on a WIndows PC. Neither Apple or Microsoft restrict Adobe's ability to develop their application on the competitor's platform. Adobe assumes all the risks, absorbs all the costs, and reaps all the rewards.
I think the EFF has no legal basis on which to stand for this one.
Ouch you get no more then $50 of compensation from apple for any reason. That is less then a day's worth of coding. That seems a bit unfair.
That's the only one I see as potentially worrisome, although can't think of many instances where Apple should legitimately be expected to pay damages. I can however, think of many cases where people would try to collect "damages" from Apple, perhaps it is a necessary evil.
Apple isn't even required to offer that. They could simply mandate complete indemnity under any circumstance and pay nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2
That's the only one I see as potentially worrisome, although can't think of many instances where Apple should legitimately be expected to pay damages. I can however, think of many cases where people would try to collect "damages" from Apple, perhaps it is a necessary evil.
As an antitrust lawyer of 30 years, I agree with this post. Apple's vertical integration and the competitive advantage it gains from it and its IP is classic pro-competitive behavior. It may be a dominant player, but its market position was gained by competition, not acquisitions or anticompetitive conduct. As a dominant player, there arguably are additional constraints on its behavior - it probably cannot engage in conduct designed only to disadvantage a competitor, there must be a competitive reason for its conduct, such as maintaining an ecosystem that supports the user experiences and stability of system itself. It could get tough for Apple, but the inability of any company to achieve a monopoly and exclude competitors over the long term argues against the need for or legal basis for action against the company - unless if really goes overboard.
Cool... and I was totally talking out of my a$$ :-)
Ouch you get no more then $50 of compensation from apple for any reason. That is less then a day's worth of coding. That seems a bit unfair.
Everything else is expected, since apple does not like info leaking out for any reason, because information is the only reason they are able to keep a competitive edge and high profit margins over the industry.
What's the value attached to Apple's SDK? What many people are not revealing is that Apple by making a software developing system that does most of the hard work for developers, actually increased the developer community tenfold. People became developers, and made money. That would never have been possible before Apple's App Store policy.
What's the value attached to the opportunity for a worldwide retail space, with a top notch Brand, where Apple handles everything and only takes a 30% cut? Do you think an NDA is too much to pay for breaking into the software industry globally?
I don't. If they told me I had to stand on my head three days a week, I'd gladly sign on the dotted line!
Yes, Apple is in control, but they are and have been, sharing the wealth to the masses for a long time now. Every Mac OS owner has the software tools to expand the Apple ecosystem as well as their personal opportunities.
They want to blame Apple because the developers signed a contract. Apple doesn't make guns and they don't hold them to developers heads. If this were such a big deal developers would go elsewhere.
The "open" alternatives to the iPhone aren't panning out, so Apple's closed model is vilified. Too funny.
Yet virtually every developer and their dog seems to be choosing Apple's "closed" and "controlled" model. Interesting.
First - I agree, there's not much they can do. It's Apple's product, they control it. I don't see what bitching about it will do other than bring to light how anal Apple is about controlling everything. If they don't like it, they should develop for a different platform and do their party to popularize THAT platform.
Second - Android is doing fine. In fact, last I heard, the android marketplace is the fastest growing at the moment. It's showing some serious potential, although, I also heard the Nexus One censors curse words, so they aren't exactly THAT different from Apple trying to babysit everyone.
Third - You know exactly why developers are flocking to the iphone, and it's not to put up with crap like this. It's because of the iphone & ipod touch's popularity. They are all chomping at the bit for a chance at the next popular app that goes viral. I would LOVE to invent some dopey little app like that ocarina app, and sell millions of copies for a buck or two. Was it useful? Not really. How expensive? Not very. So OBVIOUSLY the reason developers are putting up with this type of bs is so they can reach a large audience. Apple knows this, and is taking advantage of it.
It is what it is. The iphone is badass, and has the capability of being so much more with the help of third party developers, but it's not in the cards.
Ironic then, that these same ideals are what Apple's founders and oldest users/fans embraced. It is a new world.
I agree with the exception of "founders" (except for Woz perhaps).
The Macintosh was an integrated device and Apple's been pushing that integrated model from the word go. The idea that a computer is a "device" that should be able to run whatever software the user wants to put on it is the opposite conception that I was referring to. That hardware/software separation was never really 100% true, and in today's world it's almost irrelevant to think of devices that way IMO.
The era of the computer hobbyist is long past, just as it is for the automobile and a lot of other things.
Comments
Some days I like Apple, other days I LOVE Apple
Apple INSISTS on dominating the market for iPhones. And iMacs and so on as well! OMG!
Apple makes its software and its hardware. That way, it can control the entire experience. If you don't like that model, get an Android.
No, says the EFF. You must jailbreak your phone to be free, and thus expose your horrible iPhone, which no-one free and good would want, to the one bona fide trojan yet found on the iPhone!
And by pulling the boobs apps, they are taking away your freedom! Yes, if you don't know what a boob looks like, and you think a "developer" should be able to sell you 4 pictures of boobs that are freely available on the Safari browser -- and more -- or else be accused of "censorship".
I took my Google Voice account, pulled a few maneuvers that Google told me about, and voila! I have Google Voice on my desktop. Why not my regular app? Because Steve said it was substituting its address book, recent calls and messages for AT&Ts, etc. But all those features are right there, in glorious HTML 5! What vile censorship! Why shouldn't Google be allowed to rewrite the interface? Steve = Stalin!
You know, they're accusing Apple of monopolistic behavior, but they don't have a monopoly. I agree, this business model is not for everyone. But if anyone has a *potential* monopoly, it's Android, which has gone for the very model that led to the Windows monopoly: we write the OS, you make the hardware to comply. Sure, it's open and all. We take the money that comes to us through the ads! And all your data is belong to us!
But if we find you misusing Google, we will ban you for life. Now that's a monopoly. If you can't Google, you're screwed.
The EFF's ego has been getting a bit inflated for a while now. They are just losing credibility in my view.
Last time I checked, there were other phones that developers can work on. You want to create iPhone apps? Well, you got to play by their rules. No anarchy or democracy allowed. You folks honestly, truly need to get over it and move on.
Apple is a corporation. Not a government. Their products are not covered by the "We the People" clause.
The tens of millions of iPhone consumers don't seem to have a problem with it. Oh wait, that's because only the tech-heads that make up a very small and vocal minority, and have big delicate egos are the one's kicking and screaming. My bad.
Developers, including government agencies such as NASA, cannot make public statements about the iPhone OS developer agreement.
Is this really any different than a million other agreements.
Applications created through the development kit can be sold on the App Store only.
that's the purpose of the kit so what's the big issue.
The iPhone OS cannot be reverse engineered, and the foundation asserts this even applies to methods that courts have recognized as fair use.
the whole fair use bit was in regards to RE when you couldn't get the needed info any other way. But Apple provides developers with the information. So again, what's the issue
Apple can remove an application at any time. In 2008, a researcher discovered a "kill switch" in the iPhone software that would allow the company to remotely deactivate an application.
again, not uncommon. Amazon had it and used it. If Apple were to use it to deactivate an application that was some kind of banking info stealing trojan they would be applauded.
No matter what, Apple is never liable to a developer for more than $50 in damages.
do they have to be liable for any? legally? If not, then what's the big deal.
It's more like a game console than a computer.
As for "stifle innovation" goes, iPhone OS is not the only game in town.
I think the EFF has no legal basis on which to stand for this one.
Ouch you get no more then $50 of compensation from apple for any reason. That is less then a day's worth of coding. That seems a bit unfair.
That's the only one I see as potentially worrisome, although can't think of many instances where Apple should legitimately be expected to pay damages. I can however, think of many cases where people would try to collect "damages" from Apple, perhaps it is a necessary evil.
That's the only one I see as potentially worrisome, although can't think of many instances where Apple should legitimately be expected to pay damages. I can however, think of many cases where people would try to collect "damages" from Apple, perhaps it is a necessary evil.
As for their effectiveness, kindly hold this post up to a mirror and check out the backwards acronym for T.H.I.S.
Delete QUICK before people realize you are a troll or something...
oh wait nm too late.
People with a brain will want to read the original.
Like many other radical groups they have crossed the line from activism to outright terrorism!
"OUTRIGHT TERRORISM."
Wow.
It must be entertaining to live in a mental space where you can freely redefine words to mean whatever you want them to mean.
I think I'm going to report my local 7/11 for outright terrorism because they were out of milk this morning.
Of all the change they could effect, what they chose to concentrate on is simply baffling.
As an antitrust lawyer of 30 years, I agree with this post. Apple's vertical integration and the competitive advantage it gains from it and its IP is classic pro-competitive behavior. It may be a dominant player, but its market position was gained by competition, not acquisitions or anticompetitive conduct. As a dominant player, there arguably are additional constraints on its behavior - it probably cannot engage in conduct designed only to disadvantage a competitor, there must be a competitive reason for its conduct, such as maintaining an ecosystem that supports the user experiences and stability of system itself. It could get tough for Apple, but the inability of any company to achieve a monopoly and exclude competitors over the long term argues against the need for or legal basis for action against the company - unless if really goes overboard.
Cool... and I was totally talking out of my a$$ :-)
Ouch you get no more then $50 of compensation from apple for any reason. That is less then a day's worth of coding. That seems a bit unfair.
Everything else is expected, since apple does not like info leaking out for any reason, because information is the only reason they are able to keep a competitive edge and high profit margins over the industry.
What's the value attached to Apple's SDK? What many people are not revealing is that Apple by making a software developing system that does most of the hard work for developers, actually increased the developer community tenfold. People became developers, and made money. That would never have been possible before Apple's App Store policy.
What's the value attached to the opportunity for a worldwide retail space, with a top notch Brand, where Apple handles everything and only takes a 30% cut? Do you think an NDA is too much to pay for breaking into the software industry globally?
I don't. If they told me I had to stand on my head three days a week, I'd gladly sign on the dotted line!
Yes, Apple is in control, but they are and have been, sharing the wealth to the masses for a long time now. Every Mac OS owner has the software tools to expand the Apple ecosystem as well as their personal opportunities.
They want to blame Apple because the developers signed a contract. Apple doesn't make guns and they don't hold them to developers heads. If this were such a big deal developers would go elsewhere.
It's called an Agreement for a reason.
The EFF is barking up the wrong tree on this one.
The "open" alternatives to the iPhone aren't panning out, so Apple's closed model is vilified. Too funny.
Yet virtually every developer and their dog seems to be choosing Apple's "closed" and "controlled" model. Interesting.
First - I agree, there's not much they can do. It's Apple's product, they control it. I don't see what bitching about it will do other than bring to light how anal Apple is about controlling everything. If they don't like it, they should develop for a different platform and do their party to popularize THAT platform.
Second - Android is doing fine. In fact, last I heard, the android marketplace is the fastest growing at the moment. It's showing some serious potential, although, I also heard the Nexus One censors curse words, so they aren't exactly THAT different from Apple trying to babysit everyone.
Third - You know exactly why developers are flocking to the iphone, and it's not to put up with crap like this. It's because of the iphone & ipod touch's popularity. They are all chomping at the bit for a chance at the next popular app that goes viral. I would LOVE to invent some dopey little app like that ocarina app, and sell millions of copies for a buck or two. Was it useful? Not really. How expensive? Not very. So OBVIOUSLY the reason developers are putting up with this type of bs is so they can reach a large audience. Apple knows this, and is taking advantage of it.
It is what it is. The iphone is badass, and has the capability of being so much more with the help of third party developers, but it's not in the cards.
Ironic then, that these same ideals are what Apple's founders and oldest users/fans embraced. It is a new world.
I agree with the exception of "founders" (except for Woz perhaps).
The Macintosh was an integrated device and Apple's been pushing that integrated model from the word go. The idea that a computer is a "device" that should be able to run whatever software the user wants to put on it is the opposite conception that I was referring to. That hardware/software separation was never really 100% true, and in today's world it's almost irrelevant to think of devices that way IMO.
The era of the computer hobbyist is long past, just as it is for the automobile and a lot of other things.