App Store - Control vs Restriction
Generally, the iTunes App Store's quarantined setup doesn't cause any real issues when it comes to app publishing. It's nice as a user to not have to worry about malware and malicious apps. However, there are occasions when this is overly restrictive. While few people really care about the boob jiggle apps, classic game emulators etc, a few perfectly legitimate apps are being restricted and this can't be more evident than with streaming apps:
http://www.razorianfly.com/2011/12/1...nes-app-store/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEmkukxCTzw
This app that allows you to play full desktop quality games has been published for Android for over 1 month now and has 100,000-500,000 users:
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.onlive.client
As of today, iTunes only has the Viewer version of the app, which doesn't allow you to play games. I imagine the app must violate the in-app purchasing rules - there's no way Apple will get a 30% cut of a $60 game. This being the case, they'd have to remove all in-app purchasing options and any links to external sites where you can buy game passes.
Not only this but it allows you to play games that would normally be restricted by Apple. There are games in their catalog that feature nudity, which Apple has no control over.
Now, when you see an app like this that is clearly a great app from a respectable publisher (and an ex-Apple employee), you'd think that if the rules reduced the functionality of the app, it's time to rethink the rules, not force publishers to redevelop apps and make the user experience worse and have the client-base wait over a month while competing platforms are free to go ahead. Apple isn't going to get a 30% cut regardless of how the app works and the content publishing restrictions only serve to diminish Apple's reputation regarding the liberal arts:
http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/10/06...re.expression/
It's nice that Apple exists at the crossroads of technology and the liberal arts but we don't expect there to be a toll-booth where artists are censored from freedom of expression or forced to pay heavy fees. This just serves to strengthen Android's reputation of freedom and openness.
Personally, I would suggest that Apple rectifies this situation by putting a cap on the 30% fee i.e 30% up to a maximum of $3-5 and any 'adult/mature' apps simply get published into a restricted area of the App Store that has a different pass code set by the iTunes account owner. If app publishers want to be available to the whole App Store, they either author an additional censored version or they implement some parental controls that comply with an iOS API.
http://www.razorianfly.com/2011/12/1...nes-app-store/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEmkukxCTzw
This app that allows you to play full desktop quality games has been published for Android for over 1 month now and has 100,000-500,000 users:
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.onlive.client
As of today, iTunes only has the Viewer version of the app, which doesn't allow you to play games. I imagine the app must violate the in-app purchasing rules - there's no way Apple will get a 30% cut of a $60 game. This being the case, they'd have to remove all in-app purchasing options and any links to external sites where you can buy game passes.
Not only this but it allows you to play games that would normally be restricted by Apple. There are games in their catalog that feature nudity, which Apple has no control over.
Now, when you see an app like this that is clearly a great app from a respectable publisher (and an ex-Apple employee), you'd think that if the rules reduced the functionality of the app, it's time to rethink the rules, not force publishers to redevelop apps and make the user experience worse and have the client-base wait over a month while competing platforms are free to go ahead. Apple isn't going to get a 30% cut regardless of how the app works and the content publishing restrictions only serve to diminish Apple's reputation regarding the liberal arts:
http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/10/06...re.expression/
It's nice that Apple exists at the crossroads of technology and the liberal arts but we don't expect there to be a toll-booth where artists are censored from freedom of expression or forced to pay heavy fees. This just serves to strengthen Android's reputation of freedom and openness.
Personally, I would suggest that Apple rectifies this situation by putting a cap on the 30% fee i.e 30% up to a maximum of $3-5 and any 'adult/mature' apps simply get published into a restricted area of the App Store that has a different pass code set by the iTunes account owner. If app publishers want to be available to the whole App Store, they either author an additional censored version or they implement some parental controls that comply with an iOS API.
Comments