And I agree. I have never once claimed that I would be a good CEO of Apple.
I am not very diplomatic, many decisions made would piss many people off, I would never apologize and I would probably pull Apple entirely out of certain countries.
Apple ultimately can run its AppStore they way it likes as a private contracted construct, as we all have the freedom as consumers and vendors to take our products and money to other platforms. There is no reason that services like AppGratis could not become a web app instead!
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
I agree.
Biggest barriers to a free market is the patent system and copyright laws. Abolish them and a lot of these other laws will not be needed.
I don't think that Apple ][ understands what altruism is..
Being the informed person that I am, I obviously know what it is. However, I do not agree with it and I find it to be a repulsive concept which is often misused and hijacked by people with not good intentions.
The whole controversy would not take place if Apple's AppStore search would blow everyone else away. But it doesn't.
Apple's search in such a large collection of apps is fairly lame and, at times, frustrating.
Moreover the review/rating section is fatally flawed for all but the largest national Apple AppStores. Indeed, you can only see the reviews and ratings in your own national Apple AppStore, rendering the ratings statistically insignificant in many cases. But most apps are language agnostic. There should at least be an option to include reviews by language (e.g., many people understand English).
And, to make things worse: If, as a workaround, you temporarily switch to the US store, you lose your context !!!
@tallest skil reaaaally? If there is a small issue, just drop a company's products nationwide? You kidding? Apple could just stop implementing rules overnight and retro-imposing them, but just impose them on NEW apps, then it would be fair.
She made the important points: France is the second mobile developer in the world, which legitimates her talking, and she's the minister for those developers.
@libertyforall: because the US government, right-wing by French standards, is making a better job? Lol, US debt wants to talk to you. The world needs more, and better, regulations. Less regulations just means big business get to do whatever they want.
Now, my take on this: I think Apple is doing this both in the interest of their ecosystem and the customer, but that Mrs. Pellerin has a very valid point when talking about the excessive control power (and the negative impact on innovation, because of investors getting scared) of huge companies _such_ as Apple.
Do you guys really want Microsoft, Google, AT&T or Apple to be the final decision makers on what content you're allowed to see? How about AT&T filtering which websites they will let you access?
I hope you all see that this is anti-competitive behavior. This will lead Apple to more troubled times. I personally fear, that Apple is starting to act fearful.
No offence, but this is bordering on arrogance. While it may be hard for some people to understand, but there are societies that have other values than egoism. France has one of the best public school systems in the world, their public healthcare is among the best and most efficient world-wide (e.g. French health care index is 34 places ahead of the US, France is the country with the lowest number of avoidable deaths, while the US are dead last - pun intended - among developed nations, while having the highest prices for medical services, up to 500% above European rates), and poor dead people in France do still get an acceptable funeral and are not collected each night by garbage trucks as in Detroit. Why good education, healthcare for everybody and a respectful treatment of dead fellow citizens should be a "human rights violation"... escapes me for now. Of course, these things do cost money. And people paying the top tax rate of 75% can certainly afford it - they still make millions a year, which they can only make and enjoy, because others work for them (after enjoying good public schools), pick up their garbage and provide a safe environment with low crime rates.
Including all mandatory insurances and taxes I only see approx. 46% of my income each month (in Germany). But I have no problems paying that much. Even if my business goes downhill tomorrow, my children will still have access to good schools and universities, I will still have access to full health care (100%), I won't have to live in a trailer park or under a bridge, and when I die I will not be carried away by a garbage truck. I also enjoy that people around me do not have to live in misery, even if it costs "my" money. And I am not even religious...
I seriously don't understand the obsession with Apple's App Store, and what is allowed or not.
This developer knew full and well what he/she/they were getting into. The web on the other hand is pretty much free to do what you want.
It is just this kind of app... one that should be a Website/App... that should, and often does, get kicked out of the App Store.
Make a compelling website; link thru and engage to all of the social platforms; create the "Would you like to add this site to your home screen?"; link back to the App Store for the Apps you pushing today. Oh. So sorry, but that does mean you may have to work a bit, rather than try to game the App Store and take your chances with Apple's TOS.
I see this same BS with certain other consultants in my business telling my clients they need "iOS magazines", to be on mobile newstands, or a dedicated Company App... just to flog off a service contract for a resized PDF or a glorified flippin' webpage. :mad:
I seriously don't understand the obsession with Apple's App Store, and what is allowed or not.
This developer knew full and well what he/she/they were getting into. The web on the other hand is pretty much free to do what you want.
It is just this kind of app... one that should be a Website/App... that should, and often does, get kicked out of the App Store.
I think it's more to do with the way they decide what's allowed and not allowed. The 2.25 clause in the agreement, which they violate was added last October. AppGratis has been around since 2008, though the app might have been submitted later.
The clause 5.6, which they also violate has been in there since 2010 and yet they've been approved right up until now - they might have just recently added push notifications though. It's fair enough if you knowingly violate all the rules and are blocked from admission to the store but when they allow to you to build a large userbase and a business around your app and then they effectively say 'we changed our minds, we added this new rule or noticed you violate an existing one and you're banned now' and in that instant, wipe out your entire business model, it's not a dependable way to build a business.
It is anti-competitive too, not just to benefit Apple because they banned AppShopper in December so AppGratis will have been getting business for the last 3-4 months and AppShopper hasn't been making any money at all and yet both apps violate the same clauses.
Like I say, it's a very difficult job managing content approval because to have a nicely curated store, you need to have and enforce rules but there are so many variables that doing this fairly with such a high volume of apps is always going to be problematic. The volume keeps going up and the problems will keep coming.
I think it's more to do with the way they decide what's allowed and not allowed. The 2.25 clause in the agreement, which they violate was added last October. AppGratis has been around since 2008, though the app might have been submitted later.
The clause 5.6, which they also violate has been in there since 2010 and yet they've been approved right up until now - they might have just recently added push notifications though. It's fair enough if you knowingly violate all the rules and are blocked from admission to the store but when they allow to you to build a large userbase and a business around your app and then they effectively say 'we changed our minds, we added this new rule or noticed you violate an existing one and you're banned now' and in that instant, wipe out your entire business model, it's not a dependable way to build a business.
It is anti-competitive too, not just to benefit Apple because they banned AppShopper in December so AppGratis will have been getting business for the last 3-4 months and AppShopper hasn't been making any money at all and yet both apps violate the same clauses.
Like I say, it's a very difficult job managing content approval because to have a nicely curated store, you need to have and enforce rules but there are so many variables that doing this fairly with such a high volume of apps is always going to be problematic. The volume keeps going up and the problems will keep coming.
Thanks that's a good explanation. I can see both sides of this now. It does look like they pushed their luck a bit too far and got noticed. Apple should have been quicker on stopping violations but having said that it seem clear to me that being caught breaking rules late, doesn't mean you therefore have a right to complain when you are caught. One could argue they were lucky to make the money they did before they were caught. If you see what I mean.
I have a sneaky feeling this French Minister will wish she'd not brought this up but then again maybe the lime light this has brought will help clarify this for both Apple and developers from here on out so is a good thing.
Apple ultimately can run its AppStore they way it likes as a private contracted construct, as we all have the freedom as consumers and vendors to take our products and money to other platforms. There is no reason that services like AppGratis could not become a web app instead!
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
If the free market works, as you say, how come we produce a lot more than we need and people are still starving, even in the US? That's a total failure, yes.
I hope you all see that this is anti-competitive behavior. This will lead Apple to more troubled times. I personally fear, that Apple is starting to act fearful.
Guess what, Android is "winning" so develop for them. Don't like Apple's policies? Don't develop for them.
I hope you all see that this is anti-competitive behavior. This will lead Apple to more troubled times. I personally fear, that Apple is starting to act fearful.
Take your false concern elsewhere.
Originally Posted by hungover
Without the help of the French, you would still be speaking English
Why are you pretending the United States doesn't speak English?
Most of you seem to be missing the most important point.
She's hot!
(Yes, I am just being silly)
At least you were the first to post about her appearance and feminine status (in a nonviolent way), rather than the usual misogynist males assaulting a person's sexuality as a default way of showing they "disagree." But then, I guess she'd have to be ugly to garner that type of assault.
Still, any gender-based commentary of this kind indicates the object-status of females in human society. Sigh.
As for the topic at hand, I'm inclined to agree with the statements posed by other commentators where the app maker was in the wrong for developing something that they knew from the start would be conflicting with Apple policy. I thought the greatest excitement in capitalism was the risk of failure- oh, no, I've got that wrong, it's the opportunism.
Apple set the policy of the Apple store. Developers that don't like it shouldn't submit apps that go against policy. This isn't at all like Apple's anti-gay appearance in the comic book apps. This isn't sexuality, nationality or any other type of social platform. This is about an app maker thinking they could get around the rules by making a fuss over the rules and claim anticompetitive practices in a private environment they pay to play in. If they had created an app that was not about duplicating and obfuscating a built-in function, they'd have leg to stand on in promoting their shock and dismay. Surely they planned for this outcome, or they didn't do due diligence on their business model risk assessment when starting up in the first place.
Apple ultimately can run its AppStore they way it likes as a private contracted construct, as we all have the freedom as consumers and vendors to take our products and money to other platforms. There is no reason that services like AppGratis could not become a web app instead!
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
Ah, more libertarian/republican propaganda from someone that thinks the system works fine for him. The thing is, you aren't representative of all citizens.
Also, the free market is a lie. It does not police itself. You need only look at some history books: environmental destruction, child labor, lethal workplaces, monopolies, et cetera. The system doesn't work the way your fantasy propaganda wishes it did. Regulation by a non-invested party is the only way to keep human greed under control. The biggest problem with the market and all the losses lately are entirely driven by the greed and anticompetitive behavior of that market, not government regulation. Elimination of regulation has allowed the erosion of choice in most markets: media, medicine, food, technology, communications, etc. Choice is an illusion. All you have to do is look at the companies that own the companies that market the products you buy. There are very few these days. Back before the telecommunication regulation was ended, there were 12 service providers nationally. Today, after regulation has been undone, there are 3 (effectively 2 nationally). Etc.
Only someone benefitting from the corporate malfeasance (or hoping to), or someone brainwashed by the propaganda, can make claims that regulation is the source of all problems and that the market regulates itself. It's quite blatantly false. Society is being ground down by corporate entitlement, the environment is being wrecked, industry in the USA has been sold out, and citizens are suffering for corporate welfare ... a type of interference capitalists don't seem to mind... but "the system works..." Hah.
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
Oh I wish more people in Europe would understand this. I try to stay the hell out of Europe as much as I can because of the insane government meddling. The UK has completely lost the plot in the last decade, there are insane rules for everything. It suffocates me, I can't bare it.
Ah, more libertarian/republican propaganda from someone that thinks the system works fine for him. The thing is, you aren't representative of all citizens.
Also, the free market is a lie. It does not police itself. You need only look at some history books: environmental destruction, child labor, lethal workplaces, monopolies, et cetera. The system doesn't work the way your fantasy propaganda wishes it did. Regulation by a non-invested party is the only way to keep human greed under control. The biggest problem with the market and all the losses lately are entirely driven by the greed and anticompetitive behavior of that market, not government regulation. Elimination of regulation has allowed the erosion of choice in most markets: media, medicine, food, technology, communications, etc. Choice is an illusion. All you have to do is look at the companies that own the companies that market the products you buy. There are very few these days. Back before the telecommunication regulation was ended, there were 12 service providers nationally. Today, after regulation has been undone, there are 3 (effectively 2 nationally). Etc.
Only someone benefitting from the corporate malfeasance (or hoping to), or someone brainwashed by the propaganda, can make claims that regulation is the source of all problems and that the market regulates itself. It's quite blatantly false. Society is being ground down by corporate entitlement, the environment is being wrecked, industry in the USA has been sold out, and citizens are suffering for corporate welfare ... a type of interference capitalists don't seem to mind... but "the system works..." Hah.
The difference is that when government makes abusive decisions, there is little accountability.
By the way, who makes the decision of what is "for the greater good?" Governments?
In my experience, governments rarely make decisions based on the greater good even when their motivations are "good."
Let capitalism weed out what consumers decide for companies. Let's get government and its mindless abuses out of the way.
At least companies will die and live based on what people are willing to pay for instead of selfish political motivations of what seems "good" to bureaucrats.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Then it's a good thing you're not.
And I agree. I have never once claimed that I would be a good CEO of Apple.
I am not very diplomatic, many decisions made would piss many people off, I would never apologize and I would probably pull Apple entirely out of certain countries.
Apple ultimately can run its AppStore they way it likes as a private contracted construct, as we all have the freedom as consumers and vendors to take our products and money to other platforms. There is no reason that services like AppGratis could not become a web app instead!
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
I agree.Biggest barriers to a free market is the patent system and copyright laws. Abolish them and a lot of these other laws will not be needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
We saved your a** in WWII so give us a break. /sarcasm
... and they saved ours long before that, so they're even. /s
Without the help of the French, you would still be speaking English
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover
I don't think that Apple ][ understands what altruism is..
Being the informed person that I am, I obviously know what it is. However, I do not agree with it and I find it to be a repulsive concept which is often misused and hijacked by people with not good intentions.
You just proved my point...
Apple's search in such a large collection of apps is fairly lame and, at times, frustrating.
Moreover the review/rating section is fatally flawed for all but the largest national Apple AppStores.
Indeed, you can only see the reviews and ratings in your own national Apple AppStore, rendering the ratings statistically insignificant in many cases.
But most apps are language agnostic. There should at least be an option to include reviews by language (e.g., many people understand English).
And, to make things worse: If, as a workaround, you temporarily switch to the US store, you lose your context !!!
@nasserae yes, a GOVERNMENT complaining about COMPANIES making regulations. Makes sense, you see.
@slurpy agreed, sort of.
@tallest skil reaaaally? If there is a small issue, just drop a company's products nationwide? You kidding? Apple could just stop implementing rules overnight and retro-imposing them, but just impose them on NEW apps, then it would be fair.
She made the important points: France is the second mobile developer in the world, which legitimates her talking, and she's the minister for those developers.
@libertyforall: because the US government, right-wing by French standards, is making a better job? Lol, US debt wants to talk to you. The world needs more, and better, regulations. Less regulations just means big business get to do whatever they want.
Now, my take on this: I think Apple is doing this both in the interest of their ecosystem and the customer, but that Mrs. Pellerin has a very valid point when talking about the excessive control power (and the negative impact on innovation, because of investors getting scared) of huge companies _such_ as Apple.
Do you guys really want Microsoft, Google, AT&T or Apple to be the final decision makers on what content you're allowed to see? How about AT&T filtering which websites they will let you access?
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanFruniken
The whole controversy would not take place if Apple's AppStore search would blow everyone else away. But it doesn't.
Apple's search in such a large collection of apps is fairly lame and, at times, frustrating.
Moreover the review/rating section is fatally flawed for all but the largest national Apple AppStores.
Indeed, you can only see the reviews and ratings in your own national Apple AppStore, rendering the ratings statistically insignificant in many cases.
But most apps are language agnostic. There should at least be an option to include reviews by language (e.g., many people understand English).
And, to make things worse: If, as a workaround, you temporarily switch to the US store, you lose your context !!!
The multiplicity of Stores is also quite annoying, for anyone who moves regularly around the globe... and we are many.
...and another accolade: Great Post!
This developer knew full and well what he/she/they were getting into. The web on the other hand is pretty much free to do what you want.
It is just this kind of app... one that should be a Website/App... that should, and often does, get kicked out of the App Store.
Make a compelling website; link thru and engage to all of the social platforms; create the "Would you like to add this site to your home screen?"; link back to the App Store for the Apps you pushing today. Oh. So sorry, but that does mean you may have to work a bit, rather than try to game the App Store and take your chances with Apple's TOS.
I see this same BS with certain other consultants in my business telling my clients they need "iOS magazines", to be on mobile newstands, or a dedicated Company App... just to flog off a service contract for a resized PDF or a glorified flippin' webpage. :mad:
I think it's more to do with the way they decide what's allowed and not allowed. The 2.25 clause in the agreement, which they violate was added last October. AppGratis has been around since 2008, though the app might have been submitted later.
The clause 5.6, which they also violate has been in there since 2010 and yet they've been approved right up until now - they might have just recently added push notifications though. It's fair enough if you knowingly violate all the rules and are blocked from admission to the store but when they allow to you to build a large userbase and a business around your app and then they effectively say 'we changed our minds, we added this new rule or noticed you violate an existing one and you're banned now' and in that instant, wipe out your entire business model, it's not a dependable way to build a business.
It is anti-competitive too, not just to benefit Apple because they banned AppShopper in December so AppGratis will have been getting business for the last 3-4 months and AppShopper hasn't been making any money at all and yet both apps violate the same clauses.
Like I say, it's a very difficult job managing content approval because to have a nicely curated store, you need to have and enforce rules but there are so many variables that doing this fairly with such a high volume of apps is always going to be problematic. The volume keeps going up and the problems will keep coming.
Thanks that's a good explanation. I can see both sides of this now. It does look like they pushed their luck a bit too far and got noticed. Apple should have been quicker on stopping violations but having said that it seem clear to me that being caught breaking rules late, doesn't mean you therefore have a right to complain when you are caught. One could argue they were lucky to make the money they did before they were caught. If you see what I mean.
I have a sneaky feeling this French Minister will wish she'd not brought this up but then again maybe the lime light this has brought will help clarify this for both Apple and developers from here on out so is a good thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall
Apple ultimately can run its AppStore they way it likes as a private contracted construct, as we all have the freedom as consumers and vendors to take our products and money to other platforms. There is no reason that services like AppGratis could not become a web app instead!
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
If the free market works, as you say, how come we produce a lot more than we need and people are still starving, even in the US? That's a total failure, yes.
Originally Posted by bottleworks
I hope you all see that this is anti-competitive behavior. This will lead Apple to more troubled times. I personally fear, that Apple is starting to act fearful.
Take your false concern elsewhere.
Originally Posted by hungover
Without the help of the French, you would still be speaking English
Why are you pretending the United States doesn't speak English?
At least you were the first to post about her appearance and feminine status (in a nonviolent way), rather than the usual misogynist males assaulting a person's sexuality as a default way of showing they "disagree." But then, I guess she'd have to be ugly to garner that type of assault.
Still, any gender-based commentary of this kind indicates the object-status of females in human society. Sigh.
As for the topic at hand, I'm inclined to agree with the statements posed by other commentators where the app maker was in the wrong for developing something that they knew from the start would be conflicting with Apple policy. I thought the greatest excitement in capitalism was the risk of failure- oh, no, I've got that wrong, it's the opportunism.
Apple set the policy of the Apple store. Developers that don't like it shouldn't submit apps that go against policy. This isn't at all like Apple's anti-gay appearance in the comic book apps. This isn't sexuality, nationality or any other type of social platform. This is about an app maker thinking they could get around the rules by making a fuss over the rules and claim anticompetitive practices in a private environment they pay to play in. If they had created an app that was not about duplicating and obfuscating a built-in function, they'd have leg to stand on in promoting their shock and dismay. Surely they planned for this outcome, or they didn't do due diligence on their business model risk assessment when starting up in the first place.
Ah, more libertarian/republican propaganda from someone that thinks the system works fine for him. The thing is, you aren't representative of all citizens.
Also, the free market is a lie. It does not police itself. You need only look at some history books: environmental destruction, child labor, lethal workplaces, monopolies, et cetera. The system doesn't work the way your fantasy propaganda wishes it did. Regulation by a non-invested party is the only way to keep human greed under control. The biggest problem with the market and all the losses lately are entirely driven by the greed and anticompetitive behavior of that market, not government regulation. Elimination of regulation has allowed the erosion of choice in most markets: media, medicine, food, technology, communications, etc. Choice is an illusion. All you have to do is look at the companies that own the companies that market the products you buy. There are very few these days. Back before the telecommunication regulation was ended, there were 12 service providers nationally. Today, after regulation has been undone, there are 3 (effectively 2 nationally). Etc.
Only someone benefitting from the corporate malfeasance (or hoping to), or someone brainwashed by the propaganda, can make claims that regulation is the source of all problems and that the market regulates itself. It's quite blatantly false. Society is being ground down by corporate entitlement, the environment is being wrecked, industry in the USA has been sold out, and citizens are suffering for corporate welfare ... a type of interference capitalists don't seem to mind... but "the system works..." Hah.
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall
France is socialist out of control -- big government run amok. Everyone seems to think gov't needs to do more - when they really need to do LESS... The free market works, if the bureaucrats would let it and stop interfering in every little thing.
Oh I wish more people in Europe would understand this. I try to stay the hell out of Europe as much as I can because of the insane government meddling. The UK has completely lost the plot in the last decade, there are insane rules for everything. It suffocates me, I can't bare it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria
Ah, more libertarian/republican propaganda from someone that thinks the system works fine for him. The thing is, you aren't representative of all citizens.
Also, the free market is a lie. It does not police itself. You need only look at some history books: environmental destruction, child labor, lethal workplaces, monopolies, et cetera. The system doesn't work the way your fantasy propaganda wishes it did. Regulation by a non-invested party is the only way to keep human greed under control. The biggest problem with the market and all the losses lately are entirely driven by the greed and anticompetitive behavior of that market, not government regulation. Elimination of regulation has allowed the erosion of choice in most markets: media, medicine, food, technology, communications, etc. Choice is an illusion. All you have to do is look at the companies that own the companies that market the products you buy. There are very few these days. Back before the telecommunication regulation was ended, there were 12 service providers nationally. Today, after regulation has been undone, there are 3 (effectively 2 nationally). Etc.
Only someone benefitting from the corporate malfeasance (or hoping to), or someone brainwashed by the propaganda, can make claims that regulation is the source of all problems and that the market regulates itself. It's quite blatantly false. Society is being ground down by corporate entitlement, the environment is being wrecked, industry in the USA has been sold out, and citizens are suffering for corporate welfare ... a type of interference capitalists don't seem to mind... but "the system works..." Hah.
Twaddle.
The difference is that when government makes abusive decisions, there is little accountability.
By the way, who makes the decision of what is "for the greater good?" Governments?
In my experience, governments rarely make decisions based on the greater good even when their motivations are "good."
Let capitalism weed out what consumers decide for companies. Let's get government and its mindless abuses out of the way.
At least companies will die and live based on what people are willing to pay for instead of selfish political motivations of what seems "good" to bureaucrats.