Apple's Schiller to angry developer: "We hear you"

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 56
    The environment is largely toxic BECAUSE Apple has failed to provide transparency when it comes to their process. As a result, people submit apps and cross their fingers in the hope that it will get approved.



    Sure, one could say Microsoft or Google or whoever else is doling out crap or using similar or worth behavior but just because there are other bad apples in the bunch does not mean that it should serve as an excuse for Apple's own behavior. The company has built its following based on the concept that it was NOT like those other companies so now it needs to live up to its promise and that's where the disconnect happens.



    Just for the fun of it, I started thinking about what would happen if Apple treated their own apps the same way they treat other developers'. Would Mail and Safari require an adult rating because they can access adult content? Going down that road, I put together 2 satirical entries looking at the entire deck. Yes, it's satire but considering the obscurity of their process, how close could it be to the truth? I know it hit a never in cupertino as I've seen repeat visits to those two entries from computers within Apple's own IP range.
  • Reply 22 of 56
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post


    Right On!



    My father develops programs for his company using MS Virtual Studio, and is constantly cussing out the computer,



    lol, it's Visual Studio and I work with it also, but I don't find myself cussing it out. Ask him what sort of things he doesn't like about it, I'm curious (plus maybe it'll prepare me for when I find those things myself)



    Every once in a while I'll accidentally open the help file, which is absurdly huge and takes about 15 minutes to open. There's no way to cancel either because it's so busy processing opening the damn thing.
  • Reply 23 of 56
    Unless you are/have been an iPhone developer you really can't comment on this... I develop a free app for the iPhone. I have no complaints about how Apple supports developers with tools and providing a pretty good development SDK. I have no complaints about the the process that make sure that Apps come from known and approved sources.

    But. the App approval process really does suck big time - mainly because you have no 'right of reply'. If you app is rejected, you get an e-mail from some mysterious person in Apple with his explanation of 'why'. If you disagree, there is no conversation with this person. E-mails go to a black hole , it appears. This is clearly a problem of lack of resources on Apples side as they must be overwhelmed with apps, but they need to try harder!
  • Reply 24 of 56
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,292member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post


    Palm and Microsoft have such a good opening to steal developers and get the light to shine on their products, but they will probably screw it up.



    Palm, Microsoft, please steal these whiny developers from us. The Apple rejects will be a great base on which to build your business. You can corner the fart, porn, and general crap app market. The real developers who are actually making compelling apps that make the platform better aren't going anywhere.
  • Reply 25 of 56
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    It's not by Arrington. It's by MG Siegler. Siegler's name is right there, at the top pf the article, in bold. And what he says makes a world of sense.



    I'll reproduce the conclusion, though it doesn't quite do justice to the bulk of the article, IMHO.



    But Siegler chose to hitch his wagon to Arrington (via TechCrunch). So it never made it past my BS filter. It might be the most eloquent blog post in the history of Teh Intarwebz, but I'm still not going to TechCrunch, because that just gives Arrington more page views.
  • Reply 26 of 56
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eldernorm View Post


    ""The iPhone ecosystem is toxic, and I can?t participate any more until it is fixed. "




    he's not participating in it now.



    Quote:



    Microsoft takes years, produce crap, and people just put up with it.

    Apple takes months, produce world changing stuff, and people complain like Heck.




    something folks don't seem to remember when they are griping. the App store is barely a year old. Apple having a mobile phone, two years old. neither type of creation is going to be perfect out of the box. Apple is doing the best they can to satisfy dozens of groups and agreements.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post




    And that's where Apple sweeps up in the consumer world. People are discontent, and go to Mac. Problem is, the Apple side IS too constricting.




    Restrictions aren't always bad. Restricting apps to one installer means Apple can test that the installer won't crash and brick a device before they let it in the wild (remember we are talking about folks phones here). Restrictions on hardware means they can train their people to fix them without taking even one day sometimes.



    Sometimes restrictions can actually be better because they force creative problem solving. I remember in my film training having to read Rebel without a Crew. Great book about how one filmmaker figured out how to do a lot with very little.



    Quote:

    (remember a time when Apple said "no third party software")



    could that no have been because they wanted to make sure said software didn't kill the devices, hmmm. and they never said never. that is something folks don't seem to remember when they are shouting about how they forced the whole app store thing. they don't consider that perhaps the store was part of the plan all along.



    Quote:

    Let their system loose for a bit in the wild and see where people take it. Open it all up so people can use the iPhone (and more so the iPod Touch!) for more than what we are limited to now.



    then they might as well drop all warranties. at least those beyond what the laws require. because that 'somewhat working' software and such is going to damage a lot of folks can cause a lot of headaches



    Quote:

    Same with the computers and their prospective OS.



    1. they will cobble their genius bar program

    2. they will have to drop a lot of the free repairs they do

    3. there is a very good legal reason they don't allow 'clones'. too much market share puts them in the same boat as MS and they want to avoid that for as long as possible.



    Quote:

    As for me, I stay away from Apple.



    or rather you don't. you don't use their product but you have no trouble going on Apple talk boards and griping about how horrid Apple is.



    why don't you follow Frank's example and don't play.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TNLNYC View Post


    The environment is largely toxic BECAUSE Apple has failed to provide transparency when it comes to their process. As a result, people submit apps and cross their fingers in the hope that it will get approved.



    I highly doubt it is that extreme. I suspect when you sign up you have to sign off on pages of legelese and conditions, which will tell you a great number of details about what will and will not be approved, the ratings system etc.



    Quote:

    Just for the fun of it, I started thinking about what would happen if Apple treated their own apps the same way they treat other developers'. Would Mail and Safari require an adult rating because they can access adult content?



    why don't you answer your own question. go turn on parental controls on your phone and see if there is an option to restrict mail and safari, just like you can on your computer with a managed account. i'll bet my first born that there is at least safari
  • Reply 27 of 56
    I keep reading about the Google Voice dilema. What I can't figure out is whether or not having a third party GV app would be worth anything to me, ultimately.



    I got myself a Google Voice account. I have an iPhone. And I'm trying to think about how a GV app would work, from a practical standpoint. I mean, if I can't simply tap on a phone number in an SMS, email, etc. and dial via Google Voice instead of my cell phone account, what good is the service to me? If I search for a contact using Spotlight, and tap on that phone number, what happens? With a third party app, nothing. The number is dialed via the standard dialer, and uses my cell phone's account.



    I love the idea of having my voicemail transcribed to me, and dozens of the other features of Google voice, too. But if I constantly have to use workarounds to do something as simple as dialing someone on my phone, I think I'll pass. It needs to be native to the system in order to be of much use.



    I think this will be THE killer feature of all Android phones moving forward (native GV support). If you don't think Apple is aware of that and scared of the consequences, you're crazy.
  • Reply 28 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple executive Phil Schiller has again responded to a developer's complaints about his company's App Store approvals, this time sending an e-mail to the co-founder of a prominent Mac development studio.



    Steven Frank, of Panic, makers of Transmit, Coda and Unison, said on his blog that he received a personal e-mail from Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing after he publicly stated that he's boycotting his iPhone after the company rejected an e-book reader. Frank, who is not an iPhone developer, declined to re-print Schiller's note, but instead summarized his points.?



    "I?ve reached a point where I can no longer just sit back and watch this," he said. "The iPhone ecosystem is toxic, and I can?t participate any more until it is fixed. As people have told me so many times: It?s Apple?s ballgame, and Apple gets to make the rules, and if I don?t like it, I can leave. So, I don?t like it, and I?m leaving."



    Isn't this the guy that develops programs to allow you to build a Hackintosh? *?



    Perhaps I am jaundiced. But having attended an Apple iPhone development program and meeting literally hundreds of like developers, I haven't heard or met any that are any near as objectionable or upset about the process as what I hear or see from what appears to be non-developers and in many cases people that don't, intend to or can even own an iPhone.



    * http://stevenf.com/pages/tc1100/

    ? http://stevenf.com/pages/mini9/
  • Reply 29 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Here's the reality, very well put:



    http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/09...m=tcrn.ch_4JEz



    Let's keep this all in perspective.



    Good read. Well worth perusing.



    Thank you
  • Reply 30 of 56
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,628member
    Perhaps it's a by-product of the web and the ability to Tweet and Blog, but people today seem to get completely outraged about ridiculousness and trivia.



    Be careful of what you wish for. If the FCC rules that exclusive tie-ins between carriers and phone manufacturers are illegal, there would be little reason for a carrier like AT&T to subsidize the iPhone. Anyone care to spend $600 or more for the phone instead of simply losing a few apps, like we do today? And what the idiots at the FCC probably don't even realize is that even if they ruled that exclusive relationships are illegal, users still would not be able to use the iPhone on Verizon because Verizon is CDMA based.



    Apple does sometimes make operational and strategic errors. But look at what they provide. No one else has provided a comparable eco-system for delivering low-priced (or free) apps to consumers with a model that makes it very easy for small developers who get a very fair (70%) return with no expenses taken off of the top.



    So they don't approve apps in 24 hours. Big freakin' deal. There's what - 50,000 aps now? Is that not enough? So sometimes they reject an app they should have approved. Who cares? So the AT&T deal restricts them in some ways. Welcome to conducting business as adults. Grow up. I bet half the people who are upset by these limitations are living in their parents' basements. No wonder they expect everything immediately and for free.



    Although one can argue that they deserved it, we've killed the record business. It's declining at 20% a year and will be a tiny niche business within five years if things don't change. How many other types of businesses would we like to kill?
  • Reply 31 of 56
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    For all the crap this site heaps on Winmobile, palm, BB, and any non apple phone, I must say, at least Google Android, BB and MS dont restrict apps this way, and at the end of the day, people outside the valley buy phones for function, not glits or status. If pple keeps doing this and Google doesnt, Apple should be freaking out, given 1-2 more years of dev on android, I have a feeling that the inertia and brand name will be the ONLY leg up that Apple will have if they keep pissing on and pissing off devs.



    People want what apple offers, but that is quickly changing in the eyes of customers too, not just devs. ATT only? NO MMS on a $300 phone? what the fuck is that? I dont care if the problems are ATTs or apples fault. The fact is that my $300 phone cant do what a $99 blackbe3rry can do, and that is simply inexcusable.
  • Reply 32 of 56
    zoolookzoolook Posts: 657member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by LTMP View Post


    Apple has really gotten themselves into a mess. From the outset of the App Store, they knew that they had to maintain content standards similar to the iTunes store, they knew that they had to keep AT&T happy (and other carriers around the globe), and they knew that they wanted LOTS of Apps.



    What they didn't know was that they'd have thousands of submissions each month. So they had to scramble to build a system that could manage the load, and trust employees to make decisions on their own using ambiguous guidelines without any real oversight.



    Add that to Apples long standing policy of remaining mute about problems until they have a solution in mind, and you get a lot of pissed of developers.



    Schiller's involvement is a great sign that things will be improving.



    I hope.



    Great post.



    What's interesting is that massive market share for an open platform runs contrary to Apple's model to an extent. The Mac has barely 5% market share globally, which suits Apple just fine. The iPod was a fixed platform with no real external development, so even though it was hugely successful, this was never an issue.



    So here we have an apparently open platform, and Apple is stuck between have a MS approach of not caring who or what develops for your platform, and it's original model of tightly controlling the user experience.



    It is a very real issue, but to an extent these growing pains are to be expected. Apple does have to be careful though. The iPhone is extremely powerful and later applications may have thousands of developer-days invested in them, along with $$$s, and no one wants to get that rejection after that.
  • Reply 33 of 56
    Phil Schiller's comments that Apple is listening reminds me of a Homer Simpson response to his daughter Lisa's statement that Homer doesn't understand her: "Just because I don't care doesn't me I don't understand!".



    But, as someone brought up to believe in the freedoms that we are supposed to value, the image and practice of overt censorship by Apple is a very real problem. I'm not one who has any interest in purchasing porn, but I do find it unacceptable to reject, say, a dictionary that may have words in it that some people find objectionable goes way over the line.



    I also believe Apple's voluntary censorship of content opens them up to criminal/federal prosecution when they miss some material, such as those that violate copyright or patents laws.



    Basically, Apple should only be evaluating software based on purely technical issues that could cause the iPhone's performance to fail and degrade, or misuses some API -- that is, an evaluation process that could be significantly supported by automated QA testing.
  • Reply 34 of 56
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post


    Perhaps it's a by-product of the web and the ability to Tweet and Blog, but people today seem to get completely outraged about ridiculousness and trivia.



    Be careful of what you wish for. If the FCC rules that exclusive tie-ins between carriers and phone manufacturers are illegal, there would be little reason for a carrier like AT&T to subsidize the iPhone. Anyone care to spend $600 or more for the phone instead of simply losing a few apps, like we do today? And what the idiots at the FCC probably don't even realize is that even if they ruled that exclusive relationships are illegal, users still would not be able to use the iPhone on Verizon because Verizon is CDMA based.



    You do realize that you are paying back your subsidy WITH INTEREST, and a good portion of the subsidies on the "free" phones for those who pay like $30/Mo for a basic plan...



    How about this for a plan:

    device

    iPhone: $500



    service:

    450 anytime, unlimited nites and weekends, is now $39 could be cut to say $35

    Data plan could be chopped to $15

    txt rates could be reduced too, imagine an unlimited txt plan being $5 and not $20



    So my $90 phone bill could be like $60-70, which over the 24-36 month usable time of a cell phone, that is a real savings.
  • Reply 35 of 56
    oc4theooc4theo Posts: 294member
    For all this talk about Google Voice, you guys need to wake up to reality. AT&T pays a minimum of $400 for for each iPhone so you cry-babies can get it at a low price. And that means AT&T needs to recoup that money and some profit.



    So when you allow Apps like Google Voice on iPhone, AT&T loses on its investment. Apple should just ban all these menace totally including Skype. If you are an investor in AT&T, you don't want it to support millions of iPhone users for the fun of it.



    Here is the solution, buy your iPhone at full retail price of $599 or $699, and put whatever you want on it. For now AT&T has paid and is still paying for over 70% of the initial cost, therefore they should not allow any free calling applications on the iPhone. Period!



    FCC will not rule against Apple on that issue. Wake up to reality. Nothing is free!
  • Reply 36 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    Isn't this the guy that develops programs to allow you to build a Hackintosh? *?



    No, he does not develop programs that allow you to build a Hackitosh. The posts you linked to are him sharing his thoughts and experiences with using programs others have written to build a Hackintosh. BIG difference.
  • Reply 37 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    why don't you answer your own question. go turn on parental controls on your phone and see if there is an option to restrict mail and safari, just like you can on your computer with a managed account. i'll bet my first born that there is at least safari



    General > Restrictions > On



    safari: Allow On

    Allow Apps Rated: 4+



    hit porn site (in this case) -> works

    search for porn related term -> works



    Question answered: Apple does not restrict Safari content
  • Reply 38 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post


    Here is the solution, buy your iPhone at full retail price of $599 or $699, and put whatever you want on it. For now AT&T has paid and is still paying for over 70% of the initial cost, therefore they should not allow any free calling applications on the iPhone. Period!



    OK. Can you please point me to the place where I can buy an unsubsidized unlocked iPhone that Apple will support? I'm even willing to pay extra for AppleCare if they're willing to do this.
  • Reply 39 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post


    Palm, Microsoft, please steal these whiny developers from us. The Apple rejects will be a great base on which to build your business. You can corner the fart, porn, and general crap app market. The real developers who are actually making compelling apps that make the platform better aren't going anywhere.



    Yeah, they may not go anywhere, but so will their apps.



    You say they can corner the fart, porn and general crap app market, huh? Well do a quick search for fart apps in the app store, and you'll be amazed how many hits you get. Better yet, look at your iphone and tell me how many apps you have and how many of them you use and consider great apps.



    Google voice, Spotify (likely to be rejected), SlingMedia (wifi only), skype (wifi only)... should I go on? All of these apps are available on other phones, on AT&T network nonetheless.



    You're free to keep your blinders on and defend Apple for whatever they do, and blame developers, but if Apple doesn't rectify this soon, the backlash will not be pretty.
  • Reply 40 of 56
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post


    For all this talk about Google Voice, you guys need to wake up to reality. AT&T pays a minimum of $400 for for each iPhone so you cry-babies can get it at a low price. And that means AT&T needs to recoup that money and some profit.



    So when you allow Apps like Google Voice on iPhone, AT&T loses on its investment. Apple should just ban all these menace totally including Skype. If you are an investor in AT&T, you don't want it to support millions of iPhone users for the fun of it.



    Here is the solution, buy your iPhone at full retail price of $599 or $699, and put whatever you want on it. For now AT&T has paid and is still paying for over 70% of the initial cost, therefore they should not allow any free calling applications on the iPhone. Period!



    FCC will not rule against Apple on that issue. Wake up to reality. Nothing is free!



    There's just one minor problem with your argument: You pay for this so-called subsidy over the course of your 2 year contract!



    And Google voice doesn't bypass AT&T at all. It uses up your minutes when you make a call through GV. As for SMS, there are plenty of apps in the store right now that allow you to send free sms.



    It's not the GV rejection necessarily that has people up in arms, it's the inconsistencies of the App Store. There doesn't seem to be any logic behind some of the rejections. And Apple silence on the matter is not helping.
Sign In or Register to comment.