Many of you are missing the point, possibly because the story conflates two issues. It's not what the Wifi Scanners do that is the issue, it's how they are doing it. Apple has some API's that are private and changeable without notice. So if developers use them, their apps could break at any update. But if they do, Apple looks bad--all a user see's is the crash.
My guess is that either the iPad or the 4G changes some private APIs, and Apple is getting rid of the crashes users might see. If you are a developer, and you use private API's you have no right to complain about anything. Apple flat out tells you not to use them.
The useless App issue is of more concern, but so far all we have is one report--and no indication of the quality of that App. Do you know that to get a product put on Walmart's shelves, you have to pay Walmart? Apple having some control over whats on it's store is hardly the death of freedom. And letting developers know they should up their game instead of putting up quick, useless apps might be a good thing.
But being a bit cleared in communication would certainly be appreciated.
I find this curious. The sex apps, I'm not completely happy about, but I can understand.
The lawsuit, again not real happy about, but I can understand that one too. Though, getting the import of these devices blocked seems like a bad PR move on their part.
This shenanigans about Wi-Fi scanner apps though? This one really has me confused. Most of these are legitimately good apps that provide some useful functionality for techs and other power users. Why remove these applications?
I was considering buying an iPad later this month, but now I find myself rethinking that decision. If this is what I have to look forward to, I think I'll pass. I'm missing my iPhone, but with the stream of bad moves lately, I think I'm going to stick with Android.
The Wi-Fi scanners are using undocumented APIs. The developers should put in a request to open up any API that they need. Apple has been making some exceptions to the undocumented API rule too. It is up to the developers to ask for these exceptions though.
I think the article has it wrong. Denying undocumented APIs is much different then denying trivial apps. The only example I see of a trivial app is "Quacking like a duck." Seriously, do you want an iPhone app for every possible sound byte?
I don't think you should give up an iPhone so quickly. Apple always does the right thing in the end. Even with Apple's increased transparency lately, they still don't really tell us what they are up to. If anything, it makes it worse sometimes because we only get half an answer from Apple.
I'm not sure what Lawsuit you are referring to. If it is the recent HTC lawsuit, i'm not sure if I agree with it easier. I'd prefer Apple didn't cast the first stone in these IP lawsuits. Personally though, if a company has a history of bogus I.P. lawsuits (even not against Apple), I don't mind if Apple sues them like crazy. Those companies deserve to be put in their place. I'm not sure what the case is here though.
I don't mind the elimination of trivial apps, but I think that better organization of the AppStore would be a better solution. Simply creating a "Trivial" category would help with this. Of course, the Wifi scanners are not being denied for being trivial.
Actually, I would classify them as trivial too. At least with my iPod Touch I can more or less do the same thing with the Wifi system preference or setting. I've often gone into the Wifi system preference window and walked around a mall to see what wifi connections are out there. Why would I need an app to do it - does the app provide more information or something?
I say it's good that they're finally removing some of the junk.
I think Apple really just needs to let people sideload apps. That way if people want these silly apps, or porn or whatever they can get it. It is their device, they should be able to install what they want (just sandbox it).
As for the App Store, I think it is cluttered, annoying, and sometimes useless. Apple's biggest mistake is not editing the top list. The soft porn apps shouldn't be their, not should a fart or other useless app. I'm not against Apple doing creative editing, provided they show the top 10 useful apps (and don't cherry pick them).
I think Apple just wanted the big number 100,000 and didn't think straight. I can't even think of 100 Apps I want for my computer, let alone a small phone. As for games, Xbox 360 has a total of 736 games. Something is seriously wrong with 150,000+ Apps on the iTunes App store.
I am not an iPhone user but am contemplating switching the whole family. My sense is that this is a very slippery slope for Apple. What is "minimum user functionality?" It leaves to much room for abuse by Apple, maybe not under the current leadership, but what about the next? Are developers going to spend perishable time trying to second guess Apple? This has all the tendencies to lead us where Microsoft ( spit..spit ) ruled and still rules the computer OS game.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
I think Apple really just needs to let people sideload apps. That way if people want these silly apps, or porn or whatever they can get it. It is their device, they should be able to install what they want (just sandbox it).
As for the App Store, I think it is cluttered, annoying, and sometimes useless. Apple's biggest mistake is not editing the top list. The soft porn apps shouldn't be their, not should a fart or other useless app. I'm not against Apple doing creative editing, provided they show the top 10 useful apps (and don't cherry pick them).
I think Apple just wanted the big number 100,000 and didn't think straight. I can't even think of 100 Apps I want for my computer, let alone a small phone. As for games, Xbox 360 has a total of 736 games. Something is seriously wrong with 150,000+ Apps on the iTunes App store.
Side loading on an iPod Touch would be feasible, but I don't see Apple doing it. They can't do it on an iPhone without violating contractual agreements with AT&T.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
But that is not what Apple is all about nor do we want it to be. We like being told how we should think. That's why Steve was sent here.
I am not an iPhone user but am contemplating switching the whole family. My sense is that this is a very slippery slope for Apple. What is "minimum user functionality?" It leaves to much room for abuse by Apple, maybe not under the current leadership, but what about the next? Are developers going to spend perishable time trying to second guess Apple? This has all the tendencies to lead us where Microsoft ( spit..spit ) ruled and still rules the computer OS game.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
The AppStore is obviously intended to create a free market. Sure Apple has some veto power, but they are not engaging in tactics that eliminate small and upstart developers. There is a reason not not many independent developers write for a PS3 or Nintendo. The barrier to entry is too high. There is always the risk that a company will create an unhealthy ecosystem, but sometimes you just need to have faith. Open source solutions have as of yet not been very successful. Personally, I'd rather have a company like Apple run the AppStore. They rarely compromise or play favorites with big business. Not that big business is bad, they just get away with things they shouldn't sometimes. In Sony's or Microsoft's case, playing favorites with game publishers eliminates the small guys.
Seriously, is your life any worse for not having a "Quack like a duck" application.
And the madness continues. What next Apple? Come on, do your worst. Maybe you could wall Safari in to only sites which say nice things about Steve Jobs?
Why have many people here, including the app developer in question, missed this vital piece of the puzzle?:
Quote:
According to the development studio Three Jacks Software, Apple removed its application, called "WiFi-Where," due to its alleged use of unpublished APIs within the iPhone OS software development kit.
I don't have access to the developer NDA but doesn't it explicitly state they are NOT to use unpublished APIs?
The developers only have themselves to blame really.
Apple this week has continued its crackdown against what it feels are substandard applications in its App Store for the iPhone and iPod touch, this time removing Wi-Fi scanners and software it said has "minimum user functionality."
Can someone tell me what the Apple App Store approval process is for?
Anyway...
If Apple is gonna pay people that pass apps that Apple turns around and says has "minimum user functionality", then throw some of that money to me Apple cuz it seems like you like giving it away!
Finally, Apple, problem solved, just create a "minimum user functionality" genre and place all those apps you feel meet that compliance. Then put them on a separate server in that NC facility you're building and then remove them from iTunes EXCEPT for a link to direct possible customers to that one server containing those apps. Call it the "Useless App Store". Betcha that server gets a lot of hits!
Of course I can kinda understand Apple looking at 150,000 plus apps in their store and more in the hopper awaiting approval and more being created and saying how many are apps that can be looked at as "Keynote" or "Final Cut Pro" when it comes to useful productivity, to how many apps that can be looked at as "PhotoBooth" when it comes to fun cool apps but not as productive, to how many apps that can be looked at as "Screen Saver" when it comes to barely serving a purpose. \
I do not understand why people are upset. You (and I also) bought the phone knowing that it was a closed system, and that Apple maintained the right to absolutely control the User Experience. This is why there is no Flash on the devices.
There is no free speech issue here, there is no censorship. You do not have the "right" to put on any application you may wish, nor do developers have the "right" to post apps in the store.
This is Apple's business, and just like any other business, they have the right to restrict who does what, not unlike the standard "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs at a restaurant.
Apple's attitude is, and always has been, if you do not like the situation, you can buy something else, but they are not going to budge.
And the madness continues. What next Apple? Come on, do your worst. Maybe you could wall Safari in to only sites which say nice things about Steve Jobs?
if they wanted to, they could. It is their browser. Of course, if you did not like that, then you could either use a different browser or buy a different phone.
Why have many people here, including the app developer in question, missed this vital piece of the puzzle?:
I don't have access to the developer NDA but doesn't it explicitly state they are NOT to use unpublished APIs?
The developers only have themselves to blame really.
If that is the case, then why not let the devs do as they wish with APIs, letting them fix it upon software upgrades? It should not be Apple's priority or job to police if their own APIs are used or not. The developer however, should test their APIs on all iterations of Apple's software to make sure it works, including upgrades when they happen. How many apps have we seen so far that even using Apple's APIs, break upon software upgrades then require the dev. to upgrade themselves?
Comments
My guess is that either the iPad or the 4G changes some private APIs, and Apple is getting rid of the crashes users might see. If you are a developer, and you use private API's you have no right to complain about anything. Apple flat out tells you not to use them.
The useless App issue is of more concern, but so far all we have is one report--and no indication of the quality of that App. Do you know that to get a product put on Walmart's shelves, you have to pay Walmart? Apple having some control over whats on it's store is hardly the death of freedom. And letting developers know they should up their game instead of putting up quick, useless apps might be a good thing.
But being a bit cleared in communication would certainly be appreciated.
I find this curious. The sex apps, I'm not completely happy about, but I can understand.
The lawsuit, again not real happy about, but I can understand that one too. Though, getting the import of these devices blocked seems like a bad PR move on their part.
This shenanigans about Wi-Fi scanner apps though? This one really has me confused. Most of these are legitimately good apps that provide some useful functionality for techs and other power users. Why remove these applications?
I was considering buying an iPad later this month, but now I find myself rethinking that decision. If this is what I have to look forward to, I think I'll pass. I'm missing my iPhone, but with the stream of bad moves lately, I think I'm going to stick with Android.
The Wi-Fi scanners are using undocumented APIs. The developers should put in a request to open up any API that they need. Apple has been making some exceptions to the undocumented API rule too. It is up to the developers to ask for these exceptions though.
I think the article has it wrong. Denying undocumented APIs is much different then denying trivial apps. The only example I see of a trivial app is "Quacking like a duck." Seriously, do you want an iPhone app for every possible sound byte?
I don't think you should give up an iPhone so quickly. Apple always does the right thing in the end. Even with Apple's increased transparency lately, they still don't really tell us what they are up to. If anything, it makes it worse sometimes because we only get half an answer from Apple.
I'm not sure what Lawsuit you are referring to. If it is the recent HTC lawsuit, i'm not sure if I agree with it easier. I'd prefer Apple didn't cast the first stone in these IP lawsuits. Personally though, if a company has a history of bogus I.P. lawsuits (even not against Apple), I don't mind if Apple sues them like crazy. Those companies deserve to be put in their place. I'm not sure what the case is here though.
I don't mind the elimination of trivial apps, but I think that better organization of the AppStore would be a better solution. Simply creating a "Trivial" category would help with this. Of course, the Wifi scanners are not being denied for being trivial.
Actually, I would classify them as trivial too. At least with my iPod Touch I can more or less do the same thing with the Wifi system preference or setting. I've often gone into the Wifi system preference window and walked around a mall to see what wifi connections are out there. Why would I need an app to do it - does the app provide more information or something?
I say it's good that they're finally removing some of the junk.
As for the App Store, I think it is cluttered, annoying, and sometimes useless. Apple's biggest mistake is not editing the top list. The soft porn apps shouldn't be their, not should a fart or other useless app. I'm not against Apple doing creative editing, provided they show the top 10 useful apps (and don't cherry pick them).
I think Apple just wanted the big number 100,000 and didn't think straight. I can't even think of 100 Apps I want for my computer, let alone a small phone. As for games, Xbox 360 has a total of 736 games. Something is seriously wrong with 150,000+ Apps on the iTunes App store.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
I think Apple really just needs to let people sideload apps. That way if people want these silly apps, or porn or whatever they can get it. It is their device, they should be able to install what they want (just sandbox it).
As for the App Store, I think it is cluttered, annoying, and sometimes useless. Apple's biggest mistake is not editing the top list. The soft porn apps shouldn't be their, not should a fart or other useless app. I'm not against Apple doing creative editing, provided they show the top 10 useful apps (and don't cherry pick them).
I think Apple just wanted the big number 100,000 and didn't think straight. I can't even think of 100 Apps I want for my computer, let alone a small phone. As for games, Xbox 360 has a total of 736 games. Something is seriously wrong with 150,000+ Apps on the iTunes App store.
Side loading on an iPod Touch would be feasible, but I don't see Apple doing it. They can't do it on an iPhone without violating contractual agreements with AT&T.
Once censorship begins, it never knows where to stop. Apple should RATE apps, not remove them.
How do you define censorship?
Certainly not as the Supreme Court or the founding fathers would.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
But that is not what Apple is all about nor do we want it to be. We like being told how we should think. That's why Steve was sent here.
Get rid of the garbage!!!
tekfart is gone- isn't he?
BIG BROTHER has spoken!
I am not an iPhone user but am contemplating switching the whole family. My sense is that this is a very slippery slope for Apple. What is "minimum user functionality?" It leaves to much room for abuse by Apple, maybe not under the current leadership, but what about the next? Are developers going to spend perishable time trying to second guess Apple? This has all the tendencies to lead us where Microsoft ( spit..spit ) ruled and still rules the computer OS game.
Let the users be free to make the choices and Apple should instead remove apps that show no sales or downward trend in sales to weed out the crap. Just one man's opinion.
The AppStore is obviously intended to create a free market. Sure Apple has some veto power, but they are not engaging in tactics that eliminate small and upstart developers. There is a reason not not many independent developers write for a PS3 or Nintendo. The barrier to entry is too high. There is always the risk that a company will create an unhealthy ecosystem, but sometimes you just need to have faith. Open source solutions have as of yet not been very successful. Personally, I'd rather have a company like Apple run the AppStore. They rarely compromise or play favorites with big business. Not that big business is bad, they just get away with things they shouldn't sometimes. In Sony's or Microsoft's case, playing favorites with game publishers eliminates the small guys.
Seriously, is your life any worse for not having a "Quack like a duck" application.
How do you define censorship?
Certainly not as the Supreme Court or the founding fathers would.
Arbitrarily. Apple cannot "censor" anything, since they have no authority to censor.
According to the development studio Three Jacks Software, Apple removed its application, called "WiFi-Where," due to its alleged use of unpublished APIs within the iPhone OS software development kit.
I don't have access to the developer NDA but doesn't it explicitly state they are NOT to use unpublished APIs?
The developers only have themselves to blame really.
Apple this week has continued its crackdown against what it feels are substandard applications in its App Store for the iPhone and iPod touch, this time removing Wi-Fi scanners and software it said has "minimum user functionality."
Can someone tell me what the Apple App Store approval process is for?
Anyway...
If Apple is gonna pay people that pass apps that Apple turns around and says has "minimum user functionality", then throw some of that money to me Apple cuz it seems like you like giving it away!
Finally, Apple, problem solved, just create a "minimum user functionality" genre and place all those apps you feel meet that compliance. Then put them on a separate server in that NC facility you're building and then remove them from iTunes EXCEPT for a link to direct possible customers to that one server containing those apps. Call it the "Useless App Store". Betcha that server gets a lot of hits!
Of course I can kinda understand Apple looking at 150,000 plus apps in their store and more in the hopper awaiting approval and more being created and saying how many are apps that can be looked at as "Keynote" or "Final Cut Pro" when it comes to useful productivity, to how many apps that can be looked at as "PhotoBooth" when it comes to fun cool apps but not as productive, to how many apps that can be looked at as "Screen Saver" when it comes to barely serving a purpose.
There is no free speech issue here, there is no censorship. You do not have the "right" to put on any application you may wish, nor do developers have the "right" to post apps in the store.
This is Apple's business, and just like any other business, they have the right to restrict who does what, not unlike the standard "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs at a restaurant.
Apple's attitude is, and always has been, if you do not like the situation, you can buy something else, but they are not going to budge.
And the madness continues. What next Apple? Come on, do your worst. Maybe you could wall Safari in to only sites which say nice things about Steve Jobs?
if they wanted to, they could. It is their browser. Of course, if you did not like that, then you could either use a different browser or buy a different phone.
Why have many people here, including the app developer in question, missed this vital piece of the puzzle?:
I don't have access to the developer NDA but doesn't it explicitly state they are NOT to use unpublished APIs?
The developers only have themselves to blame really.
If that is the case, then why not let the devs do as they wish with APIs, letting them fix it upon software upgrades? It should not be Apple's priority or job to police if their own APIs are used or not. The developer however, should test their APIs on all iterations of Apple's software to make sure it works, including upgrades when they happen. How many apps have we seen so far that even using Apple's APIs, break upon software upgrades then require the dev. to upgrade themselves?