Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apple Censors App Store Rejection Notices

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Sep 25, 2008 07:33 AM
from the because-they-can dept.
isBandGeek() writes "After a few reasonable App Store bans, such as the ones on I Am Rich and NetShare, developers started complaining about excessive restrictions on applications like Podcaster and MailWrangler, supposedly because they provided 'duplicate functionality.' In response, Apple rubbed salt in their wounds by slapping non-disclosure agreements on application rejection notices. Now developers are not even allowed to tell their fanbase that Apple decided to withhold approval for an application. Is Apple confident that Google's open platform Android won't be much of a threat?"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Apple: iPhone App Store Rejects Find a New Home 152 comments
eldavojohn writes "A new site called App Rejections (somewhat slashdotted already) aims to provide a home for misfit apps. With Apple offering no documents or discussions on the matter of application rejections, this site might become a popular place to pick forbidden fruit. Could a third party horn in on Apple's monopoly in the iPhone application market?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • well (Score:4, Informative)

    by stoolpigeon (454276) * <bittercode@gmail> on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:34AM (#25149617) Homepage Journal
    • Re:well (Score:5, Funny)

      by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:39AM (#25149683) Journal
      Gee, this makes me want to rush out and develop for that platform. Right after I finish strapping the wings on to this pig...
      • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Lumpy (12016) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:28AM (#25150243) Homepage

        My company was poised to start developing for the iPhone until I brought this to their attention at the last staff meeting.

        The entire iPhone dev project has been put on hold because of this.

        Apple had better figure out how to pull their heads out of their arse because lots of companies thinking of this will instantly back off like we have.

        I know I was going to write some apps, but I'm not going to pay $99.00 to be blessed to write freeware and then have my apps rejected.

        • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

          by 3dr (169908) on Thursday September 25 2008, @09:38AM (#25151329)

          I, too, have been working on three apps, and have put them on hold.

          The seemingly arbitrary blocking/rejection of certain apps makes me wonder just what their criteria is. For some, such as the net tethering application, it is obvious (direct competition/avoidance of AT&T's minutes plans). But for other apps, what is the criteria?

          It is starting to look like the iphone app market is closing, because if Apple is declaring certain apps to be "duplicate functionality", then how can competition have a role?

          The developers who were first to the store have all the advantage right now. I.e., timing, not functionality or merit, is key. Apple should clarify exactly what they are doing, which policies they are employing to make this determination.

          Maybe I'll just write some "flashlight" apps -- those always get accepted. /rolls eyes

      • Re:well (Score:4, Interesting)

        by darjen (879890) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:58AM (#25150681)

        I would really like to develop an app for my ipod touch that will allow me to preview music with headphones while creating a playlist and playing it with an rca out from the dock connector. I can easily see apple banning it though, so fuck that.

        • Re:well (Score:5, Informative)

          by XxtraLarGe (551297) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:44AM (#25149733) Journal
          You sign the NDA by default if you download & install the developer tools.
          • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

            by CastrTroy (595695) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:53AM (#25149809) Homepage
            Do you sign something, or is it a click through EULA?
            • Re:well (Score:5, Informative)

              by larry bagina (561269) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:13AM (#25150021) Journal
              In order to get rejected (or accepted) from the apple store, you need to pay $99 to join the iphone developer progeam, which involves accepting the terms. While there is no pen and ink signature, you need to unambiguously accept the terms.
                • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

                  by electrictroy (912290) on Thursday September 25 2008, @09:35AM (#25151279)

                  Precisely.

                  A few years ago when Paypal was taken to court, most of the "user agreement" was thrown-out since it violated state or federal laws. The judge decided that consumers can not sign-away their legal protections. Apple's unsigned or shrinkwrapped NDA would also be thrown-out for similar reasons.

                  And to be honest, even if I was legally-bound to the NDA, I'd still disclose the whys and wherefores of my application rejection. From time-to-time, liberty must be protected with a little civil disobedience in order to protect one's rights, privileges, and freedoms.

                  • Re:well (Score:5, Informative)

                    by vux984 (928602) on Thursday September 25 2008, @10:38AM (#25152263)

                    And to be honest, even if I was legally-bound to the NDA, I'd still disclose the whys and wherefores of my application rejection. From time-to-time, liberty must be protected with a little civil disobedience in order to protect one's rights, privileges, and freedoms.

                    Its not even civil disobedience to "violate" a contract. Its just breaking a contract that might expose you to being sued for damages or other remedies specified in the contract.

                    There's nothing ILLEGAL about breaking a contract.

                    Citizens really need to learn this.

                    So if someone decides to break the NDA and publish their rejection letters, Apple will probably terminate their membership and that's about it. Apple's going to have a hell of a time showing that they were materially damaged by someone saying that their app got rejected.

                  • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

                    by tmosley (996283) on Thursday September 25 2008, @10:27AM (#25152081)
                    Well, I am a business man, and work for a corporation that deals regularly with NDAs and IP. If there is no signature, it's just a statement, and won't hold up in court. We have had lots of companies try to steal our IP, so I am fairly well versed in the intricacies of such agreements, and the implications of not having one.
            • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

              by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:27AM (#25150229)
              It doesn't have to hold up in court. Merely the threat of a lawsuit from the wealthy and powerful Apple will silence most small developers. Sure, you would probably win the case in the end, but only after paying lawyers a small fortune to defend you against Apple. And where are you going to get that kind of money if you're just some programmer or tiny company?
            • Canary? (Score:5, Interesting)

              by TaoPhoenix (980487) * <TaoPhoenix@yahoo.com> on Thursday September 25 2008, @09:11AM (#25150889)

              What about the Canary approach?

              1. "I promise under penalty of Perjury not to actively state a false status of my app. with Apple."

              2.
              "Today I was not declined by Apple."
              "Today I was not declined by Apple."
              "Today I was not declined by Apple."
              "Today I was not declined by Apple."

              3. ( ... Crickets ... )

              • Re:well (Score:4, Informative)

                by SQLGuru (980662) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:43AM (#25150481)

                The suggestion was the reverse of that transaction.

                1. Download SDK
                2. Develop application
                3. Transfer app to 3rd party who *IS* under the NDA.

                My guess is that they would be the one rejected and they would be NDA'ed from telling you why your app was rejected. If you were told, then the 3rd party would be up the brown river with Apple.

                Layne

        • Re:well (Score:4, Insightful)

          by the_fat_kid (1094399) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:48AM (#25149769)

          true, but you did sign a NDA when you became a registered apple iPone dev.
          it sucks but it's not quite as crazy as "by reading this message you agree to the terms of our NDA"
          they aren't just slapping this on now. they slapped it on you up front.

          • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

            by ckaminski (82854) <.ckaminski. .at. .pobox.com.> on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:41AM (#25150465) Homepage
            That's utter bullshit. Make that same argument when Windows Live! is the only way to get your software installed into your customers PCs. A platform monopoly is still a monopoly (no matter how small), and this is clearly anti-competitive. Apple needs to be taken to task for it.

            <quote>
            but I'm just tired of people whining about technology products not living up to their ever-so-important expectations.
            </quote>

            You can be tired of it, but as one of those Whingers, I'm pissed that my technology is restricted or limited at every turn, either by lack of imagination (the openness of the PC platform proved something) or by pathetic vendor lock-down in an effort to control quality or competition.
          • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

            by SenseiLeNoir (699164) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:57AM (#25150667)

            So 4 out of about 4000 apps have been rejected so far. 0.4%. I don't think it's time to panic yet.

            4000 apps, which the majority are thin wrappers around web pages, or the like vs some few (interesting) apps.

            The apps that got "rejected" are exactly the ones I would have wanted (bar the i am rich one). I have WANTED an app that can download podcasts straight to my iPod Touch. Currently I use my Nokia N95 (which has a podcast application built in) do do that, but its screen is not as nice as the iPod.

            The second thing is, Apple is charging money to "join" the program (even for freeware developers), yet are not 100% clear on their rejection policies (which allows them to revise their policies), and no scope for refund.

            I am certain this will fall foul of some UK/European laws, due to its vague nature, and some false advertising by Apple, in terms of their rallying calls for developers (yes I heard them). Finally not being able to disclose the reasons for rejection can also fall short of some laws, as reasons for rejections can help other developers avoid mistakes, or better asses their own projects.

            If Apple wants to keep secret its reasons for rejecting applications, then it could be equated that Apple are kind of performing a "lottery" of sorts. That also could fall short of some laws.

            Even Symbian (which itself is stricter than J2ME/ Windows Mobile/Android) doesnt do these shenigans.

    • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:01AM (#25149871) Journal

      An analysts opinion isn't worth the paper it is printed on, and this opinion ain't even printed.

      Both phones are less then perfect and missing some "we don't think you need this, so you don't get it" features.

      But the analyst is an idiot because he talks about the lack of iTunes. Yeah, because people care about that. Oh, they don't. First off, most music on digital players is ripped from CD's, or obtained through other means in mp3 format. iTunes is very small potatoes in the global music industry and even Apple knows that the iPod a far bigger player in the digital music player isn't always going to be used for iTunes content, which is why Apple gives you the tools needed to convert iTunes music to MP3 format or burn it to a CD.

      The idea that a new platform needs to be compatible with iTunes is silly.

      The bigger problem is lack of office compatibiltiy. While MS does offer you ways to export your documents in more general formats, that could be the real killer. The iPhone is bought by people who buy Apple and so accept that it is NOT going to be all that compatible with MS software. But android doesn't have the Apple logo, what is its excuse for not being MS compatible?

      In a way, I don't think the iPhone and Android are even competitors. iPhone is a single product offered by a company that has no other phones. Android is a platform that any phone maker can use. It would be like saying the Smart Car competes with Honda Engines. Does the iPhone compete with Windows Mobile or Symbian? No, it competes with other phones, specific models, not OS/Platforms. if this google phone fails, there are plenty of others coming out soon, while Apple can hardly afford to start making dozens of phones and a new one every season to suit the tastes of the customer. Neither can google, but the phonemakers can.

    • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Don_dumb (927108) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:10AM (#25149991)
      But that's the beauty of 'Open' and why Apple are (hopefully) shooting themselves in the foot with this kind of tactic.
      You see most of the critisms that article put at the Android phone were of particular features not included or limited, if the Android does what it claims to then people can simply write an app that performs that feature and there is nothing stopping them releasing it. However, if that feature is lacking on the iPhone or deliberately lacking(many of the critisms were also true of the iPhone) then Apple can prevent it being released.

      Therefore the Android has the unrestricted potential of fulfilling all of the lacking features whereas Apple will prevent the iPhone from fulfilling that same potential.

      I like many Apple products but this is my classic annoyance - they could be so much better if Apple didn't hold them back so much.
  • by Brian Kendig (1959) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:36AM (#25149645) Homepage

    What happens if you don't agree to a non-disclosure agreement on the rejection notice you receive?

    Usually NDAs have to be signed before you get access to see cool secret stuff. But what if the only thing you're agreeing to is to be rejected?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:39AM (#25149685)

      You agreed to take it up the ass from apple the moment you accepted the SDK.

      AC for obvious reasons.

    • by Saint Stephen (19450) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:40AM (#25149695) Homepage Journal

      It's my understanding that to even have developped an app for ipod, you have to have already signed an NDA. Must be under those terms.

      I personally just like writing C# apps to run on my PocketPC smartphone and use all the goofy Windows APIs. It may not be lickable, but darn it, the thing works and is fun to write for.

        • by Dun Malg (230075) on Thursday September 25 2008, @11:16AM (#25152821) Homepage

          PocketPC ... the thing works

          Do you have a different version of Windows Mobile to the rest of us?

          What, are you one of those poor bastards still running WM5? WM6.1 is a perfectly serviceable operating system. My HTC TYTN II doesn't get "rebooted" unless I decide to reflash the ROM. I reflashed it a couple weeks ago, but before that it ran for months without a restart. Now the phone I had before this one, the Mio A701, that piece of crap needed to be rebooted 5 times a day. Really, the problem with WM isn't the OS, but craptastic hardware compatibility due to mediocre "value engineered" phone hardware. If the iPhone OS was available to any and all Taiwanese phone mills, you'd see the same shit. Really, most problems with WM can be solved fairly easily: quit being such a cheap fuck and buy a decent piece of hardware to run it. Windows Mobile runs like a swiss watch on well-designed hardware--- just like the iPhone.

          My only wish is that HTC would make a phone using the same size display as the iPhone. This tiny QVGA shit sux0rz.

  • Reasonable? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by faloi (738831) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:36AM (#25149653)
    How was banning a tethering application reasonable?
    • Re:Reasonable? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gyrogeerloose (849181) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:58AM (#25150685)

      It's not reasonable but Apple didn't have much choice in the matter. AT&T wants to be able to charge their users extra for the privilege of tethering so they've written that into their agreement with Apple.

  • by Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:39AM (#25149679)

    Because they make cool *looking* equipment? If M$ did this, people would be all over them. Jobs is not known for working and playing well with others, but people just wink at the silliness because they like the shiny gadgets.

  • by Soruk (225361) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:39AM (#25149687) Homepage

    Add to the developer sites a line like:

    The following applications have not been removed from the AppStore: [item] [item] [item] .... ...and just delete when required.

  • irrational... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Xiph1980 (944189) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:40AM (#25149693)
    It may be just me but I really don't get why apple has such a big fanbase, seeing as how they treat their customers...
    • by Daimanta (1140543) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:42AM (#25149711) Journal

      Sir, I am afraid you need re-education. Please step into the reality distortion field.

      • Re:irrational... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Reality Master 101 (179095) <RealityMaster101NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:25AM (#25150187) Homepage Journal

        Why do so many people go to McDonald's? I mean, McDonald's has food that "tastes like sh** but you can eat it."

        Because it tastes awesome. Not particularly healthy, but awesome. Especially the french fries. Let me guess -- you're a vegan?

        Why do so many people like Subway?

        Oh, because they use fresh baked bread? Because it's fairly healthy? And how exactly do you screw up a sandwich, anyway?

        Don't get me wrong -- Toyota produces a quality product, but it's just not as good as some of the major European brands (let's face it, the Germans know how to engineer good cars!)

        Asian cars destroy German cars on long-term reliability. I prefer Honda, but they're all pretty good. I liked my couple of Benzes, but they weren't as good as their reputation after 70-80K miles.

  • by iamapizza (1312801) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:42AM (#25149715)
    I hear that the Apple NDAs are sent in glossy white envelopes to the developers, with the Apple logo on the outside and a grouping of pointless logic on the inside. But at least it looks good, so let's blame it on Microsoft anyways.
  • by Vinegar Joe (998110) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:43AM (#25149721)
    It's all about ©The Experience!
  • Not good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Teese (89081) <beezel@@@gmail...com> on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:49AM (#25149777)
    Apple needs to fix this. It should never have been allowed to get this bad.
  • by ZorbaTHut (126196) on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:52AM (#25149799) Homepage

    Apple? Abusing their power to keep people from talking about their product in any way that is not authorized by the Apple marketing department? Why, I can't tell you how long it's been since I've heard a similar story about them doing this sort of thing!

    No, I don't mean it's been a long time. I mean I literally can't tell you. I'm not legally allowed to.

    Sorry.

    (Joking . . . mostly.)

  • Well, duh! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by David Gerard (12369) <slashdotNO@SPAMdavidgerard.co.uk> on Thursday September 25 2008, @07:55AM (#25149827) Homepage

    "Fuck it, we're evil," [today.com] said Steve Jobs to an audience of soul-mortgaged thralls. "But our stuff is sooo good. You'll keep taking our abuse. You love it, you worm. Because our stuff is great. It's shiny and it's pretty and it's cool and it works. It's not like youâ(TM)ll go back to a Windows Mobile phone. Ha! Ha!"

    It's foolish to have expected anything else. As Neal Stephenson put it [artlung.com] in In The Beginning Was The Command Line:

    THE NOT-SO-CHARITABLE EXPLANATION has to do with Apple's corporate culture, which is rooted in Bay Area Baby Boomdom.

    Now, since I'm going to talk for a moment about culture, full disclosure is probably in order, to protect myself against allegations of conflict of interest and ethical turpitude: (1) Geographically I am a Seattleite, of a Saturnine temperament, and inclined to take a sour view of the Dionysian Bay Area, just as they tend to be annoyed and appalled by us. (2) Chronologically I am a post-Baby Boomer. I feel that way, at least, because I never experienced the fun and exciting parts of the whole Boomer scene--just spent a lot of time dutifully chuckling at Boomers' maddeningly pointless anecdotes about just how stoned they got on various occasions, and politely fielding their assertions about how great their music was. But even from this remove it was possible to glean certain patterns, and one that recurred as regularly as an urban legend was the one about how someone would move into a commune populated by sandal-wearing, peace-sign flashing flower children, and eventually discover that, underneath this facade, the guys who ran it were actually control freaks; and that, as living in a commune, where much lip service was paid to ideals of peace, love and harmony, had deprived them of normal, socially approved outlets for their control-freakdom, it tended to come out in other, invariably more sinister, ways.

    Applying this to the case of Apple Computer will be left as an exercise for the reader, and not a very difficult exercise.

    It is a bit unsettling, at first, to think of Apple as a control freak, because it is completely at odds with their corporate image. Weren't these the guys who aired the famous Super Bowl ads showing suited, blindfolded executives marching like lemmings off a cliff? Isn't this the company that even now runs ads picturing the Dalai Lama (except in Hong Kong) and Einstein and other offbeat rebels?

    It is indeed the same company, and the fact that they have been able to plant this image of themselves as creative and rebellious free-thinkers in the minds of so many intelligent and media-hardened skeptics really gives one pause. It is testimony to the insidious power of expensive slick ad campaigns and, perhaps, to a certain amount of wishful thinking in the minds of people who fall for them. It also raises the question of why Microsoft is so bad at PR, when the history of Apple demonstrates that, by writing large checks to good ad agencies, you can plant a corporate image in the minds of intelligent people that is completely at odds with reality. (The answer, for people who don't like Damoclean questions, is that since Microsoft has won the hearts and minds of the silent majority--the bourgeoisie--they don't give a damn about having a slick image, any more then Dick Nixon did. "I want to believe,"--the mantra that Fox Mulder has pinned to his office wall in The X-Files--applies in different ways to these two companies; Mac partisans want to believe in the image of Apple purveyed in those ads, and in the notion that Macs are somehow fundamentally different from other computers, while Windows people want to believe that they are getting something for their money, engaging in a respectable business transaction).

    It's as applicable now as it was in the late 1990s. That bit of Apple's corporate culture is straight from Steve Jobs.

  • Boycott (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jav1231 (539129) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:01AM (#25149865)
    Look the number of developers for Apple apps has to be finite. Pretty damn finite relative to other markets. Yes some of them are making some bank but these developers should just stop updating their apps. Or better yet, all agree to place a notice in their next update in protest. This could be stopped if they worked together.
  • by PainMeds (1301879) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:03AM (#25149901)
    Android may or may not provide competition for Apple. What is providing competition for Apple, however, is the growing pool of independent developers writing jailbreak applications for the iPhone; catering to an even larger open development pool and more reasons to jailbreak your device. A year ago, 30% of the market was jailbreaking. Today, that number's got to be much higher. Open developers distributing through Cydia (the third party software repository) are able to compete with AppStore developers, because they can take advantage of otherwise restricted APIs to write better software, and can write apps that Apple deems to be otherwise a threat.
  • I'm a Mac (Score:5, Funny)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:31AM (#25150309)

    I'm a PC

    And I'm a Mac

    I run almost all business software and games

    AND I'LL SUE YOUR ASS IF YOU TELL ANYONE!

  • other bias (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:32AM (#25150323) Homepage Journal

    Other sites report the incident differently. The main point being that it appears to be a clarification of the NDA that developers already agreed upon, and not an additional restriction.

    Compared to game consoles, Apple's requirements are very tame, but you don't hear much complaints about the rejections that Nintendo regularily sends out.

    What it does do, however, is make it clear (again), that the iPhone is not a general-purpose computer, but a device.

  • by MosesJones (55544) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:48AM (#25150555) Homepage

    Interviewer: So it says here you've been developing for the iPhone for 2 years
    Developer: Yup that's right

    I: So what applications have you written
    D: I've written applications around complex gene folding, stock prediction and a massively multi-player online game

    I: Great, can I get them from the App Store
    D: I can't say

    I: Why not?
    D: I can't say

    I: Why?
    D: There is an NDA covering whether I submitted them and whether they rejected them

    I: Can you show me the code?
    D: Err no

    I: Why?
    D: Because I'm not allowed to share things with other developers

    I: Why?
    D: That's in the NDA too

    I: So in summary you say you've written some amazing applications but can't prove it and they aren't on the app store
    D: Correct

    I: So why should I believe you
    D: Would anyone who hadn't done iPhone development have bothered to read the NDA?

    I: Good point, you're hired.

    • by TheJasper (1031512) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:05AM (#25149925)
      Hate to break it to you fanboy, but most of the rest of the world doesn't use iPhones either.
    • by hacker (14635) <setuid@gmail.com> on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:26AM (#25150211)

      What's that? It doesn't have a headphone jack, it can't play movies, it also cannot tether and is locked in to a carrier? Wow.. sounds like a real iPhone killer to me.

      What's that?

      1. No replaceable battery?
      2. Proprietary charging/data connector?
      3. Restrictive "mono" bluetooth support?
      4. Can't use non-Apple headsets?
      5. Doesn't sync to Linux?
      6. Have to jailbreak it to return function other handsets have by default?
      7. Ridiculously-restrictive AppStore?
      8. Can't install my own applications without a signed NDA and key?
      9. Fragile glass face?
      10. No proper keyboard?
      11. Camera can't record video?
      12. No memory card support?
      13. Capacitive touchscreen (not resistive)?

      Sounds like a Star-Tac killer to me, but my 5 year old PalmOS-based Treo trumps the iPhone in almost every single feature. The iPhone does not provide any new functionality, not revolutionary in any way, and there were plenty of full-screen, touch handsets out before the iPhone hit the market.

      The one, the ONLY thing Apple has going for them is marketing. That's it.

      • by cowscows (103644) on Thursday September 25 2008, @08:56AM (#25150659) Journal

        Actually, if you keep up on the Apple blogs and such, even a lot of long-time Apple fanboys are having trouble understanding Apple's play here. It's less a question of whether or not they're legally entitled to do what they're doing (it is their App store afterall), but more just a general wonder what Apple is trying to accomplish with the arbitrary nature of restrictions that they've created.

        Long time and successful mac developers are wondering what the hell is going on. They see Apple rejecting well designed iPhone applications for reasons that haven't been previously disclosed, and it makes them hesitant to produce applications of their own for fear of having it rejected over some rule that they were never told about.

        And looking at this from another angle, the NDA has meant that there aren't good forums or anything online for developers to share iPhone programming tricks or issues or whatever. Not to mention that you can't go buy a book about it to help you learn. That's just another wall that Apple has built that developers have to find their way over in order to make applications.

        Again, Apple is probably fully within their legal rights to reject any application for any reason. But that still doesn't make it smart for them to do so. If they want to create a mobile platform, which it seems fairly obvious is a goal of theirs, then nobody is really sure how Apple's actions so far have helped. They're still selling the phones by the truckload, so maybe it doesn't matter that much to them, but taking the longer view, a lot of people who had been very excited about the iPhone are having a hard time seeing where Apple is going with this.