Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Cellphones Businesses Apple

Apple Censors App Store Rejection Notices 477

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?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Censors App Store Rejection Notices

Comments Filter:
  • well (Score:4, Informative)

    by stoolpigeon ( 454276 ) * <bittercode@gmail> on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:34AM (#25149617) Homepage Journal
    • Re:well (Score:5, Funny)

      by ShieldW0lf ( 601553 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:39AM (#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: (Score:3, Insightful)

        >>>slapping non-disclosure agreements on application rejection notices.

        Apple can not arbitrarily take-away my right to free speech. This means nothing if I don't sign the NDA.

        • Re:well (Score:5, Informative)

          by XxtraLarGe ( 551297 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:44AM (#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 @08:53AM (#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 @09:13AM (#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.
          • by v1 ( 525388 )

            I wonder if there are ways around that, like if you download the sdk and write an app, and then someone else submits it to the store? I wonder if the sdk agreement is worded to transfer like that?

            Also I wonder if Apple would be foolish enough to consider actually taking action, surely that would initiate the Streisand Effect?

            • Canary? (Score:5, Interesting)

              by TaoPhoenix ( 980487 ) * <> on Thursday September 25, 2008 @10:11AM (#25150889) Journal

              What about the Canary approach?

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

              "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 ... )

          • Ok, I'm not sure if that's entirely the right expression, but courts will often refuse to enforce clauses in contracts which are a dramatic expansion of the intended purposes of contract law.

            I think in California, non-compete agreements which prevent people from working for any other employer in the same industry were struck down under this principal, and I would imagine that a clause which restricts you from even sharing with other parties that your app was rejected, and under what terms, would be in the s

        • Re:well (Score:4, Insightful)

          by the_fat_kid ( 1094399 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:48AM (#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: (Score:2, Interesting)

          But if you don't agree to the NDA, then you are obviously going to loose your developer membership, which is required to get your apps in the store. You may not agree that the whole situation is fair, but they sure as hell have the legal right to do what they're doing here -- they have a whole team of good lawyers to make sure of that.

      • Re:well (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:28AM (#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 @10:38AM (#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: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by pimpimpim ( 811140 )
            It is starting to look like the iphone app market is closing

            Are you assuming it was open at some point?

      • Re:well (Score:4, Interesting)

        by darjen ( 879890 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:58AM (#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.

    • by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:01AM (#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: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by rmccann ( 792082 )

        what is its excuse for not being MS compatible?

        It is Microsofts fault for not making itself combatible with 3rd party things.

        • by SenseiLeNoir ( 699164 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @10:17AM (#25150963)

          This is not informative to the context of the discussion. Fault MS all you like, but one thing, its Windows Mobile OS does not have half the draconian measures Apple has on its iPhone OS. It is possible to make and run any application, even where they duplicate existing functionality.

          As for compatiblity, even if Active Sync does NOT support third party plug-ins easily, you are free to develop your own sync platform, such as ones utilizing SynchML.

          the iPhone doesnt even allow you to replace iTunes as the music Sync application. Most Windows Mobile phones on the other hand can either support USB mass storage (or a wrapper that simulates it) on the device, or at the very least allow you to put your Memory card into a reader, to copy your songs. The in-built Media Player, will automatically search for and add songs to the library on first run, and can be requested to search there after.

          The Windows Media Player sync is optional (only required if you have some DRM songs).

          Otherwise, nothing stopping you from adding some MP3s,MIDIs etc onto the device. And if you want to support other formats, there are many free and commercial media players (TCPMP is one such free one, Nero Mobile is a commercial one, which also provides support for DNLA).

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Can I run Android on an iPhone ....?

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by TheP4st ( 1164315 )

        But android doesn't have the Apple logo, what is its excuse for not being MS compatible?

        That it don't have the MS logo.

    • Re:well (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Don_dumb ( 927108 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:10AM (#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 @08:36AM (#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 @08:39AM (#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 @08:40AM (#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.

      • It's my understanding that to even have developed an app for ipod, you have to have already signed an NDA.

        In ink? IANAL so I have to ask what if someone discloses a rejection that had the caveat of non-disclosure? And outside of the US?
        What can Apple actually do, if someone violates their 'request' for non-disclosure?
        I'm guessing this is very much an empty threat, hopefully to prevent developers being scared away but I'm guessing they haven't taken the Streisand Effect into account. The threat of "you can't develop for the iPhone anymore" is less of a threat than they think it is.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Migraineman ( 632203 )
      The obvious next step would be to place both you and your product on Double Secret Probation ... the terms of which are only available to developers with Super-Level Clearance. You don't have Super-Level Clearance, do you? Hmmm, very well, just sign here ... and here ... and here ... thank you.
  • Reasonable? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by faloi ( 738831 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:36AM (#25149653)
    How was banning a tethering application reasonable?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MoonBuggy ( 611105 )

      Or even 'I Am Rich' for that matter. If people want to waste their money then they should be more than welcome to; I can't believe people are calling it a scam - it works exactly as advertised and the price is clearly stated.

    • I would like to know that too.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      How was banning a tethering application reasonable?

      If providers (like O2 in the UK) were provided with an assurance from Apple that tethering would not be allowed.
      And if providers (like O2 in the UK) set up their pricing policy on that assurance.
      Under those circumstances, it would be reasonable for Apple to ban a tethering application.

      I can't say if that is definitely what has happened.

      In the UK, O2 provide unlimited data with no fair usage policy for the iPhone. Every other 3G device they support has data limits and strict fair usage policies.

      • In the UK, O2 provide unlimited data with no fair usage policy for the iPhone. Every other 3G device they support has data limits and strict fair usage policies.

        Wrong - look at the bottom of O2's iPhone page [] - "Excessive usage policy and full terms apply"

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Scutter ( 18425 )

      I don't have the AT&T user agreement in front of me, but I believe when you sign the contract with them, you agree not to use their data plan with a tethered computer. It's possible that Apple is using that as a way of helping AT&T enforce compliance.

    • Re:Reasonable? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gyrogeerloose ( 849181 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:58AM (#25150685) Journal

      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.

  • Doesn't an agreement imply that both parties agree to it? According to TFA it's just a notice that Apple put in the letter, that's not an agreement. Why would the recipients be legally obligated to accept it?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by 91degrees ( 207121 )
      Presumably you agree to some T&Cs before you submit an application to the Apple Store which could be interpreted as allowing them to do this.

      In practice, it's probably unenforceable. If Apple sued you for disclosing the reasons for the rejection they wouldn't be able to show any damages, and since Apple aren't doing anything, you might even be able to argue that the contractual arrangement ended with apple's rejection.
  • by Ritz_Just_Ritz ( 883997 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:39AM (#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 @08:39AM (#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.

    • I think it could be even easier - you're not allowed to disclose that your app was rejected, but can't you just raise certain questions; eg:
      "Did I make an application for the iPhone that does XYZ?"
      "Did apple reject that application that I made?"
      "Was the hypothetical rejection for the following reasons: PPP, QQQ?"

      It's not disclosing the non-disclosable information - it's just raising the question as to whether or not it happ
  • irrational... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Xiph1980 ( 944189 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:40AM (#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 @08:42AM (#25149711) Journal

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

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      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...

      Well, ask yourself this: Why do some of the top brands of anything have such a big fanbase? Why do so many people go to McDonald's? I mean, McDonald's has food that "tastes like sh** but you can eat it." Why do so many people like Subway? Why do so many people people drive Toyotas?

      These are all fairly mediocre products. 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!)

      It com

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by MrEkted ( 764569 )
        Strangely, your personal opinion doesn't matter as much to me as my own. I drive Toyotas because I find them to be infinitely more reliable than German cars (read - VW's). I use Apple products because I hate unnecessary reboots, bad user interfaces, and bloated software - all of which I find in MS products.
        From Consumer Reports [] (this is not a slam dunk, but you get my point, I'm sure).

        "European makes account for 17 models on the Least reliable list. This includes six each from Mercedes-Benz and Volks
      • Re:irrational... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Reality Master 101 ( 179095 ) <RealityMaster101 AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:25AM (#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.

    • Yeah, because most of their customers are iPhone developers?

    • by toQDuj ( 806112 )

      For me, the benefits outweigh the treatment. In my opinion I would rather have something that works with me without hindrance right out of the box, and that does what it says on said box, than to have something I need to spend billions of years on to configure just so that it has a slight semblance of usability in it.

      In the Open Source world, it is often said that you can write an app yourself if you cannot get it already, but such solutions often are very limited and require huge investments of time to ge

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by XxtraLarGe ( 551297 )

      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...

      In most cases, Apple treats their customers very well. Hardware is usually very elegantly designed and hardware & software usually work seamlessly together (iPod + iTunes for example). Get AppleCare for your products, and they'll repair/replace them in virtually all circumstances regardless of what's wrong. As a hobbyist programmer, I really enjoy XCode, since I've used eMacs, vi, .NET, NetBeans, etc. It's the best IDE I've ever used. I still think the NDA is ridiculous, and hope that they'll drop it so

    • by Britz ( 170620 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @10:27AM (#25151149)

      Studies Say Ideology Trumps Facts []
      This comment was very nice: "cognitive dissonance" []
      Applied to Apple it would mean that people that bought completely overpriced Apple products are now looking for justification and trying to convince other people that it was right to spend so much money.

  • is just to fire all the unhappy people, or make sure the reasons they're unhappy get a non disclosure clause attached.

    I'm curious what the power of this thing is? If someone complains and discloses that their app was rejected then will they be forbidden from making any more apps or could they be sued/proseuted?

  • by iamapizza ( 1312801 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:42AM (#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 @08:43AM (#25149721)
    It's all about ©The Experience!
  • Not good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Teese ( 89081 ) <beezel @ g m> on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:49AM (#25149777)
    Apple needs to fix this. It should never have been allowed to get this bad.
  • I'm waiting for Slashdot to update its category image for Apple with the "Bill of Borg" image reserved for Micro$oft stories. Apparently, Jobs and his minions are really stealing back concepts of "Squash the User and Their Rights" in exchange for the UI thefts of years past. I'll admit that I wasn't much of an Apple Fainboi over the years, and it was only last Christmas that I broke down and bought an 80GB iPod Classic over my USB Mass Storage models I've always used. I just never thought that Apple would
  • by ZorbaTHut ( 126196 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:52AM (#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.


    (Joking . . . mostly.)

  • Well, duh! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by David Gerard ( 12369 ) <slashdot&davidgerard,co,uk> on Thursday September 25, 2008 @08:55AM (#25149827) Homepage

    "Fuck it, we're evil," [] 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 [] 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.

  • Why do they insist on shooting themselves in the foot like this? I somehow suspect that the App store is led by an inexperienced team, and that Steve only has sideline control over the operation of that one. I think he would not be so foolish as to create this much bad publicity. He may be an (ass/strict ruler), but he's certainly not this stupid and he should know that this behaviour will come back to bite him later on. I'm interested in hearing the full story once upon a time.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ruin20 ( 1242396 )

      Why do they insist on shooting themselves in the foot like this?

      Because the gun's not loaded, lets face it, most people will not be upset about this, and if a feature is that freaking cool that it needs to be developed or you're going to have mass panic, then Apple will do it themselves.

      The user isn't going to care how the company treats the developer, especially now that the developer is being banned from complaining. Their competition is development on other platforms, and even then, their lack of media text messages or copy-and-paste functionality, must have featur

  • Boycott (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jav1231 ( 539129 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:01AM (#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 @09:03AM (#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 @09:31AM (#25150309)

    I'm a PC

    And I'm a Mac

    I run almost all business software and games


  • other bias (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom ( 822 ) on Thursday September 25, 2008 @09:32AM (#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 @09:48AM (#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.

If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.