iPhone App Developer Backlash Growing
from the openness-is-a-good-thing dept
Early on, we predicted that Apple's walled garden approach to apps for the iPhone would lead to developer backlash. Even if it was successful at first, the obvious trajectory was that it wouldn't just lead to problems that drove developers away, but it would eventually limit application innovation, just as other competing platforms were getting good enough to match Apple's. We might not be all the way there yet, but the evidence is growing that the backlash is getting serious. Slashdot noted that some respected developers are ditching the iPhone app store and reader Andrew Fong alerts us to Paul Graham's well argued explanation of why Apple's setup is bad for developers, bad for innovation, bad for consumers and bad for Apple.To summarize, it's bad for developers because they're distanced from their users, and can't quickly make changes and updates, since each change needs to go through Apple's long, mysterious and arbitrary approval process. On top of that, by creating a very real risk that Apple might not approve an app, developers have less incentive to put in the time. It's bad for innovation because you are putting a gatekeeper in front of any innovation. It's bad for consumers, because they can't do what they want and often the apps they get are lower quality than they would be otherwise, because developers cannot rapidly respond with necessary improvements and changes. Finally it's bad for Apple because it's driving away some talented developers who are useful in making the iPhone so powerful. As those developers move to other platforms, it will help those other platforms catch up, and potentially surpass the iPhone. But, perhaps more importantly, it's bad for Apple because it risks Apple's overall reputation. It makes it harder to hire top engineers:
There are a couple reasons they should care. One is that these users are the people they want as employees. If your company seems evil, the best programmers won't work for you. That hurt Microsoft a lot starting in the 90s. Programmers started to feel sheepish about working there. It seemed like selling out. When people from Microsoft were talking to other programmers and they mentioned where they worked, there were a lot of self-deprecating jokes about having gone over to the dark side. But the real problem for Microsoft wasn't the embarrassment of the people they hired. It was the people they never got. And you know who got them? Google and Apple. If Microsoft was the Empire, they were the Rebel Alliance. And it's largely because they got more of the best people that Google and Apple are doing so much better than Microsoft today.As for why Apple is making this mistake, Graham blames Apple's general view of the market:
They treat iPhone apps the way they treat the music they sell through iTunes. Apple is the channel; they own the user; if you want to reach users, you do it on their terms. The record labels agreed, reluctantly. But this model doesn't work for software. It doesn't work for an intermediary to own the user. The software business learned that in the early 1980s, when companies like VisiCorp showed that although the words "software" and "publisher" fit together, the underlying concepts don't. Software isn't like music or books. It's too complicated for a third party to act as an intermediary between developer and user. And yet that's what Apple is trying to be with the App Store: a software publisher. And a particularly overreaching one at that, with fussy tastes and a rigidly enforced house style.My guess is that there may be another reason: the perfectionist attitude at Apple. They don't want "bad" apps getting into the store, and certainly some people appreciate that. But the store has 100,000 apps right now, and most people are never going to see the vast majority of them. Having a few "bad apps" get in isn't a huge issue at this point, and certainly user-level reviews can help deal with that issue anyway. And, even if that is the biggest concern, why not at least allow non-approved apps to be viewed and downloaded, just without an official "apple seal of approval." Perhaps it made sense when Apple was first launching the store (though, even that seems questionable), but if it wants to continue to lead the market, it needs to break down that wall.
If software publishing didn't work in 1980, it works even less now that software development has evolved from a small number of big releases to a constant stream of small ones. But Apple doesn't understand that either. Their model of product development derives from hardware. They work on something till they think it's finished, then they release it. You have to do that with hardware, but because software is so easy to change, its design can benefit from evolution. The standard way to develop applications now is to launch fast and iterate. Which means it's a disaster to have long, random delays each time you release a new version.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: app store, developers, innovation, iphone, openness, reputation
Companies: apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Please correct title...
Over 85% of the complaints are by people new to the Macintosh Platform, or are developing their apps on a Hackintosh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please correct title...
I agree. It seems like a lot of the unapproved apps are done by people new to the Mac ecosystem and haven't developed an eye for good design or functionality Steve would want.
I think you have to work on a mac for about 6 months before you start to understand these smart usabilitys concepts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please correct title...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Please correct title...
>>Now I can't develop $3.00 apps using my hacked OS.
>>GRRR! Apple, come on!
Have you ever considered um, I dunno... doing something like buying a mac with the money you make selling apps on Apple's store? Developers can get discounts on hardware.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Please correct title...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Please correct title...
In two weeks, the Apple store can bring in revenues Android brings in in a whole year. If your idea is centered around free apps, then I suppose Android is the platform for you.
It kills me that the Jobs mob actually believe Apple when they say that it's all for their benefit.
It sounds like you actually have a beef with Armin Heinrich and his "I Am Rich" app. After all, his app is what started the maximalist approach to application reviews.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please correct title...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please correct title...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eh.
The trouble is that the delays do not serve their designed purpose. Crappy apps still arrive - I own several that crash regularly or just suck. The Facebook app as originally installed would not allow me to post status updates. WTH good is that?!
If Apple's control actually led to promised quality, it would be a good model. Not of "software publisher," but as "software editor and distributor" - a useful service. The trouble is that Apple isn't doing its editorial job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Atom Support fixed yesterday.
http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=197020&st=0
Get hackin!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mary, Steve hopes you're aware of the difference between the Mac platform and the iPhone platform, and reminds you to use the spellcheck, okay?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your Tard is poking out. You know you can only develop iPhone apps on a mac, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your a tard. You know you can only develop iPhone apps on a mac, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So when you have a pirated version of OSX and have problems with it, I'm sure you call Apple and voice your troubles with them so it can be fixed.
Oh no, wait, you probably fire up a blog and start whining about it online because you don't qualify for support. That must suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TechCrunch reports GameLoft pulling out of Android Development.
Maybe it wasn't profitable...
http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2009/11/20/uh-oh-gameloft-moves-away-from-android-devel opment/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: TechCrunch reports GameLoft pulling out of Android Development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: TechCrunch reports GameLoft pulling out of Android Development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, yeah... one more thing, Mary:
Manners, please.
...and the spell check.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You can only write iPhone apps on a Mac. Thus you need a Mac to write programs.
Or maybe I'm just a moron. So here's your chance to prove me wrong. Go find an IDE/SDK that allows you to code and compile iPhone apps on Windows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apple will dominate the iphone market.
They have gotten very, very rich on this strategy, and I see nothing to suggest they should change it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What backlash?
So a few people decide to go and make port apps to Android. Do we have any sales figures for Android yet? It's easier to sell apps on a platform that has marketshare.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What backlash?
@Bah, Graham actually mentions Android:
He then goes on to solicit startup founders with ideas on how to make a mainstream developer-friendly mobile device to apply for investment from Y-Combinator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Numbers please…
And why are respected devs like Gameloft quoted as saying there is indeed a problem with the Android Market that leads to reduced investment by games developers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Numbers please�
Facebook's Joe Hewitt:
My decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple's policies. I respect their right to manage their platform however they want, however I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process. I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.
Second Gear's Justin Williams:
With the latest app rejection being Google Voice, I am one step closer to selling off my iPhone products and focusing entirely on the Mac once more. I can't help but feel that I've wasted the past 9 months of my life building on a platform that is so hostile and anti-developer. I no longer enjoy building software for the iPhone because of the bureaucracy and infrastructure that surrounds it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Numbers please�
You still don't have any numbers or facts that support the Idea of a widespread 'backlash' that would substantially affect the leads the Appstore currently holds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Go away Apple trolls
You left your reference out of your post. I'm sure you didn't just pull that number out of your ass, so could you give us a link to satisfy our curiosity?
I agree. It seems like a lot of the unapproved apps are done by people new to the Mac ecosystem and haven't developed an eye for good design or functionality Steve would want.
Your condescension is dripping through. Really, who gives a damn what users prefer on their own phones, if Steve doesn't like it?
Have you ever considered um, I dunno... doing something like buying a mac with the money you make selling apps on Apple's store? Developers can get discounts on hardware.
Have you ever considered um, I dunno... that some people might actually want to write software for the iPhone without owning an overpriced piece of Apple hardware? Maybe you're right, though...maybe software developers should own a different piece of hardware for every different system that they intend to write software for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Go away Apple trolls
Yep, I agree, they should. Thanks for pointing that out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Go away Apple trolls
I can't provide detail. The numbers are accurate though.
>>Your condescension is dripping through.
Yes, like Steve Ballmer does coke. Thanks for noticing!
>>Really, who gives a damn what users prefer on
>>their own phones, if Steve doesn't like it?
>>Have you ever considered um, I dunno...
>>that some people might actually want to write
>>software for the iPhone without owning an
>>overpriced piece of Apple hardware?
I don't understand your point. I do pay a premium, and that goes to help pay for answers when I have a problem, not silly employees dancing in the store like their products make them bust out into song and dance.
>>Maybe you're right, though...maybe software developers
>>should own a different piece of hardware for every
>>different system that they intend to write software for.
Boy, you're dense. That's what VMWare is for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Go away Apple trolls
I'm a windows developer.
I do it all on my mac. I use vmware fusion and I do it all on one piece of hardware. It is cost effective because I just have one piece of hardware to "do it all". I bought the mac because I wanted to do some mac and iphone development. This makes sense.
Apple hardware is of higher price. It's also better quality.
I liked the user experience so much - I ditched all the other hardware and bought more macs. I've switched all my productivity to the mac side of the house and use with windows boxes only for development.
Nothing is perfect and on one macbook the fan started making a lot of noise. I took it to the apple store and they sent it off to a repair depot (no cost) and I had the machine back, repaired, delivered directly to me in 72 hours.
Match that with any other PC vendor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Go away Apple trolls
You had me until this statement.
The system I hand build will be of higher quality components. Until Apple starts letting me use my own equipment they can go pound sand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And how is this new?
The result, the PC tsunami ended up swamping Apple into being a niche for highly graphics-oriented stuff while the rest of the world pretty much ignored them.
Apple still hasn't learned their lesson that openness and being the "standards-bearer" (Here are the specs. Make your stuff compatible. Thank you, that will be one dollar.) is a much better role.
Proprietary control-freakism may be a way of life for some firms, but it's NOT a viable business model in the long run.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And how is this new?
I think you mean bigger role. Apple seems pretty satisfied with their role in the market.
Proprietary control-freakism may be a way of life for some firms, but it's NOT a viable business model in the long run.
How long does it have to be successful before you would consider it a viable long-term business model? Again, they seem to be doing just fine.
PS I own no Apple products and do not use Apple software
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A proposal
(i) Promote good UI/experience
(ii) Prevent Malicious Code
I'd propose a 3 tier system, supported by user ratings:
(a) Certified/Signed applications that have taken the time to go through the rigorous process.
(b) Unsigned applications t.hat are clearly marked to the end user as potentially dangerous
(c) Malware applications that are identified and reviewed as such after they have already been released into the system as Unsigned.
Charge all submissions to the official store still, to finance reviewing/identifying malware. Don't spend time/money identifying good ui / experience, let ratings and marketing and such cover that. Allow everything in immediately as unsigned to promote all the advantages of faster development. There is an increased risk to the users of getting "bad" stuff, but at least it's labelled as such. I don't think this is quite what's being done with android, but it'd be nice to see more gated application communities take an approach along these lines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's Steve's will I suppose.
Cripes... apploids are the only demographic that's more hair trigger than the *.aa apologists.
This to is the will of Steve, I imagine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pissing Contest
Time to stop the namecalling. That's not what Techdirt is for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I have some great news! Apple has an app that will supplement your comment perfectly.
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/one-clap/id315382629?mt=8
Best part is that the app is free for a limited time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
iPhone app review process
Both had already had apps approved. Both had submitted an update. One had been waiting 8 weeks for approval of a simple change of an icon (slightly larger than the previous version). The other guy had been waiting 4 weeks.
The latter guy said, basically, he didn't mind having to wait. That was acceptable, but it's merely human nature to need to know how long the process will actually take. Since he's running a startup, a 4 week wait for an update is excruciating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why develop on a platform with less reach?
GigaOm has an interesting summary of the iPhone + iPod Touch application purchase rate and respective market reach. And remember, the iPod Touch is essentially the same device as an iPhone, just without the phone capability.
They came to the conclusion that the app store marketplace brings in $200M monthly, whereas the Android market is worth a very, very small $5M.
http://gigaom.com/2009/08/27/how-big-is-apple-iphone-app-economy-the-answer-might-surprise-y ou/
The iTunes ecosystem is one tough purchasing infrastructure engine to beat, with $2.4 Billion in sales annually, versus Android's $60 Million, there is no comparison. Remember, on Apple, you can use an iPod Touch without a service contract, Android doesn't offer an iPod Touch equivalent.
If developers believe they can do better elsewhere, I guess that's okay. But because the actual marketplace is much, much smaller...
Expect a drop in monthly revenue.
A 98% drop in revenue.
Which may be just fine for some people, but the majority of developers are probably a little smarter and don't let emotions drive their actions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why develop on a platform with less reach?
Sure, for now. Android is much newer to the market than the iPhone, so it's share is smaller. However, there may exist developers who believe that in the long run, the iPhone will not be the dominant platform. (Disclaimer: I am one of these).
Even if the iPhone IS the dominant platform forever, why do you think that money is the sole motivating factor for developers? It clearly is not -- there are myriad other factors that play into this as well, and the iPhone comes far short on quite a lot of them.
If it really was all about market penetration and maximizing potential for revenue, then there would be no Mac developers -- they'd all be writing for Windows.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Manick's Fantasy Universe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Manick's Fantasy Universe
Never said otherwise. Not sure what reading of my post suggested that, but we've been pretty clear about what a success the iPhone app store has been initially. The question is will it continue.
And consumers are flocking to the iPhone in droves because of the apps, and the innovation represented by the apps.
Yes. For now. Again, no disagreement.
All of the hard evidence points in a direction completely opposite to what this article asserts.
Ok. What "hard evidence" is that?
Again, please read what I actually wrote, rather than what you want to slam me for. Difficult to take you seriously when you seem to be arguing against something I have not said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i provide customer support for itunes store ... you have no idea how many customers call us about an app that does not run properly and say this exactly... "you sell it on your store, you are responsible" Until the general public changes the way they view the apps we sell for developers, apple will always inspect every file on the store with a fine tooth comb. the public has to change before apple will change to meet the public demand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But I think there are ways to remove that customer expectation of support.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To borrow a phrase from Reagan, who said it best...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I agree and disagree
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
App Store
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A few bad apps ruining the whole bunch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]