The implication that it's somehow wrong to base a business on the App Store is goofy. It's not much different from basing one on a single OS or a mobile platform or even a particular line of automobile or type of entertainment.
It's not a requirement that Apple (or any other company) protect your business model at the expense of their own.
They are not very inconsistent with rules. I have 24 apps on the appstore and the ones that were rejected and later accepted were consistent with the policies aggregated here: http://appreview.tumblr.com/
I am upset because apple rejected google voice but so far I haven't seen anything which was rejected and was not on the list in the link.
Moreover, apple does have an appeal process. Once the app gets rejected they ask you to make changes, and resubmit the app.
There are definitely things that apple can do to improve the process for example, they should definitely get rid of changing the availability date with updates because a lot of developers just keep on posting updates with no real updates to be on the new release list. Check McPhun for example and they are actually able to keep themselves in top 10 for the past 6 months just because they have an update every week. But other than these minor issues which I am pretty sure apple will solve, there are a lot of good things going with it, which people tend to ignore.
I disagree. The rules might be consistent, but Apple certainly doesn't apply them consistently. The classic example is a simple bugfix update, which adds no new functionality, being rejected for something that is already in the approved version of the app. (happened to me, happened to Nine Inch Nails).
I agree to a point, but I don't think this is much different than developing accessories for someone else's product(s) that need to be approved by the owner of the target product. (Example: Official iPod accessories.) Those companies seem to get on just fine risking some money in R&D while trying to get official approval for an item. You can bet they don't just develop in a vacuum, either, but that's what a lot of the very loudly complaining app store devs seem to be doing.
It doesn't have to be such a huge gamble developing for the iPhone. There are Apple representatives that developers can talk to, meet in person at events like WWDC, and even send development builds to. They give feedback and can warn of potential issues with approval, etc. These resources are there, but somewhat scarce. Apple obviously cannot guarantee everyone who pays their $99 access to significant face time with an insider without the dev putting in some effort. As a developer who's aiming to be serious about this, you have to be proactive in elbowing your way into the system - but once you're in, the "risk" is greatly reduced. The big iPhone and OSX studios all know this and work behind the scenes within the system to the benefit of both parties (usually).
Comments
The implication that it's somehow wrong to base a business on the App Store is goofy. It's not much different from basing one on a single OS or a mobile platform or even a particular line of automobile or type of entertainment.
It's not a requirement that Apple (or any other company) protect your business model at the expense of their own.
True. But you could at least expect:
- consistency
- open rules
- an appeal process
The way it is it is more like a gamble.
They are not very inconsistent with rules. I have 24 apps on the appstore and the ones that were rejected and later accepted were consistent with the policies aggregated here: http://appreview.tumblr.com/
I am upset because apple rejected google voice but so far I haven't seen anything which was rejected and was not on the list in the link.
Moreover, apple does have an appeal process. Once the app gets rejected they ask you to make changes, and resubmit the app.
There are definitely things that apple can do to improve the process for example, they should definitely get rid of changing the availability date with updates because a lot of developers just keep on posting updates with no real updates to be on the new release list. Check McPhun for example and they are actually able to keep themselves in top 10 for the past 6 months just because they have an update every week. But other than these minor issues which I am pretty sure apple will solve, there are a lot of good things going with it, which people tend to ignore.
They are not very inconsistent with rules
I disagree. The rules might be consistent, but Apple certainly doesn't apply them consistently. The classic example is a simple bugfix update, which adds no new functionality, being rejected for something that is already in the approved version of the app. (happened to me, happened to Nine Inch Nails).
I agree to a point, but I don't think this is much different than developing accessories for someone else's product(s) that need to be approved by the owner of the target product. (Example: Official iPod accessories.) Those companies seem to get on just fine risking some money in R&D while trying to get official approval for an item. You can bet they don't just develop in a vacuum, either, but that's what a lot of the very loudly complaining app store devs seem to be doing.
It doesn't have to be such a huge gamble developing for the iPhone. There are Apple representatives that developers can talk to, meet in person at events like WWDC, and even send development builds to. They give feedback and can warn of potential issues with approval, etc. These resources are there, but somewhat scarce. Apple obviously cannot guarantee everyone who pays their $99 access to significant face time with an insider without the dev putting in some effort. As a developer who's aiming to be serious about this, you have to be proactive in elbowing your way into the system - but once you're in, the "risk" is greatly reduced. The big iPhone and OSX studios all know this and work behind the scenes within the system to the benefit of both parties (usually).
When you build accessories for the ipod, you talk with apple before you go and make it to see if they would be fine with it.
That's exactly my point. You can do that with apps, too.