

DHH: Appstore is a warehouse of shit - sbt
http://bigthink.com/davidheinemeierhansson

======
gte910h
The Appstore is full of crap because apple won't pre-approve things, so no one
will risk doing "big" things as they're afraid of rejection.

If you spend 200k of your company's money then Apple rejects you and refuses
to publish your app, then you lose your job in most companies.

I have this conversation with large large companies over and over.

~~~
antileet
Your point is very valid, and I would imagine that prevents really high-
quality and groundbreaking applications to be built. However that would not
explain why a majority of applications are sub-par quality.

If I was a developer and wanted to make a lot of money, I would either go
ahead and build a perfect, innovative app and market it well, or basically
churn out app-after-app, which is cheap, redundant and has very little
difference between each one.

I haven't personally used the app store much, but from what I saw, a lot of
the newly produced applications were merely a bunch of titillating pictures,
or a glorified unit converter.

I've seen and read about people make huge amounts of money from applications
and websites which offer little or no content, but capitalize on knowledge of
what people are looking for - and by doing this in very large and persistent
quantities.

~~~
refulgentis
The quality problem with the App Store isn't that there isn't pre-approval –
the problem is that they pretty much allow _anything_.

In all seriousness, the experience of iOS developers who play by the rules,
and even those who just push them a little bit, is Apple allows pretty much
anything, even if it's low quality. There were some blunders at first, but
they're pretty settled now. The last mis-step was the banning of 'widget apps'
on the iPad
([http://www.macworld.com/article/151680/2010/06/myframe_rejec...](http://www.macworld.com/article/151680/2010/06/myframe_rejection.html)),
and that was quickly reversed. (it's available on the App Store, go check)

Philosophically, the idea that I have to bend over for Apple's approval is a
problem, but in practice all they're really doing nowadays is making sure
you're app isn't crashy, and doesn't link heavily against private APIs – hell,
most of the time they'll let you use private API. Even that isn't an issue to
me, because their private API is private for a reason – it's not done yet, and
is subject to further revision that could break compatibility in future OS
revisions, so if you're using it you're essentially screwing your customer.
Your customer isn't smart enough to know you're are a lazy idiot, they'll just
assume it's Apple's problem – Apple sold them the device, and the app, and
made the OS upgrade. If they can exercise their power in small ways like this
so they don't end up wasting engineering cycles like Microsoft
(<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html>), disassembling apps and
writing special cases into the OS to fit apps that insist on breaking the
contract of private API being private.

The quality issue is separate from the approval issue. The quality issue stems
from the fact that everything appears on the same 'shelf', essentially. Apple
can't censor what's appearing in the 'newly released' section in each
category, but they can and do feature apps that are good top and center in the
editorialized sections of the App Store. There's plenty of people doing great
work, making great apps, and making amazing money. iTeleport (interviewed on
37signals here: [http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2421-bootstrapped-
profitable-...](http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2421-bootstrapped-profitable-
proud-iteleport)), has cleared over $1 million selling VNC software which
isn't even probably the most 'popular' on the store. OmniGroup sold over $1
million worth of OmniFocus for iPhone copies some time ago (I can't find a
link), and must really like what they're seeing because they've spent the last
6 months working around the clock on apps for the iPad (OmniGraffle,
OmniGraphSketcher, and OmniFocus). tap tap tap earned ~$150k on Convert in
it's first month almost a year ago, and they have a wide portfolio of similar
quality utility apps. I have no idea, but they're probably clearing at least
$250k/month with the expansion in the number of iOS devices and their
portfolio over the last year. For every 100 apps that some crapware developer
is pushing out, there is 1 absolute gem available.

Another problem is, if you're not a talented developer, it's much easier to
dump piece of crap after piece of crap on the store and just hope someone dumb
enough to search for random stuff on the store and buys it. Personally, this
isn't fulfilling to me, so after releasing 3 relatively simple apps in 6
months, about a year ago I started heavily investing my time in writing
software that allows iOS devices to act as networked point of sale machines
for restaurants. It's been a rough 9 months since I only have my income from
the App Store and working as a waiter to go on, and my income from the App
Store dropped off the map after I stopped investing time in working on my old
apps. However, when I'm done with this, there's a possibility to make tons of
money given the poor state and technology of the point of sale industry, and
even if I don't make it, an app selling 2-3 copies a week for $20 a pop makes
me a hell of a lot better off than trying to make money selling crapware at
$0.99.

~~~
gte910h
> the problem is that they pretty much allow anything

1\. That's not a problem, they just need to allow curated subsections of the
appstore itself, which allow people to go through and make subsections of the
store which are highly reviewed for quality.

>Another problem is, if you're not a talented developer, it's much easier to
dump piece of crap after piece of crap on the store and just hope someone dumb
enough to search for random stuff on the store and buys it.

That's the case with the web too. That's why there aren't comprehensive lists
of the web, there is google, reddit, and hacker news. We just need the app
version of those apps.

------
dieterrams
I broadly agree with DHH, but the "warehouse of shit" argument is a bad one,
and has been whenever anyone has tried to make it. The argument basically goes
like this:

    
    
      - Apple restricts what languages can be used to increase the quality
        of apps in the App Store.
      - But the App Store is full of crap.
      - Therefore, the restriction does no good, and should be abandoned.
    

The problem is that the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. The
restriction is undoubtedly effective at preventing even more crap from
entering the App Store. Just because the store isn't over 50% gold doesn't
mean it isn't fulfilling its purpose.

From Apple's perspective, the restriction is a particularly efficient one,
because it prevents a lot of crap from entering, not just the App Store, but
the _review process_. Because violating the language restriction can be easily
and objectively determined, hardly anyone will try to get away with it.
Imposing higher standards for app quality, by comparison, requires lots of
subjective judgments, which are far less effective at deterrence and generate
far more controversy. The existing standards and their enforcement are
frustrating and arbitrary enough as it is.

To his credit, DHH emphasizes letting the marketplace work things out over the
"warehouse of shit" argument, which I consider more persuasive. It's just too
bad the latter is getting the attention.

~~~
theBobMcCormick
Why would you say "The restriction is undoubtedly effective at preventing even
more crap from entering the App Store". Is there _any_ evidence that Apple's
restriction on languages is preventing more crap apps?

Keep in mind this isn't about Flash (or at least, not just about Flash). It
means iPhone developers can't use _any_ other languages (Lua, JavaScript,
Python, etc), interpreted _or_ compiled.

You've got to have your head shoved pretty far up Steve Job's reality
distortion field to claim that this restriction _anything_ other than an
anticompetitive move to "lock" developers into the platform.

~~~
dieterrams
_> Why would you say "The restriction is undoubtedly effective at preventing
even more crap from entering the App Store". Is there any evidence that
Apple's restriction on languages is preventing more crap apps?_

Sturgeon's Law puts the burden of proof on anybody who doesn't think it would
prevent more crap apps. (Crapps?) And practically speaking, I can't imagine
allowing Flash-to-iOS apps _not_ resulting in a deluge of more crap. The
restriction also implicitly weeds out programmers who can't handle a C
language requiring manual memory management. That doesn't mean you won't have
crap programmers, but it probably boosts the average skill of iOS app
programmers by a bit.

The downside to the restriction, obviously, is that it prevents not-crap apps
from making it to the App Store as well. This seems to be your real issue, but
preventing not-crap apps does not imply not preventing crap apps.

 _> Keep in mind this isn't about Flash (or at least, not just about Flash).
It means iPhone developers can't use any other languages (Lua, JavaScript,
Python, etc), interpreted or compiled._

Not true. You've always been able to use JavaScript, and you can use pretty
much any other language provided you get approval from Apple and don't use it
to build the bulk of your app. Plenty of game devs are using other languages
for scripting or emulation.

 _> You've got to have your head shoved pretty far up Steve Job's reality
distortion field to claim that this restriction anything other than an
anticompetitive move to "lock" developers into the platform._

You'd have to be pretty uncharitable to think there couldn't be any other
valid reasons. For someone who supposedly has his head up Steve Jobs' reality
distortion field, I think developer lock-in _is_ a plausible motive. But
nobody except Jobs, Forstall, etc. has any ability to claim that it's the
_only_ motive, or even the primary one.

~~~
chc
_Not true. You've always been able to use JavaScript, and you can use pretty
much any other language provided you get approval from Apple and don't use it
to build the bulk of your app._

So I can use any language I want as long as I hardly use it at all and get
some vague "approval" for my incredibly limited use. Big whoop. That's pretty
much the same as not being allowed to use any other language. Much closer to
banned than allowed.

------
ra88it
Who cares about the percentage of shit in the app store? It's not like you
have to sift through all the apps manually. Think about all the web pages on
the internet. Does the web have a better batting average than the app store?
Does it matter?

The only pragmatic argument against Apple's app store policies (IMO), is that
companies cannot be confident enough to invest heavily in an application that
has yet to be approved by Apple. But I don't know for sure that this is a big
problem. I'm watching the Android marketplace closely, and I'm not convinced
that Apple should change course yet.

~~~
bad_user
> _Think about all the web pages on the internet. Does the web have a better
> batting average than the app store?_

That's bullshit ... main difference is that the Internet has multiple choices
for whatever you want and real competition in a Darwinistic sense.

That argument would be valid if Apple wouldn't reject apps that "duplicate"
their own functionality ... like Google Voice. When Apple stops doing that,
then you might have a point.

The Web also has better mechanisms for filtering out the garbage ... people
rely on their search engine or on their friends recommendations (first by
email, now by Facebook/Twitter), not on some central authority.

> _Who cares about the percentage of shit in the app store? It's not like you
> have to sift through all the apps manually._

I care because people are trying to lie to me about the virtues of Apple's
policies.

I also care because I want to develop for multiple platforms and it's one
thing to be technically hard to have cross-platform code, and it's another to
ban that practice through a license.

And most of all, I care because people haven't learned anything from the
closed-world that was once called Wintel. When starting anything, people used
to worry about the "Microsoft problem", which isn't a problem anymore because
of the Internet ... but Apple is Microsoft 2.0 ... they know how to make
customers happy within closed walls, even in the Internet age.

So yeah, it's a worrying trend ... especially since other companies like
Amazon are noticing Apple's success.

~~~
ra88it
It's too late for me to edit my original post, but I should have written this
line:

> The only pragmatic argument against Apple's app store policies

Like this:

> The only pragmatic argument against Apple's app store policies _with respect
> to average app quality_

I'm _only_ talking about average app quality here, and whether we can conclude
anything about Apple's store policies affecting app quality. I would like to
see evidence that a more open policy would yield higher quality apps.

Also: I am not arguing that the web is the same as Apple's app store except
insomuch as general users needn't care about the average unit's quality. My
appreciation for a single well designed app is not impacted by 100 terrible
apps that I will never encounter.

> people rely on their search engine or on their friends recommendations
> (first by email, now by Facebook/Twitter), not on some central authority.

This applies to the app store as well as to the web. I use email and Facebook
and Twitter to get recommendations for apps (whether for Android or the
iPhone). I don't rely on Apple to tell me what app to use.

------
protomyth
"Have you so little faith in the marketplace?"

The whole Adobe saga has greatly influenced Apple's thinking on the cross-
platform that I think they have more faith in their belief that 3rd party
companies will make economic decisions on development that keep the unique
features of iOS from being used. Forcing a set of tools to be used removes
this choice from a bean counter.

Do I really like this situation? No, not really. I like Objective-C, C++, and
C, but I would like some more choice. The crux is that any platform
improvements (from what seems to be Apple's point of view) need to be
supported fully in the tool. I am encourages by the ability to embed Lua, but
I would love to see other things.

Just a theoretical, I do wonder sometimes if a person were to add a language
to clang would it get added to the shipped tools from Apple.

------
watmough
The headline refers to an 8 minute segment in a 45 minute chat from DHH.

I've only watched part of the talk so far, but it is a very persuasive piece
of advocacy for Ruby. DHH is a smart guy, but he seems to have had relatively
light range of language experience prior to discovering Ruby.

One of his examples is the ability to use 'unless'. Big deal, this is an ugly
and non-intuitive (for me) perlism. I appreciate others may like it though.
Despite this, I was still motivated to pull down my copy of 'pickaxe' and leaf
through it.

Keep in mind though, he's arguing just one perspective. Personally, the
Cocoa/UIKit apis on iOS 4.0 are incredible, and have reawoken my desire and
motivation to 'just code'. Objective-C rocks, because you can write nice tight
C code, and yet still have pretty wide-ranging abilities to pass objects
around, easily make a view into a control immediately giving you all the extra
stuff from responders/controls.

There may indeed be a bunch of shit in the App store, but it has everything to
do with crappy programmers writing crappy software, and Apple's lax
enforcement of UX standards, rather than any enforced choice of programming
language. Does he really think that programmers write crappy programs because
Objective-C is hard?

------
hop
You don't know crap until you jailbreak your iPhone and browse through most of
the wares in Cydia.

------
josefresco
I think the argument he makes about trusting the marketplace is laughable. I
think we can all see that consumers don't always pick the 'best' solution (no
this isn't a free market argument although it could be), and relying on them
to decide the winner isn't Apple's strategy. In fact I'd argue it's the
opposite. Apple does things _their_ way and regardless people swoon over their
products. If Apple started listening to it's customers they'd be producing
garbage like Netbooks and not innovating (iPad).

------
nphase
Unrelated: Has anyone actually tried using 37signals' Draft iPad app? Would
rank pretty high on my "Worst $10 I've ever spent" list, if I maintained such
a list.

------
jambo
Tag as [video], please.

~~~
jargon
everything at bigthink is a video.

~~~
duck
From <http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>:

 _If you submit a link to a video or pdf, please warn us by appending [video]
or [pdf] to the title._

~~~
jargon
Yeah, I know the "rules". Point is, everything at big think is a video.

Funny how I had 21 karma points before I posted that comment, which got 4 down
votes and another comment got 3 upvotes, but now I have 15 karma points.

How does 21 - 4 + 3 = 15?

~~~
judofyr
1) I've never heard of BigThink.com before.

2) I very often open many links without thinking about which domain it's on.

3) A post's karma will never show below -4, even though the _real_ karma could
be way lower.

~~~
jargon
Months ago -8 was the limit. Really, what's the point in limiting the display
to -4 if it's really minus n? Why not just show minus n?

------
jfno67
If someone has a link on a transcript, please post in the comments.

~~~
briancooley
If you click the discuss links, you get a transcript. Here's the stuff on
Apple:

<http://bigthink.com/ideas/21603>

~~~
jfno67
Thanks, I would not have thought of that.

------
alphadog
DHH has exhausted the antagonist role.

------
ars
I think <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeons_Law> is pretty applicable
here.

------
WiseWeasel
The headline is flamebait, but the content of the interview is quite
insightful. I agree completely that serious competition (both in unit sales
_and_ user experience) is badly needed, and sorely lacking at the moment.
Here's hoping HP is able to bust some moves with the WebOS platform; shake
things up a bit.

~~~
patrickaljord
> sorely lacking

I think you forgot about android.

~~~
WiseWeasel
Nope, handset vendors are screwing that platform up, with junkware you can't
delete, customized interfaces (often for the worse), locked down firmware,
reluctance to support Android OS updates, etc.

~~~
patrickaljord
Android is not doing that bad really:

[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/android-sales-surge-
surpa...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/android-sales-surge-surpass-
iphone-updated/2019)

<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367313,00.asp>

------
gnok
All I see is a message that says "This video is not authorized for playback on
this device". I'm using an iPhone to try and view the page. Not sure what
content the video has, but I'm pretty confident I'm no longer interested.

~~~
Qz
Is that supposed to be ironic?

------
code_duck
Well, I'm pretty used to bold, profane statements from this guy now, to the
point where they have no effect on me. Anyone else?

------
jsz0
I can't see the video because apparently it's blocked on the iPad but in
general isn't it well known that 90% of everything sucks to any one
individual? I guarantee you that there's someone out there who thinks Fart
Keyboard is the most brilliant must-have app ever made. If your shit warehouse
is big enough you can make everyone happy.

------
duck
Pretty good talk by DHH, but nothing new. Seems like the end of it was just
cut off though (on purpose).

------
gte910h
So is the web. We just need better indexing apps, which are either human
curated or have better search parameters (for instance, filter out things with
less than 2 stars, etc).

------
korch
I think the problem with the CrapStore isn't that there is too much
crap(Sturgeon's Law afterall, it's to be expected), rather Apple's interface
to search, sort and present apps _completely fucking sucks_. Apple really
ought to at least try to be more like Google search. What's ultimately tragic
is that Apple won't let anyone else make a better or even different interface
for searching for apps _and_ have it be available as an app on the AppStore.
What Google gets right is that any idiot can find what they want, nearly
immediately, and they don't even need to see or know just how much total crap
is out there on the web.

Seriously, what the hell is Steve thinking with so many hundreds of thousands
of apps? When you want vanilla apps that are simple and popular enough that
you know ahead of time which app you want, then the AppStore is great. When
you trek even slightly off the beaten path, maybe exploring what's out there,
or looking for something very specific and rare, and for which you would be
willing to pay a lot more than $0.99, well, that ends up being a lost cause.
All iPhone devs know that users simply won't spend any time sifting through
apps, and this is why spamming your way to the top of any category lists is
just as important as being on Google SERP #1.

Case in point: tonight I went to order a pizza, and thought to myself that it
might be neat to try one of the pizza ordering apps. Seconds later I'm
scrolling through more than 50 different pizza apps. Half of them I can't even
tell whether they are for ordering pizza, nor whether they are local,
nationwide, integrated with chains or just mom & pops. If I can't figure it
out, and I'm a programmer, how well will a completely non-technical person
fare? Do I have 30 minutes to tap and dig down multiple menu levels on several
of them, read each one's spamtastic description, then read the user reviews
which are worse than YouTube comments, then install it and try it out? Then do
that again 50 more times? Does Steve think I'm a moron? If you can't even
create software that can semantically represent "order a pizza local to me",
how the fuck can we expect them to do something more complex? I ended up going
to dominos.com in Safari.

It's almost as if Apple doesn't give a shit about promoting exceptional
software for the long haul over the next few years, no, they only care about
churning a fast buck right now, with a horizon of just a few business quarters
ahead. What Apple will end up doing is driving all of their users to the web,
and then html5 is going to mop the floor with Apple's entire Objective-C
walled garden. Sorry, as much as the web is flawed, it is always going to be
infinitely more simple to use than apps.

------
hackermom
Has he taken a look at the Android appstore?

~~~
seymores
If Appstore is warehouse of shit, then I am sad to say Android Market is a
POS.

