
Why Apple Doesn't Trust Developers - redial
http://statictext.tumblr.com/post/3676219047/trust
======
stcredzero
I have karma to burn, so here it goes with another hard truth:

There is a big, undeniable, compelling reason for Apple to distrust us iOS
developers: as a whole we're incompetent bumblers. I'm talking about security.
The number of iOS developers who do things like transmit the UDID (Universal
Device ID) in plaintext, or who "encrypt" their communications by doing things
like zipping it (no encryption, or the same key for every client) then
"securely authenticate" it with CRC32 is just jaw-dropping. In terms of doing
things with just a competent level of security, large numbers of us are
screwing the pooch in ways that severely contaminate the pool for the rest of
us.

Of course, this points to the ultimate incompetent bumbler in this regard:
Apple. Apple should've built a better security library -- one which makes it
harder to use security in an incompetent way. (Forces you to do security
right, or the API doesn't work at all.) For heaven's sakes, they require you
to muck with 3 objects just to shift a date from one month to the same day-
number the next month. Some better support in security might benefit the iOS
developer community just a bit more than the ability for our apps to work
smoothly in both Julian and Gregorian calendars.

I plan on making my living through iOS in the next year, but Google seems to
be way ahead of Apple with regards to security.

------
trotsky
_But I also think there is more to it than that. Apple needed to provide those
services in order to highlight the devices they were selling, because specs
alone don’t sell. [...] And you can’t trust third party developers to do it
for you._

It all sounds pretty reasonable until you remember that the 30% tax is more or
less aimed directly at removing Amazon ebooks from the platform, and that the
kindle app was available well before iBooks.

~~~
hello_moto
What if certain companies made a pact of increasing their services/goods cost
by some percentage (let's say 15%-30%) and call it "the iPhone tax".

Make a beautiful logo out of it, constantly reminding people that the price
increase is due to Apple.

... and at the same time offer a clue that they can get the same
services/goods cheaper on another platform (say... Android).

Would that help to drive users to understand how bad Apple is and hopefully
start a public uproar?

Perception right?

~~~
trotsky
Apple's service agreement actually demands price matching, which means a
content provider must provide their best price available through the app. It
is probably possible to charge more for an "iOS edition", but Amazon
specifically has a standard publisher contract that requires them to charge
the same price on all platforms.

~~~
alxp
Which is a sensible clause for Apple, so that Amazon can't go and say "all
books bought on the Kindle device are 50% off what you pay when you buy the
book on the Kindle for iPad app" to drive device sales.

~~~
trotsky
You have it a bit backwards, the kindle is there to drive ebook sales, not the
reverse. Apple only added the clause when they added the mandatory in app
sales with the 30% tax - if amazon had any intention of doing something like
that you'd presumably already have seen that behavior on the iphone or pc or
osx or android.

------
greattypo
I think "Trust" is used in a weird context here.. "Why Apple Doesn't Rely on
Developers" might be a more accurate title.

He's saying that Apple doesn't sit around waiting for developers to create
compelling apps for their products, not that developers are "untrustworthy."

To me those have different connotations.

~~~
neutronicus
I think "trust" is actually the perfect word.

Apple seems determined to avoid depending on Photoshop and Final Cut Pro to
sell hardware, to the point of curbing software offerings that _might_ become
_the reason_ to own an Apple device.

They don't simply believe that "you can't count on third-party software to
sell your device." They believe "if you let third-party software sell your
device, you have made a deal with the devil that you will regret."

------
MoreMoschops
"The iPod started the digital revolution"

I suppose next you'll be telling me Apple invented the helicopter, and next
week will be increasing the chocolate ration.

~~~
recoiledsnake
And according to Gruber, the iOS ecosystem is the biggest and most important
thing in the history of the industry.

It as if, when it comes to Apple, some people completely lose their
perspective.

~~~
rbarooah
Right because in 10 years time when we're all using Android tablets that will
be because the Xoom and the Galaxy Tab started it all.

------
thurn
Not trusting developers is kind of a problematic approach when your platform's
key strategic asset is a vast library of third party applications. Apple's own
iOS software is great, but the playing field for Android and Windows Phone 7
seems a lot more level without developers on Apple's side.

~~~
forensic
>Not trusting developers is kind of a problematic approach when your
platform's key strategic asset is a vast library of third party applications.

I still don't think that's true. The key strategic asset is the unbeatable
user experience and the core functionality - web browsing, movie watching,
book reading, maps, stuff that comes built in.

A very large number of iPad users have never downloaded an app. Same for
iPhone users. They find the core functionality to be sufficient for their
needs. And they would be unhappy with ANY Android device because the user
experience is sub par.

~~~
cubicle67
_A very large number of iPad users have never downloaded an app. Same for
iPhone users._

er, I'm going to need some sort of citation on that as it's pretty much the
exact opposite of what I've seen

~~~
dwynings
9% of iPad users haven't downloaded an app.
[http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/connected-...](http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/connected-
devices-does-the-ipad-change-everything)

~~~
trotsky
Seems possible a fair amount of that 9% simply aren't using it.

------
DjDarkman
The article exaggerates a lot. Denying users to have a browser other than
Safari does not make iOS a better platform. Safari(and other similar apps) is
not the best there is, the there ever was and the best there ever will be.
Someone may create a way better browser then Safari at any time.

There is something we call competition in a free market. Example: when only IE
was relevant, Microsoft couldn't care less about making IE better, but when
things started to heat up, Microsoft took up the challenge and made IE a lot
better.

Apple shipping a default browser and whatnot is good, but not letting
developers compete with them is terrible.

Here is an example when Apple was forced to relax it's restrictions:
<http://my.opera.com/community/countup/>

------
benatkin
This is a new blog. I think it must be a play on <http://statichtml.com/>
which got on HN a day or two ago.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2289610>

------
kkowalczyk
The article provides no evidence to support the conclusion that it's about
Job's or Apple's trust of developers. It just recounts some history and then
jumps to disjointed conclusion.

In fact, it has nothing to do with trust. I can predict with 100% certainty
that developers will flock to popular platforms and mostly stay away from
failed platforms.

In the platform business Jobs had failures (NeXT, Macintosh classic) and
successes (Apple II, iPhone, iPad). His successful platforms had no problems
attracting developers, his failed platforms less so.

The trust relation actually goes in the other direction: it's important that
the developers trust the platform maker.

Platform providers have a symbiotic relation with their developers which
creates a positive feedback loop: successful platform attracts developers
which make useful programs which makes the platform even more successful etc.

At the same time platform providers invariably compete with developers on
their platform. Nintendo competes with other game companies writing games for
their consoles, Microsoft competes with some companies writing software for
Windows and Apple competes with other companies writing software for Mac or
iOS.

To me the core of the issue is: how fair is the game. Platform provider will
always have technical and marketing advantage over independent developers.
Nintendo programmers probably know the hardware the best and Nintendo can
cross-promote their games with their console. At the same time we know it's
not enough to win: there are games that, at a given time, sell better than
Nintendo's games. Microsoft Money couldn't beat Quicken and the Windows
software market is so huge that Microsoft is not even playing in most
categories.

Apple did set up the game to be unfair and they are fully taking advantage of
that to maximize profit.

As such, they've broken my trust and trust of many developers.

First, unlike Android or Microsoft, they set themselves up as a final arbiter
of what kind of software is even allowed to run on iOS. When Microsoft was
competing with Netscape, they actually had to write a better browser for
Windows. Due to Apple rules (no interpreters allowed => no JavaScript allowed)
you can't even write a competing browser for iOS which is why there's no
FireFox for iOS or Chrome for iOS.

When they didn't like Google Voice app, they just banned from iOS (despite it
not even violating any official rules). It allegedly took government (FCC)
investigation to get it enabled.

But that wasn't enough: the new in-app payment rules target companies that
have much bigger and comprehensive businesses that just writing iOS apps.
Apple wants to interject themselves between any service that offers some kind
of paid service and users using iOS devices and collect chunk of the revenue
despite the fact that for many such businesses 30% is economically impossible.

Those are major violations of developer's trust on the part of Apple. I for
one will not write a single line of iOS code as long as there is a viable
alternative like Android.

Breaking developers' trust isn't enough to break the platform. If the platform
is successful enough, most developers will just swallow the bitter pill.

However, if there's one thing that doesn't change it's this: things change.
Apple is on top of the world right now but Android is gaining momentum.
Apple's greed is a dangerous game: if the Android momentum continues, it'll be
much easier for developers to walk away from Apple's platform into a welcoming
embrace of Google.

~~~
cletus
> The article provides no evidence to support the conclusion...

+1

I also agree that success of the platform was the driving factor in attracting
developers. In fact I think some pundits put way too much weight in the
argument about attracting developers. If people use it, they will come.

> they set themselves up as a final arbiter of what kind of software is even
> allowed to run on iOS

Personally I think this policy is part of the successful formula. The ugly
truth is this is the right decision fr most people. Building trust in the
platform by the users is FAR more important than the philosophical objections
by a few developers and users.

As for competing browsers it's a little more complicated than that:

[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/will-firefox-mobile-
ever-...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/will-firefox-mobile-ever-be-
released-for-ios-devices-no-blame-apple/10770)

I'm not sure than stance is still correct either.

Technically Google Voice wasn't banned either. It was just held in limbo with
no decision. The end result is basically the same however.

I for one am waiting to see what happens with the Kindle. I think it's now so
influential that Apple would be idiots to kick it off. If they don't it'll
lead to confusion about their policy. If they do it'll be the first
competitive advantage Android tablets will have (IMHO).

Lastly when it comes to App Store rejection, in spite of Apple's nebulous
rules it really is a case of "you'll know it when you see it" 99% of the time
(if not more).

There seems to be a trend for some people to create apps that were never going
to get rejected, submit them, get rejected and then immediately come to places
like this to complain about how they've been victimized, which of course gets
a certain level of support from the Apple haters irrespective of the merits.

It's almost like the blog post complaining about rejection is written before
the app is submitted.

------
zdw
Well, if you need examples, look at Android, which has frequent malware
scares:

[http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/03/01/the-mother-of-all-
an...](http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/03/01/the-mother-of-all-android-
malware-has-arrived-stolen-apps-released-to-the-market-that-root-your-phone-
steal-your-data-and-open-backdoor/)

(not a slam on Android, but just the natural progression - if you allow
anything, someone, somewhere will abuse the privilege)

