

Apple’s New Stance On ‘Cookie Cutter’ Apps - anderzole
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/07/apple-cookie-cutter-apps/

======
glhaynes
I saw someone point out the parallel between Apple's online stores and "real
world" retail stores and how the latter strive to sell items in line with an
image they want to convey. Particularly astute, if you ask me; we techies see
the digital world as having no inherent limitations. There's no reason the App
Store couldn't have and sell every piece of executable code anybody wants to
put up there -- they're not gonna run out of internets like a "real" store
would run out of floor space. But the problem _isn't_ just one of floor space:
Target doesn't want to give you an impression of cheap crap when you come in
the door and neither should Apple. Focusing on just the limitation that's been
broken by moving to digital misses that the human perception factor is still
the same.

~~~
CoreDumpling
In the "real" world, you're also welcome to buy from a different store when
you have different values from the vendor. Nobody can force you to buy from
Target when you're happy with what's carried by WalMart. You can't do this
with the App Store, and Apple goes out of its way to prevent you from loading
software from elsewhere.

On top of that, the inconsistency of the enforcement of App Store guidelines
and the moving target set by Apple makes it seem like they are suffering from
some growing pains. It doesn't look like they've really made up their mind
about what impression they want people to get, other than some "slick" user
experience.

Bottom line is that on top of dealing with the unpredictable market out there,
developers also have to put up with a very fickle supply chain with no
alternative channels. I'll pass.

~~~
glhaynes
Are there not other phones available?

~~~
Groxx
Good point. That's similar to being upset that you can only buy things from
WalMart _at_ WalMart.

@CoreDumpling: I agree that consistency would be better, but which real-world
store would you say is consistent with what they'll have? And which will
_tell_ you what their qualifications are for allowing products in?

~~~
CoreDumpling
I'm not sure I understand your position. At the risk of beating a dead horse
with another contrived analogy, in my opinion dealing with the App Store as
the only channel for apps is akin to buying a house and being forced to get
all my furniture and housewares at Crate & Barrel. On top of that, the house
is built such that anything I buy from another retailer either won't fit in
the door or might unexpectedly cause the roof to collapse.

I'll concede your point that real-world stores can be just as difficult to
work with, if not even more so, but this doesn't change the fact that having
the App Store as the sole arbiter of what's allowed is introducing artificial
barriers to restrict consumer choice. Even WalMart has to deal with
competition from other distributors.

~~~
Groxx
I don't mind beating dead horses, and this strikes me as being quite civil and
interesting, so I'm all for continuing.

They're artificial barriers, certainly. And I'd love an open App Store, though
I understand their reasons for keeping it locked down. The worst barrier they
have right now, IMO, is the single-carrier barrier, which I really think is
flat-out wrong. But the USA is rather backwards when it comes to cell phones.

As to the WalMart / other contrived analogy, which I admit my comment was
rather lacking in content, lets try another comparison. The DS only plays DS
games (especially with the DSi now, which loses the GBA slot). However, not
only is that the same restriction, it's even _worse_ because getting
permission to sell your game is an absolute nightmare if you're not big, and
the development tools are far more expensive.

To make the comparison stronger, and the App Store's position worse, the DS
has sold _three times_ as many units than the iPhone, though probably not as
many cartridges as apps. But that's physical vs digital distribution for ya.
How often do you hear about the DS and its _far_ tighter distribution chain,
as opposed to the iPhone? Granted, the App Store has been changing lately, but
the criticism hasn't abated since day 1.

For WalMart in particular, I'd say it's closer to buying a DVD player from
WalMart, and having it only play DVDs sold at WalMart. It'd certainly suck for
people trying to sell things, but they carry 99.9% of what people buy anyway,
so most of the buyers won't mind (and it may be worth avoiding the huge
amounts of porn that might appear there otherwise). And there _are_ other
options, like Android phones, Blackberry / PalmOS based phones, etc, which
match other retail options.

~~~
CoreDumpling
Fair point. I've basically resigned myself to the fact that Apple, Nintendo,
etc. are happily raking in the green from developers who are willing to play
by their rules and consumers who are content with living in their walled
gardens, and that their relationship with developers who desire more
flexibility should be left at a healthy mutual disregard.

~~~
Groxx
Yeah, same here. It's part of why I really like the new focus on indie
developers. It might flatten things a bit.

------
DenisM
Here's the funny thing - at any point in time most of developers should be
happy with the culling - it makes survivors more noticeable. Until they
themselves are culled, then it's a tragedy.

~~~
philk
Not sure I agree here:

a) A developers biggest problem is his competitors. As the culling is a
specific category of apps, it's unlikely to remove his competitors from the
mix.

b) It adds uncertainty into the business model. You can spend time and
building an awesome and popular app and there's no guarantee that Apple won't
decide they're culling your specific class of app next.

c) The app store already has so many apps that simply culling a category
doesn't bump the numerical odds up that much for an individual developer

~~~
DenisM
Good points. I guess it would make a difference in discoverability of
survivors if Apple got more aggressive and purged, say, 50% of the app store,
but this isn't likely.

------
zaidf
_...not everyone is having as much luck as the Appmakr team._

And that, my friends, is the problem with the App Store.

------
megaduck

      First they came for the PhoneGap applications, and I did not speak out- 
        for my app was iPhone-only;
      Then they came for the boobs, and I did not speak out- 
        for I was not a porn peddler;
      Then they came for the shovelware, and I did not speak out-
        for I was not an app spammer...

~~~
Zev
Perspective is important; this is the App Store, not the Holocaust.

~~~
megaduck
You're right. It's not, and I came dangerously close to activating Godwin's
Law. If anyone's truly offended, I'm sorry.

However, there's a basic human tendency to look the other way when abuse
happens. That's really what I was referring to. Apple has been swinging the
ban-hammer on 'undesirable' apps for a while now, and the definition of
'undesirable' keeps expanding. That's an issue of some concern.

~~~
Zev
I wasn't offended. It just seems like a bit of an overreaction, to compare
some people being unable to sell software in a store to state-sponsored
genocide on a massive scale.

I like having my app on the App Store as much as the next iPhone dev. I
disagree with the boob apps being pulled; better parental restrictions are the
answer for that situation.

I don't disagree with the wifi apps being pulled; private API's are private
API's. If you want an API to be made public, file a radar ticket. You will get
a response from Apple - either the API being made public, or the reason why
they won't make it public.

