3 ms·

I've rejected Apple's ability to tell me what programming language I'm allowed to use (whether I'm kept back in the 80's in terms of language sophistication, fo

I've rejected Apple's ability to tell me what programming language I'm allowed to use (whether I'm kept back in the 80's in terms of language sophistication, for example) and I've rejected their ability to make me wait weeks only to hear an update has been rejected for some dumb random reason which they shouldn't care about at all. I've rejected a marketplace full of fart apps that somehow do meet with their approval, and I've rejected a marketplace full of dumb content which should never have been an app in the first place. </rant>

rimantas 16y ago
Too bad you did not reject an urge to rant about the things you neither care about nor use them.
- wallflower 16y ago
  The poster of the parent comment is a published iPhone developer with substantial experience in delivering games and custom apps. http://synisma.com/iphone.html http://synisma.com/iphone.html
  - rimantas 16y ago
    Thanks for pointing that out. Now I am confused…
  - mkramlich 16y ago
    yes, thank you! and I've sold non-iPhone software outside the App Store so I know what the alternatives are like. It is definitely a bigger challenge getting eyeballs but is better in most every other way.
- shadowfox 16y ago
  But he did use and care about them. It is a rant from experience
jrockway 16y ago
So has everyone else. They rejected AT&T, too, and Apple's market share went from "everyone" to "just the true believers".
wallflower 16y ago
Can you imagine the backlash if Apple raised the bar on what would be an acceptable app? Class action lawsuits and senators would get involved. They knew there was no way to get the best apps without allowing anyone (with restrictions) to submit an app. As an iPhone developer, I agree with the seemingly too long eight to ten day approval queue. However, the App Store's closed marketplace is currently the only viable solution for independent developers to have the potential for making money. Unless Android decides to reign in part of its anarchist marketplace, the Apple App Store will be the marketshare leader. iTunes is a fuzzy safe place for people to buy stuff - before iTunes it was very difficult for people who wanted to buy music without time-bomb DRM involved. People like the feeling of security - locks on doors are a good thing. Apple may be banning other languages (with exceptions like Lua) because it is a protectionist policy that benefits them and (to a lesser degree) their developers. Think of Objective C/Cocoa as a tariff that developers must pay to enter the closed marketplace. App makers like Titanium and Phonegap devalue the value of the marketplace because they allow anyone to participate and simultaneously release apps to multiple platforms. In the long run, Google and Android will get the majority of market share. That is their strategy. It's like Windows v. Mac redux. Commodity against premium. The reality is that before Apple - you had to court a mobile network operator to get an app on a mobile device. And they took 50%. If Google cared about its Android developers, they would buy an app maker like Titanium and make it the Visual Basic of the mobile web.
16s 16y ago
How can you reject C and fart apps in the same rant? One is a serious technological breakthrough, the other is a mockery of technology. The OpenBSD guys have a point when they are critical of much of the new-fangled technology. When a significant percentage of power consumption and band-width are used for fart apps and Farmville, you have to wonder if that is a wise use of the technology. Edit: Clarified C's place in technology.
- boucher 16y ago
  I think the policy is stupid, but I have a soft spot in my heart for Objective-C. It may be a product of the 80s but it remains very relevant, especially in its 2.0 form.
lzw 16y ago
It's the ultimate quality control.... If you aren't willing to learn objective-C then you were likely not working on a worthwhile app. Same thing if you already know objective c but are unwilling to develop in it. Of course this is a side benefit, the realvreason was to keep flash crap off of the platform, so that apple wouldn't be hostage to adobe again.

rimantas 16y ago

Too bad you did not reject an urge to rant about the things you neither care about nor use them.

wallflower 16y ago
The poster of the parent comment is a published iPhone developer with substantial experience in delivering games and custom apps. http://synisma.com/iphone.html http://synisma.com/iphone.html
- rimantas 16y ago
  Thanks for pointing that out. Now I am confused…
- mkramlich 16y ago
  yes, thank you! and I've sold non-iPhone software outside the App Store so I know what the alternatives are like. It is definitely a bigger challenge getting eyeballs but is better in most every other way.
shadowfox 16y ago
But he did use and care about them. It is a rant from experience

jrockway 16y ago

So has everyone else. They rejected AT&T, too, and Apple's market share went from "everyone" to "just the true believers".

wallflower 16y ago

Can you imagine the backlash if Apple raised the bar on what would be an acceptable app? Class action lawsuits and senators would get involved. They knew there was no way to get the best apps without allowing anyone (with restrictions) to submit an app. As an iPhone developer, I agree with the seemingly too long eight to ten day approval queue. However, the App Store's closed marketplace is currently the only viable solution for independent developers to have the potential for making money. Unless Android decides to reign in part of its anarchist marketplace, the Apple App Store will be the marketshare leader. iTunes is a fuzzy safe place for people to buy stuff - before iTunes it was very difficult for people who wanted to buy music without time-bomb DRM involved. People like the feeling of security - locks on doors are a good thing. Apple may be banning other languages (with exceptions like Lua) because it is a protectionist policy that benefits them and (to a lesser degree) their developers. Think of Objective C/Cocoa as a tariff that developers must pay to enter the closed marketplace. App makers like Titanium and Phonegap devalue the value of the marketplace because they allow anyone to participate and simultaneously release apps to multiple platforms. In the long run, Google and Android will get the majority of market share. That is their strategy. It's like Windows v. Mac redux. Commodity against premium. The reality is that before Apple - you had to court a mobile network operator to get an app on a mobile device. And they took 50%. If Google cared about its Android developers, they would buy an app maker like Titanium and make it the Visual Basic of the mobile web.

16s 16y ago

How can you reject C and fart apps in the same rant? One is a serious technological breakthrough, the other is a mockery of technology. The OpenBSD guys have a point when they are critical of much of the new-fangled technology. When a significant percentage of power consumption and band-width are used for fart apps and Farmville, you have to wonder if that is a wise use of the technology. Edit: Clarified C's place in technology.

boucher 16y ago
I think the policy is stupid, but I have a soft spot in my heart for Objective-C. It may be a product of the 80s but it remains very relevant, especially in its 2.0 form.

lzw 16y ago

It's the ultimate quality control.... If you aren't willing to learn objective-C then you were likely not working on a worthwhile app. Same thing if you already know objective c but are unwilling to develop in it. Of course this is a side benefit, the realvreason was to keep flash crap off of the platform, so that apple wouldn't be hostage to adobe again.