8 ms·

This is good in my opinion. The more the rejection, the more the developers will tend to flee away from arrogant Marketplaces like that of Apple's. It will also

by neya 14y ago

This is good in my opinion. The more the rejection, the more the developers will tend to flee away from arrogant Marketplaces like that of Apple's. It will also, in a way, probably force developers to try out other marketplaces like the Windows Phone Marketplace and the Google Play store. Now, I do understand 500px is trying to create a uni-platform experience for its users, but now that 500px isn't allowed to publish their app, I'm sure it's only a positive sign for other market places. More and more developers will start (slowly, but surely) to neglect Apple's Appstore by default due to the fear of the ridiculous approval process and the uncertainty that their development efforts for the iOS platform may go a waste, because they have seen the history of popular apps like 500px and others. There is a very thin line of difference between being an elitist and being a d*ck. Apple is making it clear to everyone that they are the latter.

w1ntermute 14y ago
> More and more developers will start (slowly, but surely) to neglect Apple's Appstore by default due to the fear of the ridiculous approval process and the uncertainty that their development efforts for the iOS platform may go a waste, because they have seen the history of popular apps like 500px and others. I really hope this happens, but it seems so far that people are more than happy to put up with Apple's draconian App Store policies. We're not even talking about equal treatment - iOS apps continue to come out before Android apps, and Windows Phone apps often aren't even made.
- neya 14y ago
  Like I said, I predict it will be a very slow change. You know how MySpace was once THE Social Network to be on, and when you weren't there, you would be looked down upon? Now, despite an epic re-design, nobody even talks about it, except for examples like these, perhaps. It could be the same case for Apple's Appstore, assuming they continue this painful trend of pissing off developers.
  - bollockitis 14y ago
    I don't think that analogy works very well. If anything, the App Store is more comparable to Facebook: despite all of its pitfalls and drawbacks, everyone is already so invested that switching seems impossible. Developers will go where the money is, and as long as Apple continues to sell millions of iDevices, most developers won't abandon a profitable platform.
  - taligent 14y ago
    Why do people keep bring up with this stupid Myspace argument ? There are plenty of examples of market leading companies that have remained on top despite additional competition e.g. Windows, Office, Google Search.
    - chii 14y ago
      of the examples you supplied, only windows fits, and it barely. MS Office beat the entrenched lotus 123, google beat yahoo. I can only think of one more that fits - Amazon - which hasn't been replaced. It seems its more common for a first mover to be displaced than to remain...
- mcantelon 14y ago
  >it seems so far that people are more than happy to put up with Apple's draconian App Store policies. Devs are going where the market is. But where the market is will eventually change and Apple may be forced to open up to compete.
- interpol_p 14y ago
  I like Apple's draconian policy. Not all of their policy, but sometimes it's just appropriate for them to keep developers in line. For example, about two years ago we released an app for a running event in our state. It used background GPS events to record the runners' locations on a map. Gave them stats and all that. Apple rejected it because we didn't prominently warn users that background GPS could affect their battery life. This was a good change, that we would not have made, had Apple not reviewed our app. Sometimes it feels like developers think they have an inherent right to pollute whatever platform they want with their apps, just because they can write code. If anything, I think Apple is not strict enough. There's a lot of crap on the App Store. And I say this as someone who has had apps rejected a ton of times, and would seriously benefit from being able to include downloadable code and a JIT interpreter in my app (both disallowed).
  - ghshephard 14y ago
    I disagree with you here rgarding Apple Policy and GPS - one area that Apple has absolutely been failing for the last couple years is in their horrible policy regarding background GPS draining of the battery. Almost every time my battery goes to zero (in fact, I actually think it IS every time) - it is because of background GPS lighting up the radio and draining my battery. Lots of apps do this, and it is a blight on the iOS platform. If windows mobile/blackberry come up with better policies regarding developers that would increase the quality of the applications, and reduce the amount of crap that the iOS developer engage in, then I suspect those platforms will start to pick up users. Android = Ultimate Freedom, but you need to manage it. Apple IOS = Some Freedom to shoot yourself in the foot.
    - interpol_p 14y ago
      Like I said, I think Apple should be more strict with their policy. I just thought it was nice that they actually checked our app, and told us to clearly warn our users about background GPS. They've done this sort of thing a lot to our apps. One game we had still had placeholder art. They found it, rejected it, and told us to fix the placeholder art. I also like that they reject outright if your app crashes during the review process. Sadly, I think they have been getting more and more lenient as the sheer volume of App submissions increases.
nthitz 14y ago
Unfortunately until there exists another good way for people to get their apps onto iOS devices (not counting web apps) Apple will remain the gatekeeper of their garden. Windows Phone Marketplace or Google Play store don't do much good for someone wanting to release an iOS app.
- eupharis 14y ago
  Why do we continue to accept the Apple euphemism that their ecosystem is a "walled garden"? There are much more accurate terms to describe the Apple ecosystem. When governments do this, prevent their users from looking at fine art that happens to involve nudity, we don't call the society a "walled garden."
  - chc 14y ago
    That isn't an "Apple euphemism." It's a pejorative term much older than the iPhone that Apple's critics apply to the Apple ecosystem.
    - eupharis 14y ago
      The term has been appropriated. John Gruber: http://daringfireball.net/2010/06/iphone_os_too_closed http://daringfireball.net/2010/06/iphone_os_too_closed Neven Mrgan: http://mrgan.tumblr.com/post/653708588/the-walled-garden http://mrgan.tumblr.com/post/653708588/the-walled-garden
    - mkr-hn 14y ago
      I think I first heard the term used in the context of technology on Observers.net in reference to AOL, but it's probably even older.
megablast 14y ago
> This is good in my opinion. The more the rejection, the more the developers will tend to flee away from arrogant Marketplaces like that of Apple's. It will also, in a way, probably force developers to try out other marketplaces like the Windows Phone Marketplace and the Google Play store. People have been saying this for years, and it convinced me to make my Apps available on the android app store. The result, is a lot of messing around, and produced not much extra income. Until Android starts to make the same sorts of money, which may never happen, this will not change.
- moultano 14y ago
  What's your app?
  - anthonyb 14y ago
    This is a fair question, and not downvotable imo, especially considering that john/megablast's profile is out of date. There's a history of people who produce Android versions of their software which aren't anywhere near as polished as the iOS one. If that's the case, then of course nobody's going to pay for it. If you have two versions which are more or less identical, that's different.
    - Steko 14y ago
      As you've framed it, it's a loaded question that assumes the author is a moron who somehow expects a half-assed port to produce equal returns. Reasonable people can presume he has an idea of the quality of his own Android app and managed his expectations accordingly and yet he was disappointed. This is not a new story nor does is contradict the vast majority of data points we have.
      - moultano 14y ago
        I was curious about it for a bunch of reasons. I'm curious if there's a high order pattern for apps that make more on ios than android and vice versa. I'm curious if as much promotion went into the android app as the ios app. I'm always interested in finding new quality android apps, and I enjoy promoting ones that I'm particularly happy with.
taligent 14y ago
> due to the fear of the ridiculous approval process It's not ridiculous and pretty easy to understand. No questionable content. No trying to be clever about the rules. No private APIs. I have been involved in over 20 popular apps on the store and not one has ever been rejected. > their development efforts for the iOS platform may go a waste Developers aren't stupid. The iOS platform is by far the largest and most profitable and will continue to remain so in the years ahead. And the fact is that iOS is a much simpler platform to develop and test for than the myriad of device combinations on Android. Plus you're entire argument is tired. It has been around since the beginning of the store and will continue to be so long as Apple rejects apps.
- mikeash 14y ago
  And then you do something as seemingly innocent as querying the NSComputer image on a Mac, sending it over the network, and showing it on an iPhone, and Apple rejects you. It's great that you've had no trouble, but please don't extrapolate that into a belief that there is no trouble.
  - taligent 14y ago
    At what point did I ever say there was no trouble ? There will always be people who try and get around the rules. Including using Apple's artwork without permission.
    - mikeash 14y ago
      It's not "using Apple's artwork without permission." There's a public API for obtaining this stuff, and all we did is send the result across the network. Note that Apple agreed with us... eventually. You did essentially say that Apple's review process is not a problem as long as you actually follow the rules, which is simply not true.
ry0ohki 14y ago
Developers go where the users go (and pay). Until the Windows and Android stores start bringing devs the same type of money, it's still always worth it to "take the risk" of Apple's store. The only way I see this changing is if users themselves cared about an app being pulled, and this app doesn't seem big enough for people to care (maybe if Instagram was taken down).
- fauigerzigerk 14y ago
  Most developers go where users go, most of the time, until some of them have a reason not to. Luckily for those who don't always follow the money, demand sometimes follows supply instead of the other way around.
- clarky07 14y ago
  I recently decided to port some apps to Android and Windows 8 to lower my Apple only risk. Diversification is good right? It's been a really mixed bag so far. 1 of my apps is doing better than it's iPhone counterpart, the rest might as well not exist. [1] [1] - http://www.entrelife.com/2013/01/case-study-of-android-vs-iphone-app.html http://www.entrelife.com/2013/01/case-study-of-android-vs-ip...
  - cageface 14y ago
    Very interesting. Thanks for sharing numbers. Are you using something like Mono to share code among platforms or are you doing total rewrites for each port?
    - clarky07 14y ago
      So far I've done native rewrites. Initially everything was designed specifically for iOS, so when porting I've just gone with native. I may consider some kind of cross platform option for the next completely new app. I haven't decided yet. (In general I think native is better, but there are obviously benefits to writing one version.)
  - jmspring 14y ago
hnriot 14y ago
This is the same argument that has been used for decades for many problems. Like making gas $10/gallon to reduce dependence on middle east oil. It never works and is an unamerican argument. It's tantamount to saying Marx had it right all along. If this were 1950-56 i'm sure your argument would have been better received. That said, what Apple did was ridiculous. Youtube, safari, chrome, Flickr etc etc all have the potential to show nudity. Big deal, the walls of the Uffizi are lined with nudity... Damn Puritans, we're still paying for their religious fundamentalism in this country.
alayne 14y ago
It's telling that you want Apple to burn rather than improve.
bksenior 14y ago
Meh. It sucks that businesses like 500px have to be a marter in a bottle necked distribution environment. Its amazing enough that they built a beautiful product that people want to use, found a way to get adoption and have cultivated such a passionate users base. Now they have to go solve a tangential business that wasn't part of their vision or expertise.
zomgbbq 14y ago
I'm not going to argue about whether what they did was right or wrong but I am going to argue about why they make the decisions they do. A company with a 475B market cap doesn't just do things to be "elitest and a d*ck". I often see these arguments that Apple does things just to be mean or evil but frankly, I think these are emotional responses. There is a more objective reasoning behind why they do the things they do. From the beginning, Apple has been about presenting a certain "consistency of quality". They want people to equate an Apple product with a product that is free from worries. I get it. You may not agree with it, but I get it. This will naturally piss off 5% of the hard core users who want ultimate flexibility from their platform. But it will also make 95% of the people feel all snugly and warm that they don't need to worry about things like porn or viruses appearing on their device. Again, I'm not arguing whether 500px's app measures up to "objectional material" or not. What I am arguing is that the reason why Apple removed the app is not because they're trying to be mean but because they have discovered that an app (whether it's had 1,000,00 downloads or 100 downloads) violates the "consistency of quality" that they are trying to present. Frankly, the 8 year old version of me would have had no difficulty visiting the desktop version of the website and disabling safemode.
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  Or searching in safari. The fact that there is an actual web browser on there is what makes these removals so ridiculous.
  - pooriaazimi 14y ago
    Parents can disable Safari (and other browsers all have 17+ rating).
    - Dylan16807 14y ago
      How are you supposed to turn on nudity without a browser?
mtgx 14y ago
At the very least developers should make the Android app first, which would still have the potential for about as much userbase, and then make the iOS first, perhaps using this: https://code.google.com/p/j2objc/ https://code.google.com/p/j2objc/ At least they wouldn't waste so much time just to get rejected from the beginning.
hilti 14y ago
Maybe 500px should think about making a great web app, to avoid being pulled out of the Apple Store. Everytime I'm fascinated by beautiful web apps with a great responsive UX. Something like Sun: http://pattern.dk/sun/ http://pattern.dk/sun/ I think the 500px app shouldn't be too complicated running as a web app. As far as I can see, there's no big usage of iPhone hardware sensors which couldn't be easily implemented in a web app. So maybe this is a way to go.

by neya 14y ago

w1ntermute 14y ago

> More and more developers will start (slowly, but surely) to neglect Apple's Appstore by default due to the fear of the ridiculous approval process and the uncertainty that their development efforts for the iOS platform may go a waste, because they have seen the history of popular apps like 500px and others. I really hope this happens, but it seems so far that people are more than happy to put up with Apple's draconian App Store policies. We're not even talking about equal treatment - iOS apps continue to come out before Android apps, and Windows Phone apps often aren't even made.

neya 14y ago
Like I said, I predict it will be a very slow change. You know how MySpace was once THE Social Network to be on, and when you weren't there, you would be looked down upon? Now, despite an epic re-design, nobody even talks about it, except for examples like these, perhaps. It could be the same case for Apple's Appstore, assuming they continue this painful trend of pissing off developers.
- bollockitis 14y ago
  I don't think that analogy works very well. If anything, the App Store is more comparable to Facebook: despite all of its pitfalls and drawbacks, everyone is already so invested that switching seems impossible. Developers will go where the money is, and as long as Apple continues to sell millions of iDevices, most developers won't abandon a profitable platform.
- taligent 14y ago
  Why do people keep bring up with this stupid Myspace argument ? There are plenty of examples of market leading companies that have remained on top despite additional competition e.g. Windows, Office, Google Search.
  - chii 14y ago
    of the examples you supplied, only windows fits, and it barely. MS Office beat the entrenched lotus 123, google beat yahoo. I can only think of one more that fits - Amazon - which hasn't been replaced. It seems its more common for a first mover to be displaced than to remain...
mcantelon 14y ago
>it seems so far that people are more than happy to put up with Apple's draconian App Store policies. Devs are going where the market is. But where the market is will eventually change and Apple may be forced to open up to compete.
interpol_p 14y ago
I like Apple's draconian policy. Not all of their policy, but sometimes it's just appropriate for them to keep developers in line. For example, about two years ago we released an app for a running event in our state. It used background GPS events to record the runners' locations on a map. Gave them stats and all that. Apple rejected it because we didn't prominently warn users that background GPS could affect their battery life. This was a good change, that we would not have made, had Apple not reviewed our app. Sometimes it feels like developers think they have an inherent right to pollute whatever platform they want with their apps, just because they can write code. If anything, I think Apple is not strict enough. There's a lot of crap on the App Store. And I say this as someone who has had apps rejected a ton of times, and would seriously benefit from being able to include downloadable code and a JIT interpreter in my app (both disallowed).
- ghshephard 14y ago
  I disagree with you here rgarding Apple Policy and GPS - one area that Apple has absolutely been failing for the last couple years is in their horrible policy regarding background GPS draining of the battery. Almost every time my battery goes to zero (in fact, I actually think it IS every time) - it is because of background GPS lighting up the radio and draining my battery. Lots of apps do this, and it is a blight on the iOS platform. If windows mobile/blackberry come up with better policies regarding developers that would increase the quality of the applications, and reduce the amount of crap that the iOS developer engage in, then I suspect those platforms will start to pick up users. Android = Ultimate Freedom, but you need to manage it. Apple IOS = Some Freedom to shoot yourself in the foot.
  - interpol_p 14y ago
    Like I said, I think Apple should be more strict with their policy. I just thought it was nice that they actually checked our app, and told us to clearly warn our users about background GPS. They've done this sort of thing a lot to our apps. One game we had still had placeholder art. They found it, rejected it, and told us to fix the placeholder art. I also like that they reject outright if your app crashes during the review process. Sadly, I think they have been getting more and more lenient as the sheer volume of App submissions increases.

nthitz 14y ago

Unfortunately until there exists another good way for people to get their apps onto iOS devices (not counting web apps) Apple will remain the gatekeeper of their garden. Windows Phone Marketplace or Google Play store don't do much good for someone wanting to release an iOS app.

eupharis 14y ago
Why do we continue to accept the Apple euphemism that their ecosystem is a "walled garden"? There are much more accurate terms to describe the Apple ecosystem. When governments do this, prevent their users from looking at fine art that happens to involve nudity, we don't call the society a "walled garden."
- chc 14y ago
  That isn't an "Apple euphemism." It's a pejorative term much older than the iPhone that Apple's critics apply to the Apple ecosystem.
  - eupharis 14y ago
    The term has been appropriated. John Gruber: http://daringfireball.net/2010/06/iphone_os_too_closed http://daringfireball.net/2010/06/iphone_os_too_closed Neven Mrgan: http://mrgan.tumblr.com/post/653708588/the-walled-garden http://mrgan.tumblr.com/post/653708588/the-walled-garden
  - mkr-hn 14y ago
    I think I first heard the term used in the context of technology on Observers.net in reference to AOL, but it's probably even older.

megablast 14y ago

> This is good in my opinion. The more the rejection, the more the developers will tend to flee away from arrogant Marketplaces like that of Apple's. It will also, in a way, probably force developers to try out other marketplaces like the Windows Phone Marketplace and the Google Play store. People have been saying this for years, and it convinced me to make my Apps available on the android app store. The result, is a lot of messing around, and produced not much extra income. Until Android starts to make the same sorts of money, which may never happen, this will not change.

moultano 14y ago
What's your app?
- anthonyb 14y ago
  This is a fair question, and not downvotable imo, especially considering that john/megablast's profile is out of date. There's a history of people who produce Android versions of their software which aren't anywhere near as polished as the iOS one. If that's the case, then of course nobody's going to pay for it. If you have two versions which are more or less identical, that's different.
  - Steko 14y ago
    As you've framed it, it's a loaded question that assumes the author is a moron who somehow expects a half-assed port to produce equal returns. Reasonable people can presume he has an idea of the quality of his own Android app and managed his expectations accordingly and yet he was disappointed. This is not a new story nor does is contradict the vast majority of data points we have.
    - moultano 14y ago
      I was curious about it for a bunch of reasons. I'm curious if there's a high order pattern for apps that make more on ios than android and vice versa. I'm curious if as much promotion went into the android app as the ios app. I'm always interested in finding new quality android apps, and I enjoy promoting ones that I'm particularly happy with.

taligent 14y ago

> due to the fear of the ridiculous approval process It's not ridiculous and pretty easy to understand. No questionable content. No trying to be clever about the rules. No private APIs. I have been involved in over 20 popular apps on the store and not one has ever been rejected. > their development efforts for the iOS platform may go a waste Developers aren't stupid. The iOS platform is by far the largest and most profitable and will continue to remain so in the years ahead. And the fact is that iOS is a much simpler platform to develop and test for than the myriad of device combinations on Android. Plus you're entire argument is tired. It has been around since the beginning of the store and will continue to be so long as Apple rejects apps.

mikeash 14y ago
And then you do something as seemingly innocent as querying the NSComputer image on a Mac, sending it over the network, and showing it on an iPhone, and Apple rejects you. It's great that you've had no trouble, but please don't extrapolate that into a belief that there is no trouble.
- taligent 14y ago
  At what point did I ever say there was no trouble ? There will always be people who try and get around the rules. Including using Apple's artwork without permission.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    It's not "using Apple's artwork without permission." There's a public API for obtaining this stuff, and all we did is send the result across the network. Note that Apple agreed with us... eventually. You did essentially say that Apple's review process is not a problem as long as you actually follow the rules, which is simply not true.

ry0ohki 14y ago

Developers go where the users go (and pay). Until the Windows and Android stores start bringing devs the same type of money, it's still always worth it to "take the risk" of Apple's store. The only way I see this changing is if users themselves cared about an app being pulled, and this app doesn't seem big enough for people to care (maybe if Instagram was taken down).

fauigerzigerk 14y ago
Most developers go where users go, most of the time, until some of them have a reason not to. Luckily for those who don't always follow the money, demand sometimes follows supply instead of the other way around.
clarky07 14y ago
I recently decided to port some apps to Android and Windows 8 to lower my Apple only risk. Diversification is good right? It's been a really mixed bag so far. 1 of my apps is doing better than it's iPhone counterpart, the rest might as well not exist. [1] [1] - http://www.entrelife.com/2013/01/case-study-of-android-vs-iphone-app.html http://www.entrelife.com/2013/01/case-study-of-android-vs-ip...
- cageface 14y ago
  Very interesting. Thanks for sharing numbers. Are you using something like Mono to share code among platforms or are you doing total rewrites for each port?
  - clarky07 14y ago
    So far I've done native rewrites. Initially everything was designed specifically for iOS, so when porting I've just gone with native. I may consider some kind of cross platform option for the next completely new app. I haven't decided yet. (In general I think native is better, but there are obviously benefits to writing one version.)
- jmspring 14y ago

hnriot 14y ago

This is the same argument that has been used for decades for many problems. Like making gas $10/gallon to reduce dependence on middle east oil. It never works and is an unamerican argument. It's tantamount to saying Marx had it right all along. If this were 1950-56 i'm sure your argument would have been better received. That said, what Apple did was ridiculous. Youtube, safari, chrome, Flickr etc etc all have the potential to show nudity. Big deal, the walls of the Uffizi are lined with nudity... Damn Puritans, we're still paying for their religious fundamentalism in this country.

alayne 14y ago

It's telling that you want Apple to burn rather than improve.

bksenior 14y ago

Meh. It sucks that businesses like 500px have to be a marter in a bottle necked distribution environment. Its amazing enough that they built a beautiful product that people want to use, found a way to get adoption and have cultivated such a passionate users base. Now they have to go solve a tangential business that wasn't part of their vision or expertise.

zomgbbq 14y ago

I'm not going to argue about whether what they did was right or wrong but I am going to argue about why they make the decisions they do. A company with a 475B market cap doesn't just do things to be "elitest and a d*ck". I often see these arguments that Apple does things just to be mean or evil but frankly, I think these are emotional responses. There is a more objective reasoning behind why they do the things they do. From the beginning, Apple has been about presenting a certain "consistency of quality". They want people to equate an Apple product with a product that is free from worries. I get it. You may not agree with it, but I get it. This will naturally piss off 5% of the hard core users who want ultimate flexibility from their platform. But it will also make 95% of the people feel all snugly and warm that they don't need to worry about things like porn or viruses appearing on their device. Again, I'm not arguing whether 500px's app measures up to "objectional material" or not. What I am arguing is that the reason why Apple removed the app is not because they're trying to be mean but because they have discovered that an app (whether it's had 1,000,00 downloads or 100 downloads) violates the "consistency of quality" that they are trying to present. Frankly, the 8 year old version of me would have had no difficulty visiting the desktop version of the website and disabling safemode.

Dylan16807 14y ago
Or searching in safari. The fact that there is an actual web browser on there is what makes these removals so ridiculous.
- pooriaazimi 14y ago
  Parents can disable Safari (and other browsers all have 17+ rating).
  - Dylan16807 14y ago
    How are you supposed to turn on nudity without a browser?

mtgx 14y ago

At the very least developers should make the Android app first, which would still have the potential for about as much userbase, and then make the iOS first, perhaps using this: https://code.google.com/p/j2objc/ https://code.google.com/p/j2objc/ At least they wouldn't waste so much time just to get rejected from the beginning.

hilti 14y ago

Maybe 500px should think about making a great web app, to avoid being pulled out of the Apple Store. Everytime I'm fascinated by beautiful web apps with a great responsive UX. Something like Sun: http://pattern.dk/sun/ http://pattern.dk/sun/ I think the 500px app shouldn't be too complicated running as a web app. As far as I can see, there's no big usage of iPhone hardware sensors which couldn't be easily implemented in a web app. So maybe this is a way to go.