Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

37signals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#61

Post by MWinther »

Perceval wrote: post #37
BudVVeezer wrote: post #21

Apple's focus is and always will be: 1) Apple, 2) Marketers, 3) Users, 4) Developers, and #4 has always been a distant one at best (anyone remember the Rhapsody fiasco?) Keep that ordering in mind, the latest changes make perfect sense.

While I think putting marketers in that list is a bit trollish, I think you've hit on something that's broadly true. Developers reacted with rage to Apple's app screening process and are reacting with rage again to Apple's banning of intermediary layers/languages. Whereas Microsoft's slogan is "developers, developers, developers..." Apple's is decidedly not. Apple prioritizes the end user experience over the develope…

I would add Support Engineers along with the devs in that list. I was an AASE back in the late 90s, and working with Apple behind the scenes in the retail chain was quite the different experience than being an end user.

Of course, I firmly believe this is as it should be.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#62

Post by MWinther »

confuzatron wrote: post #60
glhaynes wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the thinking that Apple doesn't want going into App Store apps: "I'll just put up this good-enough piece of crap because that's all I have time/money to do." They've got a ton of businesses wanting to be on iPhone so they're willing to lose those businesses that will only put out crap. I agree with you that putting out a piece of crap might make the most sense for your business. But it's not what Appl…

Apple don't want crap apps in the appstore? Have you /seen/ the appstore? I'm sorry, but the undiluted denial-of-reality from the more extreme Apple apologists is making me dizzy.

I'd say that now that Apple has plenty of volume in the app store, they're focusing more on quality. I imagine they want to implement higher standards at a rate that still makes the number of apps grow. Like when they removed a bunch of basically web-browsers with a hard-coded link somewhere for 0.99. It's a process, ya know?

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#63

Post by grinich »

stanleydrew wrote: post #53
rimantas wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is tons of competition on features and price. That's exactly the problem. Apple does not compete on features and price, they compete on user experience.

I don't understand why that's a problem.

It's easy to optimize product to cut costs, or put more engineers on the project and add features.

What's truly difficult is reduction. Removing "features" and simplifying the product. The success of the iPad and iPhone is not about what it-- it's about all the things it doesn't do.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#64

Post by zaphar »

fjabre wrote: post #4

The problem is Apple has no real competition. They can do almost anything they want without fear of retribution because your average consumer has no idea what any of this means. That's bad news for all us pissed off developers since Apple's new platform will continue to be extremely popular in which case devs are forced to develop for it. Google seems to be inching towards being a real threat but they also seem extre…

Devs are not forced to develop for it. You can go develop for Android. You can go develop for RIM. You can go develop for non mobile phones. Devs develop for the iP* because they want to sell to that market. It wasn't too long ago though that we saw a whole bunch of articles on HN about the myth of the get rich quick AppStore apps. Apple is skating on thin ice because if the developers leave then the iPad loses big. The pain may not have crossed the average developers threshold yet but Apple still has to play a dicey game with how far they can go before they do cross the threshold.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#65

Post by pohl »

flogic wrote: post #46
pohl wrote: post #42

#1 is a bizarre argument. I can't weed my garden unless it is already free of weeds?

I think it'a more "Don't claim you're weeding the garden. We know you're not."

I would say that adding terms to the document constitutes evidence of conscious weeding.

Come to think of it, so does every headline I've ever seen about an app store rejection.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#66

Post by jasonlotito »

MWinther wrote: post #56
jasonlotito wrote: post #2

All are good points, but number 2 is the big one for me. That was my first thought when I heard what Apple was doing, and I think it's important to keep that in consideration. While I don't always agree with DHH, he makes some good, rational points here. It should be noted that most of these arguments have been made elsewhere, but it's a great summation.

It's fascinating. This is the way I look at them, as being on the side of people who agree with Apple on this one. #1: Don't agree. Apple has 180,000 apps in their App store, maybe a good time to remove incentives for a new influx of non-programmer-written apps straight from Flash? Oh, they're getting rid of other stuff that also encourages people to use other tools than their own? I think they can live with that. #2…

I don't have time to respond to each point, but I will say that it's well thought out. I don't agree with many points, but you've clearly thought about it. =)

"They're putting up rules, if you follow them you should be fine."

The big issue is that they are changing rules. They are. There isn't anything you can say that changes this. So even if you did follow the rules, you are still stuck with an unsure situation.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#67

Post by dhh »

raganwald wrote: post #40
mrkurt wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone really, seriously argued that Apple isn't "entitled" to do as they please? They are, and developers are entitled to be annoyed when their seemingly artificial and arbitrary limitations cause them problems. And we're all entitled to post our opinions about it, but you should maybe try and give the opposing views a little more respect. :)

Well yes, I have read opinions that Apple is abusing some sort of market dominance and/or reneging on expectations it has set by changing its SDK terms. But let's stick with opinions that Apple is either (a) disadvantaging itself, or (b) disadvantaging developers with its current set of choices. I didn't realize that quoting Giles was considered disrespectful of either of these opinions. It was an interesting take. I…

This is not about calling Jobs out for not adding more features to the iPhone. This is akin to if I had said you couldn't use any other editor than TextMate to program in Rails. Or that you had to run it on OS X server. That would have been some lame, fascist shit.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#68

Post by stanleydrew »

grinich wrote: post #63
stanleydrew wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why that's a problem.

It's easy to optimize product to cut costs, or put more engineers on the project and add features. What's truly difficult is reduction. Removing "features" and simplifying the product. The success of the iPad and iPhone is not about what it-- it's about all the things it doesn't do.

Yes I've heard lots of people toe the Apple company line on simplifying before. But I thought we were talking about whether or not there is smartphone competition.

If you want to believe there is nothing that can truly compete with the iPhone because of its magical UI or lack of features or whatever I can't prevent that. Yes, it's true, the iPhone is the only iPhone in existence. But in that sense nothing can compete with Android either. Nobody else is producing an open-source smartphone os even close to its quality. If you get specific enough, everything is in a category of its own without any competition.

My original comment has nothing to do with whether Apple has produced the perfect mobile os by reducing and removing features. It has to do with the statement that Apple has no real competition.

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#69

Post by raganwald »

dhh wrote: post #67
raganwald wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes, I have read opinions that Apple is abusing some sort of market dominance and/or reneging on expectations it has set by changing its SDK terms. But let's stick with opinions that Apple is either (a) disadvantaging itself, or (b) disadvantaging developers with its current set of choices. I didn't realize that quoting Giles was considered disrespectful of either of these opinions. It was an interesting take. I…

This is not about calling Jobs out for not adding more features to the iPhone. This is akin to if I had said you couldn't use any other editor than TextMate to program in Rails. Or that you had to run it on OS X server. That would have been some lame, fascist shit.

> This is akin to if I had said you couldn't use any other editor than TextMate to program in Rails.

Well for starters let me say I admire your perspective on Rails development greatly. And speaking as someone who is greatly enamored of code generation, I am not a fan of restrictions on "original" programming languages.

My only question about your response here is your choice of comparison. The choice of text editor does not appear to me to parallel the imposition of an entire cross-platform compatibility layer like Flash.

I realize that in a certain sense it seems to be about dictating tools for self-expression, but where things like Flash compilers are concerned it also very much about proprietary companies attempting to control developers by owning the platform.

So... If I had to draw a lesson from Rails it would be that if we developers find ourselves having to choose which behaviour we want from a proprietary platform vendor or choosing which proprietary platform we are beholden to, maybe we should step back and ask ourselves whether we really want to be beholden at all.

Maybe what we really ought to be doing is sucking it up and developing for web standards where "Worse is Better."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better

Re: Five rational arguments against Apple's 3.3.1 policy

#70

Post by clawrencewenham »

flogic wrote: post #46
pohl wrote: post #42

#1 is a bizarre argument. I can't weed my garden unless it is already free of weeds?

I think it'a more "Don't claim you're weeding the garden. We know you're not."

They have been. Remember they expurgated all of the "sexy" apps a couple of months ago?
Post reply on HN