Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
rogueamoeba.com
Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
1–10 of 97 posts
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#2I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here.
They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key.
Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been the game for the last 3 years and Rogue Amoeba should not act surprised.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#3I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#4I don't think they're making the right case in that response. It should be focused solely on the "this should be allowed by Apple" argument, because telling users that it's not illegal doesn't matter when it's Apple's store and Apple's rules, for better or for worse. They say that the encryption around AirPlay streams appears to primarily be there to prevent third parties from creating applications that work with AirPlay—so it's easy to assume that Apple wouldn't approve of something they tried to prevent.
Is releasing something you know will get kicked out the best approach to take when you can't provide an approved solution? Maybe, if you think the resulting discussion and PR is your best chance at getting things changed... but then, again, you need to keep your message perfectly focused. Claiming that they didn't violate any agreements feels too defensive to me.
EDIT: and it's not just this response... initially they professed something much closer to ignorance/surprised innocence over the removal, while it now looks like there wasn't much reason for any surprise.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#5I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
I agree that it is ridiculous the way Apple basically changes the rules as it goes along. I just don't understand the outrage or surprise. There has been 3 years of developers trying to bend the rules and posting complaints like this.
FACT: They reverse engineered Apple's proprietary technology and want Apple to help sell their app.
MY POINT: You must be nuts if you think that will happen.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#6I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
What? Schiller lays out the reasons the app was rejected quite clearly. Rogue's response is to suggest that these issues are ambiguous because it hasn't been clearly defined by Apple. Well, guess what, now it has. Rogue should've just let it go.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#7I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…
Goading Apple into breaking their own rules is a bit trollish, but when all else has failed maybe trolling is what we need.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
I agree that it is ridiculous the way Apple basically changes the rules as it goes along. I just don't understand the outrage or surprise. There has been 3 years of developers trying to bend the rules and posting complaints like this. FACT: They reverse engineered Apple's proprietary technology and want Apple to help sell their app. MY POINT: You must be nuts if you think that will happen.
I just don't understand the outrage or surprise.
The moment we get complacent is the moment we lose. What's the worst that can happen from trying or speaking up? At worst Apple says "no", and maybe the public becomes more aware of the situation and thus might feel compelled to apply pressure to Apple. This is the reason for the outrage.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#9I don't understand where Rogue Amoeba is coming from here. They don't have a "right" to be on the App Store. It's Apple's store ergo their rules. And everybody knows that the rules are more guidelines and Apple can and will change their mind about them at any time. Especially if you try and undermine them e.g. by using their private encryption key. Does it suck. Absolutely. Is it unfair. Probably. But this has been t…
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that this is an arbitrary decision by Apple, or that Apple is lying about something in the matter. It seems clear to me that even though Apple keeps using the term "approved API" what they mean is "the AirPlay encryption key that you don't have a license for". It's an odd use (or misuse) of terminology but it doesn't change the facts.
Re: Rogue Amoeba responds to Phil Schiller
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removing an app from the store is one thing. Bending the truth or outright lying to your own customers in order to deflect blame for a decision that you made arbitrarily is entirely another. The fact that this nonsense is coming from a high-level Apple employee and not some customer service rep who can claim not to have known the truth makes it worse.
I agree that it is ridiculous the way Apple basically changes the rules as it goes along. I just don't understand the outrage or surprise. There has been 3 years of developers trying to bend the rules and posting complaints like this. FACT: They reverse engineered Apple's proprietary technology and want Apple to help sell their app. MY POINT: You must be nuts if you think that will happen.
One interesting question is whether or not this sort of thing will be grounds for revoking a Gatekeeper certificate. Apple certainly could argue that accessing AirPlay streams without proper authorization is a form of malware / something they have to police because of agreements with content providers / etc