Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#211

Post by jdmichal » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:38 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #156

jdmichal wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see very few cries of monopoly, and many cries of antitrust. These are not the same thing, at all. This particular instance could be approaching a tying arrangement. It is certainly against the consumer's best interest. Also, under the Sherman act, conspiracy to monopoly is just as illegal as actual monopoly.

I'm probably more progressive than most on HN, and would love to see big conglomerates broken up. But on this issue, I think the accusations of illegal activity are absurd for multiple reasons. 1) Apple does not have anything near total domination in the mobile arena. 2) Apple clearly has a right to control the content in their App Store. Whether that's removing offensive material or just material they don't like. 3)…

> If you want to go after Apple, go after the way they don't allow consumers to modify the software or install custom software on iOS.

I agree, because this is practically the same issue. The app store isn't just a way to get iOS software, it's the only way to get iOS software. Which means that being rejected from the app store means you cannot provide your product to those consumers. Which means Apple rejecting products from the store is the same thing as Apple stating that that company cannot provide that app to customers. You could see where this might become an issue when that reason for rejection has nothing to do with the actual application and everything to do with mentioning a competing product in the description.

If side-loading was permitted, then I think (2) would hold. However, in our current world without side-loading, (2) basically states that Apple has full control over what software products consumers may purchase for their device. IANAL, but to me, that fact could bring antitrust liability.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#212

Post by anaptdemise » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:39 PM UTC

happyscrappy wrote: post #184

anaptdemise wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple hate is quite blinding. So is Apple fanboyism. There are laws that prevent Ford from requiring you to only service your vehicle at Ford dealerships. There are also laws that prevent Ford from restricting sales of third-party after market parts in franchised dealerships. Not a good comparison.

Claiming Apple is a monopoly because only they make iDevices, what I was responding to, is just as ignorant as saying Ford is a monopoly because only they make F-150s. Is that hard to understand?

I was just raising the point that your specific example of Ford is weak due to the fact that there are indeed laws that prevent how Ford can sell and restrict third-party sales of their vehicles, parts and services.

> is just as ignorant as saying Ford is a monopoly because only they make F-150s

Which only goes to support my statement of the weakness in your example. That even if you don't entertain the grandparents claim that a manufacturer has a monopoly on a product, your specific example shows there are indeed laws that prevent Ford from asserting that kind of control on the market. Which include franchise laws preventing auto manufacturers from owning dealerships which is likened to Apple owning the App Store. It also prevents auto manufacturers from preventing third party manufacturers from creating compatible aftermarket parts, likened to Apple's MFi restrictions. All of these are playing out elsewhere in the example market you brought into the discussion. The manufacturer controlled marketplace is playing out through Tesla. The third-party and aftermarket suppression is playing out in the Right to Repair in the auto and heavy equipment market. I never asserted that the grandparents claim of a "manufactures monopoly" over their own product was correct. Only that your example was a poor choice.

[edit] spelling

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#213

Post by xbmcuser » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:41 PM UTC

LordKano wrote: post #155

rrss1122 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It seems like Apple is doing that as a way to kill competition and promote their own watch, which is fair from a business standpoint." It's nowhere near fair. It's extremely anticompetitive. This is the kind of behavior that gets a company in trouble with the FTC.

This is the kind of behavior that gets a company in trouble with the FTC. Indeed but Apple is aware that the FTC isn't likely to punish them enough that the behavior will be a net negative. If only the Federal Government would be as serious about "Sending a message" on antitrust as they are about low-mid level drug dealers, this kind of thing would be a lot more rare.

FTC won't but European union probably will plus in Europe they fine you a percentage of total revenue of company which for Apple could be over 15billion.

   My recommendation to any one developing for apple devices is be ready to be blocked or kicked out of the app store if you are too successful. As apple will enter the market and if they do they will start applying rules they were ignoring earlier as those were selling devices for them but now they don't need you as you are a competitor so out you go.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#214

Post by cududa » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:41 PM UTC

LordKano wrote: post #155

rrss1122 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It seems like Apple is doing that as a way to kill competition and promote their own watch, which is fair from a business standpoint." It's nowhere near fair. It's extremely anticompetitive. This is the kind of behavior that gets a company in trouble with the FTC.

This is the kind of behavior that gets a company in trouble with the FTC. Indeed but Apple is aware that the FTC isn't likely to punish them enough that the behavior will be a net negative. If only the Federal Government would be as serious about "Sending a message" on antitrust as they are about low-mid level drug dealers, this kind of thing would be a lot more rare.

But Apple doesn't have anywhere near a monopoly on smart phones, so being anti-competitive is completely legal

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#215

Post by s73v3r » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:42 PM UTC

Title is misleading. They're not rejecting apps that code in support for Pebble. They're rejecting apps that say they support it in the App Store copy. This is nothing new; you've never been able to mention other platforms in your App Store copy.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#216

Post by atomicfiredoll » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:42 PM UTC

blumkvist wrote: post #195

random28345 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nowhere near... You're right, Apple is significantly worse. Microsoft went out of it's way to make sure that competitors applications didn't work (DOS isn't done until Lotus 123 won't run). This sparked a development arms race wasting hundreds of hours of development time working around intentional compatibility bugs. On the other hand, Apple sometimes just doesn't let your software run at all. No matter what. Beca…

It's about market share and global impact. It might sound like double standard to you, but denying your awesome new airbnb for dogs app is not quite the same as denying Java.

> It's about market share and global impact

There's not some kind of, "the impact has to be as large as when company X did it" rule.

Apple now has enough market share, especially in mobile, that the global impact is troubling.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#217

Post by wvenable » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

epaga wrote: post #94

vlunkr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still a rule worth discussing. I hardly think this deserves to be flagged.

I can see the community disagrees with me, which is fine. It just gets very old to see so much uproar over an IMHO completely standard App Store rejection. The rule makes complete sense to me (they don't want you using their App Store to point to competitors), and nowhere is Apple saying apps are not allowed to support Pebble - Pebble itself has an app! Now, if Apple decides to remove Pebble's own app from the store,…

The purpose of the application description is to describe the features of the application. If your application has Dropbox support then I think you'd agree it's perfectly reasonable to mention Dropbox in your app description. The Pebble is an iOS accessory. It's equally reasonable to describe Pebble support as a feature. This goes beyond simply not mentioning competitors; Apple is preventing developers from describing features of their iOS app. It might be the same rule, but it's being used quite differently and worryingly.

Some apps only exist as companion apps for the Pebble, what are they going to put in their description?

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#218

Post by toxican » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:43 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #90

toxican wrote: post #2

I think I want to see more information before I grab my pitchfork. From the replies, > are you sure you're a developer? because this has been part of iOS submission guidelines for 4 years. (developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#metadata) I mean I really wouldn't put it past Apple to start enforcing this more aggressively because of the iWatch, but a forum post by some dev is hardly proof that Apple is inte…

"By that logic" doesn't belong anywhere near a discussion of Apple review guidelines or behavior. The only thing they are consistent about when reviewing iOS apps is being completely inconsistent. You cannot point to the acceptance of one app as evidence that some rule isn't being applied to another app. Apple constantly rejects apps for claimed rule violations while allowing other apps through with identical violati…

It does belong because the claim is that Apple is actively denying apps that support Pebble (which is not true). If Apple were doing that, they'd have taken down the official Pebble app entirely. You're muddying the entire discussion bringing in the consistency of Apple's enforcement of rules or how fair the rules are. None of that matters in this discussion.

What matters is that some dev made a wild claim that Apple is actively denying Pebble apps for being Pebble apps, when in fact they just failed to follow the rules. That's all there is to this. That this story is as popular as it is is ridiculous. The headline is clickbaity as hell and just outright false.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#219

Post by robgibbons » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

I've worked for Apple twice in my life, but it's policies like this that keep me from ever being an Apple developer. I will never support the Apple software market, for as long as they continue being so transparently shitty to developers.

Just look at how far Apple has come since the original Apple I, directly aimed at the DIY market. These days, Apple locks down everything, tightly controlling what developers (and users) can and cannot do.

"Golden handcuffs" does not even begin to describe the level of restriction Apple exerts on the tech market.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#220

Post by s73v3r » Thu, Apr 23, 2015, 4:45 PM UTC

pbreit wrote: post #198

fluidcruft wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree about Android. It's helpful to know whether some particular app you're purchasing is going to lock you into one platform or the other. Why should you have to leave the app store to investigate? What's the point of suppressing interoperability? Companies should be rewarded for interop efforts, not punished for it.

Nah. The pebble complements an iPhone whereas android replaces.

The Pebble replaces an Apple Watch, however.