Hilarious. Serves them right for thinking too different.
Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
261–270 of 414 posts
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way? They aren't rejecting the app, they're rejecting the use of the trademark "Pebble" in the app's description.
Erm... Wouldn't that be similar to Google rejecting the trademark "Apple" from their search results? You're making it sound like Apple owns Pebble trademark and aren't happy for it to be used.
Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy.
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should Walmart, who has 100% market share of people walking in a Walmart right now, have control over what is on their shelves? Should Disney have control over what stores are on Disney Main St.? iPhones are not the only choice, so if you don't like how they work, you can choose not to buy them (because they have significant competition). The reason there are laws that limit monopoly behavior is because you wouldn't…
I totally agree with this analogy. All of the hate in these threads is just... weird. Maybe it's because people relate better to the developers who are losing money, than the company who is controlling it. My bet is someone with a basic understanding of business and marketing would side with Apple, and everyone else would side with the little guy, even if the little guy isn't in the right.
I honestly don't understand why you'd defend Apple as an iPhone user - that actively harms you as a customer O.o
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#264If you want people to use your platform instead of a competing platform, please make your initial ecosystem cost less than $1000 for me to buy into.
The Apple watch, complete with it's requirement to have an iPhone initially, makes the same kind of derp Apple made with the original iPod only supporting Macs, as a firewire-only product...
I suppose at this point, they just don't even care anymore, what with the fact that anything they make will sell millions of units regardless of anything, but I would have paid $150 for that watch, that's if it would work without an iPhone.
What if I just want a watch? Couldn't that potentially be a much larger market?
Apple, I swear, as an iOS developer you put food on me and my partners' table, but you make it really, really, difficult to actually support you.
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#265Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#266It's a bit tricky. I agree with most comments here that Apple is in the right to control what appear in the description and metadata. Not just from a competitive standpoint but in a way to make the it better for the user experience. That being said, in the Pebble case, I think it makes the user experience worst for the user. I.e. if I have a pebble watch and am looking for an iphone app that play well with it, I'd wa…
> I think it's different than saying "Also on Android" because this is a totally different device. I.e. saying it's on another smartphone doesn't add value to the description
Being less restrictive on the users future smartphone choices if they want to keep using the app is, for osme users, a valuable fact about a product.
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is incorrect. They are rejecting apps that mention other mobile platforms. Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform. Them reclassifying it seems awfully timely. This makes the user experience of pebble watch owners worse as they won't be able to search for applications that support Pebble anymore; they'll have to find them elsewhere. Not being able to discover applications in an app store is…
>> "Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform." Aren't smart watches a type of mobile platform?
If we want to be pedantic...I don't think so. Mobile implies a device that is connected to the world, standalone and is small / handheld; smart watches are only accessories for mobile devices that can't stand on their own.
I would argue they're different but the word mobile can be interpreted various ways. It would be nice for Apple to be more explicit in their terms.
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
What? Doing an anti competitive practice is legal if you don't have a monopoly?
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#269If you want people to use your platform instead of a competing platform, please make your initial ecosystem cost less than $1000 for me to buy into. The Apple watch, complete with it's requirement to have an iPhone initially, makes the same kind of derp Apple made with the original iPod only supporting Macs, as a firewire-only product... I suppose at this point, they just don't even care anymore, what with the fact t…
The cheapest Apple watch for me in Canada right now (correct me if I'm wrong) is a harrowing $449...
Combine that with the minimum $469 I have to spend on an iPhone 5C, which is the cheapest model, and without AppleCare or taxes, I'm already close to $1k.
For $1k, I can get a Surface Pro 3 ($499), a Nokia Lumia 520 unlocked ($179) a pebble smartwatch ($119), still have $200 to spare, and be able to use my watch without my goddamn smartphone.
Give us a break.
Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is far more true than people realize. And the worst part is, it's not an exaggeration in the slightest. > You cannot point to the acceptance of one app as evidence that some rule isn't being applied to another app. This is something they won't even discuss if you question how other apps can have some feature they may not like. You could have the same exact feature, and you'll get rejected.
Because someone else breaking the rules is no excuse for you breaking the rules. It's like when you were a kid, and you tried to say, "But Johnny's doing it!".
Every app violates the word of at least one of those rules. So the only thing you can do is interpret it the best way you can, and that interpretation is guided by what you see being approved.