4 Comments

Summary:

An item in the NY Times’ Bits blog today details the capricious state of the rules that may or may not affect iPhone application developers. The post focuses, in particular, on the fate of a software that allows you to download podcasts and stream them over […]

An item in the NY Times’ Bits blog today details the capricious state of the rules that may or may not affect iPhone application developers. The post focuses, in particular, on the fate of a software that allows you to download podcasts and stream them over a Wi-Fi or cellular connection. Apple decided not to sell the software in the App Store, telling the developer that iTunes already offered that functionality. The post argues that iTunes does not, in fact, offer it. But it’s more concerned with Apple’s approach to the iPhone as a platform.

What matters here is a set of clearly stated rules. If Apple wants to be a platform (and these days, everyone wants to be a platform) then it needs to play the same way with everyone all the time — and it needs to tell people the rules governing that play. When Facebook earlier this summer started shifting the rules governing applications that shut some programs down for a few days, it caused some investors in Facebook applications to grouse that the social network wasn’t acting like a platform.

They’re right. If startups are to build out wealth on a social networking platform, a mobile phone platform or a cloud computing platform, the platform providers need to have a set of rules, as well as a process to change the rules, that lets the affected parties have some say. In Facebook’s case, the changes were made to protect the user experience, but it’s good business to set policies in place ahead of time to prevent some of those problems (the cynic in me says that, if Facebook had done that, it would have sacrificed some of its growth).

The flip side of this is for application developers to realize that unless a platform has set rules in place, then they’re building their products not on firm ground, but on quicksand. So build for the iPhone or for other so-called platforms, but keep in mind that without a clear set of rules, they may not be stable.

  1. “Some developers demand Apple try to communicate better, lest they assume the worst of the platform vendor. While that sounds plenty reasonable at face value, given the curatorial demands on the fledgling state of the App Store platform and Apple’s overall reliance on product-plan secrecy, we shouldn’t realistically expect Apple to ‘open up’ anytime soon,” as I explain in:

    Resolved: Apple is right to curate the App Store
    http://counternotions.com/2008/09/15/app-store/

    Share
  2. This is the second podcast application that was rejected by Apple. Another was rejected a week earlier..

    http://podcastanswerman.com/itunes-app-store-denies-iphone-without-consistency/

    Note: We have stopped our companies development of a podcast application due to Apples Actions. I am no way associated with either app that was rejected.

    Share
  3. Microsoft is really losing it in the evil stakes these days. They used to be really good at evil. Now Apple is kicking their backsides for evil. When Steve Jobs goes “MuWAAAhahahaha!”, the brainwashed minions listen. His henchmen are really loyal, not just getting paid to be. Poor Ballmer.

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post