Isn’t It Time Apple Allowed Others to Sell iPhone Apps?
Apple has drawn an enormous amount of flak from developers for banning a host of offerings from its App Stores. But while some rejections may seem arbitrarily imposed, Apple — like any other retailer — has every right to decide which products line its shelves. The problem, though, is that it stubbornly insists on being the sole distributor of iPhone apps.
Instead, Apple should focus on maintaining a top-notch storefront and allow other vendors to hawk iPhone offerings that may seem controversial, distasteful or simply worthless. Doing so would help placate iPhone developers and consumers, and may keep federal regulators at bay.
Read the full article and get involved in the discussion on GigaOm Pro → (Subscription Required)
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
No this is an awful idea. The amazing thing about apple is that they can control what’s out their for their products. Let’s keep our devices applesynced and be glad that our products don’t crash every 5 minutes like windows products!
…which has nothing to do with ‘like Windows products’. The difference is, Apple offers THE hardware, that’s it. Now think about how many different companies build computers, where Windows should run smoothly on and even other software on top of that, and how many companies build different phones, on which Windows Mobile should run smoothly on, and again other software on top of that,…
I agree with Me (sounds like I’m agreeing with myself ;p )
Windows has to serve EVERY possible hardware configuration imaginable. Apple is lucky that it’s software is hackintoshable, otherwise it’s popularity would never have occurred and would remain a niche-market (it also helps to have kick ass software, which Apple does have).
As to the App store, I fully agree that there should be an open market for this instead of forcing an underground market where developers go if they don’t get treated well by Apple (GV Mobile, for example). Why do you think jailbreaking happens? Jailbreaking allows a customer a way of having the smartphone they paid for.
Sure, they have stock holders to answer to, but at the current pace, Apple is being very short-sighted. Pretty much the entire blogoworld is aware of their mistreatment of developers, its perception of customers as uneducated underage hill billies that don’t know what’s good for them (Ninja dictionary, pron apps), it’s zealous secrecy that probably leads to murders/suicides overseas.
Given the recent attention by Apple to the response to Ninja app oppression, they probably will fix up their store. But this is not going to be enough for all those tinkerers out there that may want to install and experiment with crazy software as SBSettings, that IS actually useful. All in all, yes, there must be an open market if Apple wants to curtail jailbreaking and cracked app use.
Unlocking is a completely different layer of complexity. Apple will be able to address this by not marrying 1 phone company and allowing anyone to jump on their phone with any provider, as RIM does for the most part.
You’re kidding me, right? Let’s set a few things straight…
1. This is apples device.
2. This is apples store.
3. This is apples OS.
4. Nobody is forced to use any of it if they don’t want to.
There are all sorts of offerings out there for smartphone, pda’s, and cell phones. If you don’t like apples monopoly on their own device then use something else.
But this is apples device, store, and software. All 3 required a huge capital investment by Apple and could easily have flopped. They have every right to profit from it in any way that they choose. They took the risk, and now they are reaping the rewards.
As for sensoring the content. I think it’s great. I know that I can give an iPhone to my kids safely, without them downloading Porno apps. I can’t say the same for a blackberry or treo. It’s about time that hardware manufacturers gave us that option.
And it is an option. You have choices of other devices, software, and operating systems.
But I do agree that Apple would likely profit more from having their device on competing carriers. But then again, they have spent a lot more time studying their options than I have. They also know their business better than anyone here does, which is why they are Apple and we are consumers. And they seem to be doing OK for themselves. If it ain’t broke…
Imagine a bizarre world where you could ONLY buy software from Apple to put on your Mac OR where you could ONLY buy software from Microsoft to run on your PC. If either company did this the platform would have died.
Let’s get this straight: IT IS MY iPhone that I paid for. MY data plan, I pay for. I should have the right, like EVERY OTHER computing device to buy software from whomever I like! Use the data I pay for on whatever I like (as long as I don’t break the law).
Apple promised apps, touts that there is an app for everything, EXCEPT of course for ANYTHING that competes with them or AT&T.
It is very clear that Apple has abused its control of the iPhone with the customers that PAID for them. They are not rejecting and removing apps solely for porn, security, or crashing issues. They are removing them to STOP competition for themselves and their partners.
Slingplayer – NO 3G as AT&T has U-verse. BUT MLB.com At Bat has ALL games streamed everyday. Apple and Akamai are now starting to stream LIVE events. Slingplayer is 3G on AT&T for BB and Windows Mobile!
Netshare removed from App Store as it competes with AT&T – WHICH a year later STILL does not other tethering!
Skype or other VoIP, no 3G. Google Voice apps rejected and removed – they use little data, contain NO porn, do not harm iPhone, BUT compete with AT&T.
How about the customers that paid for these apps before they were removed? They now paid for apps that can not be updated.
What’s next, removal of all SMS apps when AT&T FINALLY gets around to adding MMS? MMS is available even on cheap cellphones.
I will remind you that many of the apps rejected, crippled and removed from the iPhone are available to other smartphones. EVEN on the same carrier in many cases. SO, the control that Apple wields is being abused.
AT&T could not stop apps from being used on a Blackberry, Windows Mobile, etc as there is no absolute control over ONE app store. Someone should stop this before Apple hurts themselves!
The truth is if Apple continues to abuse this power, the platform WILL die as all the other devices will catch up and other what Apple will not. Watch the devleopers leave if this continues
Funny when it comes to net neutrality people get angry, but on wireless, it goes out the window. There is really no difference! If you pay for data, you should be able to use what you pay for.
I can’t wait for the explanation (to the FCC) of Google Voice and the removal of GV Mobile & VoiceCentral after being in the App Store for months!
Joke is Google is building a web app for iPhone users, so what did the actions of AT&T and Apple accomplish? Just pissed off their customers and is bringing in the government to take a look. A rock in a river does NOT stop the water from flowing!
If Microsoft had tried this, there would be countless lawsuits and antitrust and monopoly complaints, but it seems to be okay for apple to do it.
I agree, apple has a right to want to “protect” it’s product, but what it is really trying to protect is it’s control. It is very good at telling us how we should be using there products, rather then giving us (what is quite frankly the best) a platform and saying, go on, surprise us!
(I don’t agree entirely, but I appreciate the fact that the phone API is restricted, but I think the user should have some control over determining the access to these api’s in a similar fashion to the location apis)
I have no issue with needing to get any of my apps “certified”, what I take issue with is then having to “push” it through the app store, rather then been allowed to distribute to my friends, family or other groups of interested.
I’d love to do some apps for our community group, but can’t cause 1. we’re not a corporation and 2. the apps would not have any place on the store (as they would be suited to the needs of the group and there data management requirements).
I’d prefer to see an opportunity to be allowed to distribute “certified” apps without the need to go through the app store, but still have the market place should we develop tools we thought might be useful to a wider audience.
It might also give apple a chance to move some of the “less-then-useful” apps to other domain while allowing for more targeted market places.
Apple should also not be filter content based on “partnerships”, as not everyone in the world uses AT&T networks, this has always been a sore point for me in particular.
Apple had a reputation of leveraging the creativity of it’s use base, now, its looking to limit instead.