The AppStore isn’t perfect, but it’s better than an open one.

There’s a couple things that have been on my mind for quite a while, and I’ve only just started to be able to figure them out in my head. I thought this would be a good place to get a discussion going about some things that have been starting to annoy me lately, and I wonder if others are feeling the same way I am.

monopoly The AppStore isnt perfect, but its better than an open one.I’m here for the quick buck

What are the ethics in creating an application for the AppStore, charging money for it, and then abandoning it’s development, but still charging for an application that has known bugs?

We’re in the early stages of the AppStore, but this seems to be something that’s going to have to be looked at eventually. With new iterations of iPhones and Touches coming yearly, there will eventually be a tipping point where applications will cease to work on either device, unless they get some more attention from developers.

We’ve been hearing a lot of noise from developers about the increasingly annoying tendencies of Apple to pull applications, and even make it difficult for them to publish their applications on the AppStore, but who’s talking on behalf of consumers who are spending money on applications only to find out they’re broken, and, poorly supported? I’ve received a number of emails over the last year from consumers who’ve received scathing remarks from iPhone developers when an app purchaser asks questions about support cycles and updates. The replies are sickening at the very best of times, but toss in the fact that consumers have spent money on these applications, and it starts to becoming a little more nauseating than the situation already is to begin with. Why is no one talking about this, and why have we made it okay for developers to treat the AppStore like the gold rush, stepping on people along the way, making a quick buck, then bailing on their consumers as soon as they’ve received some monetary benefits?  It doesn’t seem alright to me, and it’s becoming quite alarming.  This is not one of the reasons I write about Apple.  It makes me ill, and needs to be addressed.

open happy 257x300 The AppStore isnt perfect, but its better than an open one.An Open AppStore Clearly Isn’t What We Need

The second thing that’s really starting to annoy me is that iPhone developers are lambasting the AppStore process in public forums, without thinking about how consumers feel. There’s a key difference between developing for a desktop platform and a mobile device, and I think it’s about time we actually talk about them.  Developers need to realize that consumers approach mobile applications in a very different way than they approach desktop applications.  They need to develop accordingly, instead of whining and complaining about how Apple has created a closed the system.

I don’t install new applications, for personal use, on my desktop very often, and when I do, it’s from a reputable source. There’s development firms out there that produce sound applications that make my work-flow easier. I’m completely confident in the tools they’re releasing, so they get installed without a second guess.

If on some off chance I decide to try a new application from someone I haven’t heard of before (happens a lot since I review applications), and somehow they mess up my machine, I can revert to a backup relatively quickly. Heck, if I can’t revert to a backup, I can live with using my laptop until I get around to fixing the problem on my machine. Conversely, I don’t have that luxury with my iPhone. If it’s broken, I need access to a desktop with my backup to fix it. So, I’m completely screwed if I’m on the road. Furthermore, I don’t have a second phone to replace my iPhone, and if a poorly coded application decides it’s going to eat my OS for lunch, I’m screwed. I’ll now have no way of communicating with people and clients trying to phone me. None. Zero.

So, when we put together my two annoyances we have an iPhone AppStore, where two thirds of the applications were developed to make a quick buck, they’re poorly coded, written in haste, and buggy as hell. They don’t get quick bug fixes, and developers leave them on the store to make a couple extra dollars to supplement their day job, in addition to a bunch of people arguing that Apple shouldn’t be meddling in the approval process.  Funny, it seems like there are some applications that Apple has already vetted, in an apparently extensive review process, still making my phone unstable. What would the AppStore look like if the vetting process was removed, and instead there was a carte blanche for iPhone developers?

The AppStore would turn into a market where a few big developers gain the trust of iPhone users, and users will be reluctant to try anything new because it could completely annihilate their phone. That’s not the world I want to live in as a consumer. I want to be able to install an application with some degree of faith that the absolute junk was already weeded out.

Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, my thoughts, and subsequent rant here has nothing to do with me advocating an application gate keeper. Apple should not, under any circumstance determine whose applications get published and whose gets tossed on the scrap heap. They should however be able to vet out applications that break the device. If they can expedite their current process, and eliminate developers concerns about the time it’s taking to carry out that process, then I’m all for a closed system. Wouldn’t you?

The big development firms might find the process to be restricting because they have both the knowledge and the time to properly test their applications before submitting the programs they create for review, but, I’m not all that confident that the get rich over night crowd has the skill set to do that. Some might, but I bet a large majority of them don’t. The restrictions aren’t in place because of the Facebooks or the Rogue Ameoba’s of the world, they’re in place for us, the consumer, who wants a little assurance that a flashlight application won’t make their phone unstable, and that fart applications actually make fart noises. It’s not always about developers, and sometimes, just sometimes, it’s about consumers having devices that work.

Where do you stand on all this?  Let us know in the comments.

Image Credit: DavidDMuir and Christopher Chan

  • Pingback: ForkBombr » Blog Archive » The Risks of an Open App Store

  • http://justanotheriphoneblog.com patrickj

    Very good post Joshua. I agree that having no vetting process at all sounds like an awfully bad idea from a user standpoint. Also agree that any vetting beyond soundness / safety of code kinda thing should be jettisoned, so that all the ridiculous, subjective, inconsistent nonsense could be a thing of the past. Why do the words ‘dream on’ spring to mind when I write that last bit?

    Oh, and I do still think that the words and actions of Hewitt and Rogue Amoeba are very damaging from a PR / image perspective.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      Well, to borrow an overly used saying, “Rome wasn’t built in one day.” I didn’t expect the AppStore to be perfect at the time of its release, but I certainly didn’t expect it to take this much time to evolve either. It has a long way to go, and I can easily understand that, the fact that developers are crying about it because they can’t get paid quick enough is really annoying. Talk about a generation of entitlement. /rant

  • http://jessearmand.com Jesse

    I agree with that. That’s definitely what I’m thinking since a long time ago.

    But, as a long time iPhone Dev. Joe Hewitt has truth in what he said.
    iPhone apps have very few chances or capabilities to ruin your phone.

    Apple has designed the iPhone app bundle to be sandboxed, unable to do dangerous things that would ruin the device’s basic capabilities.

    Unless if you installed an unofficial app for jailbroken phones, which has a lot more system-changing capabilities.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      See, what happens if the AppStore was completely open? An AppStore where there is no vetting process, and no hardware locks on the devices? That’s what a lot of developers are asking for, and that’s what a truly open appstore would become. If a phone came unlocked, or jailbroken as we now refer to it, there would be a very good chance that an app could brick your iPhone. Nothing would be sandboxing developers in, and the only reason a sandbox currently exists at all is because Apple put it there to begin with. Take away that Apple owned sandbox and you’re going to be left with a wild west without the hot cow girls.

      • http://jessearmand.com Jesse

        I don’t completely agree with “no review” situation, I already said that many times in other places. But, I was referring to your assumption that an app built with official iPhone SDK will be able to do dangerous things on the phone.

        It couldn’t do much (as Joe had said), unless the unofficial apps from Cydia which requires a firmware to be Pwned.

        I’m not even talking about unofficial apps or jailbroken ones, there’s no intended relation between a “transparent” App Store and an “open iPhone”.

        It’s purely about the assumption that an officially signed app, built with iPhone SDK would be able to do dangerous things. The worst that it could do are:

        - Exhausting the current memory on the phone, and it exits, because of memory warning.
        - Crashing apps, which just exits.
        - Messing around with your contacts using address book API (but this is a security problem).
        - Add more here, please.

        So it has very few chances to eat the OS :-).

        Because we’re not talking about jailbroken phones. But, a legit app, that has not pass the review stage. (Apple themselves do not really test all apps for proper functionality 100%).

        Let me defend Joe a little bit, regarding this, not Rogue Amoeba:

        1. Facebook app is not a paid app.

        2. He has his rights to quit his iPhone Dev project. (TechCrunch is making too much noise out of it).

        3. Facebook will continue to be maintained by other developers, which I’m sure will have the capabilities to maintain it.

        4. It’s “Joe’s decision” not Facebook’s decision.

        Referring to iPhone Devs as greedy is a very discriminative opinion.

        The people who are not quitting are:
        - Companies who keep on investing the platform with their massive amount of apps with similar basic functions, but different content. These people don’t care about quality, they know how to take advantage some workforce to “churn out” apps. Hundreds may be rejected, hundreds more are in the store.

        - Devs who doesn’t give up on the platform, and still making their efforts to be successful.

        The people who quits:

        - Those who want to do something else. Well if their apps doesn’t make a dime, why bother ?
        If atebits quits, then people could complain, but his app is in the store and works fine. Not screwing the phone.

        - Those people like Joe Hewitt, who prefer to do web development. (He’s working at Facebook remember. It’s better to send complaints to Facebook).

        - Rogue Amoeba (they had done something that violates iPhone SDK’s agreement, so it’s reasonable to make complaints to them).

        • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

          I think the whole argument about apps not being able to cause much harm is a bit misleading. I’ve installed a number of applications on my phone that have caused the device to act in ways that are not normal. Phone restarting or shutting down unexpectedly being a key case in point. My phone isn’t jailbroken in any way.

          As for the greed, I don’t mean to imply that either Rogue Amoeba or Facebook are acting out of greed. Instead, they are used in this article to frame the current discourse on AppStore issues. There is a large demographic of developers who create one off applications with no plan of supporting their applications, but still continue to charge for them. I think both Hewitt and the R.A. team have some valid points about approval times, but my point on a whole is that they need to take a step backwards and look at the process from a consumer lens. Hope this clears some things up a little.

  • http://www.definitivemind.com James Katt

    Apple doesn’t totally sandbox apps.

    Developers know that.

    All a developer has to do is to use undocumented features to get out of the sandbox.

    Examples of this are in the jailbroken iPhone marketplace.

    This is why an open App Store is dangerous for the consumer.

    Apple has been continuously refining its App Store vetting process. Thus as time goes on, things will improve.

    I don’t like those developers that WHINE, WHINE, WHINE. They should get out of iPhone development. Good riddance when they leave. The other app developers can be left to making tons of money.

    • http://www.macgasm.net Joshua Schnell

      Sounds like we’re on the same page. :)

    • http://jessearmand.com Jesse

      Again, still in my view of “it should be fair, transparent, efficient, and communicative, instead of completely none” review process.

      Okay some official apps could do these:
      - Steal phone numbers (Unity game engine).
      - Messing around using address book API (there’s one company doing this, and it finally got caught).
      - Make a prank call (although the app just exits afterward).
      - Reboot the phone accidentally.
      - Hangs the phone.

      All of these are the things that Apple could solve by adding some more restrictions to the API. They have the full control to protect the private API.

      Now, your claim is quite invalid in the case of “All a developer has to do is to use undocumented features to get out of the sandbox.”

      It’s not enough. They have to be able to communicate and operate “system-wide”.

      They need to be able to run in the background for some situation, or else it just stops functioning (iPhone OS only allows one app running at a time).

      It needs to be installed in the filesystem, not the sandbox folder (App Store could not install apps outside the sandbox).

      In the case of jailbroken apps, those apps are not living in the sandbox as most official apps. They’re installed directly on the iPhone filesystem as most of other iPhone OS built-in apps. This is controlled by Cydia.

      Some apps in the jailbroken system (which are using undocumented API) are also taking advantage of intermediate system such as WinterBoard, MobileSubstrate, SBSettings, or I don’t know what else.

      There are some that’s taking advantage of some unix binaries, a port of the existing binaries from the Intel platform (desktop).

      If we’re just using the undocumented APIs, we could not access or execute these binaries.

      The point is,
      Of all App Store whiners, lots of them knows what’s best for users and what will be great for their apps.

      Some of them are just pure whiners who just want to win the popularity contest in the App Store. But, not all of them.

      But, the way Apple communicates by closing in on them, putting up silly reasons for rejections doesn’t help at all. That’s the thing that never changes until now, ever since devs start complaining.