The App Store Mania Is Catching
In spite of all the flaws with the App Store (both real and perceived), I think the concept is brilliant and the execution very well done. In fact, my biggest gripe with it is that it only works with the iPhone; I want this in OS X too. I want to be able to open iTun- ok, maybe not iTunes, but you get the idea. I want everything that it offers for the iPhone on my Mac, because that is where the future is heading. However, that may be looking a bit too far ahead at the moment. Speaking of today's market, Microsoft and Google (among others) are creating their own versions of Apple's mobile success story.
I have no doubt that Microsoft plans on aping Apple's design as much as possible. So, it isn't going to surprise me very much if they, too, end up having a review process by which prospective applications must pass. Of course, since it is Microsoft we can just assume that it is going to be a very ugly, horribly implemented experience, but it will be similar enough to Apple's store that you won't mistake it for anything else.
But look at Google, they are trying a very different approach. In fact, this is where I think Apple's real competition will lay, and here is why. If you develop for Apple's store, then even if you spend months making a product that you feel is great, Apple will still take several weeks to review it, and can ultimately reject it based solely on their own internal rules. So, developing for the store involves a considerable risk in time and effort. Now, I can already hear the arguments that go something like this: "Well, if you create quality products then you'll have nothing to fear."
And while that is an admirable sentiment, it smacks of the same logic for allowing the government to spy on you. Perhaps you've heard the excuse of "Well, if you aren't doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to worry about." To which I must respond, "If I'm not doing anything wrong, you've no cause to watch me." And I find myself having a similar feeling towards Apple's process of approving applications. I realize that if you want to play in their sandbox then you have to play by their rules, but that doesn't imply that their rules will be fair.
For example, what if someone writes an application that would compete with an application that Apple had planned on releasing at their next big event. They don't want their keynote spoiled so they delay the vetting process or deny it on grounds that might be a security risk. Assume that the developer complains and Apple ultimately relents and allows it on the site, after their own version is released of course. Would you want to develop in that kind of environment? Maybe you would. Maybe the risks and the hoops are ultimately worth it. But Apple has a lot of power in this situation and the only thing the developers can do is hope that they don't abuse their power.
Which brings me back to Google. They are planning on creating a store for Android that will allow anyone to upload anything. Quite a different approach from Apple's, isn't it? And this is where things will get very interesting. Because while Google will attract lots of buggy, poorly designed, and malicious apps, they will also get the benefit of the same unrestrained energy that has made the web such a fun place to visit. In fact, this reminds me quite a bit of AOL's walled garden approach to the internet. And we see how well that turned out.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
I like Apple’s approach. I want my iPhone to work. I don’t want a bunch of trash. It’s their platform: I have no problem with them deciding what apps are acceptable. Besides, I really have no interest in my phone being able to make fart noises.
“I want my iPhone to work.”
You know, my Mac works, and I can install anything I want on it from anyone at any time (as much as Steve Jobs would like for that not to be the case). If the iPhone is supposedly the “real” OS X, then why not let it be more open?
I just converted from a Treo 700p to iPhone in July because my Treo didn’t work—3rd party apps conflicted with each other giving me a handicapped smartphone. I’m very happy to have an iphone that actually works and does what it is supposed to do. The Treo tries to be everything to everyone and fails in the process. I’ll take Apple’s approach with the iPhone, thanks. I don’t need it to be more open: I need it to do what it promises to do…and it does!
You did buy an i-“Phone” didn’t you? It just happens to be an iPod and a PDA based on Core OSX besides being a nice phone.
So, now you expect it to be some kind of an iPhone Air? And load it with untested and unguaranteed applications from who knows where? At will?
My lord. You give them a nice $199 Apple phone and here comes snotty, whiny folks from the smoggy coast demanding some imagined “rights” to an open firmware. Why won’t those folks stick to the Blackberries or better yet, get a Windows Mobile phone and complain to RIM or MSFT. They don’t deserve the iPhone.
Sheeez! Just take the iPhone as it is. You knew what it was capable of when you walked in the store so just stop friggin’ WHINING! Steve did not promise you full OSX glory did he? Or did I miss something?
Um, James, my last piece was directed at some clown from the Hollywood hills.
Anyways, we cannot talk about the Android App Market just yet because it ain’t here to begin with. Another, Google may own the copyright to the Android middleware BUT Google does not own the carriers - unless they will become some kind of a virtual carrier or MVNO such as Virgin Mobile leasing Sprint excess capacity, etc.
But I doubt that. The handset makers for Android - HTC for one - will manufacture some units with Android and any carrier who’ve signed on, most likely Verizon, will not allow full access to its network from these Android apps. No. Verizon likes to play god and they have no obligation to anyone, not even Google, to back down their network access policies.
Apple is obligated to screen the iPhone apps until proven to be safe, not for you, but the AT&T;network, before making the app available. When one gets through (like the wireless modem app) Apple can yank it back from you - it is all in their contractual obligations to AT&T;.
Google Android phones won’t be any different.
“I’m very happy to have an iphone that actually works and does what it is supposed to do.”
That’s fine for you, but other people have wants and needs that go beyond what Steve Jobs says they want and need.
And before you say it, I realize no one is being forced to get an iPhone. But as a consumer, I have the right to express my complaints as well as praise about a product.
Again, if the iPhone is the “real” OS X, as promised, then shouldn’t it be able to run apps from anyone without completely crapping out? That’s not much of a robust OS if they’re so worried about apps that they have to approve each and every one of them.
I think part of the point of having a nice system like OS X on the phone is that I can have some flexibility in the applications I run on it. And given the proliferation of jail-broken phones, many others feel the same.
The apps aren’t some side benefit of the phone. They are a selling point. And as such, the system has its pros and cons, and it certainly could offer more than what they’re offering.
To Beeblebrox: Based on your comments, then clearly the iPhone is not for you. Move on. Apple is not trying to be all things to all people: they are trying to provide a spectacular device that works great for a very large group of people including myself.
Yes, the iPhone is the real OS X. That’s what makes it work like it does. That fact does not convey any responsibilities or obligations for Apple to make it work in other ways that they don’t want it to do. It works EXACTLY as advertised. (For me, it works better than any other smart phone available and that’s good enough.)
I think the iPhone is tremendously flexible. In only a couple of months, there are thousands of apps available and that do much more than I ever imagined an iPhone could do. I agree that the apps are a selling point—they sold me and they resell me nearly every day. They are absolutely awesome. And I think its great that Apple takes some responsibility for the apps by reviewing them.
Sure, there are those “superusers” who have jailbroken the iPhone. More power to them. But they are far and away the minority. I have never met one (in person). I think that most iPhone purchasers are similar to me—they want an awesome device that works, dependably, and who don’t want to spend hours fiddling with it.
Apple is on the right track and I hope they don’t change it to meet the needs of the minority of “superusers”.
Chip meet our friend Beeblebrox. Botox relax Windows Mobile 7 is coming at ya so stay put that wallet before you enter the Hollywood Apple Store, ok?
Let me say one thing, AM staff = superusers, Robo = superuser, Chip sounds like a superuser (he appreciates his iPhone), but Beeblebrox the proud eMachines owner and an all-Apple hater ≠ superuser.
Chip, I personally welcome you to the A.M. ego forum where heated debates of all things Mac and beyond.
Choose your A.M. buddies well…
-Robo
But as a consumer, I have the right to express my complaints as well as praise about a product.
Consumers express their dismays and disapprovals by not buying the product.
8+ millions of consumers thus far has voted their $199/299 in favor of Apple technology and the iPhone.
You are not entitled to whine by just browsing the feature list at the Apple website, dude. It is kind of like whining about not winning the big lotto ball when you never spent even $1 for a ticket.
“Yes, the iPhone is the real OS X.”
So would you be happy if you could only buy apps for your Mac from one store, and that store was owned by Apple, and Apple had to approve each and every app that you could purchase? (actually most Mac fanatics probably would).
I hardly think wanting more choices makes one a power user. A power user simply has the ability/knowledge to do something about it. That doesn’t mean that no one else WANTS more choices.
“Based on your comments, then clearly the iPhone is not for you. Move on. Apple is not trying to be all things to all people: they are trying to provide a spectacular device that works great for a very large group of people including myself.”
Yeah no kidding, sherlock. But does that mean that the iPhone is beyond any criticism? That the mere suggestion that the experience could be improved is forbidden? Either love it 100% or “move on”?
The iPhone has the best interface bar none of any phone or smart phone. That alone makes it a compelling device, and the new phone I’m leaning towards. But that does not mean that I accept everything about it, including how locked down it is.