Monday, December 1, 2008

Apple’s Capricious Rules for iPhone Apps

Alex Sokirynsky spent two months, working nights and weekends, to write an application called Podcaster for the Apple iPhone, allowing people to listen to and watch Podcasts on their phones.
He was encouraged because he had written a few dozen Web-based applications that worked with the first-generation iPhone, all of which were promoted by Apple’s Web site. And he was quickly approved when he applied to download the iPhone software development kit, unlike many who faced inexplicable delays.
On Aug. 14, Mr. Sokirynsky submitted his application to be distributed through Apple’s Web store. It was his turn for an inexplicable delay. Last week, Apple finally contacted him, saying it would not distribute Podcaster. “Since Podcaster assists in the distribution of podcasts, it duplicates the functionality of the Podcast section of iTunes,” Apple said, according to Mr. Sokirynsky’s blog.
 
This is very curious. Yes, the iTunes software does allow users to download podcasts to their personal computers and transfer them onto their iPhones. But Mr. Sokirynsky’s application does two different things: It allows people to stream podcasts over a Wi-Fi or cellular connection. And it allows them to download podcast files wirelessly to watch or listen to them later. These are both functions I’d love to see in iTunesthe iPhone, but they are not there yet.
Moreover, Apple allows all sorts of apps that duplicate various aspects of its own software. For example, several developers offer versions of the Apple Contacts application that manages names and phone numbers. There are downloads that similarly overlap with Apple’s maps, stocks, weather and photo viewer applications.
Much more significantly, Apple has allowed music streaming applications that directly compete with its music download business, such as Pandora and LastFM Internet radio. When I spoke to Tom Conrad, the chief technical officer of Pandora, shortly after the launch of the iPhone App store, he told me that he saw no signs that Apple was worried about competition.
There are even a bunch of applications that allow for the streaming of podcasts, sometimes among other functions, including vSnax, Stitcher Radio and Truveo. There is an application meant solely for watching the Diggnation podcast. (These other applications don’t offer to download podcast files, as Podcaster does.)
What is more, Apple has denied that it is motivated by thwarting competition even when that appears to be what it is doing. For example, it says it doesn’t ban Adobe’s Flash player from the iPhone to favor its own QuickTime software; it argues that Flash uses too much processing power for the phone.
So does Apple actually have rules or standards for what iPhone applications are and aren’t allowed to do? It hasn’t published any. It didn’t give any helpful information to Mr. Sokirynsky suggesting how he might change the application.
So far, Apple won’t say. I first sent an inquiry Friday afternoon to Natalie Kerris, the head of Apple’s iPhone PR department, asking what the standards are. She quickly wrote back, saying, “I’m not familiar with this particular app, so let me look into it.”
On Monday, Ms. Kerris did not respond to several phone calls and e-mail messages.
In the mean time, Mr. Sokirynsky is trying to sell Podcaster through a complex back door, which Apple calls “ad hoc distribution.”
I bought Podcaster and it seems rather handy.
I can’t see how distributing the program will hurt Apple. If anything it will make the iPhone a tad more valuable. On the other hand, treating developers capriciously is most certainly going to discourage them from spending nights and weekends working on new and useful applications that may give more people reasons to buy an iPhone.

No comments: