Katie MarsalAs detailed by TechCrunch, Apple has recently started cracking down on submissions to the App Store that are just "basic applications." These apps are "little more than RSS feeds or glorified business cards."
"In short, Apple doesn't want people using native applications for things that a basic web app could accomplish," the report said.
The issue has primarily been with iPhone applications built with "templates" that are available from a number of software generating services. Medialets CEO Eric Litman said the change in policy plays into Apple's desire to control the user experience.
"Apple wants iPhone apps to be superior to Web experiences because they are extremely sticky and drive people specifically to buy the iPhone over competing smartphone platforms," Litman said. "Apps that are too simple or largely indistinguishable from the Web, other apps or particularly other apps on other platforms send the message to end users that the iPhone app ecosystem might not be particularly special."
But the report noted that Apple has also worked with developers like Appmakr, which helped to make content from The Atlantic available as an application, to add features like in-app purchases, instant notifications, offline access and more.
It's yet another change in policy for Apple regarding the App Store. Last week, some developers said the company began removing applications the Cupertino, Calif., handset maker felt provided "minimum user functionality," such as one that simply quacked like a duck.
Apple also removed software it felt contained content that was "overtly sexual," resulting in a purge of more than 5,000 applications from the App Store.
In addition, a number of Wi-Fi scanners were also recently removed from the App Store, though they allegedly relied on unpublished APIs within the iPhone OS software development kit, breaking the terms set forth by Apple for developers.
Malcolm Owen
Oliver Haslam
Andrew O'Hara
Wesley Hilliard
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
76 Comments
I totally support everything this company thinks is the right thing to do. Even their most controversial decisions with time turn out to be very ingenious and beneficial.
I totally support everything this company thinks is the right thing to do. Even their most controversial decisions with time turn out to be very ingenious and beneficial.
Nice to know the RDF generators are working at full power south of the equator...
if we're to believe developer feedback over the last couple of years, you'd think your sense of the review and approval process AAPL had been employing was, if nothing else, a thorough one.
i guess all that's out the window now...but interested to know how much of this is an affirmative step away from the criteria used to approve submissions originally/previously.
you'd think it wouldn't be too difficult to review things like whether an app simply recreates an inferior web experience, or is simply a regurgitation of an app that exists on another platform...even whether a given app's code is particularly out-of-bounds with respect to leveraging unpub'd APIs.
did somebody just wake up this morning in cupertino and decide to lay the hammer down? you'd think these kinds of objections would've come up against more of a hurdle to begin with... what were they evaluating if NOT this kind of thing? what was driving the publishing delay we'd hear developers complaining about, then?
It's about time; these kinds of App Store abuses have been going on for far too long. Anything that clears the way for legitimate iPhone software is a good thing.
I agree with this decision. Makes sense to me.