[cmadan]

Does it even matter whether Apple is wrong, unreasonable or irrational? Just like I reserve the rights of admission to my house, Apple reserves the right to accept or reject applications from the app store.

If you really want Apple to change, how about NOT developing for iOS? Articles like this aren't really going to make them change their policies.

[repsilat]

If you really want Apple to change, how about NOT developing for iOS? Articles like this aren't really going to make them change their policies.

Certainly convincing other people not to develop for iOS would have more of an impact than just swearing off it personally. More generally, I dislike the idea that we shouldn't write this sort of thing because "the market will sort it out anyway". This sort of post is the market sorting it out.

Apple reserves the right to accept or reject applications from the app store.

Sure, they're probably legally entitled to do almost anything. That doesn't mean they can't (or shouldn't) be criticised for it, though, and it doesn't mean that criticism of them can't have any impact on anyone's behaviour.

[cmadan]

I agree wholeheartedly with you. However, there is no shortage of articles detailing Apple's arbitrary App store approval process. Yet, the number of applications on the App store keeps on increasing and increasing.

What is striking is none (or I haven't come across one) of these articles end with the developer washing their hands off the App store and vowing never to develop another iOS app. Instead, most of them seem to be aiming to generate publicity so that Apple takes notice and hopefully approves the app.

[gcp]

I'm going to take a guess here and say the posts that were notorious enough so that you found them were all done by app developers with a heavy investment in the App Store, so they couldn't just ignore what happened, and chose to try to fix their problem with publicity.

To protect their investment, "bending over" may have been the most sensible, if painful, option.

If you're a new developer choosing whether to target Android, iOS, or both, your perspective may be different. But people won't care about your blog posts.

[jasonlotito]

> What is striking is none (or I haven't come across one) of these articles end with the developer washing their hands off the App store and vowing never to develop another iOS app.

Probably because that's a foolish approach as a developer. If your app is worth a damn, then preventing it's use by potential customers simply because of your personal opinion is fairly inconsiderate. Should someone be deprived the use of an app simply because they bought a different phone then the one I approve of?

That's a hard line to take, I understand, and realize not everyone will agree with that. =) I just feel that from the customer perspective, the only thing that matters is the developer. And if the developer choose not to release on the platform I am using, then the developer is essentially telling me I do not matter.

[philh]

If someone doesn't release on Android because the money they get from sales isn't worth the time it takes to port, that seems a perfectly reasonable approach to take.

If someone doesn't release on iOS because the money they get from sales isn't worth the various negative aspects (e.g. frustration of dealing with reviewers, giving support to a business model they disapprove of), that also seems a perfectly reasonable approach to take.

I don't own a Windows box, or an Xbox or PS3. If I said I was being deprived of video games because Call of Duty doesn't run on "linux on a netbook from 2008", I don't imagine I would get much sympathy.

[jasonlotito]

I was careful to specify: "simply [a] personal opinion". A business decision not to support a platform is not that.

I was also careful to specify: "If your app is worth a damn". Call of Duty is not worth a damn. I'm talking about meaningful apps that actually making a difference.

I was specific, because the opinion is specific. If your app isn't worth a damn, then it doesn't really matter, does it? It's a toy, nothing more.

[praptak]

> If you really want Apple to change, how about NOT developing for iOS? Articles like this aren't really going to make them change their policies.

Articles like this made me avoid Apple altogether and judging by the general sentiment here on HN at least some other people capable of software development have made a similar decision (to various degrees.) I'd wager this article probably has much more power than jwz quietly dumping iOS development.

[ralfn]

Apple should indeed be free to offer only the products they want to in their store.

The problem is: the store is mandatory. Side loading is the OS equivalent of net neutrality.

This is like car companies deciding which supermarkets you may shop at, and then suggesting only their own.

Unfortunately, Mircosft and Amazon are going to do, or are already doing, the same thing.

They want to be the new cable companies. Extorting content producers, by selling or blocking access to consumers.

[caf]

It's more like the guy who built your house and sold it to you reserving the right to decide who can come into it.

[eli]

I think you meant that as a hypothetical, but actually it's not uncommon -- Google "restrictive covenant." If you don't want to be restricted in what you can do with your house then don't buy one that has restrictions.