A Tale of Two Apps

[Vincent Ferrari]

<p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1236774696.usr18053.jpg" /></p><p>Apple really needs to get a handle on its approval process.&nbsp; Today we learned that after days of cajoling, Tweetie 1.3 was approved for the App Store.&nbsp; Tweetie is a full-featured Twitter client that allows you to even check out the trending topics on Twitter.&nbsp; The app was rejected because you could find profanity in the trending topics section, despite the fact that said section is generated dynamically from Twitter content.&nbsp; The irony, of course, being that Apple has thousands of songs that people would consider profane in the iTunes Music Store.&nbsp; Eventually, after an enormous amount of pressure, the app was approved.</p><p>The Amber Alert app, however, languished in approval limbo for what seemed like an eternity (It was actually about a month) until an uproar about how useful it was <strong>and</strong> a personal letter was written to Steve Jobs himself begging Apple to approve the app and explaining how they had worked with CMEC to build it.&nbsp; To this day, there's no explanation for the delay in the app.</p><p>These two apps demonstrate the one consistent failing in the App Store: the approval process.&nbsp; At every turn it seems to get more arbitrary and ridiculous, rather than more structured and common sense-based.&nbsp; Many times a developer has complained that they aren't sure they're willing to continue to develop for Apple if the app store doesn't improve for getting apps into the store and getting criteria that's more concrete than the whim of some underpaid dope who thinks that an f-bomb as a search result is grounds for denying an app.</p><p>Fix it, Apple, because it's starting to seem like the more broken it gets the further from being able to fix it we're going to be when it's all said and done.&nbsp; There's no way to look at that as a good thing.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Macguy59]

While I agree the approval process seems broken, the fuss over the Amber Alert app is much ado about nothing. Especially the 'personal' straw man letter.

[doogald]

The app was rejected because you could find profanity in the trending topics section, despite the fact that said section is generated dynamically from Twitter content.&nbsp; The irony, of course, being that Apple has thousands of songs that people would consider profane in the iTunes Music Store.


I've mentioned this before, but I'll repeat myself while playing Devil's Advocate. With video and audio content, there are parental controls in iTunes that allow a parent to prevent their children from accessing this content in the store. There is no such ability for apps, yet. Perhaps they are working on such a facility and just haven't had time to get to it yet?

The app store is 8 months old; go ahead and send feedback, but be aware that the cannot get everything perfect right away.

[jdmichal]

So do they also disable "bad" websites on Safari? Is there an option that starts blanking out profanity and censoring nudity? Twitter is, first and foremost, a website. That website just so happens to have a backend API to access its content in a way that is not HTTP and HTML. If you can get to the exact same content through Safari, what's the point in blocking the application?

I'm definitely with Vince on this one. There's absolutely no reason for the Amber Alerts app to be blocked, and I'm surprized they're not taking more flak for delaying it. It's "for the children"! Something needs to be done, but I doubt it will, because then Apple would lose some level of control. Also, I think if they outright say something like "an application which competes or is meant to replace one made by Apple", that would obviously lead to an anti-trust suit pretty fast. But still, something like this would be great:

The following things will likely lead to your application submission being rejected. This list is not comprehensive, and we reserve the right to amend or append to it at any time, effective immediately, without warning:

(insert list here)

[Jason Dunn]

...the fuss over the Amber Alert app is much ado about nothing.

I doubt the parents of abducted children would agree with you - any avenue to broaden the reach of amber alerts is something I'm sure they're eager to see, and for Apple to drag their feet in approving it - if it was anything more than a back-logged approval process - is deplorable.

[Jason Dunn]

Apple does some thing really well: hardware design, marketing, easy to use software.

Apple does some things really poorly: communicate with their customers and partners in an open, transparent manner; listen to feedback and respond to public pressure.

Apple, under Steve Jobs, has always been like this - the app store approval process is simply a manifestation of Apple's long-held attitude toward others.

[Jason Dunn]

With video and audio content, there are parental controls in iTunes that allow a parent to prevent their children from accessing this content in the store. There is no such ability for apps, yet. Perhaps they are working on such a facility and just haven't had time to get to it yet?

While I agree with you, let's face it, on a WiFi or cellular-connected device with a Web browser, anyone (kids included) are one Google search away from hardcore pornography or anything else they want to look at. Maybe an iPhone or Web-connected iPod Touch isn't a good choice for a child. I think there's a lot of wisdom in supervised Internet access - like having the computer in family area instead of a child's room - for young children. Software can't replace hands-on parenting.

[doogald]

While I agree with you, let's face it, on a WiFi or cellular-connected device with a Web browser, anyone (kids included) are one Google search away from hardcore pornography or anything else they want to look at. Maybe an iPhone or Web-connected iPod Touch isn't a good choice for a child. I think there's a lot of wisdom in supervised Internet access - like having the computer in family area instead of a child's room - for young children. Software can't replace hands-on parenting.

Actually, you can disable Safari on an iPod Touch, if you wish. Of course, you can also disable the App Store as well (although I think that disables it only on the device - I'm not sure if your child purchased the app on iTunes on the PC if the app would install on next sync.)

There are a lot of adults, though, who dislike profanity, and who do you think that they are going to complain to if an app that they buy on iTunes displays it?

The Amber Alert thing is dumb, and they need to enable explicit tags for apps at some point, but I still think that this is mountain out of mole hill material.

[emuelle1]

This is why, when I read tech blogs that seem overly-excited about app stores for other platforms, I wonder what they're smoking. The app store "works" for the iPhone platform because that's the way Apple runs things. I would hate to see Windows Mobile locked into a similar format.

[jdmichal]

I don't even understand why an application store is being built for Windows Mobile. There's already Windows Mobile Catalog (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/catalog/cataloghome.aspx), Handango (http://www.handango.com/), and PocketGear (http://www.pocketgear.com/), just to name the ones I know of off the top of my head. I'm assuming the only forward movement here will be a good looking mobile browsing interface and a click-to-install type interaction.

[Jason Dunn]

The app store "works" for the iPhone platform because that's the way Apple runs things. I would hate to see Windows Mobile locked into a similar format.

Platforms, long-term, live and die by their applications - and when I see how easy it is to download apps and spend money on the iPhone/Touch, I'm convinced that Microsoft needs to mimic the same type of solution. Yes, it has some drawbacks, but the upsides are *huge* for developers.

[emuelle1]

I can't say I've ever seen Microsoft implement anything that gives me confidence in their ability to run an app store. I get the feeling that their thinking is along the lines of "it's been really successful for Apple, so we should do it too". I'm sure they've spent a little more time and thought on it than that, but I doubt they've taken the user experience into account the way Apple does.

You're right that a platform lives and dies by it's applications. When I look at the utility built into the iPhone, I can't help but want one. To the best of my knowledge, there isn't anything available for Windows Mobile like Urban Spoon, and if there is, it isn't free. I have Urban Spoon on my iPod Touch, but it really doesn't work that well without GPS and it does nothing without wi-fi.

[Phillip Dyson]

I can't say I've ever seen Microsoft implement anything that gives me confidence in their ability to run an app store.

I would have to disagree with this. The Xbox Marketplace is a huge success. and to a lesser degree the Zune Marketplace... Okay success is a matter of perspective in the case of the Zune Marketplace, but it is a decent showing of their ability.

The Xbox MarketPlace is a great model for both commercial and community products. Will they be able to scale that down to Windows Mobile? Well that is another question indeed.