I think they are correct, Apple could reject their app based on the TOS. Its unclear whether or not they would. I imagine this will be rather murky for a while for all apps of this sort.

What I mean by not the real deal though is that TinyGrab doesn't appear to have much of a presence on iOS devices. Apple could have possibly said, "We need 200 hours of additional programming work from you or we'll reject your app in the future" and they may have bailed. One indicator of this is their complaints of the $99 developer fee. I think most successful companies would welcome a small yearly fee simply because it would reduce the number of low quality competing apps entering their market place. A small yearly fee helps ensure to some degree that the app developer has some serious intentions to create something meaningful.

A lot of the complaining is fully justified. There are other cases like Rhapsody where the company has over 700k subscribers in the US and the CEO has admitted most of these users listen to Rhapsody through an iOS device. That has real implications for them as a subscriber service with small margins. In TinyGrab's case though, they could work around the terms of service and still provide access to their user base. They might have to take a large cut in their subscription fee, or increase their prices, but for a basic screenshot/share service they have options.

The fact they are not pursuing those options, or at least publicly saying they won't be, indicates to me they either have a smart PR team that realized the opportunity here or they just are not successful enough on iOS to justify continuing anyways.

Would you have them continue to use their time developing for the iOS platform despite the changes being accepted or rejected is a function of who they get to review their application and how strictly they follow their own rules? Didn't Apple post the guidelines to avoid this exact situation?

And what if they are small? How many companies had a large user-base from the beginning? Also, while small companies may not be of much interest to the readers of HN, they make up a decent chunk of the world's economy.

Honestly, it feels like they are trying to add to the pressure on Apple to drop this ridiculous cash-grab. If in the process they get some free publicity, all the better for them.

I don't disagree. Its a risk, but keep in mind Rhapsody had this same risk just trying to get their app approved initially. They can work around the TOS to get approved as well, thats part of my point. They are just a screenshot and share service.

In terms of them being small, thats fine too. I'm just stating things as I see it. The company is not stopping production because they can't come up with a solution, its that it likely is not worth their time because they are not all that successful on iOS.

In terms of pressure, this really does nothing to Apple. Rhapsody, Netflix, and Kindle are much bigger deals. It will be the big service providers that push the pressure on Apple.

Not to mention the world moving with its feet to Android.

A lot of tech people seem to be in love with the iPhone and the press made it seem like the only smartphone in town for a few years there. But realistically I don't think it's ever had more than a minority market share of high end phones.

Apple has historically been very comfortable with a minority share of the market, but I doubt their stockholders will have infinite patience to sit and watch Android eat up its market share _and_ developer mindshare _and_ all the top-brand content provider deals.

I think Apple shareholders are pretty happy to have 50% profits share with 5% market share.