News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters. Parent comment

Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by mechanical_fish on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @06:36PM (#312930)
If I were a soulless lawyer, I might point out that this position is entirely consistent with Apple's strategy of disallowing apps that are similar to Apple's own apps. Inevitably, some of Apple's apps have been written but aren't yet released to the public. If Apple is planning to release, say, an official accounting app for the phone, they not only have an incentive to stifle your accounting app for the phone, but they also have an incentive to avoid tipping off the market too early by publicly rejecting your accounting app for the phone.

Fortunately, I'm not a soulless lawyer, so I'm also free to point out that this argument isn't so much a defense as an explanation, to opine that this sucks, and to observe that Apple's control-freak nature has now officially gone overboard. Of course, Microsoft acted like this for years, and it didn't hurt them much, so I guess it's not surprising that a company would try it again...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by mattmaroon on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @09:01PM (#313024)
Microsoft didn't act like this at all. If they had, Windows would never have reached the market share it has today.

You don't have to ask Microsoft for permission to develop an app for Windows. You don't have to pay them to do so or sign an NDA. They don't have a kill switch to remove it.

They may include a free competitor in the next OS, and you can argue that that is an unfair abuse of a monopoly, but they at least allowed you to try. And Firefox's immense success shows that if your product provides enough value, you can still compete.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by mechanical_fish on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @09:32PM (#313043)
Not only has Microsoft acted like this, they're doing it right now. From the Wikipedia page for "XBox Development Kit":

Only developers that are licensed by Microsoft may compile code and release binaries (.XBEs)of their software with the XDK, any software released using the XDK by developers that aren't licensed is illegal.

Nintendo and Sony do this as well, yes? There's nothing particularly unusual about this model, alas.

Yeah, Microsoft never did this for Windows. I believe that much is true. Perhaps it's a testimony to the enduring influence of the early PC hackers, like Wozniak and the Homebrew Computer Club guys, that I don't think anybody ever really tried this trick in the PC industry. Though I'm probably forgetting several examples because they're, um, so forgettable.

I'm pretty sure that old mainframe hands would recognize this game, though.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by snprbob86 on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @11:52PM (#313160)
Microsoft negotiates terms with licensed developers on a case by case basis. It is practically unheard of for an Xbox developer to deliver the game that was agreed upon and face rejection. Before a game is released to the market, Microsoft performs a battery of certification and pre-certification reviews to ensure quality and platform consistency. I can't comment on Nintendo or Sony's practices, but I'd assume they are similar.

Xbox Live Community Games is much more similar to Apple's App Store system in that anyone can sell a game. Unlike Apple, we'd happily allow anyone to produce a game which is a direct competitor to one of our games. Check it out when it launches with The New Xbox Experience later this fall.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft on XNA Game Studio, but do not have direct knowledge of or involvement in the developer relations or certification processes. Additionally, Community Games is currently in development, so anything I said above is subject to change.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Tichy on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @03:21AM (#313268)
That is a completely different case, XBox was never promoted as a universal device that anybody could program for.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Retric on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @09:58AM (#313484)
Was the iPhone? I always thought they where building the same type of walled playground but that could have been my inner cynic talking.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Tichy on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @12:50PM (#313724)
The XBox is no playground, I think to be allowed to develop for it you need to be pre-approved and throw millions of $ in the ring. I haven't checked, though.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Retric on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @03:18PM (#313925)
Read up on XBOX live it's a walled garden but it does not take much money mostly it's all about jumping though the right hoops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_XNA

The XNA Framework provides support for both 2D and 3D game creation and allows use of the Xbox 360 controllers and vibrations. XNA framework games that target the Xbox platform can currently only be distributed to members of the Microsoft XNA Creator's Club which carries a $99/year subscription fee.[1] Desktop applications can be distributed free of charge under Microsoft's current licensing.

Edit: Xbox 360 games written in XNA Game Studio can be submitted to the Creators Club community[15] for peer review. Other Premium Creators will perform a peer review of the title. Creators can set a a price point – between 200 and 800 Points – that Xbox 360 owner can then choose to pay to download. The game is listed on Xbox LIVE Marketplace, the programmer will get an electronic payment every quarter. If the title sells exceptionally, it may be featured in advertisment on Xbox 360 and other Microsoft online properties.[2]

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by cstejerean on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @02:44PM (#313879)
maybe you should check
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Tichy on Thursday September 25, 2008 @03:00AM (#314598)
OK, so I forgot about the LIVE marketplace. I was thinking about "real" games.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by Create on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @08:29AM (#313415)
"mmense success shows that if your product provides enough value, you can still compete" ... iif u r backed by GOOG.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by iamelgringo on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @09:54PM (#313068)
Yeah. It seems that certain departments in Microsoft have seen the light. IronPython, IronRuby, F#, PowerShell, supporting the Apache Foundation, all the cool stuff coming out of Microsoft Research. I think that cooler heads a prevailing at times. Perhaps Ray Ozzie is finally starting to have a bit of influence on the organization. Although there is still a long way to go.

I've always been fairly OS/tech agnostic over the years. But, Apple's attitude towards openness has really turned me off the past 5-6 years.

My antipathy started for me with their attitudes towards artists and Quicktime in the late 90's early 2000's, and it has continued with the transition to OSX, the ITunes handcuffs that come with any Apple product and now the issues that developers are having creating Apps for the iPhone.

Also, can someone please tell me why OSX is one of the few existing OS's that I can't install as a client OS on top of VMWare? I can have any flavor of x86 OS that I want, but now OSX.

I love Apple's design. It's the best in the industry. OSX is really shiny and pretty and I love me some good looking Unix. But, I really dislike their attitude towards openness, users and developers.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by andrewf on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @11:23PM (#313142)
Not to contradict your overall point, but because you might find it useful - you can supposedly run OS X Server inside VMWare Fusion (itself running on top of OS X).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by iamelgringo on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @02:07AM (#313225)
No, I appreciate it, I wasn't aware of that. I think that it makes my point even clearer, however. The only reason that Apple doesn't want to allow a VM of OSX to be able to run on top of Linux, BSD, Solaris or Windows is because they want a locked down system. They want to make more money selling the associated hardware. And, while that is certainly a choice they are entitled to make, it speaks fairly loudly to a culture of being closed and locked down.

Even Microsoft is releasing Open Source licensed software these days. Isn't OSX built on top of a Darwin Kernel? Any one know of Open Source releases the Apple has done? It would be nice if they returned the favor to the community.

</rant>

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Extends Non-Disclosure to App Store Rejection Letters by demallien on Wednesday September 24, 2008 @03:10AM (#313263)
Ummm, well, LLVM and Bonjour come to mind, and then there's a little-known project known as WebKit for which Apple is the main sponsor :-).

They also do tons of smaller stuff - as a ruby programmer, I appreciate Apple's sponsorship of the RubyCocoa project, and the fact that they have hired Laurent (the main programmer for RubyCocoa) to develop the next-generation MacRuby implementation, which provides free bridging between ruby and Objective-C

[ Parent | on HN ]