> The article provides no evidence to support the conclusion...
+1
I also agree that success of the platform was the driving factor in attracting developers. In fact I think some pundits put way too much weight in the argument about attracting developers. If people use it, they will come.
> they set themselves up as a final arbiter of what kind of software is even allowed to run on iOS
Personally I think this policy is part of the successful formula. The ugly truth is this is the right decision fr most people. Building trust in the platform by the users is FAR more important than the philosophical objections by a few developers and users.
As for competing browsers it's a little more complicated than that:
Technically Google Voice wasn't banned either. It was just held in limbo with no decision. The end result is basically the same however.
I for one am waiting to see what happens with the Kindle. I think it's now so influential that Apple would be idiots to kick it off. If they don't it'll lead to confusion about their policy. If they do it'll be the first competitive advantage Android tablets will have (IMHO).
Lastly when it comes to App Store rejection, in spite of Apple's nebulous rules it really is a case of "you'll know it when you see it" 99% of the time (if not more).
There seems to be a trend for some people to create apps that were never going to get rejected, submit them, get rejected and then immediately come to places like this to complain about how they've been victimized, which of course gets a certain level of support from the Apple haters irrespective of the merits.
It's almost like the blog post complaining about rejection is written before the app is submitted.
+1
I also agree that success of the platform was the driving factor in attracting developers. In fact I think some pundits put way too much weight in the argument about attracting developers. If people use it, they will come.
> they set themselves up as a final arbiter of what kind of software is even allowed to run on iOS
Personally I think this policy is part of the successful formula. The ugly truth is this is the right decision fr most people. Building trust in the platform by the users is FAR more important than the philosophical objections by a few developers and users.
As for competing browsers it's a little more complicated than that:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/will-firefox-mobile-ever-...
I'm not sure than stance is still correct either.
Technically Google Voice wasn't banned either. It was just held in limbo with no decision. The end result is basically the same however.
I for one am waiting to see what happens with the Kindle. I think it's now so influential that Apple would be idiots to kick it off. If they don't it'll lead to confusion about their policy. If they do it'll be the first competitive advantage Android tablets will have (IMHO).
Lastly when it comes to App Store rejection, in spite of Apple's nebulous rules it really is a case of "you'll know it when you see it" 99% of the time (if not more).
There seems to be a trend for some people to create apps that were never going to get rejected, submit them, get rejected and then immediately come to places like this to complain about how they've been victimized, which of course gets a certain level of support from the Apple haters irrespective of the merits.
It's almost like the blog post complaining about rejection is written before the app is submitted.