Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Benevolent dictator syndrome. Apple/Jobs have produced a lot of cool and good products out of the 'my way is always the best way, and I need 100% micromanagement control to make things my way' attitude. Apple has always had this philosophy -- at least under Jobs -- but people tend dismiss it because up to now it's served Apple and Apple fans well.

Though I'm sure if you popped over to someplace like the AppleInsider.net forums there would still be a ton of people trying to defend Apple here. My feelings are the entire 'App Store Approval Process' issue boils down to this:

If Apple feels that they are so right _and_ justified to pull such stunts with the App Store, then why are they in many cases hiding behind some 'iron curtain' of corporate bureaucracy? Why not just come out and say, "These Google Voice apps duplicate 'x' functionality. Sorry, but we won't allow it." If their approval process is anything but blindly throwing darts at the wall, then why not _publish_ their standards so that iphone application developers _know_ what the do's and dont's are so they can navigate the minefield successfully? If those standards miss something, just amend them and apologize to the developer community for overlooking that aspect. But Apple is not doing _any_ of these things.

The developers for the AppStore are Apple's business partners on some level. They are obviously making Apps as part of their own business plans, but they are providing utility and functionality to Apple's product. Apple's product is _more valuable_ as a result of all of the various AppStore applications out there. Yet Apple seems to want to treat their business partners with disdain.

Personally, I would have a hard time trying to justify why I would want to do business with Apple after seeing the way it treats other companies that are doing business with it.




"These Google Voice apps duplicate 'x' functionality. Sorry, but we won't allow it."

That's almost word-for-word what they did say. The problem is inconsistency -- there are tons of apps that could be, but have not been, rejected on the same grounds.


No. They didn't say what 'x' functionality was. Just that it 'duplicated something, but we won't tell you what.'




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: