Lately, it seems to me that at Apple is doing everything they can to completely annoy developers and geeks. Which is, of course, a very bad premise for a post; as far as I have seen Apple proved to be right against all the odds most of the times. People continuously complain on Apple (and I have never seen a company with so many haters, with the possible exception of Microsoft), though sells grow and the products improve.
In fact Snow Leopard is the best OS they did (and perhaps the best I ever tried). The machines they build are sturdy and elegant at the same time. And the ipad is a wonderful tool .
There are many things that I don't like, though. Perhaps one day I will elaborate on this. At the present, however, I would like to point out the conditions to have an app accepted at the Apple store.
Some are worried that they will become the sole way to distribute software. I am confident it will not. First, the EU already questioned whether it was acceptable to do that on the iphone/ipad. I am sure that they will seriously avoid having Apple doing that on a PC. Moreover, Apple would lose developers and applications (thinking Adobe and Microsoft and many other commercial companies will comply with those lines is pure madness)... And I even think that it is good to create such an OS.
It means slowly going towards some Raskin's ideas (he also opposed the very idea of third party applications). Though, it would be an OS completely useless to me. If they do it and they do it right, perhaps it is a good thing. But they won't get my money. Windows 7 is a solid system and Ubuntu gets better with every release: I'm not even sure that they would catch up without Apple going so experimental (they just lack some software).
Back to the rules...
2.1Apps that crash will be rejected
2.2Apps that exhibit bugs will be rejected
Am I reading this for real? Every developer knows that every non trivial piece of software has bugs. We strive to put in fewer bugs and for having the severity of the bugs reduced. But no bugs? Madness. An uncaught exception means that the application is going to crash. As far as I can see, those rules are basically reducing the set of acceptable apps to applications so small that they can be manually proved correct (unfortunately, this basically excludes GUI and concurrent applications).
So I think that those rules are fakes. They don't mean a thing. If they do, I am going to buy some Apple software from the store and ask them to remove it from the store as soon as it manifests a bug. And it will... ah, it will! Apple software is far from perfect: it just has a very careful UI design... ;)
2.7Apps that duplicate apps already in the App Store may be rejected, particularly if there are many of them
Oh, really? So you've got to be fast! Perhaps if the developers publish a bunch of word processors (which, with Cocoa API is quite simple) then Microsoft Office will be rejected. I don't really believe this, but it would be funny. In fact, I'm not even sure that MS is going to put anything on the store.
2.8Apps that are not very useful or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected
What the fuck does it mean? Office does not provide any entertainment value: its a tool. I am not entertained when I work with Word or with Keynote. Dear sirs at Apple... there is people working with your bloody macintosh computers. We are not to be entertained: we don't want to have a funny dog advisor to make the software entertaining.
2.16Apps that download or install additional code or resources to add functionality or change their primary purpose will be rejected
At last, they rephrased the sentence on the ipad guidelines. The way it was before basically would rule out a web browser.
2.19Apps that require license keys or implement their own copy protection will be rejected
2.20Apps that present a license screen at launch will be rejected
I love those two. I hate developers spending effort on protections. If I like the app, I am going to pay for it. If I don't like it, I'm not gonna use it. There are developers who put on the protections before writing useful functionalities (and sometimes they do sell the betas as well... luckily, the MacStore will at least make this behavior unrealizable).
2.18Apps that install kexts will be rejected
2.23Apps that spawn processes that continue to run after a user has quit the app without user consent will be rejected
7.4Apps containing "rental" content or services that expire after a limited time will be rejected
Ok... here it is obvious other means for installation will remain
2.24Apps that use deprecated or optionally installed technologies (e.g., Java, Rosetta) will be rejected
No Eclipse on the Mac Store... It seems that Python apps will be ok, as Python ships with every mac. At least nowadays.
2.25Apps that do not run on the currently shipping OS will be rejected
Oh... so developers... you always have to keep up with the last Apple OS!
3.1Apps with metadata that mentions the name of any other computer platform will be rejected
Don't know... CommodorEmulator seems to violate the rule.
6.1Apps must comply with all terms and conditions explained in the Apple Macintosh Human
Interface Guidelines
6.4Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined, creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex or less than very good it may be rejected
Ok. Reasonable. Perhaps even possible. A certification "(Good UI)" would be very good: a prohibition to sell is bad.
6.2Apps that look similar to Apple Products or apps bundled on the Mac, including the Finder, iChat, iTunes, and Dashboard, will be rejected
How is this called in english? Abuse of a dominant position? Yeah. If this mac store is ever going to be successful, then Apple will got into troubles. And rightly so.
7.6In general, the more expensive your app, the more thoroughly we will review it
LOL. ROTFL. Makes sense, though.
8.3Apps that are simply web clippings, content aggregators, or a collection of links, may be rejected
Actually, no wikipedia app.
9.1Apps that encourage users to use an Apple product in a way that may cause damage to the
device will be rejected
LOL.
9.2Apps that rapidly drain a products battery or generate excessive heat will be rejected
So, no scientific computation tools allowed.
11.1Apps portraying realistic images of people or animals being killed or maimed, shot, stabbed, tortured or injured will be rejected
11.3"Enemies" within the context of a game cannot solely target a specific race, culture, a real government or corporation, or any other real entity
Looks like some games will be rejected. E.g., in 2nd war games, it seems you will have to be able to play both sides.
2 comments:
Actually the "wikipedia app" is built in the dictionary, so it would be forbidden for other reasons ;)
That's right. These rules are strict, indeed.
Post a Comment