Comments on: Fixing the App Store http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/ I'm the violence inherent in the system Fri, 10 Sep 2010 00:14:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Anonymous http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/comment-page-1/#comment-2992 Anonymous Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:15:00 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=1802#comment-2992 Just a little problem: "From that point a dedicated team would periodically review the applications being offered by the developer." How can they do so if the applications are distributed on the side, potentially without Apple knowing about it? One solution would be that it is Apple that actually finally signs the binary - but then sends it back to the developer for use as he sees fit. Another is: how can they revoke the developer's certificate in a meaningful way? Either they stop signing apps from the dev, but it doesn't prevent the dev from still selling his already signed binaries, or they go all the way and broadcast a certificate revocation to all the devices (which incidentally would prevent already bought apps from running), and this would be too heavy handed, and happen too often for this to be practical, in my opinion. However, I feel this or something similar will be necessary in the end: Apple has recently made it clear that the App Store isn't just a repository of all iPhoneOS software, but should actually be seen more like a retail store; to which I say, okay, but then it shouldn't be the only store in town. It could be a "Salon des refusés", it could be manual side loading, it could be something else people haven't thought of, but it will be necessary in the end. Also, Apple needs to stop treating apps as just another kind of media; they are not. Just a little problem: “From that point a dedicated team would periodically review the applications being offered by the developer.” How can they do so if the applications are distributed on the side, potentially without Apple knowing about it? One solution would be that it is Apple that actually finally signs the binary – but then sends it back to the developer for use as he sees fit. Another is: how can they revoke the developer’s certificate in a meaningful way? Either they stop signing apps from the dev, but it doesn’t prevent the dev from still selling his already signed binaries, or they go all the way and broadcast a certificate revocation to all the devices (which incidentally would prevent already bought apps from running), and this would be too heavy handed, and happen too often for this to be practical, in my opinion.

However, I feel this or something similar will be necessary in the end: Apple has recently made it clear that the App Store isn’t just a repository of all iPhoneOS software, but should actually be seen more like a retail store; to which I say, okay, but then it shouldn’t be the only store in town. It could be a “Salon des refusés”, it could be manual side loading, it could be something else people haven’t thought of, but it will be necessary in the end.

Also, Apple needs to stop treating apps as just another kind of media; they are not.

]]> By: ZPedro http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/comment-page-1/#comment-2520 ZPedro Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:15:59 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=1802#comment-2520 Just a little problem: "From that point a dedicated team would periodically review the applications being offered by the developer." How can they do so if the applications are distributed on the side, potentially without Apple knowing about it? One solution would be that it is Apple that actually finally signs the binary - but then sends it back to the developer for use as he sees fit. Another is: how can they revoke the developer's certificate in a meaningful way? Either they stop signing apps from the dev, but it doesn't prevent the dev from still selling his already signed binaries, or they go all the way and broadcast a certificate revocation to all the devices (which incidentally would prevent already bought apps from running), and this would be too heavy handed, and happen too often for this to be practical, in my opinion.<br><br>However, I feel this or something similar will be necessary in the end: Apple has recently made it clear that the App Store isn't just a repository of all iPhoneOS software, but should actually be seen more like a retail store; to which I say, okay, but then it shouldn't be the only store in town. It could be a "Salon des refusés", it could be manual side loading, it could be something else people haven't thought of, but it will be necessary in the end.<br><br>Also, Apple needs to stop treating apps as just another kind of media; they are not. Just a little problem: “From that point a dedicated team would periodically review the applications being offered by the developer.” How can they do so if the applications are distributed on the side, potentially without Apple knowing about it? One solution would be that it is Apple that actually finally signs the binary – but then sends it back to the developer for use as he sees fit. Another is: how can they revoke the developer's certificate in a meaningful way? Either they stop signing apps from the dev, but it doesn't prevent the dev from still selling his already signed binaries, or they go all the way and broadcast a certificate revocation to all the devices (which incidentally would prevent already bought apps from running), and this would be too heavy handed, and happen too often for this to be practical, in my opinion.

However, I feel this or something similar will be necessary in the end: Apple has recently made it clear that the App Store isn't just a repository of all iPhoneOS software, but should actually be seen more like a retail store; to which I say, okay, but then it shouldn't be the only store in town. It could be a “Salon des refusés”, it could be manual side loading, it could be something else people haven't thought of, but it will be necessary in the end.

Also, Apple needs to stop treating apps as just another kind of media; they are not.

]]> By: Matt Stocum http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/comment-page-1/#comment-2514 Matt Stocum Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:01:56 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=1802#comment-2514 I could see Apple even require that binaries be submitted through iTunes Connect for the “Preferred Developer” program, but instead of going into an approval queue, the developer gets a link to download a signed binary from Apple. This way Apple could run the binary through their private API detector, and would have a solid list of all applications being deployed this way, and a quick way to revoke developer access if they abuse the system. I think Palm implements something very similar to this right now. I could see Apple even require that binaries be submitted through iTunes Connect for the “Preferred Developer” program, but instead of going into an approval queue, the developer gets a link to download a signed binary from Apple. This way Apple could run the binary through their private API detector, and would have a solid list of all applications being deployed this way, and a quick way to revoke developer access if they abuse the system. I think Palm implements something very similar to this right now.

]]> By: kiil http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/comment-page-1/#comment-2513 kiil Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:47:28 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=1802#comment-2513 I like the points you make. Your idea for sideloading has its merits but I believe that until iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch users start complaining loudly Apple will not allow an official way to directly add aps.<br><br>Regarding “Discoverability” - the solution is advertising. Advertising online, on air, in newspapers and magazines and even on billboards. I understand that a small developer might not have the funds for advertisments but I am surprised that they are not banding into groups and associations. Form guilds, clubs or what have you in order to share costs and more important a voice. It is also time to think out of the box.<br><br>No one has reported about companies who have signed up for Apple's iPhone Developer Enterprise Program. It allows companies with 500 or more employees to deploy in-house applications to their users. That means as far as I know, no need for App review and acceptance from Apple itself.<br><br>I could easily imagine a developer(s) offering a complete package ( Enterprise Program sign-up assistance + iPads / iPod touches + SQL backend or other inhouse server solutions) to firms ( retail chains, clinics, distribution centers and so on).. Even small companies who would use fewer than 100 devices could profit from Ad Hoc distribution. All they need is the Standard Program. $99 dollars (per registered developer) to be able to deploy to upto 100 devices is cheap. It also means no 30% cut for Apple. <br><br>I see the iPad (electric clipboard) as a serious advantage for developers to break into enterprise and offers new perspectives. Think back to the 90's and how companies where locked into funky Access database solutions.<br><br>Ian I like the points you make. Your idea for sideloading has its merits but I believe that until iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch users start complaining loudly Apple will not allow an official way to directly add aps.

Regarding “Discoverability” – the solution is advertising. Advertising online, on air, in newspapers and magazines and even on billboards. I understand that a small developer might not have the funds for advertisments but I am surprised that they are not banding into groups and associations. Form guilds, clubs or what have you in order to share costs and more important a voice. It is also time to think out of the box.

No one has reported about companies who have signed up for Apple's iPhone Developer Enterprise Program. It allows companies with 500 or more employees to deploy in-house applications to their users. That means as far as I know, no need for App review and acceptance from Apple itself.

I could easily imagine a developer(s) offering a complete package ( Enterprise Program sign-up assistance + iPads / iPod touches + SQL backend or other inhouse server solutions) to firms ( retail chains, clinics, distribution centers and so on).. Even small companies who would use fewer than 100 devices could profit from Ad Hoc distribution. All they need is the Standard Program. $99 dollars (per registered developer) to be able to deploy to upto 100 devices is cheap. It also means no 30% cut for Apple.

I see the iPad (electric clipboard) as a serious advantage for developers to break into enterprise and offers new perspectives. Think back to the 90's and how companies where locked into funky Access database solutions.

Ian

]]> By: bkharmony http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2010/02/23/fixing-the-app-store/comment-page-1/#comment-2512 bkharmony Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:31:11 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=1802#comment-2512 tl;dr tl;dr

]]>