I don't think this is surprising at all. Apple and Google worked together to get Google Maps on the device before the App store was even conceived.

Nuf said

We want you to build apps for us to make our hardware more attractive to potential buyers, but we are going to take 30% of everything, cripple you to make only apps that don't compete with our or those of our friends, and if you dont like any of this, you are out of our protection raquet.

The app store takes the idea of a free market back about 100 years.

You are welcome to your jesus phones.

... in that Google have their own platform to push so, unlike many iPhone developers, can easily just leave the ecosystem. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple go out of their way to help Microsoft's Mac Business Unit too.

Still very disappointing and demonstrative of Apple's paranoid micromanagement of applications though. I'm from the "vetting is justified, making the criteria opaque is not" school of thought.

is it just me?

Does this means Opera et al have a case for discrimination or uncompetive practise/advantage??

How is this different to MS not fully publishing details of APIs?

In fact it seems worse, they pick and choose who can use their precious APIs based on who the like and who can make them the most money.

1. This has nothing to do with MS and as fun as MS bashing seems to be for this place, lets leave it out here!

2. This is not to do with them not publishing the API's, it's to do with them having one set of rules on what can be used for 99% of the developers and another set of rules for google.

Try to keep the MS bashing to the MS threads

Didn't MS get punished for doing pretty much exactly this sort of thing?

What I find amusing about all these rants is that everyone immediately seems to assume that Steve Jobs is micromanaging the entire thing, as if he is personally vetting each app, and making idiotic choices. Stand back for a moment and look at the pattern. This isn't some sort of high handed conspiracy. It is simple incompetance.

The guys charged with vetting the apps are not going to be the brightest geeks in the building. It is going to be a thankless task, essentially checking over other peoples programs. Not much creativity, coding, or indeed anything much at all. A few cubicles with some second rate geeks, and a semi competant middle manager. About one step up from helpdesk duties. Any wonder you get inconsistent rulings, poor feedback, and when a clearly stupid decision gets some publicity, a retraction. (When no doubt a senior manager whacks the group over the head and tells them they stuffed up.)

As for the usual ranting about Apple's 30% cut, read the comments on the Apple as gansters piece a few weeks ago, and see how nobody who actually writes and sells code thinks this is at all bad, and indeed that 30% is vastly lower than the 90% odd they usual never see selling though any other channel.

That's going to be indefensible in court. It's certainly prima facie grounds to suspect anti-competitive practices.

Firstly, these are only rules, not laws. Rules are essentially guidance. I suspect the major reason for Apple not being keen for all and sundry to start using any API they choose is simply down to trust. Google and Apple have developed a lot together for the iPhone, so there is plenty of trust involved. AN Other developer putting out yet another torch application or tip calculator on the App Store is just some random code monkey. They have no real relationship with Apple, hence no trust.

For this reason, some of the rules do not apply to Google.

Paris, 'cos you can trust her to bend the rules too.

I wish Apple would stop policing the appstore quite so stupidily... I got an iPhone last week (buurrrrrrrrrn himmmmmmmm, I know I know, I've heard it all the last week in work and at home), but so far so good, I like the thing - I've been enjoying it, I miss the decent camera from my last phone, but the app's are very useful so it's been a good trade off.

But I want more app's that do things I would use - so far I've seen tons of "level" applications, daft games, and a few remote applications... infact I bought an extremely buggy xbmc remote application yesterday... but I want more... if they want to vet applications for the sake of safety and compatibility then great, fine, make it so... but to stifle competition by saying the phone already has that feature, or it will "confuse the user", or "use too much mobile network bandwidth" is annoying to say the least.... it cuts down innovation, and is essentially Apple saying it's user's are too dumb to make their own decisions. It's not their job to say what I can and can't use my 3g network for, or whether something is above my level of intelligence or not... I just want choice, but obviously I'm probably not going to get that...

I'm not regretting the iPhone purchase just yet, and I knew what I was getting into when I jumped into bed with Apple and O2 (up until 6 months ago I was pretty anti-apple and still hate their marketing machine), but if they want my custom with the next iPhone incarnation, or to actually make some app-store purchases, then they should relax the chains and let people do what they do best - create cool useless crap that SOME people might find useful! :)

I started out looking at the framework a few months ago when I wanted to port some functionality I had on my symbian phone to the iPhone, but realised it was just a dream as Apple would never allow the application to be released. I could always jail break, but I'm not risking it just a week into owning the thing, the wife wouldn't let me! ;)

I wasn't having a pop at MS, rather a pop at monopoly behaviour. The idea being that MS got in trouble for having a whole load of undocumented APIs that only they could use, which is much like Apple having a whole bunch of APIs that only they, or their friends are allowed to use controlled by prevention of distribution rights..

on Line Spout. http://www.linespout.com?q=apple

Because Apple is being an ass, and the $100/mo fee. Screw that.

The difference...

MS got knocked because they have a monopoly on the PC and were using API locking to keep out others.

The iphone could hardly be considered a monopoly at approx 1% of phones.

To tell the emperor that he has no clothes?

A friend of mine at work wen't against my advice about buying an iPhone. I recommended a nokia N96, another friend a HTC.

She is gutted with her choice now. But hey, as I tell her, at least she can use it as a skateboard...

....have clearly never developed for any other type of device.

It's a fantastic deal, 30% of revenue for free payment processing and handling, marketing, hosting etc... most places charge nearer 90% for just allowing you the privilege!

Sure at times the practice seems a little draconian, but most things eventually get resolved.... i'd rather they were over zealous in there efforts than let crap through.

And as for working more closely with Google/Microsoft etc - is this really a surprise... people expect to see things from these corporations on the phone, so i'm not at all surprised.

I can picture the uproar now when Garmin/TomTom or whomever Apple are blatantly working with to get a SatNav app working get exclusivity on this type of App.... but i welcome it wholly!

Would you believe that the N96 was my first choice, I even considered the HTC handsets too - but I went through every store I could find to play with them to see if it was worth the switch from my N95, but nobody could show me a working version - they either didn't have it, or only a dummy block on display.... I made the mistake of buying a Samsung phone without trying it out first in the past, so decided not to make the same mistake again.

Thanks for the skateboarding tip... ;)

... gives a flying fuck? Its a PHONE with useless gadgets designed to make the simple-minded part with a few grand.

Walk on by ...

It has to be said, this comes as no real surprise when you consider the arbitrary nature in which Apple seems to be imposing its rules with the App Store. It looks as though it’s one rule for Google, and one rule for everyone else when it comes to this kind of thing, and it’s easy to understand why some developers might begin to feel a little put out.

If Apple continues to put people’s noses out of joint like this, there’s always the chance that developers might take their creations elsewhere. Apple is never likely to be short of apps for the iPhone, but it could miss out on revenue making opportunities nevertheless, as well as restricting choice for its users.