Please stop whining about App Store review
November 11th, 2009Joe Hewitt garnered some remarkable press (for a developer) today by going on record saying he quit developing Facebook for iPhone because of Apple’s App Store review process. I am unimpressed. (With the article, that is — not with Joe and his paparazzi. Damn Joe, how’d you get TC in your pocket?) And I’m qualified to weigh in on this topic because…I wrote Pandora Radio for iPhone? Weak, but I’ll take the podium now, thank you very much.
Now, I understand that dealing with app review is a pain. No one likes it, it’s an imperfect process, it’s often arbitrary, blatant mistakes are made, etc etc. While some prognosticate a review-free ecosystem that is far superior to the status quo, let’s remember that such predictions are speculative, because no such mobile app ecosystem exists.
Read that last sentence again, because there’s a subtle trap in there. See it? Here’s a hint: name the platforms for which indy developers were writing apps prior to the App Store’s existence.
The moral of the story: the only reason indy developers are writing mobile apps today is because Apple let them when no one else would. So yeah, that review process is awful. But compared to the alternatives, the iPhone was unbridled freedom. Despite this, from day one we’ve heard endless harping about the evil review process and how bad it is for Apple and customers. Call it The Developer’s Thank You. And yet 100k apps later I’m still awaiting the flood of developers leaving the iPhone for greener pastures, and the flood of customers leaving the iPhone for other devices. Well, OK, there’s Joe Hewitt and Mike Arrington.
Apple is all about taste. The App Store is too. And there’s one thing I’ve learned from years of working for people with exceptional taste: to those without taste, tasteful decisions seem arbitrary and capricious. If you think the App Store would be better without a review process, ask yourself which criteria you’re judging. Can you honestly claim that the iPhone would be more tasteful if there was no review process?
Apple serves its customers, not its developers. And given Apple’s success with the iPhone product, it’s pretty hard to argue that they’ve been somehow missing the point. Quite the opposite. It’s always amusing to watch people question the sanity of product decisions for an insanely successful product. Are you crazy? This thing went off like a rocket ship! It’s hard for me to point to any iPhone product decision as an abject failure. It’s not about developer convenience. To misquote James Carville: it’s the product, stupid.
There may come a day when Apple’s review process causes it to lose customers. And if/when that day comes, I’m sure we’ll see Apple change its ways. Until then, can we give it a rest with the whole App-Store-review-process-sucks meme? The horse is dead. Hell, the whole farm is dead. Clearly, Apple and its detractors do not see eye-to-eye. The review process is a fact for now, there are alternative platforms for those who object, so let’s move along.
(p.s. Lest anyone take this post as criticism of Joe’s decision, it is not. To be clear, Joe was very respectful in his comments and he did what he needed to do: he voted with his feet. When I talk about “whining,” it’s not the Joe Hewitts of the world that I’m referring to.)
November 12th, 2009 at 12:14 am
“name the platforms for which indy developers were writing apps prior to the App Store’s existence”
Blackberry and the Danger Sidekick? I believe the former was all user-installed, and the Danger “review process” was just technical (making sure your app didn’t kill the backend service) and marking adult apps appropriately. None of this “duplicates an existing app’s functionality” or “you can load the Kama Sutra, therefore your e-book reader is inappropriate” nonsense.
I would never expect to see *users* leave the iPhone–they don’t care, they don’t usually know about apps that aren’t available. But I’d expect developers over time to think twice before putting significant time and effort (and hence money) writing an iPhone app without knowing whether they’ll be able to sell it.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:02 am
I see no point in making comparisons to less than ideal systems of the past. Let’s imagine what the best possible system is and compare against that. Yes, Apple’s approval process is far easier than, say, getting approval for a Nintendo or Playstation game. That doesn’t mean it can’t be improved.
November 12th, 2009 at 11:39 am
@Chris: you’re right — over time, developers may vote with their feet (like Joe did) and force Apple’s hand. Until that happens, what’s going to cause Apple to change? Nothing.
@Joe: No point in comparing? I couldn’t disagree more. Let’s compare Apple’s system with *all* previous systems including the web and the desktop, and let’s see which ones fare the best. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, right? As for the best possible system — from who’s perspective? My whole point is the the review process isn’t developer friendly, but that’s irrelevant as long as it’s not hurting Apple’s product and the end consumer. So what’s best for the end consumer? Is the “wild west web” with no single distribution point, no standards of conduct, and no consumer recourse really best for consumers? I’m not so quick to jump on that bandwagon. Same goes for the desktop.