Michelle Steiner

<http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/09/09statement.html>

The App Storeâ„¢ has revolutionized the way mobile applications are
developed and distributed. With over 250,000 apps and 6.5 billion
downloads, the App Store has become the world’s largest mobile
application platform and App Store developers have earned over one
billion dollars from the sales of their apps.

We are continually trying to make the App Store even better. We have
listened to our developers and taken much of their feedback to heart.
Based on their input, today we are making some important changes to
our iOS Developer Program license in sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 3.3.9
to relax some restrictions we put in place earlier this year.

In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development
tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not
download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they
want, while preserving the security we need.

In addition, for the first time we are publishing the App Store
Review Guidelines to help developers understand how we review
submitted apps. We hope it will make us more transparent and help our
developers create even more successful apps for the App Store.

The App Store is perhaps the most important milestone in the history
of mobile software. Working together with our developers, we will
continue to surprise and delight our users with innovative mobile
apps.

<http://db.tidbits.com/article/11586>
App Store Review Guidelines -- Honestly, the App Store Review Guidelines
sound pretty reasonable on the whole, while still be sufficiently vague as
to allow Apple to do anything it wants. However, they are written in plain
English, and Apple clearly differentiates between apps and books or songs,
neither of which the company curates in the iTunes Store. If nothing else,
it's nice to have that fact stated officially as well.

Apart from the many specific guidelines that will primarily interest
developers, Apple lays out some broad themes that boil down to:

• Since lots of kids are downloading apps and many parents don't set
parental controls, Apple will pay closer attention to apps that might be
inappropriate for kids.

• Apple is looking for apps that does something useful or provide
lasting entertainment. The money quote: "We don't need any more Fart apps."
Thank goodness!

• Put some effort into it. Apple - and serious developers - don't want
the App Store to be overrun with amateurish apps.

• Apple will reject apps for any content they believe is "over the
line," where the line is defined with a quote from the late Supreme Court
Justice Potter Stewart, referring to a no-longer-used definition of
obscenity: "I know it when I see it."
• The guidelines are constantly evolving to address new situations.

Finally, you can appeal to the App Review Board if your app is rejected,
but Apple goes on to say "If you run to the press and trash us, it never
helps."

I hope that that last bit proves true in the future, because in the past,
it repeatedly appeared that the only reason that bans were lifted on
certain apps was because of public outcry, and media coverage that made
that public outcry possible. (See the Wikipedia entry on censorship in the
App Store for links to coverage). Would Apple have reversed those decisions
on its own? Doesn't seem likely.

Shining a light on situations like this is exactly what the press should be
doing - the public does not have a right to know everything about Steve
Jobs's private life, but the fact that Apple is rejecting political satire
from the App Store is absolutely in the public interest.

App Development Language Restrictions Lifted -- Let's look next at the
changes to the iOS Developer License Agreement. First, a clause stating:

Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or
JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code
written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against
the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs
through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are
prohibited).

has been removed entirely. This clause was added initially in April 2010 to
prevent the use of cross-compilers such as Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone
compiler. (John Gruber wrote an excellent summary of what the change meant
back then.) The ostensible reason for this was to reduce the likelihood of
security vulnerabilities and to avoid the poor interface quality of
cross-platform apps.

Keep in mind that this all happened during Apple's dustup with Adobe over
Flash, and while Steve Jobs claimed Adobe started it (see "Steve Jobs
Answers (Nearly) All at D8," 11 June 2010), there's no question that
emotions were running high and could have resulted in this blanket ban that
still managed to target Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler.

But why the change, and why now? According to a brief New York Post
article, Apple's ban of cross-compilers generated antitrust scrutiny from
the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and from European regulators. While all
parties have refused to comment, if there is truth to the Post's report,
Apple's backpedaling would make sense in an antitrust context.

Interpreted Code Allowed in Apps -- Next, a clause that previously
restricted apps from installing or launching other executable code by any
means has been recast. Previously, it banned plug-in architectures, calling
other frameworks, using other APIs, and downloading or using interpreted
code other than code that was provided or approved by Apple.

That clause continues to ban the downloading and installation of executable
code, but explicitly allows interpreted code as long as all scripts, code,
and interpreters are packaged within the app and not downloaded. An
exception is carved out for code downloaded and run by Apple's built-in
WebKit framework.

Again, this change would seem to be designed to allow developers to create
and use their own interpreted languages within apps, as long as they aren't
downloaded, which would open up a gaping security hole. And again, along
with the technical aspects of the decision, it may also make sense in the
context of an antitrust investigation.

User Data Collection Restrictions Simplified -- Finally, a clause that was
previously quite specific about the situations in which user or device data
could be collected has been greatly simplified. Previously, this clause
carefully laid out when and how data could be collected (basically, to
provide a service or function that was directly relevant to using the app,
or for advertising, but then only a subset of data designated by Apple as
available for advertising purposes). Now, it simply says that apps cannot
collect user or device data without user consent, it must be for enhancing
the app or serving ads, and that apps cannot use analytics software to
collect and send device data to a third party.

According to an earlier New York Post article, there could also be
antitrust scrutiny associated with Apple's iAd service, and this change of
the iOS Developer License Agreement might be construed as loosening
restrictions that could have been interpreted as limiting third-party
advertising services.

--
Check out the Hot Cocoa Party
<http://www.hotcocoaparty.info>

Borg

We don't need any more fart apps.

LOL

News

Borg wrote:
> We don't need any more fart apps.
>
> LOL


Flashlight apps, on the other hand...

Adrian C

On 09/09/2010 18:14, Borg wrote:
> We don't need any more fart apps.
>

The guy that wrote one of those fart apps is ....

--
Adrian C

Wes Groleau

On 09-09-2010 13:33, Adrian C wrote:
> On 09/09/2010 18:14, Borg wrote:
>> We don't need any more fart apps.
>
> The guy that wrote one of those fart apps is ....

..... overseeing the revision that says they don't need
anything that competes with his fart app.

:-)


--
Wes Groleau

"To know what you prefer, instead of humbly saying
Amen to what the world tells you you should prefer,
is to have kept your soul alive."
-- Robert Louis Stevenson

Todd Allcock

"Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
news:michelle-6931FA.09415009092010@62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi...
> <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/09/09statement.html>
> • Apple is looking for apps that does something useful or provide
> lasting entertainment. The money quote: "We don't need any more Fart
> apps."
> Thank goodness!


Then where is Apple going to find future app store management?

Wes Groleau

On 09-09-2010 12:41, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> Again, this change would seem to be designed to allow developers to create
> and use their own interpreted languages within apps, as long as they aren't
> downloaded, which would open up a gaping security hole. And again, along

Or maybe it is to allow use of productive languages, instead of limiting
developers to the most error-prone language around and its derivatives.

--
Wes Groleau

"To know what you prefer, instead of humbly saying
Amen to what the world tells you you should prefer,
is to have kept your soul alive."
-- Robert Louis Stevenson

Tom Harrington

In article <i6b832$2rm$3@news.eternal-september.org>,
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> wrote:

> On 09-09-2010 12:41, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> > Again, this change would seem to be designed to allow developers to create
> > and use their own interpreted languages within apps, as long as they aren't
> > downloaded, which would open up a gaping security hole. And again, along
>
> Or maybe it is to allow use of productive languages, instead of limiting
> developers to the most error-prone language around and its derivatives.

Meh, Objective-C kicks serious ass, and anyone who thinks otherwise
hasn't used it much.

--
Tom "Tom" Harrington
Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002
http://www.atomicbird.com/

Mike Jacoubowsky

"News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
news:kYKdnemKIeS8hxTRnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> Borg wrote:
>> We don't need any more fart apps.
>>
>> LOL
>
>
> Flashlight apps, on the other hand...

My son was amused that his Flashlight app needed an "upgrade."

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Marc Stibane

News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

> Borg wrote:
> > We don't need any more fart apps.
>
> Flashlight apps, on the other hand...

SpringFlash. Switches the iPhone 4 camera LED. With Activator you have a
dozen possibilities to trigger it - I chose double-click of the sleep
button. Because this I'll even manage in the night, without looking at
my iPhone.

Too bad SpringFlash (and Activator) will never make it to the AppStore.

--
In a world without walls and fences,
who needs windows and gates?