Filed under: Features, TUAW Interview, iPhone
TUAW Interview: Ambrosia's Andrew Welch on the iPhone update and iToner
As we reported yesterday, Ambrosia Software is working hard to get their iPhone ringtone maker iToner working again after it was broken by the iPhone 1.1.1 update. Last evening the president of Ambrosia Software, Andrew Welch, was kind enough to sit down with us (virtually, anyway) to comment on the iPhone update and iToner, as well as to share some of his outlook as a third-party developer more or less beholden to Apple's business decisions. I think he draws an important distinction between the sort of hacking that went into the actual third-party iPhone applications and what iToner does. Speaking as he does from long experience, I think he has an interesting perspective on the development of third-party applications in the Apple ecosystem.Do you think Apple has done something unjust in locking down the iPhone the way that they have with the latest update?
Unjust, I would say no. It's Apple's product, and their license clearly stipulated what was allowed and was was not with the iPhone. I also understand their reasoning for doing what they have done. Agreeing with what they are doing is another matter.
Here's the thing. One of the things that Apple is very good at is creating excellent user experiences. For something general, like a computer, they can't create everything that people want to use... so Apple (grudgingly sometimes it seems) nurtures a developmental community for the Mac.
For devices like the iPod and the iPhone, they are limited in scope enough that Apple believes they can control every aspect of the product, and end up giving the user a better experience than if the Philistines were allowed to put anything on it they want to.
I understand this rationale, and to some extent, I agree with it. However I do believe that Apple is erring a bit too much on the side of controlling everything on the iPhone. So is it unjust? No. Is it unwise? That depends on your perspective.
As a third party developer, I absolutely want to develop for the iPhone. I think I can create some fantastic software for the iPhone that people will love, absolutely. However I do understand Apple's opinion that if they control every aspect of the phone, people won't end up with a lousy user experience.
So where is the line? What do think would be reasonable degree of freedom for third-party devs?
Apple is not marketing the iPhone as a PDA, so I think to an extent they don't care if it has the range of applications that Palm, the Blackberry, and other devices have. Apple is marketing the iPhone as the best damn phone money can buy. To an extent, it is. However I am reminded of their decision to not license the MacOS way back when... and an inferior but for more "promiscuous" standard is what ended up taking over the market.
There is slightly less of danger of that here, I think, because of the relatively limited scope of the device, but Apple is taking on an awful lot by saying that they are going to develop everything that goes onto the phone. We can all see the shortcomings in a number of areas... no to do list, for instance. No search in the list of contacts. These are things that no one can come up with a solution for except Apple.
It's a gamble. Apple thinks they can pull it off. I hope they are right.
Well clearly many devs would like access to the iPhone, but do you think Apple owes anything to third-party developers who work on a closed platform that Apple has not provided an official SDK for (e.g. besides the iPhone, the Apple TV)?
I don't think Apple owes third party developers anything. If they want to make it a closed device like they did the iPod, they can. The iPod was very limited in scope, and they did a fantastic job with it. The iPhone however... people expect much more. I think Apple is biting off an awful lot by taking on everything themselves.
That said, they certainly have and will continue to "bless" certain developers (like Google) with access to a way to develop for the iPhone if Apple finds the partnership beneficial. The key is that Apple wants total control. Again I understand the reasoning, but I question whether it's the best long-term strategy if they want this to be the device that meets everyone's needs
So specifically with regards to iToner do you feel that Apple has wronged Ambrosia in some way?
I'm frustrated, honestly. With iToner, we worked very, very hard to make sure we did things the right way. We didn't hack into the phone at all, we didn't "jailbreak" it - we used the same APIs that iTunes uses to put files on the iPhone, and we put those ringtones in the user area of the phone. This is why iToner ringtones survived OS updates.
Then Apple rolled out their iTunes music store sale of ringtones... and they broke iToner. The way they broke it seemed excessive, but understandable from a programming point of view, so we rapidly came out with a fix. The first few weeks of iToner's life was nothing but coffee, code, and sleepless nights for people here at Ambrosia, so as such, sure, it's frustrating that it's broken yet again.
We're not putting anything but data on the iPhone, and we're doing it in the right way, and we're putting it in the user area of the iPhone. Apple is intentionally making sure that products like ours don't work. That I think is a mistake - it's as if in an iPhone OS update, Apple decided that MP3s you got from ripping a CD should no longer play on your iPhone, and you should instead buy them from their store.
So I take it your position is basically that the user area of the phone should belong to the user and it's not really fair for Apple to artificially restrict what you can put there?
Absolutely. Apple should no more be controlling what ringtones I want to use than they should be controlling what music I can listen to, or what photos I can look at.
Here's a good analogy, I think. Apple came out with their online store, and they charged for music. They said "We know you can get music from elsewhere, but we're going to make the user experience so good that you'll want to get it from us." And guess what? They were right, it worked!
The tack they are taking with the ringtones, though, is not "We'll provide such great ringtones that you'll want to buy from us" but rather "This is all you're ever going to be able to use, too bad if you want to use something else." I think they took a winning formula, and got it entirely backwards.
I fully understand that much of Apple's behavior is the result of signing deals with multiple "devils" in terms of AT&T and the various music labels. So to an extent, I think some of the choices that Apple is making now are not their own. But I find it amazing that they'd take the exact opposite approach of providing fantastic content and a fantastic user experience to make you want to buy music from them.
I hope that this is not the attitude they are going to take going forward, because if they no longer focus on delivering the best possible content in the best way - and using that as a selling point - and instead try to sell things by restricting what you can buy, well. I think it's really sad.
Do you yet have a good idea what it will take to get iToner working again? Is Ambrosia prepared to more or less continually respond with updates?
Yes, we know what it will take to get iToner working again, and we've been working non-stop since the iPhone 1.1.1 OS came out. It really caught us by surprise, and [that's] why we said iToner ringtones would work with future iPhone OS updates: we put our data in the user area of the iPhone, and [Apple] would have to specifically go out of their way to block our software from working.
Sadly, that's what they did. It's really as if they decided one day to not allow you to play MP3s you purchased from elsewhere on your iPhone. So fixing it for us means a lot of work, because we have to figure out exactly how Apple decided to target us and block our ringtones from working. We'll fix iToner to work with iPhone 1.1.1. Our fear is that Apple will then once again block us from working.
That to me is a dance I don't look forward to dancing, but... I think we're writing a very legitimate application, and we're doing it the right way without hacking anything. I think we have every right to be able to exists.
But as of right now it's Ambrosia's policy to continue updating iToner as necessary in response to Apple's updates?
Obviously Apple holds all the cards in this game. I would really hate to have our customers have our app constantly broken and re-broken by Apple. We know a LOT of people at Apple that own and use iToner... and they love it! So yes, it is our policy to continue to make iToner work. It's almost become personal now, in addition to wanting to do the right thing and support our customers.
However if the day comes that we decide Apple is going to constantly target us, and make our lives miserable, we would have to evaluate what to do at that point. I hope that day never comes, I love iToner. I use it myself.
Is there any chance that you'd offer users a refund for iToner if it gets too difficult to keep up with the changes?
Yes, we've been in the Mac software business for 15 years. My name means a lot more to me than $15. If people want a refund, we will refund their money. It sucks, because it's happening due to forces beyond our control, but ultimately it is our product, and therefore our responsibility to make it work.
Ambrosia is one of the older Mac shareware publishers; do you feel like Apple's relationship with third-party devs has changed recently/over the years?
Apple is a business. When you're useful to Apple, they are very friendly and helpful. When a competitor of yours is useful to Apple, they will embrace the competitor. It's just business in that sense. When you do something Apple likes, or Apple can demo well, they love you. Otherwise they largely ignore you - I think this has been fairly constant over the years. That's not a criticism, by the way. I think it makes good business sense to operate in that manner. I can't say I've seen that aspect of things change much over the years.
What has changed is that Apple is producing more compelling products, and they are selling more of them. That's fantastic for us, since we feed off of them to an extent. Apple is producing exciting technologies these days more than in years past, and in that way, it's more fun to be working with them.
Do you have any advice for other developers who might be thinking of working on one of Apple's closed platforms?
My advice would be to go into it with eyes wide open. That means knowing that you're an ant that's scrambling around underneath the legs of an elephant. One step in the wrong direction, and you're toast. If you decide to develop for a platform that Apple tells you to stay away from, you have to be prepared to get crushed. That's why we're a little bothered by iToner being squashed as it has been... we went out of our way to do the right thing, not put any code on the phone, not hack it, etc. and yet still we get trampled.
I'm certainly not trying to play the victim here, but it is somewhat disheartening to work your guts out on a great product, only to have it seemingly senselessly terminated. So if you want to develop for a closed Apple platform... be prepared for the heartache that may come, no matter how careful about it you try to be.
Lastly, is there anything else you'd like to add?
And to end on a positive note, we're coming out with a product called WireTap Studio that I think is going to impress the hell out of you and your readers. It's a new way of thinking about recording and editing digital audio that I think breaks new ground... and it doesn't depend on a closed Apple platform!
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Distorted Loop said 8:37AM on 10-03-2007
Great interview.
It would be very easy for Andrew Welch to be bitter and slam Apple for this fiasco; with all the Apple hate floating around in the geek community right now, it's a pleasant surprise to read such a balanced and fair view of the state of Apple iPhone development.
Reply
Rob Porta said 8:55AM on 10-03-2007
I think it's sad, Apple will soon piss enough people off and they will crash again. I love the phone but since Apple is being a dictatorship I will probable buy another phone when this one dies. Another company will take what Apple did right on the phone and add all the stuff Apple did wrong.
In the past two months I've been getting the shaft by Apple, 1. My 2 year old computer doesn't run half of iLife. 2. My iPhone only will play the crappy selection iTunes has. 3. My new iPod doesn't play any of the games I bought. 4. I'm sure Leopard will run like crap on my 2 year old computer so I'm not even going to bother.
Reply
mentalsticks said 8:56AM on 10-03-2007
Great interview!
good questions, and a fine analysis of how apple is going wrong.
Reply
Steve said 10:11AM on 10-03-2007
Good article... I am really surprise too that iToner stopped working. I was not an iToner user, but from the technical point of view, like Andrew is describing iToner was in all the third party iPhone apps the one that personally I was not considering a hack. iToner was not trying to install any custom code on the device itself, and their goal was just to drop your new ringtone in the appropriate location on the iPhone.
Basically iToner was doing a workaround on the fact that Apple did not provide the iPhone to be a mountable disk like the iPods.
I really wish good luck to Ambrosia and find a good workaround that can't be stopped by Apple. In fact I wonder too how much effort was done by Apple because of the pressure of the music label. Something that's not really clear in all that story.
Steve
http://inewsonly.com
The first ZUI news aggregator for iPhone & iPod touch
Reply
portorikan said 10:42AM on 10-03-2007
Rob, You've been getting the shaft by Apple and their crappy selection? Have you ever heard of CDs? You can buy these and rip them to your computer and then transfer to your ipod.
I think it does suck that Ambrosia has had problems with their software being blocked. This really shouldn't come as a surprise since no official support has been given by Apple for this.
I really think that aside from the blogging and geek community, people could care less about software to add for their cellphones. The more consumer centric these devices get, the more people that don't really care about purchasing additional software on their phones are going to increase. My wife has had her Treo 650 for years and has yet to add any other application to it. Same with other folks I know with smart phones.
In regards to ringtones, this is probably an AT&T requirement. My cell carrier currently charges anywhere from $1.99 to $2.50 for ringtones so, realistically speaking, $0.99/ringtone isn't that expensive with current carrier prices. I'm guessing AT&T is getting a cut from these fees.
Has anyone tried 3gforfree.com and seen if it works on the iphone?
Reply
Billy K said 10:44AM on 10-03-2007
Ambrosia is one of the class acts of the Apple community. We need more like them and Panic.
I think I'm gonna go but iToner - even if it doesn't work - as a show of support.
Reply
Ishan Bhattacharya said 11:44AM on 10-03-2007
What a superb interview. Mr. Welch is terribly frustrated and a bit angry, also (I am sure), but he carefully refrains from expressing his bitterness overtly. What is being lost in all of this iPhone debacle is Apple's reputation as supporting the "little guy." But, perhaps, that was just marketing also. Some CEOs are able to see the "bigger picture" as they get older and wiser. I hope that happens at Apple as well.
Reply
hfvienna said 10:54AM on 10-03-2007
One of the rare opportunities to listen to a fair, informative and honest guy, who knows and respects business reality, but has not lost sight on how to treat customers and vendors right. I am bowing my head in front of such a man and wish him fantastic sales in close future .
Reinhard H
Reply
KeynoteKen said 11:06AM on 10-03-2007
"Another company will take what Apple did right on the phone and add all the stuff Apple did wrong"
Not even remotely likely, but nice to think about. Even at Apple's worst, they're still producing a product in it's first generation that's outselling multi-generation competition products. (Nokia may come close as they've openly stated they plan to copy the iPhone)
I don't envy Ambrosia, but then again, if you don't take the risks, you don't reap the rewards. It's one thing to have some free open source project that doesn't work, another thing entirely to be a customer to expect that, since something has been paid for, it should work. Not sure I could ask for money for a product not knowing if it will be rendered inoperative every few months or so. Any potential "hole" found is likely already targeted by Apple for the next update...
Reply
RobW said 11:29AM on 10-03-2007
What a thoughtful guy. I bought iToner and would never ask for my money back, even if it could never be fixed. Apple is really going to have to stop this nonsense. It is such a shame that Apple continues to treat its partners poorly but that is likely not going to change until some event-- it might be the iPhone-- triggers enough backlash that the Board muscles in.
Apple needs to see itself as not an elephant and ant situation, but rather, as a Leopard and elephant -- where all parties have certain powers that are brought to the party --and there is cooperation in the jungle.
Reply
Stan said 12:40PM on 10-03-2007
Great interview. I purchased iToner and love it. Apple is being forced by the record labels here, but I don't think they should be excessive about "enforcing" the ringtones blocks. I sure as hell won't buy songs again I already own legally from purchased CDs just to make ringtones. The record labels are the real villians here. Doesn't surprise me as the are run by greedy fools that don't understand technology.
Reply
Adam said 11:53AM on 10-03-2007
I think Port (#5) makes a very good point, that the majority of iPhone users who aren't in the "geek" or "computer" classes probably don't care too much about ringtone pricing. Ideally, they should be free, especially if you already own the music. I mean, it's already on your iPhone. Still, they're trying to get it out as much as possible, this is a business after all.
I think in a few versions of the iPhone we'll se one that's open for third party apps, but they didn't want to risk anything with the very firt model. Of course it can be argued that there isn't anything malicious to risk, but Apple saying there's a threat and closing the phone is easier and simpler for them than ignoring it and POSSIBLY creating a problem. It's a problem that probably would never happen, but most potential consumers, (IE, everybody who owns or wants a cell phone), won't see the difference.
Reply
wsnoble said 11:58AM on 10-03-2007
Hi
Great interview and this guy has "class" written all over him.
While I am not calling anybody anything, or saying somebody is something that they are or are not, I will say that the level of "whining" about Apple's implementation of iPhone (locked down, no SDK....but it's in the ULA we all acknowledged) has gotten WAY out of control in some circles...IMHO.
I think this article shows somebody who acknowledges this (locked, no SDK, etc), is still excited to dev for Apple/iPhone and is going about it the right way. He isn't playing the "whoa is me" card or making silly demands. I say silly because again we all saw the ULA before jumped onboard.
Hopefully some will take notice of how well he handles himself and his situation.
I know I did while reading the article.
Reply
Eric Gochko said 12:11PM on 10-03-2007
Kudos Mr. Welch ... the clarity you've brought to this complex issue is quite refreshing. Good luck in all your future endeavors.
Reply
Dave M said 1:03PM on 10-03-2007
I wonder what the age is of the people who have no interest in adding applications. It is ridiculous that there is no native chat/IM application that can notify you when you receive a message while listening to music.
I have successfully discouraged many people from buying the iPhone because of its lack of features and Apple's apparent belief that the market doesn't demand features. Most of the people I know with iPhones are very disappointed with the lack of functionality.
The browsing is great, but the iPhone is inferior otherwise to many smart phones on the market -- thus the price drop.
There isn't even 1 game widget! The idea of using the browser for all added apps is ridiculous, especially when I am on the train of in a bathroom with bad reception.
Reply
Jeremy said 12:48PM on 10-03-2007
The whole thing makes me wonder how much longer it will be before Mac OS X runs only signed executables and no third-party software is allowed. Before iTunes and the iPod will play only music bought from Apple, and ripping our own CDs is no longer allowed.
I'm frankly disgusted with Apple.
Reply
KeynoteKen said 12:53PM on 10-03-2007
"Apple's reputation as supporting the "little guy."
Again, that just appears to be a popular thought that people impose upon Apple. If you read the article, he clearly states
--Apple is a business. When you're useful to Apple, they are very friendly and helpful. When a competitor of yours is useful to Apple, they will embrace the competitor.--
Apple has always been this way and have irked developers ever since they charged $10,000 for a development kit for the Mac that included the purchase of a Lisa. Why do people have this false view of Apple?
Reply
Steve Sabol said 1:02PM on 10-03-2007
I've said it before (well, to my computer screen late at night when no one's around) and I'll say it again: my problem with Apple's ringtone policy isn't the pricing but the selection and functionality.
Let me use the first 2 seconds of Pearl Jam's rearviewmirror, looped without a space, for 30 seconds. Or let me edit In Da Club to remove the lyrics and just give me the intro and the outro. Or loop Prince's Now the same was as rearviewmirror. Or use the Benny Hill Theme for when my family calls. Sadly, I can't even buy some of these songs or any of these ringtones from the store, let alone do the editing I want.
And then there's the whole issue that I recorded my daughter saying "Daddy pick up the phone" and I can't use that one either.
Figure it out, Apple! Charge a per-use fee to edit a song and upload as a ringtone and then fork that money over the RIAA to put in their sue-grandma fund or something. People are willing to pay at least 12 bucks for a non-sanctioned third-party piece of software to do it! Pathetic.
Reply
David Scrivner said 1:41PM on 10-03-2007
This was a great interview. I am very impressed with how calm he is in response to how Apple has been essentially attacking third party developers.
I feel that it is very important to the growth of the iPhone that they allow third party software to be used. Apple is doing its most loyal customers a disservice by blocking third party content.
Reply
Dion said 1:31PM on 10-03-2007
Apple has the best effing phone on the market right now, but if they continue to disallow 3rd party developers from enhancing their product, the next new open development phone that's around the corner from LG, Palm, etc. is going to sway people from iPhone purchases. I loved my Treo, and when Palm integrates iPhone like features into a future handset with the ability for awesome third party apps I might actually wait in line this time.
P.S. Isn't Apple the company that is frequently known to challenge our nation's creative and talented folks? Look at Apple's Insomnia Film Fest. Apple should use 3rd party app development to their benefit and at lease make a challenge out of it. Why would you not want your phone to be the best on the market?
Reply