Put yourselves in Nullriver's shoes for a minute: you create an app (NetShare - see TUAW passim), which as far as you can tell does not break any of the App Store rules. You submit it to Apple for inclusion. It passes the vetting procedure (so it must be OK, right?) and goes live online, for sale to real people.
Then it disappears, with no warning. No explanation is given. Then it returns. For a while. Again, no explanation. Then it goes offline again. (I've now lost count how many times NetShare has been online, then offline, rinse and repeat.)
And throughout all this, you get nothing from Apple. No explanation. No reason. No polite email asking you to wait. Not even an impolite email. Nothing.
What makes this more extraordinary is that developers of App Store products are not just developers; they are an income stream. Thirty per cent of the money we pay for every app goes directly to Apple, that's how the App Store works.
It's a deal, and deals work in two directions. Both sides get something. In this case, Apple gets software to offer to users of its exciting new platform. And the developers get access to a secure online distribution system, including payment processing, hosting, everything they need to sell their work.
Deals make partnerships, and partnerships (even unequal 30/70 ones) ought to work both ways. Apple expects (and has a right to expect) developers to behave themselves and act within the rules it has laid down. But in return, developers expect (and have every right to expect) Apple to be a responsible, indeed responsive store owner. At the very least, they have the right to know whether or not Apple considers their work suitable for sale in the Store, and to be told why it has been withdrawn. Then reinstated. Then withdrawn again. And so on.
But Apple has not done this. According to the updates on the Nullriver web site, Apple has simply ignored Nullriver's requests for an explanation. There might be a perfectly simple explanation for the whole sorry story -- that would be great! Apple's mistake is that it doesn't see a need to explain itself to anyone.
And you're all thinking what I'm thinking, which is that this is an echo of the MobileMe disaster, which required weeks of user complaints followed by days of negative coverage in the media before Apple saw fit to explain itself in public. And even when it did, it responded with a once-every-few-days, when-we-feel-like-it status page, which reeked of PR designed to paper over the cracks.
As I write these words, Nullriver's home page says: "Is this acceptable business practice? We don't think so. When an application fails to be approved or even more importantly so, when an application gets removed from sale, Apple should be required to provide a valid reason."
Hear hear, Nullriver. Hear hear.
UPDATE: Since posting this, Nullriver's home page has been updated with the following: "We've finally gotten in contact with Apple. Looks like the lack of communication was due to automated e-mail systems being employed onboth ends, which resulted in e-mails being lost in transit. We're working with Apple to get NetShare back up on the AppStore." Thanks to everyone who pointed this out in the comments,
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
8-04-2008 @ 5:15PM
Miguel said...
I bet AT&T has a lot to do wiith this.
Reply
8-04-2008 @ 5:37PM
Jason said...
That someone would submit a modem app can't have been a big surprise to Apple/AT&T. I'm sure it's long been in their contract to block any such app.
The fact that it got released probably speaks to the size of the task of vetting all of the submitted apps. The fact that it got removed, I'm sure, speaks to an already made decision to not release such apps.
As for how they're handling relations between themselves and the app authors... I'd be as pissed as Nullriver if it were anything but a modem app. The fact that it's a modem app means they shouldn't be surprised.
8-04-2008 @ 5:57PM
Allen said...
I don't think this could have anything to do with AT&T, because Microsoft has had tethering built in for at least 3 years on Windows Mobile phones. If this was AT&T, then why did they only target the iPhone?
8-04-2008 @ 5:38PM
booger said...
I'd like to think that Apple is simply gathering its lawyers for a "can we allow this" pow wow, but I'm more inclined to think that Apple is just ignoring this in the hopes that it will go away. "Netshare Mystery" is not as bad of a headline for Apple as "Apple censors developers".
Ironically, when it comes to the app store, Apple has become the big brother of its own mac commercial.
8-04-2008 @ 5:48PM
dastranger said...
@Jason
That still doesn't address why Apple put it back up after they pulled it. Sorry, but this argument just doesn't hold water. The developers deserve an explanation.
Lets look at it this way, you get DSL service. You have it up and running, but one day the provider pulls it. You ask for an explanation, but hear none. Then, the next day, you have DSL service again, but two hours later you have no service. Again, you get no explanation.
How would you feel?
8-05-2008 @ 2:26AM
oki said...
@ allen
the other windows mobile devices usually require the real data plan which is 60$ unlimted. we are paying half for no dun allowed.
8-04-2008 @ 5:16PM
SSteve said...
I hate to say this (especially as an Apple stockholder), but Apple's behavior in this situation reminds me a lot of the Bush administration.
Reply
8-04-2008 @ 5:37PM
Jason said...
"This situation" is but a small, infinitesimal blip to Apple. It was a mistake to release the app in the first place. They corrected their mistake, though perhaps not perfectly the first time.
To compare Apple to the Bush Administration is to lose all sense of scale.
8-21-2008 @ 9:51AM
James said...
SSteve, your a fucking retard, leave it to a nimwit to push political views on a Apple APP, what a blithering dumbass.
8-04-2008 @ 5:18PM
Kevin Elliott said...
This is also true of the iPhone OS 2.0 brickings and app crashes. Apple is refusing to admit that there is a real problem. In fact, many Apple Discussions customer service representatives are deleting posts and conversations about brickings and crashes.
Apple certainly likes to act silent until enough negative press begins to brew, because they like to create fixes before they admit any fault. Apple looks like the hero of the day when they almost immediately release a fix after all that negative press.
I do admit that I'm starting to get a little tired of it. For example, I stopped installing and updating apps recently, because I was getting daily bricks. Apple customer service reps and Geniuses said to restore. That gets very old after a while.
What will it take for Apple to get back on track?
Reply
8-04-2008 @ 5:53PM
CaptSaltyJack said...
Dude.. you weren't getting daily bricks. :) The term "brick" refers to when a gadget or device is permanently dead (hence the term "brick"). It's dead forever, there's no fixing it.
8-04-2008 @ 6:11PM
Kevin Elliott said...
CaptSaltyJack,
I definitely agree with you in general, but even Apple refers to "bricked" for unactivated phones (i.e. you can't use it for normal activities). Most of the references to bricking I've seen in the iPhone land over the last year have referred to corrupted firmware states or unactivated states.
-Kevin
8-04-2008 @ 6:28PM
Jeff said...
i'm with CaptSaltyJack.
Just because there are idiots out there using a phrase incorrectly doesn't merit you doing the same. it's one of those "if everyone else was jumping off a bridge" things.
that, and it really irritates me to see people so gleefully destroy words and phrases by actively watering them down so severely. "Brick" is a useful, awful, scary word, or at least it used to be. ...now (if you have your way) when my remote control runs out of batteries, it's "bricked" - or when my car runs out of gas, or my brand-new hard drive isn't yet plugged in. :\
8-04-2008 @ 6:33PM
Kevin Elliott said...
What's really sad is you've both decided to troll about the 'misuse' of the term instead of getting the point of the comment. In any case, Apple's buggy ass OS/AppStore/DRM is a problem that will render your phone useless eventually, until you restore it. Since most people are not tied to their Macs throughout their entire day, that can mean a lot of productivity loss when you're depending on your phone but you can't use it because it's sitting at the black bootup screen with an endless Apple logo.
8-04-2008 @ 11:57PM
CaptSaltyJack said...
Kevin,
I just tried to point it out nicely and not be a jerk about it, sorry if my comments above offended you.
8-05-2008 @ 12:59AM
Kevin Elliott said...
No offense taken! Let's hope that 2.0.1 doesn't lead to "bricks" :P
8-04-2008 @ 5:21PM
William said...
Well said, Giles.
Sadly, this is a perfect example of Apple's arrogance and disregard for its partners and customers. Apple makes great products, but their customer service and public relations leave a lot to be desired.
Hopefully, Apple will soon realize that if they are more open, and basically, just are nice, they will have customers and partners who are more loyal to them and are more willing to advocate the benefits of Apple products and services.
Reply
8-04-2008 @ 5:25PM
Matthew Granda said...
I completely agree. I am all for NetShare. I've been checking back everyday on their website for an update -- once I can get to it on iTunes Store, I'll buy it. It is worth $10, and yes, I know about the jailbroken solution. But I am all for supporting Nullriver. They've done so much for us, and I think this is the perfect way to repay them and make me happy at the same time.
- Matthew Granda (Supporter)
Reply
8-05-2008 @ 10:07AM
eric f. said...
I heard on Buzz Out Loud yesterday that when NetShare is running, your iPhone can't charge (from USB or wall). That leads to extremely crappy battery life.
It makes NetShare an "emergency" app, rather than something you could use all the time.
8-05-2008 @ 2:30PM
Matthew Granda said...
That is completely inaccurate. I finally got a hold of NetShare. And I must say... this may be my most used application.
I can charge it while I'm using it. I can even put the iPhone into sleep as long as I don't kick the iPhone back to the home screen.