Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Software, iTunes, iPhone, App Store
Podcaster app distributed via Ad Hoc after Apple rejection
There was a lot of debate last week when Apple rejected the Podcaster app for inclusion in the App Store, saying that it "duplicated iTunes functionality." Rather than taking a stand against programming iPhone apps until Apple's policies shift, like Exposure dev Fraser Spiers, Alex Sokirynsky decided to bypass Apple and distribute the app via Ad Hoc App Distribution.Many developers use Ad Hoc App Distribution to insure that beta testers and reviewers get copies of their software prior to the App Store release. A developer takes the Unique Device Identifier (UDID) from your iPhone, does a little magic, and then sends you two files -- one contains the app, while the other is a provision file. You drag the provision file to your iTunes Applications window, followed by the app file. A quick sync with your iPhone installs the app, and you're ready to go.
Alex has set up a website where you can sign up to get an Ad Hoc distribution of Podcaster. You'll need to "donate" $9.99 to Alex via PayPal to get the app. I think this is a great way for smaller developers to get their apps out there, particularly when Apple decides to shut 'em down -- although they are sharply limited in the number of licenses they can distribute this way, no more than 100 devices total are allowed.
[via ReadWriteWeb]
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Zeromaru said 6:01PM on 9-15-2008
Does one have to be a paying developer to use ad-hoc distribution? I have an idea in mind for a personal program, in addition to being useful would also serve as a learning utility, which I don't want to distribute.
Reply
MostTornBrain said 8:48PM on 9-15-2008
You need to pay the normal $99 developer fee to distribute Ad Hoc apps.
Caravan said 6:06PM on 9-15-2008
I like the idea of developers using ad-hoc to distribute apps not worthy for the App Store; however, $10 for an app that can effectively be simulated by Simplify Media (for podcasts already in your iTunes library; set iTunes to update every hour, then stream them with SM) or FlyCast (for finding new podcasts; on-demand has many streamable shows that are normally podcasts in iTunes)... it just seems a bit pricey.
Reply
Nate said 6:14PM on 9-15-2008
Well I mean... the developer has 100 slots at $10 a pop which accounts for $1000. Then you just apply for another iPhone dev account for $99 to get another 100 slots.
This way Apple only takes 1/10 cut instead of 3/10.
Reply
Nate said 6:19PM on 9-15-2008
Well, look at it this way. The developer can make a larger return by running apps this way. 100 slots at $10 a pop nets a cool $1000. Applying for another iPhone dev account costs $99.
This way Apple only pulls 1/10 of the sales instead of 3/10 if the app is accepted to the App Store. I can't imagine that Apple would allow this to go on for too long. Remember that magical shut down mechanism that Apple has for rouge apps?
Reply
Nate said 6:33PM on 9-15-2008
iPhone "phones home" giving Apple the ability to disable apps. - Tuaw post
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/08/07/iphone-hacker-says-devices-phone-home-allows-for-disabling-a/
Just in case someone missed it.
Nate said 6:20PM on 9-15-2008
Sorry for the double post.
Reply
TheMadCow said 1:54PM on 9-18-2008
Um Nate. Using BossPrefs in Cydia, you can disable the application killswitch. So, no, it's not that big of a deal. And using QuickPwn, you're able to Jailbreak you iPhone even faster and it's made for those who just want the functionality of Jailbreaking without the hassle of being a propeller head.
Nate said 2:46PM on 9-18-2008
I know that the iPhone jailbreaking community is very large in comparison to some product communities that allow for homebrew code to be run on devices. And the iPhone dev team has made it easy-as-pie to install and run jailbroken firmware on your phone.
However, the product in-mass is sold un-jailbroken and is subject to the usage of individuals who can't be bothered to jailbreak their devices.
We can't really determine what the figures are, number of jailbroken phones vs. non-jailbroken, though that would be a fun statistic to play with. And I suppose people who don't jailbreak their phones probably wouldn't have heard of this product's availability anyways because it's not on the app store. So my point may be moot.
My point being that Apple will either pull this rouge application or reverse their call to ban it from the app store. If they pull the application I'm not sure how many people will be bothered to buy an app that can only be used on a jailbroken phone.
Have you bought an application from the jailbroken community? The video recorder?
The developer wants to make money. I think this will eventually be more trouble than it's worth.
Josh said 6:28PM on 9-15-2008
We wrote about this earlier. There's just a bit more information that you may find helpful/entertaining. Interesting take, Nate... didn't know that each dev only had 100 slots. I kinda remember that, but it seems rather miniscule. Hope it works. More devs should definitely do this... NetShare anyone?
Reply
Kevin Sutherland said 6:51PM on 9-15-2008
Apple should pull their head up out of the sand and let this app into the App Store, when I first heard about the iPod Touch when it was introduced in 2007, I was disappointed that the iTunes Store or some other app on the device did not allow wireless syncing of Podcasts. Now that I have an iPod Touch myself, the only real reason I need to sync it daily is to update my podcasts. Unless Apple is planning to implement this feature very soon, which I doubt, they should realize that this developer spent time developing a useful app that adds a function to the device that it did not previously have and that does not duplicate iTunes in any way.
Reply
iJason said 7:22PM on 9-15-2008
The app is $9.99 and is not guarenteed to work cause Apple can remotley pull the switch if they wanted to. Why not just use the free NetNewWire in App Store. It streams podcasts the same way. Funny how Apple let that one on there, but not this one. Oh well, NetNewsWire is free, plus it has a killer desktop app, that syncs with it (also free). Go to NewsGator.com to get the desktop app, and you know where to get the iPhone App.
Reply
ebhauke said 9:51PM on 9-15-2008
I really don't believe Apple's excuse for not allowing this app in the store, but I do think I know why they denied it. The problem isn't with streaming, it's with the fact that Podcaster allows you to download podcasts to your device. That means that music could be disguised as podcasts and distributed freely. I think that's a bag Apple doesn't want to open up.
Reply
James Rosenthal said 10:43PM on 9-15-2008
"For the Rest of Us"
I am a 100% supporter of his right to publish his application.
I'm generally an ardent supporter of Apple. HOWEVER, this is a very stupid and counterproductive Apple policy. It is totally unrealistic to expect anyone to invest the hours and creativity necessary to develop a great application with the threat that Apple can review the work, legally copy the concepts and then reject the application because they say it's in conflict with one of their current or upcoming applications.
Apple is a software company and while I agree that restricting the operating system to Apple hardware is legitimate, I DO NOT agree that Apple has any right to serve as a censor over applications that run in its hybrid (OSX & Hardware) environment on the iPhone or any other platform.
Independent third party applications are the fundamental reason for Apples success. Where would Apple be today without Thomas Knoll's development of Photoshop, or Pagemaker, Quark Express or Dan Bricklin's VisiCalc? Would Apple still be in business? I admire Steve Jobs and respect his willingness to be a prick to get what he wants. It's a risk to believe in your thinking enough to do what it takes to get your way. On the other hand, Apple, Woz and Steve Jobs are all about building a better mouse trap. OSX is UNIX, the Apple I was built to run an operating system developed by WOZ to improve RPM. Apple's tag line "for the rest of us" is based on Apple's GUI accessibility. Where did the GUI concept come from? Not Apple, it came from work done by XEROX PARC.
I'm not criticizing Apple, Woz or Steve. Understanding the implications of what you experience, learn and see is the basis for any successful endeavor. It's brilliant to apply that thinking to re-invention or understanding how to improve the status quo. Apple is successful because they were willing to wipe the slate clean and find a better way. The iPhone is a revolutionary product and perfect example of what can happen, not by invention but by imagination. We had all the pieces, a computer, a phone, the touch screen but Apple had the brilliance and the balls to imagine a better way "for the rest of us."
The problem here is it's not possible to be a hippie and Attila the Hun at the same time. Using iTunes as the only distribution point for iPhone applications is an expression of total self interest. The concept is, while your in the store you'll spend a buck on something else (I buy most of my online music from Amazon, no DRM.) Using iTunes as a gatekeeper to stop any dilution of Apple’s self interest is an intellectual and commercial crime.
Apple should consider that "For the Rest of Us" is dependent on the belief, innovation and investment of independent developers.
James Rosenthal
Reply
GoNano said 3:18PM on 9-18-2008
He said Woz hehe
brettt said 11:44PM on 9-15-2008
this application is incredibly useful, and is clearly a functionality that the phone lacks, so i don't see their logic in denying it. it's also pretty shortsighted to not allow such a productive application when there's such a a small percentage of actually-useful stuff in the app store so far.
Reply
rjflyn@yahoo.com said 12:12AM on 9-16-2008
Or he modifies a line or two of code, changes the name and has 100 more apps to release
Reply
oldManInFL said 9:02AM on 9-16-2008
I would like to see other application follow this approch such as NetShare!
Reply
Tyson Edwards said 12:08PM on 9-16-2008
You guys are missing the obvious...
One can have multiple AdHoc apps that they are distributing from their one account.
Making Podcaster101, Podcaster201, Podcaster301, etc. a possibility to get around the 100 limit.
The 100 limit was an arbitrary number set aside for testing before an App was destined for the AppStore. If you sign up as an Enterprise developer for $300, then you do not have that limitation.
~Tyson Edwards
Reply
James A. said 1:03PM on 9-16-2008
the fact it was rejected for simulating iTunes behavior is either a) totally wrong or b) the iTunes/iPod app on iPhone is due for an update soon with new functionality.
As someone who uses podcasts alot (and has a daily smartlist built for his morning commute), I definitely have wanted a way to update my podcasts on the device itself when I am away from my home computer. I can sync my contacts and calendar on my work pc, but it wont let me manage my music on it at all. So there is no way to update podcasts on the device when not at your main machine. this is awful for travelling salesmen like myself, or those who just want thier hourly news update updated before their commute home....
Id love to see this functionality built straight into the ipod app. "Check for new podcasts" button somehow, and I'd be fine with it only working over wifi. I want more granular control on how many podcasts get synced too, on a per podcast basis rather than a single number for ALL podcasts regardless of length or frequency...lots of tweaks needed for good podcast functionality really...
Reply