Filed under: Bad Apple, iPhone, App Store
Facing App Store limbo, StarPlayr developers give up and go home
Last November, as visions of cranberries and turkey danced in our heads, the first tidbits about a forthcoming Sirius/XM app for the iPhone began to emerge on the Howard Stern fan forums. In January, the satellite radio player's name and details were confirmed -- StarPlayr was on the way from NiceMac.Two weeks ago, word arrived from NiceMac that the app was neither approved nor rejected by Apple... perhaps keeping it out of the way of an official Sirius app rumored last week. No independent developer wants to be in this no-app's-land between approval on the store and a branded app around the corner, so you can probably guess what happens next.
It's a sad and frustrating outcome, not only for the hardworking team behind StarPlayr but also for the eager fans who were ready to lay down their cash for the app. Without some sort of advance roadmap for internal/partner projects from Apple, or a published list of 'no-go zones' for third party developers to stay clear of the official-app juggernaut, this is going to happen again. I understand that competitive pressures may force Apple to keep licensing and development deals under wraps -- chances are, the team answering emails in Developer Relations has no idea what's in the works up in the executive offices -- but there's got to be a way to avoid this deep chill on innovation and investment from third-party devs.
Update: As some commenters have pointed out, the back-end infrastructure of StarPlayr is being shut down, which will disable the WinMo version of the app. This points strongly towards Sirius/XM, and not Apple, as the Big Bad in this scenario.
Thanks Jim
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
BokenBill said 11:28AM on 3-08-2009
As a developer and relatively recent Apple-convert, this game Apple plays where they fully control what gets in AND they won't review app designs until the app is ready to go live is disgusting. While I would prefer a more open exchange, I understand Apple's desire to control the content but the least they can do is review a design of an app before a developer invests the bulk of the development costs. Then on app submission they can re-review the app to ensure it kept to the design.
Why is this so hard? You would think this is Apple's first time dealing with developers. I hate to say it but they can learn a lot from how Microsoft interacts with its community.
Reply
Michael Rose said 11:33AM on 3-08-2009
I agree that a design-phase review option would help, but as noted above the team doing the reviewing may not be aware of the competitive landscape and branding deals in the works. Hard to warn developers to stay clear of a category when you don't know that they should.
Historically, Apple hasn't had many qualms about releasing apps that compete with third parties -- the difference now is the gatekeeper effect.
Bill Grant said 11:49AM on 3-08-2009
Seems to me if they can catch it during release they can catch it during design.
Why not run a scan to look for keywords like 'podcast' or 'radio', etc. Then they can decide to let Pandora in and Satellite out.
Sure they can still bounce a final product but at least the initial gate can save many developer's time writing a product Apple will certainly not let in.
(Sorry if this posts twice, first one didn't seem like it saved.)
DistortedLoop said 12:01PM on 3-08-2009
This is Apple's first time dealing with thousands (10's of thousands?) of active developers developing for a closed platform, isn't it? An ambitious task they've set themselves, and one they're obviously failing at. I suspect a very small staff that is overwhelmed with submissions, updates, and a set of unclear marching orders from His Steveness, all overshadowed by the fear of the wrath of Steve, as well as all the hate they got on these blog sites.
JD said 3:34PM on 3-08-2009
I must say, for all the doubts I had about the idea of the App Store when it was announced, the reality has turned out to be far, far worse. Furthermore, all of these problems derive from the basic complaint we had at the outset: in a closed system, we are all subject to the whims and incompetencies of a single company. Defenders argued that this was Apple -- therefore it would be competently run (it hasn't been, particularly for developers), and run fairly (it hasn't been -- I now can't count the number of stories I've read about apps being rejected or intentionally delayed due to some business interest of Apple's or Apple's sympathy with the business interests of some unrelated large company).
No one ever had a good argument about why we needed a closed garden for the iPhone when we didn't need one for the Mac itself (I've still never heard anyone advocating handing over the keys to Mac development to Apple), especially now that it's clear that the "bring down the network" arguments were BS. The arguments for Apple's dictatorial control have only gotten weaker over time, but people are so used to thinking within the constraints given to them by these big companies that now most arguments take place within the assumption that the App Store must stay. But clearly, all but the most incompetent grandmothers-with-iphones would be better off without it -- or at the very least, with an App Store that was free, open, and allowed you to acquire Apps elsewhere as well. (And yes, I'd certainly put my money where my mouth is and go over to Android if it weren't for Jailbreak.)
Eideard said 12:03PM on 3-08-2009
"My heart cries for you - sighs for you - and dies for you"
Yeah, commerce and competition is tough. Take your marbles and return to the backyard.
Or try to sell aps for Microsoft.
Reply
Codey H. said 11:50AM on 3-08-2009
Quite a shame. The Sirius/XM market needs anything it can get to help.
Reply
Jason Martin said 11:51AM on 3-08-2009
@Michael Rose
You're right that developers often are not aware of "the competitive landscape and branding deals in the works", but that is precisely the reason why a design-phase review is necessary. If a developer complies with all of Apple's regulations and works within the confines of the SDK, then they should have no reason to think that their app would not be approved. For Apple to reject such an app is certainly within their rights, but they would do everyone (including themselves) a huge favor by nixing that app ASAP, not at the 11th hour.
Reply
Michael Rose said 12:08PM on 3-08-2009
Jason, I'm not saying that 3rd party developers are unaware of the partnering deals -- that's a given. I'm saying that the developer relations team at Apple is unaware of them, and can't give prudent/informed advice about future internal projects or partnerships that they know nothing about.
Drooling Dog said 11:56AM on 3-08-2009
Very sad indeed, but as a developer, you have to understand the risk you're taking when you create something that relies on a 3rd party to provide the content. Especially when that content is legally guarded.
If I write an app that displays TUAW content, without an agreement with TUAW, and TUAW decides to block it, that's nobody's fault but my own.
Of course, when the content is subscription-based, the chances of the content provider wanting to control it increase a great deal.
Obviously NiceMac wasn't doing anything to assist people in getting around the rules or subscription fees. It's not that they were doing something "wrong". Just risky.
Reply
Scott Bass said 12:03PM on 3-08-2009
Why not just release it through the cydia store instead?
Reply
DistortedLoop said 12:03PM on 3-08-2009
I don't get why the guys are packing up shop and throwing in the towel. This would be a perfect app for the newly opened Cydia app store. Once a few serious players go to the Cydia store instead of Apple, the floodgates will open and Apple will have to change its way or face even more jailbreakers leaving the Apple App Store walled garden and all its associated revenues.
Reply
Michael Rose said 12:11PM on 3-08-2009
I have a strong suspicion that high-profile commercial developers will stay well clear of the Cydia store as long as the jailbreak community is so strongly associated with app piracy.
What's the point of releasing a paid app to only 10% of the device userspace, when that same 10% are demonstrably much less likely to actually pay you for your work? It's economic masochism of the first order.
DistortedLoop said 12:29PM on 3-08-2009
Are the guys mentioned in this article "high profile commercial developers?"
10% of the iPhone market is a pretty good sized market, and a lot of high profile people are running around with jailbroken iPhones (Steve Wozniak/Kathy Griffin and Ashton Kutcher (he uses Qik on a jailbroke iPhone - check this link: http://tinyurl.com/cyd3pm)), making it something less shady and more hip to do. Look at what Kutcher and other celebs have done for Twitter follower counts once the masses realized they were on it.
You're correct that Adobe or the like will not want to piss off Apple by going to non-official stores, but Qik has already done so, and a couple of guys "in their garage" (like NiceMac appears to be) who can't get past Apple's screeners could probably make some coin on their rejected projects in other sources.
Also, jailbreakers will gladly pay for quality software. At least I will. I've purchased iPhoneVideoRecorder, BiteSMS, Snapture, and a few others that are only available via jailbreaking. It's not fair to paint all of us with the "less likely to pay" brush.
Michael Rose said 1:27PM on 3-08-2009
"It's not fair to paint all of us with the "less likely to pay" brush."
I respect your position that you are personally a responsible, non-pirating jailbreak user. It is inarguable, however, that all app store piracy is done on jailbroken phones. Statistically, an owner of a jailbroken phone is more likely to be an app pirate, because only owners of jailbroken phones CAN be app pirates. QED. "Less likely to pay" may seem unfair, but it's a statement of statistical fact when applied to the universe of jailbroken phones vs. the universe of non-jailbroken phones.
Notice I didn't say "X number of jailbreakers are pirates" or "X percentage of copies of app Y are unlicensed," although there are various numbers floating around the ether on those topics.
We'll be doing a full post on this shortly, but Ben Chatelain has done some digging into the numbers on his app & updated with an antipiracy version.
http://benchatelain.com/2009/03/07/cracked-copies-of-full-screen-web-browser-function-as-demos/
Blue43Fan said 12:20PM on 3-08-2009
I think it's pretty clear that this is of SiriusXM's doing. Why else would the Nicemac team abandon StarPlayr for WinMo as well, a product which they have been selling for months now.
It's too bad, because I've been waiting for this since last June.
Reply
James said 12:29PM on 3-08-2009
I have been watching and waiting for this app since it was first announced, and this is a real disappointment. The simple fact that XM/Sirius was not ready to go with their own app the moment their merger was approved is the quintessential example of how poorly managed these companies are. I also say release Starplayr in the Cydia store... I would jailbreak my phone just to have it.
Reply
Sean Peters said 12:53PM on 3-08-2009
This is why I've never understood why everyone is so in love with the App Store concept. Sure, it's great for Apple... but it sucks for everyone else, both developers and customers. On any other platform, if you want to release an application, you just release it. Your only risk is that customers won't buy. But with iPhone, you have to develop the app, then get down on your knees and bow towards Cupertino, and hope that Steve will be merciful.
Reply
mac said 1:19PM on 3-08-2009
until they run out of cash ? sounds like daylight robbery to me
sell thin air, then - not even deliver the thin air.
3 words for : crack you lous
Reply
Michael Rose said 1:21PM on 3-08-2009
You missed a key detail, the refunds are for the Windows Mobile version which has been sold for a while.