Filed under: iPod Family, Apple, iPhone, App Store
Yeah, there's an app for that. But for how long, and at what cost?
With the recent kerfuffle surrounding the removal and rejection of Google Voice apps from the App Store, many developers are beginning to question the trust they have placed in Apple to provide them with a reliable system for developing and distributing applications.Generally, the major hurdle associated with iPhone development is getting approved by Apple. It's no secret that this process is often quite frustrating, and sometimes downright arduous. Developers often wait several weeks without any response before they are suddenly rejected, and then they must make the requested changes (if possible), resubmit their application, and again wait for a response.
But once they have put your app through the paces, and presumably have double and triple checked to ensure that you have complied with the terms, you're safe, right? Your hard work has paid off, Apple has accepted your app, and now you can move on.
Wrong.
Now one might also argue that some features offered by Google Voice do overlap with the iPhone, such as the SMS and voicemail functions, although contrary to popular belief, Google Voice is not a VoIP service and doesn't really compete against AT&T. But even if you concede that point to Apple, couldn't they just ask the developers to remove those features and resubmit? What about the other apps -- like Skype, TextFree, or iCall -- that offer similar feature sets, are they going to disappear too? And if AT&T is really responsible for this, as has been suggested previously, why was the app pulled from the App Stores of other countries? Why not just honestly tell the developer that the app is being pulled at the request of the carrier?
As if having to worry whether or not your apps could start disappearing isn't enough, there is another layer of complexity to deal with if a paid app is removed: the users. Sure, if a live app is removed, users will likely be upset no matter what happens... but if they've paid for it, and they can't get future upgrades or bug fixes, some of them are going to be wanting their money back. As some developers have already discovered, refunds can get expensive if there are enough of them, because Apple's developer contract allows the company to retain its 30% commission, while the developer may have to reimburse the full cost of the application to cover the refund -- meaning each refund on an app that is priced $9.99 would end up costing the developer the full $9.99, rather than the $7 in revenue that they actually made from the purchase. Apple's enforcement of this clause has been inconsistent, however, as developers report mixed results in whether or not they have been charged the full amount when dealing with refunds in the past.
By now, you're probably wondering how the refunds fit in with the Google Voice situation. Simple: Apple is now issuing refunds to users of the VoiceCentral application. That's right, Apple suddenly decided that the application should be removed -- after it had already been approved months ago -- and is now giving out refunds for it when users request them, leaving the developer to foot the bills for both refunds and staffing end-user support to answer questions about what happened to the app. Meanwhile, Apple gets to keep their cut of the profits. Sounds fair, right? Didn't think so.
The folks at Riverturn then did what anyone else in this situation would do, they went to Apple. As has been the case with other incidents, many of their e-mails and phone calls went unanswered. They finally got a response from the Apple employee that initially notified them of the removal, but the bulk of his responses can be summed up in just four words: "I can't help you."
So for the sake of posterity that may be aspiring to develop their own iPhone app, let's review:
- Lets say I write an application that lets me control my Google Voice account from my phone.
- I submit it to Apple for review, and several weeks later, it is approved.
- The app does well in the App Store, and other similar apps pop up as well.
- A few months later, without warning, Apple pulls the app from the App Store, claiming it now duplicates functionality of the iPhone. (Funny, it didn't do that before...)
- I now have to reimburse Apple for their decision to remove the app and refund upset users, as well as field support questions that are pouring in about the sudden disappearance
- After repeated requests to Apple go unanswered, I finally get a response of "Sorry, but I can't help you."
At this point, I'd be running away from even the though of developing for the iPhone. This is not a good way to do business. Yes, the iPhone is doing incredibly well right now. And yes, there are over 10,000 developers, 65,000 apps, 40 million devices, and 1 billion downloads from the App Store. But none of that matters unless you realize that the developers themselves are directly responsible for much of the iPhone's success. By alienating those developers through inconsistent policy handling and refusal to communicate one-on-one with them to resolve problems, Apple is setting itself up for failure.
iPhone developers should be able to spend their time doing what Apple intended: developing great apps. Instead, they are forced to spend their time worrying how to keep their apps alive, and how much it's going to cost them in the end.
Update: Due to shortcomings in the App Store reporting, Riverturn is not certain at this point exactly how much Apple is taking back for the processed returns. Judging by conversations I've had with other developers, however, it does seem that, in most cases, Apple generally takes only the 70% revenue that was paid to the developer and not the full purchase price of the app -- although their policy still clearly states otherwise.
Regardless, it is still very unsettling to me that Riverturn is being held responsible for any of these refund charges, seeing that the decision to pull the app from the App Store rested soley with Apple, and was not a direct result of any wrongdoing by the developer. It is also quite disturbing that Kevin Duerr, the president of Riverturn, has yet to receive any response from Apple regarding the situation.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Alex S said 11:10AM on 7-30-2009
Excellent article, and another reason the 3GS may be my last iphone.
I totally love the iphone and what it can do, but these recent events from Apple are making me thinking about switching to Android more and more...something I'd never even considered doing before.
Apple are getting a lot of bad PR for this...I hope they know what they are doing.
Reply
Jordan said 11:56AM on 7-30-2009
I agree. I really do love my iPhone, but I feel like the more I use Apple products the more I am told what I am allowed to do, when, and where. I don't like that.
Brandon said 12:21PM on 7-30-2009
Yup, one more episode like this and Pre here I come. Why would I reward Apple every month when they take devs for granted like they've been doing since 2.0 launched?
That refund policy is utter bullsh*t.
Dan said 12:34PM on 7-30-2009
Ditto. I'm up for a new phone next summer, and there's already some viable options with Android and Web OS. When I got my 3G (which I do really enjoy using) there really wasn't any competition.
ChillyWilly said 2:10PM on 7-30-2009
Adding my "Excellent article" statement here to the mix.
Apple really does need to make some decisions on how to make this process better. You make some really good points in your 6 step outline of the process.
Confusion doesn't make for good business, regardless how many iPhone users and apps have been purchased and downloaded.
SubGenius said 4:53PM on 7-30-2009
To be perfectly honest, as pissed as I am about no Google Voice or Latitude on the iPhone, I'm not going to switch.
But I am considering jail breaking for the first time.
I want to pay for good, no scratch that, GREAT apps.
I like supporting developers who make great stuff.
I'm pissed that Apple is dumbing down the best "smartphone".
I'm pissed the AT&T is trying to prop up their antiquated business model.
It just a bunch of dumb tubes!
Wakka said 11:39PM on 7-30-2009
And this is why I, an iPhone developer, am using a Blackberry Storm. Why? I can use the Google Voice app. I can install absolutely any app I desire, even if it's not from the official app store. RIM doesn't care. Even in its App Store, 3rd party apps have more control over the device, can multitask, have more access to the phone's features (like notifications and better integration.) For example, the Facebook app for Blackberry lets me sync my friends' numbers and contact info/pictures, and BB Messenger PINs. Google Sync keeps all of my PIM info in sync. Plus, the BB interface on the storm isn't so stale, like the iPhone. It's actually kind of sexy. So that brings the best from the Pre and iPhone. And from a developer's standpoint, you still have a huge market experiencing steady growth in both the corporate and consumer markets. A win for most, not all, as no platform is perfect.
temjinx1 said 11:50PM on 7-30-2009
you took the words right out of my mouth
mentalsticks said 11:12AM on 7-30-2009
>many developers are beginning to question the trust they have placed in Apple
This is what Wikipedia calls weasel words.
Reply
Michael Jones said 11:20AM on 7-30-2009
It doesn't take much of a look around to find developers who have posted in their blogs, on their websites or on Twitter that they are upset with Apple's policies.
Eric Warnke said 11:49AM on 7-30-2009
I never trusted them... the signs were there from the beginning and this was really inevitable.
akatsuki said 11:56AM on 7-30-2009
Sure developers are upset - but Apple has them by the balls. If you want in on the mobile space there is only one game in town.
When developers, en masse, walk away from the platform, you might get real reform. But where are they going to go?
hmlong said 2:05PM on 7-30-2009
Ditto. As the article says, there are over 10,000 developers, 65,000 apps, 40 million devices, and there have been 1 billion downloads from the App Store.
With 10,000 developers and 65,000 apps, the process can't have been too arduous nor too painful nor too risky, nor, given the rate of growth, does it seem that they've become too alienated.
Should Apple make some changes? Sure. But until there's a competing platform with any traction whatsoever, developers will develop for the iPhone, and the vast majority of those 40,000 owners will regard the App Store with delight.
scott said 11:15AM on 7-30-2009
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/comment-page-2/#comments
Reply
Kai Cherry said 1:07PM on 7-30-2009
Scott:
I don't think this crowd will get it :) But it certainly shows a level of dishonesty that is pretty over the top and out of control here.
-K
jd said 11:20AM on 7-30-2009
In my opinion, it's not completely Apple's fault. The iPhone will never be able to be used to its full potential unless it is on it's own network.
Reply
Michael Jones said 11:26AM on 7-30-2009
I don't think that all of the problems have been Apple's fault, but this particular issue is.
Even *if* AT&T is really behind the removal of these apps, Apple's handling of the issue is simply wrong. They aren't communicating to the developers what can be done to fix the issue, they are forcing the devs into costs associated with the removal that was done on their own terms, and they are certainly not sticking up for the developers by blocking AT&T's anti-competitive demands (again, that's if AT&T was responsible for this)
I really think they could have handled it better. Call up the devs and talk to them about the issue. Let them know they will need to remove the app on a set date, and possibly give them the option to make changes to bring it in compliance if possible. Or take responsibility for the costs of the refunds, since it was apparently Apple's mistake that the app was approved in the first place.
Apple really needs to step up to bat for the developers, rather than against them.
Kai Cherry said 12:05PM on 7-30-2009
The iPhone's potential will never be fully realized as long as Apple customers keep supporting the App Store as the only sanctioned conduit. It has so little to do with telcos at this stage it isn't funny; the same arbitrary crap happens on the iPod touch *which is not a phone* and the sooner EVERYONE mans up stops giving Apple pass after weary drag ass pass, the better off the *platform* will be for it.
The GVoice stuff is a perfect example of hella people commenting on "what ATT did" that have no idea whatsoever how the software works.
GVoice, GV Mobile, etc aren't even VOIP apps. You don't get free SMS *to a mobile phone*...the calls flow thru ATT, consuming minutes.
ATT has stated "we didn't do it"...but no one wants to consider this. ATT is a monolithic company run by Texans; they aren't arbitrary.
No one can say this about "Big Fruit" with a straight face.
All of the theorizing about "lost revenue" is complete crap...or "marginalizing" the telco...since you still use minutes using GVoice services...or being tied to the telco since number portability is federally mandated.
But I guess since Apple has a proven track record of rejecting and pulling apps for the most arbitrary of reasons *even after giving 'prior approval'* it is totally illogical and unreasonable to even remotely use historical behavior as evidence huh?
Makes way more sense to blame ATT here, huh?
Sheesh.
James Donevan said 11:24AM on 7-30-2009
"iPhone developers should be able to spend their time doing what Apple intended: developing great apps."
That's naive. If someone wants to develop software and have none of the associated worries that go with any business enterprise, the she/he should find a job developing software for their employer. They can spend all their time developing great apps and have no worries beyond that.
"Instead, they are forced to spend their time worrying how to keep their apps alive, and how much it's going to cost them in the end."
Forced by who? Again they chose this vocation. As anyone running a business will tell you, there are these kinds of problems in any field.
That said, the refund scenario, if correctly reported, is atrocious. I say if correctly because TUAW bloggers have terrible track records for mangling the facts in stories like this. Too often righteous indignation overtakes factuality. Apple should not be profiting (ie retaining their sales commission) if they were responsible for removing the apps. If they are, someone needs legal advice about contract law.
Reply
Michael Jones said 11:38AM on 7-30-2009
James,
I agree that those who choose to develop for the iPhone do so with some risk. But the problem is that Apple has marketed the platform in a way to that has enticed people to develop for them in their spare time, for many as a hobby rather than a full-time gig. Truth be told, if I wrote up a couple of useful little apps in my spare time, and Apple approved them and put them up for sale in the App Store, I wouldn't expect that a few months later, they might pull them out and start issuing refunds to furious users, and expect me to foot the associated costs. Yes, the risk was there all along, but it's not something that a lot of hobbyist developers are prepared for.
Besides, even Apple has touted that the SDK and App Store lets developers focus their time on developing great apps, I don't have a direct reference at hand, but I know they have used that phrasing before.
As for the refund situation, I linked to a report about their refund clause in the post. The last part of the refund clause states:
"In the event that Apple refunds any such price to an end-user, You shall reimburse, or grant Apple a credit for, an amount equal to the price for that Licensed Application. APPLE WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO RETAIN ITS COMMISSION ON THE SALE of that Licensed Application, notwithstanding the refund of the price to the end-user. " (emphasis added)
So yes, Apple does require the developer to pay the full price of the app back to Apple in reimbursement for the refund, thus keeping their commission on the sale. And yes, it is as you said, atrocious.
Thanks for your comments.