Apple refused to say that many of the applications before it could be an understatement: The company, as anyone who reads technology news knows, has earned a reputation for making decisions that put the interests of content users second (or perhaps even third). Apple when it reaches the point and start to lose customers as a result of their actions?
The Google App Store Rejection Voice
Voice of the official Google application was submitted for inclusion App Store six weeks ago, a Google spokesperson explained, and returned without authorization. The company says it will continue to find ways to bring its technology to the iPhone platform – browser based on the use of connection methods, for example – but from now on, a separate application does not appear to be in the cards.
The developer of mobile GV, a Google for voice applications of energy, announced Monday it had learned of their program was being pulled, too. Sean Kovacs said an Apple representative told him that his utility and duplication of functions available on the iPhone.
"He really did not specify what features, although I imagine that the whole application in general," Kovacs wrote in a blog posting.
Trying to locate any specific reason for the rejections is a useless journey. Apple as usual is not saying anything – a spokesperson did not respond to my request for information before today’s date, and representatives have only issued a "no comment" to other media. AT & T, meanwhile, referred all questions to Apple.
Conflicting interests
Official explanations aside, it is not difficult to fill in the blanks and find out what is happening here. Google offers users voice is a powerful set of tools for your phone, including free text messaging and voicemail improved. These tools overlap with the built-in services from Apple and / or AT & T wants you to use.
This self-service approach seems to be at odds with Steve Jobs’ mission of the App Store. In the event of the Apple App Store that was introduced last year, employment – in the discussion of the limitations – which says sharing program porn, invasion of privacy, or anything that would not be harmful to leave in. But said, "We have exactly the same interests as the vast majority of our developers."
Harry McCracken of Technologizer provides an excellent perspective on the subject:
"For 30 years, PC owners have had the final call on what software you use. That’s why many people run Apple software on Microsoft operating systems and software for Microsoft operating systems from Apple," McCracken writes.
"It’s why people use Firefox on Windows and chromium, even though they duplicate the features of Internet Explorer. Had it not been for decades, the growth of Windows and Mac would have been horribly stunted, and computers we use today would be much less useful and interesting. "
We have the freedom to install any software that we like the computers in our house. Why do we limit ourselves to a mobile computing system that does not offer the same privilege?
The Big Picture
The iPhone has many attractive features – no one will deny that. It is undoubtedly one of the most innovative and powerful platforms in the mobile market. But there are many other devices, either available or exciting on the horizon, too, many of which give the iPhone a good run for their money.
If the application of the prohibition of fault-inside Apple or AT & T, one thing is inevitable: if the current focus on content continues, the value of the iPhone to a customer begin to decrease. At any given time, the alternative – which permitted the choice agenda – are increasingly attractive.
A closed platform can provide the most immediate financial benefit to a supplier. Eventually, however, one is hopeful of a system that caters to the interests of customers will pay. So far, the positive aspects of the iPhone have been able to overcome the negative aspects of its closed system. The real question is increasingly competitive in the mobile market, how long Apple will be able to maintain that balance.
Related posts: