All Articles in Development

Speaking of tiny, incremental improvements, Erica Sadun over at TUAW highlight a new addition some developers are seeing when entering iTunes Connect — a submission history:

Appearing near recently reviewed items, this option opens a detail table showing how your application has worked its way through the App Store review process, and on to the shelf. Stormont details this update on his site.

Sadun also states that the amber status bubbles are slightly more verbose now, adding “waiting for review” for the freshest uploads.

If you’re a developer and you’re seeing these, or any other changes in iTunes Connect, let us know, and let us know what you think about them, and what else you’d like to see.

Umpteenth verse, same as the first — Macworld turned their iPhone ebook into and app and submitted it to the iTunes App Store. It was rejected. Several times. Finally editor Jason Snell expressed his frustration on Twitter and several high profile blogs picked it up. Apple called him immediately to try and make it right.

Good for Macworld. Bad for all the developers who lack the same megaphone by virtue of their job and connections.

Granted, with 100,000+ apps, the non-sensical and erroneous rejections remain a tiny percentage, but even a tiny percentage of 100,000+ represents many developers’ time, effort, and money. It’s frustrating for them and embarrassing for Apple.

Tim Cook and Phil Schiller claim they’re making improvements, and no doubt they are. From a pure perception point of view, however, this is one issue that needs fixing sooner rather than later.

One of the many, many “great unknowns” of Apple’s iPhone App Store is how the top-grossing list is calculated, specifically whether or not it factors in revenue from in-app purchases. While we could theoretically wait and see if, now that they too can use in-app purchase, a free app makes its way up the list, the folks at Freeverse wanted an answer now. And they think they’ve found it:

Top Grossing Freeverse Apps are Skee-Ball (#17), Flick Fishing (#97), and Top Gun. Now, interestingly, the Top Paid Apps Chart lists Top Gun as #60 and Flick Fishing as #72. How does this happen? The games are priced the same…but Flick Fishing features DLC. This leads us to conclude that the Top Grossing Apps list seems to include In-App Purchases in its calculations.

What if anything does this mean for developers? Will they be able to land on the Top Free and Top Grossing lists at the same time now? And so what if they do?

Interesting times…

[via Daring Fireball]

As part of the commentary on Jamie Zawinski leaving the Palm Pre for the iPhone (linked in the previous post), Daring Fireball adds:

Apple had a similar idea to WebOS for the iPhone, where certain apps would run as Dashboard-style widgets, written in HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Apple abandoned the idea in the six months between the iPhone’s January 2007 announcement and when it went on sale at the end of June, concluding that performance for such apps was unacceptable and that they should go native Cocoa across the board. And Apple was only going to do it for small apps, like Weather, Stocks, and Calculator, not the flagship apps like Calendar and Mail.

Of course, web technologies have improved since 2007, especially JavaScript rendering. Usability and performance complaints aside, Palm embracing web developers in order to incentivize adoption of their platform was a smart strategy. Still, it’s interesting to see Apple’s reaction to it back then, and their decision to go 100% native. (Especially considering they’re now being criticized for not having widgets).

Did Apple make the right choice, do we still want widgets on the iPhone, or is HTML5 and SQLite in Safari making them redundant?

Tim Cook (in)famously said other platforms and devices are still struggling to catch up with the original 2007 iPhone 2G, and while TiPb wouldn’t go that far (the App Store didn’t show up until the iPhone 3G in 2008), strictly in terms of user experience and functionality, he may have had a point.

First up, Jamie Zawinski (jwz) has abandoned the Palm Pre and gone all in on iPhone, despite Apple being worse than Palm when it comes to developer relations and closed ecosystems. Why? “Because it just [redacted] works.” He highlights Mac sync, but especially performance as key. Long delays in being able to use the Pre calendar, phone, and camera apps are especially irksome.

I don’t expect the performance of this phone to be even remotely suitable for every day use for at least a year. I figure it’s going to either take a substantial amount of work on the lower levels of the OS, or they’re going to have to throw Moore’s law and new hardware at it…

Next up, Steven Frank, who abandoned the iPhone after the Google Voice incident, and returned to it when he couldn’t find happiness with another device, nails why that’s still the case some 2 years later:

It’s not just that the iPhone has fancy woo-woo transitions and purty graphics; it runs all the way down the software stack. For example, when I tap on something, I don’t have to hover for five seconds wondering “now did it get that tap, or do I have to do it again?” This is something other platforms are still struggling with. When we say you have a bad experience, this is the sort of thing we mean. It has little to do with features, and everything to do with core functionality.

Lastly, Daniel Pasco offers a theory as to why — Apple spent years and a fortune figuring out the iPhone:

Because of that effort, since the iPhone was released, everyone else has been struggling to play catch up, and no one has really come close. Apple raised the bar higher than anyone else had before, and by the time the competition realized how much of an effort would be required to seriously compete, the public had already turned to them to see how they would meet Apple’s threat.

Spending 2.5 years in secret, and who knowns how many of those billions, and then unleashing the iPhone 2G multi-touch user interface changed the game in 2007, and more — it forced competitors to play catchup in public. Sure, many have the iPhone now to copy, but Apple has the momentum to keep innovating.

The question is, can incredibly rich companies like Microsoft, and amazingly innovative ones like Palm — or Google which is both — bridge that gap at the core functionality and user experience level?

[via Daring Fireball]

Apple has announced an iPhone Tech Talk World Tour, which is billed as expert advice, coming to a city near you.

Apple technology evangelists are coming to a city near you with expert advice on how you can maximize the innovative technologies of iPhone OS within your apps.

Advanced content for advanced developers

The iPhone Tech Talk World Tour features a range of sessions for advanced developers who want to enhance the capability, functionality, and usability of their iPhone apps. You’ll dive deep into coding and design techniques that will help you take your apps to the next level.

Don’t miss this unique opportunity available only to you as a member of the iPhone Developer Program. The event is free, but space is limited. Register for an iPhone Tech Talk today.

Cities include San Jose, Seattle, New York, Toronto, Paris, London, Hamburg, Bejing, and Tokyo (already full). Schedule, agenda, and registration information can be found online via developer.apple.com.

Anyone going?

This weekend GigaOm brought word that Mozilla was working on an iPhone app. Of course, thoughts turn immediately towards their most famous product — Firefox. However, Apple doesn’t allow 3rd party code interpreters and that means no Gecko HTML renderer and no TraceMonkey Javascript engine. And again, I don’t think there’s any need for Mozilla to make a WebView wrapper…

So what else is there? Browser link sync? The iPhone will sync Safari links, or Internet explorer on Windows, but syncing links for Firefox users is thus far unsupported, and no doubt many would love to have that functionality:

Later, I sat around gabbing with Lilly and Jay Sullivan, Mozilla’s VP of Mobile, talking about Weave and the Awesome Bar, which is a way to get access to all your browsing history and bookmarks by just typing them in the URL bar on your browser. And while we were talking about Weave, I asked them if it was going to be part of this new, mysterious iPhone app. Lilly and Sullivan smiled and remained silent. Interestingly, they didn’t correct me.

Malik notes that Weave might be too competitive with MobileMe for Apple’s tastes, but that of course will depend on the exact implementation offered on the iPhone, and how flexible Apple is feeling (more so than ever, it seems of late). And if ever a Weave there was, bringing it to the iPhone certainly makes sense.

Gizmodo has an interesting post up on Apple’s iPhone App Store, and how it might be headed straight down the road to oblivion. Their basic take is that downward price pressure, users conditioned by iTunes to expect $1 songs and $2 TV shows, Apple recommending (and wanting) cheaper prices, high development costs with low chances for visibility, all combine to put iPhone (and iPod touch) development on the endangered species list. Further, yesterday’s announcement of in-app purchase for free apps, they argue, makes things like the Top Lists nebulous going forward.

And it doesn’t just apply to the iPhone:

don’t forget, Palm and Android fans, this App Store Effect sends ripples well beyond the App Store. Customers expect to see functionally identical apps priced the same way across platforms, because to us, that’s what makes sense. Can devs really afford to port an app to the webOS to sell to the tens of thousands of Pre owners, when they’re expected to tag it with iPhone prices, calculated for a base of millions? Whether by Apple’s design or totally by accident, everyone who doesn’t own an iPhone will suffer for it.

See their chart, above, showing the pricing differences between platforms. Some would argue the market can correct for anything. If premium developers leave in frustration, users will tire of CrApps, a premium developer will sense the voice, fill it, make a killing, and other premium developers will flock back. Others believe Apple controls the market and so it’s their job to make it as good a market for developers — and ultimately users — as possible through proper policies and procedures (BlackBerry, for example, won’t allow paid apps under $2.99 into the App World).

We’ve all discussed this a lot in the past, and no doubt will continue to discuss it moving forward, but give Giz’s article a read and let us know what you think.

Apple has just sent out a letter to developers introducing in-app purchasing for free apps.

UPDATE: Developers Erica Sadun on TUAW, and Marco Arment delve deeper into the subject, as does Techcrunch (twice).

ORIGINAL: Here’s what Apple had to say:

In App Purchase is being rapidly adopted by developers in their paid apps. Now you can use In App Purchase in your free apps to sell content, subscriptions, and digital services.

You can also simplify your development by creating a single version of your app that uses In App Purchase to unlock additional functionality, eliminating the need to create Lite versions of your app. Using In App Purchase in your app can also help combat some of the problems of software piracy by allowing you to verify In App Purchases.

Visit the App Store Resource Center for more details about how you can add In App Purchases to your free apps.

So in one email, Apple ends the clutter of Lite apps, provides a real possibility for demoware (a developer can provide 1 level of a game, for example, for free, and 10 more via in-app purchase), and offers developers the carrot of anti-piracy measures at the same time.

Previously, Apple was resolute about “free apps stay free” so as to avoid user confusion. What changed their mind, all of the above? And will in-app purchases in free apps be extra-carefully marked to avoid just such confusion?

[Thanks everyone who sent this in!]

An update from the folks Cerulean Studios on the status of the iPhone version of their popular IM client, Trillian:

It’s been 60 days since our initial and only submission to the App Store. Unlike many of the horror stories you may have read about, we haven’t yet received a rejection notice and we’re not frantically going back and forth with Apple fixing reported problems. Despite sending a steady stream of emails to Apple requesting status updates, we continue to receive generic form letters in response – frustrating, to say the least. As developers, we absolutely understand and appreciate Apple’s need to quality control applications – including the need for additional review time when warranted – but being kept in the dark for two months is a strange way to accomplish this. Cerulean remains ready and willing to work with Apple to ensure the software meets all necessary requirements.

We’re hoping they hear back soon as well. We’re also hoping Apple understands that their lack of communication continues to hurt what’s otherwise a fantastic success story with the App Store. Step up to the mic, will ya? Everything can’t be dead silence and boilerplate on one end, Phil Schiller email on the other…

[Thanks Robert for the tip!]