Twitterrific developer Craig Hockenberry has written a long, considered essay on Furbo.org framing the changes Apple has already made to the iTunes App Store, what problems it still presents to developers, users, and Apple itself, and proposes some interesting solutions.

From the differences between selling music and apps, to the long delays and uncertainty surrounding the approval process, lack of viable upgrade options, ill-defined rules, inability to provide demos, inability to respond to iTunes reviews, and the lack of discoverability for apps, Hockenberry leaves few stones unturned — nor does he throw those stones, turned or otherwise, in Apple’s direction.

He comes off as a veteran developer more than a little frustrated not just at what is, but at not yet reaching the potential of what could be. One solution he proposes might be controversial — and we’ve heard it from him before — but is still more than promising:

Charge [developers] $999 for premium service. For professional developers, this cost is not prohibitive and would allow Apple to provide additional services…

He does, rightly, chastise Apple for not communicating effectively with developers — for failing to hold up their end of the platform partnership. However, by pointing out how far the App Store has come in just one year, it leaves us with hope that given Apple’s and developers’ shared passion for the iPhone, it can go further still in year two.

Right Apple?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Appy Anniversary: Hockenberry on How the App Store has Changed, and What Still Needs to be Changed

Twitterrific is looking to be the Alpha and Omega of iPhone Twitter clients. As it was first (before there was even an official SDK!), so it is also now the most recent — in snazzily updated 2.0 form.

So what’s changed? Nothing. And everything. Cliched, maybe, but Twitterrific was originally born from the Iconfactory’s passion for a graceful, gorgeous Twitter reading experience. But then came a host of other Twitter clients that banged the uber-functionality drums and while it seemed like every celebrity with an iPhone clung to the grandaddy goodness of Twitterrific, the unwashed tech-masses wandered elsewhere.

Well, with Twitterrific 2.0, many will wander back. It somehow manages to keep that quick, clean experience but — through UI wizardry — neatly tucks away most every power-user feature imaginable beneath the covers.

Old awesomeness remains — I’ve always loved the ability to quickly, and at any time, change from new tweet to @reply to direct message (dm) at the touch of a tab. New awesomeness is introduced — now I can also tap the “eye” icon to see the tweet I’m replying to for reference, to add another @username to the reply, etc.

Yes, in Battlestar Galactica terms, if Twitterrific 1.0 was the Cylon Centurian, Twitterrific 2.0 is the red-dressed Caprica 6. It has evolved. (And definitely has a plan).

Speaking of which: there’s inarguably the feature-equivalent of an arms race going on among iPhone Twitter clients, and it’s one that greatly benefits users. If the first Twitterrific was a board with a nail in it, and subsequent Twitter clients went from sword to gun, this is our first plasma cannon. And I can’t wait to see what happens next.

Note: Twitterrific 2.0 comes, as it always has, in two versions. There’s Twitterrific (Free with ad support – iTunes link) and Twitterrific Premium ($3.99 – iTunes link). I bought the original Twitterrific Premium and was startled to see Twitterrific 2.0 come to me as a free upgrade. I would easily have paid another $10 for this, much less $3.99. Donation button please?

Full gallery after the break!

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Quick App: Twitterrific 2.0 Twitter Client for iPhone

We know our readers are far too savvy to ever fall victim to the “greater internet ****wad theory“, but a couple posts today made us stop and think about App Store reviews, how the system works (or doesn’t), and whether we ever take the time to leave positive reviews for developers of our favorite apps, or just tear off in a fury when we think we’ve been badly done by?

Last things first, is iTunes stacked against developers? Maniacal Rage (via Daring Fireball) has highlighted an issue also raised today on Twitter by Craig Hockenberry, and submitted to Apple via Radar, namely that the iTunes review system, which may work well for music and other media, breaks down when it comes to the back-and-forth requirement of the app ecosystem.

Says Garrett Murray:

But my favorite part of this whole experience is that there’s no way for me to respond to reviews as the app creator. So I can’t go in and say, “Hey, by the way, version 1.3 fixes all this and we’re just waiting on Apple’s ridiculously slow and convoluted approval process!” I just sit by and watch.

Murray’s deeper contention is that, through a one-way review system on iTunes, and a fart-app-driven, race-to-the-bottom rewarded ecosystem, Apple is fostering exactly the kind of that developers don’t want to have as customers. Yep, the dreaded appsholes.

Perhaps developers, many of whom treat their creations as dearly as children, aren’t thick skinned enough to handle the greater pressure — and greater odds of negative pressure — that came with the 20 million iPhone OS (including iPod touch) ecosystem. Maybe users like us forget there are real, living, breathing people on the other end of our “send” buttons. Maybe anger and bad experience are greater motivators than appreciation and great experience. We don’t know.

But here’s what we’re interested in finding out: do you leave positive reviews for the apps you love? Of your top 5 favorite all time iPhone (or iPod touch) apps, how many have you left rave reviews for? And to help grow and support the developers behind those great apps, would you consider doing so now if you haven’t already?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Do You Ever Leave Positive iTunes Reviews For iPhone Apps?

As many of us eagerly wait for Twitterrific 2.0 to hit the iTunes App Store, developer Craig Hockenberry has provided an interesting insight into the mind — and strategy — behind one of the most high-profile development houses in Apple-dom. Says Hockenberry on being Trendy:

As software developers we often fall into the “just one more feature” trap. We want a 1.0 release to be awesome, and that one more thing will only take a day or two, and people will love it, so why not?

Because that awesome feature could be a very good thing to generate buzz and sales for a 1.1 or a 1.2 release. And by not “doing it all” in the first release, you get your product to market faster. You’ll be making money while you implement that cool new feature.

And holding back can have another advantage: you might find that your users want something different than what you had planned. Their input can often change your idea, so don’t waste time doing something without feedback.

The rest of the article is a worthy read, as is his blog Furbo.org in general.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Hockenberry on App Store, Being “Trendy”, and Why NOT to Delay for Extra Features

Craig Hockenberry and the Icon Factory are among the earliest and most well respected iPhone developers in the community. In addition to their amazing design work and Mac and Windows software, they created the highly popular Twitterrific and Frenzic for the iPhone.

TiPb: We’ve been spending a lot of time lately discussing the App Store and what business model(s) it will evolve From launch, you took the route of having both a premium paid version of Twitterrific and a free, add-supported version. What made you settle on that idea, and how effective has it been for you?

Craig Hockenberry: The desire to have both a free and paid version of Twitterrific came from our experience on the Mac. It’s the best of both worlds for everyone: we get some funds to pay for the development of the product, and users get to choose how they want to support us.

We decided on having ads before the final details of the App Store were revealed. Since there are no demos in iTunes, the ability to have a free version for people to evaluate has been a big benefit. A lot of my fellow developers are now looking at this model.

With stories about apps being rejected or removed from the App Store, how (if at all) does this effect your planning or strategy as a developer? Is it something a developer should have to consider?

Rejections and other App Store issues are certainly a factor in planning. But it’s just one aspect of a successful product: it’s more important to focus on how an app will make customers happy or solve a problem.

That being said, I know of an app that was cancelled before it even left the drawing board. It included both podcasting and fart noises, and was actually a great app concept. I’m sad that it will never get made.

There’s still a demand for multitasking on the iPhone, which would obviously benefit apps like Twitterrific. How far will Apple’s still- pending Push-Notification service go towards satisfying this demand for you as a developer and as a user?

Asking me about a unreleased Apple technology isn’t going to get you a very interesting answer. (This stuff is still under NDA.)

I will make the observation that Apple is still getting its own push service (MobileMe) in order, so we’re all waiting to see how this will pan out. It’s not a simple problem from a developer’s point-of-view.

Now that Twitter seems to have solved their up-time issues, what could they surface or add to their platform to make apps like Twitterrific even more useful or powerful?

There are a lot of things that could make Twitter more useful: http://bit.ly/9L0A

One thing I see a need for is the ability to “jump into” existing threads of conversation amongst a group of users. This has been hard to do until recently because replies didn’t contain accurate links to original tweet. That has improved recently (thanks to Twitter implementing one of my suggestions.) But there could still be a lot done in that area to make the user experiences better.

You’ve now developed for the iPhone during three distinct phases: pre-SDK, post-SDK under NDA, and now SDK post-NDA. Any particular insights you gained from that range of experience, and what steps would you like to see Apple take next?

Everything led up to the “SDK post-NDA” phase. It’s what I wanted all along: developers can now freely exchange information about what we’re working on. When something doesn’t work right, others can help.

I think Apple is fully aware of this need: the recent launch of devforums.apple.com is an excellent example of how they’re actively working to help developers come up to speed with this new platform.

The only thing that I’d like to see from Apple at this point is a detailed list of what is and is not allowed in the App Store. This lack of information regarding acceptance limits innovation from developers: it’s too risky.

If there were absolutely no limitations on the SDK, what app would you never consider developing yourself, but still love to see on the iPhone?

I’d love to see a native version of Lotus Notes with excellent calendar support.

Seems like a strange request, I know.

But my wife uses a BlackBerry because she needs this functionality. If it was available on the iPhone she could buy her own and stop borrowing mine all the time

Profound thanks to Craig Hockenberry for taking the time to share his insights on the iPhone.

Furbo.org is his personal blog, iconfactory.com is his company’s website, and both Twitterriffic (read our review) Free and Premium and Frenzic (read our Forum review) are available via the iPhone iTunes App Store.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

TiPb Interview: Craig Hockenberry on Free vs. Paid, Twitter To-Dos, and Why He Wants Lotus Notes for the iPhone

Not content to simply produce great (and great looking) software, Craig Hockenberry continues to knock it out of the park on his furbo.org blog as well, this time with an open letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs on App Store Pricing:

As an iPhone developer who’s been in the App Store since its launch, I’m starting to see a trend that concerns me: developers are lowering prices to the lowest possible level in order to get favorable placement in iTunes. This proliferation of 99¢ “ringtone apps” is affecting our product development.

This is something we’ve been following on TiPb, and something that both interests and concerns us greatly. The App Store is quite literally a killer app on the iPhone, but competition of revving up from all sides, including Android Market and the BlackBerry series of offerings.

Check out Hockenberry’s complete article, and let us know what you think Apple could do to properly incentivize developers to make the next Excel, the next Quark, the next killer app?

Or should they? Do you prefer your $0.99 apps, and don’t really care if we ever see anything more?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Hockenberry: An Open Letter to Steve Jobs on App Store Pricing

Back before my iPhone was torn from me (sniffle) for the Round Robin, Twitteriffic was (and will be again) my mobile Twitter client of choice. Since TiPb has also been looking into App development and iPhone UI lately, this all added up to make Craig Hockenberry’s post today on furbo.org especially interesting. Hockenberry talks about the importance of making choices in development, about what features to add and what to leave out, and perhaps most importantly to us, in variety of different approaches:

There will always be more than one way to solve a problem: a developer’s personal preferences will inevitably seep into the implementation. Having many choices for a Twitter client means that developers don’t need to create a “one size fits all” solution. In essence, users get to choose a developer whose preferences match their own.

If you’re at all interested in a behind-the-curtains peak into what makes a good app great, be sure to read the whole article.

Also, let us know if you’re currently using Twitterrific, if what he mentions was already obvious to you, or if you’re using another Twitter client, what you’re using and why you prefer it?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Hockenberry on Choices and Designing Twitteriffic

For the last week or so I’ve been beta testing a well known iPhone application. Beta testing involves using the 100 iPhone “Ad Hoc” distribution method first outlined at WWDC 2008. I was planning on writing up the process, and my experiences being involved in it (all straightforward, all great — all definitely far more work for developers than testers) when, thankfully for all involved, one of the foremost iPhone devs, Craig Hockenberry of Twitteriffic fame, went and did it the way it should be done.

Interested in Ad Hoc distribution and how iPhone beta testing works? Get you to reading over at his site, Furbo.org.

Meanwhile, Erica Sadun over at TUAW presents a very well though out essay on how Apple could (and should?) improve the App review process with more objectivity, consistency, and transparency.

In [redacted] NDA land, John Gruber over at Daring Fireball offers an interesting theory, via a reader: what if it’s all about patent protection? Seems Apple might start the clock ticking when the NDA is lifted, and the technology gets published, and their lawyers may not have all the dots and crosses in place yet.

Finally, is it time to put BoxOffice on a milk carton yet?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

State of the Apps: Ad Hoc Distro and Beta Testing, a Call For Review Sanity, and NDA All About Patents?

A few posts back we got into a few App Store early growing pains/gripes, including that some less-scrupulous — or more marketing-savvy, depending on your point of view — developers were prepending spaces and symbols to their App names in order to get them to sort higher in the alphabetical listings. Well according to MacUser (via Ars), seems like Apple called shenanigans on that one and has put an end to the practice.

Visiting the App Store now, I see that Jirbo’s titles, as well as quite a few others, still have a space in front of them, but are simply alphabetized by the following letter.

Nicely done. Would that all App Store problems were so easily solved…

We likewise mentioned that one of the big problems with the App Store, given its locked-down distribution method and gagging NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) was that it effectively prevented developers from doing proper betas, collecting crash or other bug data, and testing fixes. That is if, unlike Iliumsoft, you can even get your App into the Store!:

Wow. If you think waiting for eWallet is painful out there, try being in here. We were really fired up for the big launch and now we’re just pulling our hair out wondering what is happening (and if you’ve seen pictures of me, additional hair removal is a serious problem in my case.) We were told that the app would appear by the 11th, talked to “thrice-removed from the actual AppStore” support personnel, emailed every person we can think of, and stared endlessly at the status screen willing it to change. Still, nothing.

Twitteriffic’s Craig Hockenberry (unsurprisingly via Twitter) posts that the length of time it takes Apple to push out updated Apps can lead to buggy versions still being downloaded even after they’re fixed:

A few minutes ago, the first line of the Fit description was “* THIS VERSION OF FIT HAS SHIPPED WITH A CRASHING BUG *” The next line was: “We have uploaded a fix in version 1.01, but Apple has not deployed the update to the App Store at this time.”

What’s more, the Review feature in iTunes for the App Store has become a vehicle for more than just reviews, with some apps getting literally flamed for dozens of posts (e.g. BoxOffice getting blasted in post after post by irate Canadians for only providing US Zipcode support, nothing international). Others just get nonsense. Again, via Hockenberry:

Another fine review: “Make sure you have this app when you’re digging your bomb shelter or spying on your neighbors’ subversive activities.” This is a real shame: it could be a wonderful way to collect ideas and feedback. Instead, it’s just frustrating. One can only hope that someone at Apple eventually figures out that software is not music. I’ve never had an MP3 crash or lack features. Flagging the reviews as inappropriate seems to have no effect.

Some developers have gone so far as to suggest a mass boycott from App Store (reportedly they can withdraw and terminate the distribution agreement at any time) as a way to get Apple’s attention. (Because, of course, Steve Jobs has always been easily swayed, right?)

Especially if, according to Tech Crunch, for-pay apps are increasing in popularity on the App Store. We hands out our money, we wants our awesome user experience.

Hopefully Apple will respond quickly and improve the system for both users and developers alike. Proper beta and QA, never mind a system for demos, would go a long way towards making better Apps all around.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

App Store Re-Ordered, Developers Still Daunted

The iPhone SDK will not allow 3rd party apps to multitask or run background services. We’ve previously covered both initial developer Twitter-rage at this, and pundit counter-points. We’ve also covered Craig Hockenberry before — the man who (perhaps poetically) develops Twitterrific for the Mac and jailbroken iPhones, and is now bringing it to the SDK.

Hockenberry, via his furbo.org blog, shares his experience on iPhone development and his views on the multitasking (non-?) issue.

To be blunt, I’ve never seen so many experts without a fricken’ clue. If you haven’t written code using the jailbreak tool chain, your opinions on the iPhone SDK, based entirely on what you see in a simulator, just aren’t relevant. You might as well be explaining the nuances of brain surgery.

Wha-wha-wha-what? Please, allow Mr. Hockenberry to continue:

Twitterrific on the iPhone could definitely make use of a background process to gather new tweets. In fact, a prototype version of the software did just that. And it was a huge design failure: after doing XML queries every 5 minutes, the phone’s battery was almost dead after 4 hours. In fact, the first thing I said after giving Gruber this test version was “don’t use auto-refresh.”

Hockenberry goes on to discuss the power demand problem of the radios, both EDGE and Wi-Fi, and the danger of even well-intentioned developers getting individually reasonable but collectively overwhelming access to background services. He does, however, expect that in a future release Apple may include some method of notifying network apps that the radios are being used (for example, by MobileMail Touch), and allowing brief TCP/IP connections during that period. Bottom-line, at the OS’s discretion, not the individual apps’.

Sound reasonable? Sound crazy? Should Apple give unfettered access to everyone immediately an trust users to sort through it themselves? Or should Apple be as strict as possible from the get-go? What do you think?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Multitask-Masters: Brain Surgeon Stat!