I think JWZ has some of the details wrong. The Palm app catalog may resemble the Apple app store. This is not a bad thing. This is a repository of apps that are easy to find and install from the device itself, and it carries a certain seal of approval from Palm/Apple. There should be quality requirements for this distribution channel.
However, there is no "2nd citizen" app store. What Palm is doing is providing a link to your app that can be posted anywhere that will do exactly what JWZ wants: install the app on your phone when clicked. There is no charge for this link, and the app is not reviewed. Palm is simply hosting the app for you AND providing over-the-air updates for your app. What you don't get is the on-device distribution channel.
(Disclaimer: I work at Palm, but am not in developer relations. These are my opinions; I'm not privy to information on this topic outside of what you fine folks have.)
That's just semantics. Palm is still in control of it. It is their catalog, and the app is surely hosted on their servers.
So maybe the user-facing interface for getting at apps is a web page instead of a "store" application that runs on the device. That's just an implementation detail. Palm is still mediating my interaction with my customers.
I love the "that's just semantics" argument. Semantics have connotations, and his were far from the truth. The "just an implementation detail" is another favorite. The differences between good programs and bad programs that do the same thing are, largely, implementation details.
It's great that people want to discuss the upsides and downsides of this approach, but the dismissive language and outright anger in the original post makes JWZ's argument weaker.
I doubt you'll ever see this, for security reasons.
I'm just imagining a scenario where I install your app, and it decides to SMS all of my contacts with a bit.ly link to spread itself, send out emails and do whatever else it wants to.
At least linking through Palm, they know who you are as the app author and can shut down the app if necessary and go after you if your app turns malicious.
But this is exactly his point, this kind of gatekeeping is ridiculous. If it hasn't been necessary for PalmOS previous and it's damn clear that desktop operating systems don't work this why, why do phones have to? There's much more sensitive information on my desktop computer and much more potential for damage yet when it comes to my phone I have to be treated with kid gloves?
I think the much better argument to make in Palm's favor is that 30% is a lot of money, not that it's a good idea to keep users "safe."
1. You can install whatever you want on your own phone if you first enable developer mode. It's very easy to do.. See the homebrew app scene here: http://www.precentral.net/homebrew-apps
2. Palm hasn't tried to shut down the homebrew scene at all. Actually they have been reaching out to developers of those apps and offering to let them host their apps in the official app store too.
3. Most people are not going to go through the trouble of hacking their phone just to install homebrew apps. They expect their phone to act like a phone, and they don't want to have to buy a virus scanner just to protect their phone from threats. For those users, I think the kid gloves are reasonable.
4. I believe Apple takes a 30% cut from iPhone app sales too.
And who gets blamed every time some dumbass downloads an attachment named britney_spears_naked_pic.exe and runs it? Windows, for being un-secure and virus prone. Palm's trying to avoid that fate, just like Apple is. I can't say I blame either of them. They're simply learning from history.
The only difference is they're letting those of us who know what we're doing install whatever we want via the homebrew route.
If jwz really wanted people to have his tip calculator (because the other 8 that are already there aren't good enough I suppose) he could simply post it at one of the many places that are referenced by WebOs Quickinstall or Filecoaster or Preware and people like myself who can't even spell SSH let alone use it can install the app.
Android allows this (users can download apps directly from third-party web sites). It just requires the user to check an "I know what I'm doing" box in the settings first.
I really think his interpretation on the "second citizen" app catalog is completely wrong. I've read the palm release and it doesn't say that at all..
JWZ had a very valid point the first time around, and he got everyone's attention, deservedly so. But in Part II he comes across as being whiny and rude, even misrepresenting the Palm press release.
No, he's right. If Palm has a way to deny a developer the means to let his users install his (open source) application, they are still the middleman. That's the kernel of his objection, and that's still there.
One day we're going to look at these dark days of app approval processes, registration fees, application fees, fragmented platforms, crazy APIs and laugh. Or cry.
What an awkward phase.
I for one hope for a decent cross-platform browser API that lets me access mobile phone functions (database / GPS / camera) in js and just be done with all this drama.
I agree with you. Its sad that we have taken all this stuff as being "normal". From start ($99 fee) to finish (30% of sales), they are ripping developers off. They should be paying developers to build apps that are resulting in more and more sales of these phones.
From start ($99 fee) to finish (30% of sales), they are ripping developers off.
That's very subjective. It's apparent that thousands of developers feel that what they get in return is worth the price. If they don't like the price of goods and services, they can choose not to buy them. They are not on the whole being deprived of anything that is owed to them. It's accepted as "normal" because it's the way commerce works everywhere, and because these are very established practices in fields other than desktop software.
They should be paying developers
They are! Why do you think developers are choosing to develop for these platforms? Where do you think the other 70% goes?
Pay developers to make apps? This doesn't happen for desktop computers/laptops, games consoles, etc., so why do you think it should be different for mobile phones?
Roughly on the app store topic, an app store for TVs/set top boxes is going to be big one day in the near future. Could quickly take the Apple TV to a new level.
Closed platforms, for all their sins, are generally easier for consumers. The process to buy an app in iTunes is dead simple. Media Center PC's (for most people) require having a friend with patience and skill.
I'm tired of telling friends and family how to install and maintain systems like "a computer hooked up to a TV". There's a reason why there are more TiVos out there than MythTVs.
If someone could build an alliance to get this into next-gen TVs without a standalone STB, they could rake it in. Weather and news apps, live TV guides with video previews, games, photo viewers, etc.
Maybe a modular, generic box to include in the manufacturing process, with built-in wireless or ethernet plug, ability to update firmware via the net, and a central app store and paywall.
Alternatively, just build it as a STB with a fairly killer feature out of the box, loss-lead on getting them out there, and control the app sales. The 360 is probably the closest thing to it, but it's large and expensive compared to what would gain greater market penetration.
I agree; what he wants is a stellar idea and how it should work for definite.
The problem is twofold.
Firstly Apple. They achieved unbelievable lockin (even accounting for jailbreaking) with the App Store and are certainly raking in a fortune with it. Im not surprised Palm want a portion of the pie.
Secondly; I bet you the Pre is "sold" at a loss. Because Palm looked at the App Store and thought "hey that is a limitless pot of money, lets do it!". Im sure the Iphone/Ipod Touch is sold for the same sort of "loss" - the profit is from tertiary services (this is a fairly standard model, right).
We already have a dangerous simile for this sort of loss leader system: it's called printed news media. They make money off of advertising revenue and that is falling apart as things evolve.
There will be a revolution in phone software at some point; a time when phone providers finally realise they should open up their phones to other OS's the same way computers are. When that happens these companies are fucked; and I dont think it can be too far away. The number of disgruntled App store devs is growing, Android is increasing in popularity and gaining market traction (though I dont rate any of the production phones yet) and it looks like Palm devs will be joining the pool. That is a dangerous group of people :D
I am not sure I see the "open" trend. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the future is the integrated hardware / software / store. Look at game consoles, iphone, and palm pre. The "open" computer might actually be a blip in computing history. (Please Note: I am not liking or advocating this trend)
My problem with Android is my general problem with Google. It seems like they are incapable of doing the kind of UI polishing required to have a great consumer product. Given how they have treated some of their UI people, I don't see this changing. You need someone with the authority of a Steve Jobs or Jonathan Ive to do real design. You can't just have pretty icons.
I don't like it much either, but it mostly depends on what most customers want, whether there is enough value involved for some players to go for niche (hobbyist &/or programmer) markets, and on how well the closed systems can be made to work together (for example exchanging info between phones and other systems).
Actually, Apple makes a mint on every iPhone and iTouch (see http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2009/06/iphone_3gs_cost...) to the tune of about 50% of the retail price, or 100% of the manufacturing cost, whatever way you want to look at it. This excludes all research, development, and marketing of course.
That's interesting thanks for that. I do have 2 points though.
Firstly that you do really have to include R&D cost - I bet that adds a reasonable amount.
Secondly that your using the retail price of the phone; I don't imagine Apple gets that full amount per sale. Plus dont forget upgrades - my upgrade phone [it's coming tomorrow. woo! :)] is costing £50 ($80 ish).
What he wants is basically what Palm is giving him, except for one point..
The device won't install apps directly off the developer's website - it will only install apps either through the actual app catalog, or through a free link that somehow goes through Palm. However they said that they would provide these links for any app, even without any formal review process. Really, this is a good thing.
Why? Because Palm needs to be able to yank an app if it turns out to be malicious. They are doing this to protect their platform, and it's a reasonable security measure.
In this same world where Apple and Palm babysit phone owners does Dell get to dictate what software I install on my netbook and get to ban certain pieces of software because they're not approved by them? I understand the idea of vendor lock in and I don't think it's in Palm's worst interests to try to profit from their App Catalog but trying to justify it based on safety just sounds absurd.
Why should I let Palm decide what I can install on my phone? Android, Windows Mobile and PalmOS users have been doing fine with having the option of installing their own software.
You still can install whatever you want on the phone. You just need to jump through a few (very minor) hoops to enable developer mode.
The Palm Pre has a thriving homebrew community of hackers who have done exactly this, and have written over 250 apps that don't go through the standard Palm app store and can be installed just by a normal download link.
Palm devs have even been following the homebrew community closely and invited many of the developers there to offer their apps through the official app store as well as through the homebrew scene.
If the app was on the device from the web or from a store it could remove their capability, but if the app is not yet on the device palm can easily upload a list of bad apps to not allow to run. Presumably this is what they would have to do with an existing app store app that went bad as a way to kill the one that have already been installed.
So, $99 fee and $50 per app for the "real" app store. I wonder how this is going to effect the developer's decision on what pricing should be and how feature filled the application will be?
The $99 fee is basically the same as what it costs to become a developer for the iPhone. The $50 fee for being listed in the official App Catalog is different, and feels like a good alternative to me since they also have the free distribution option. This should help avoid the App Catalog getting over-crowded with a ton of really poor cheap/free apps, and hopefully means the App Catalog will attract developers producing the higher quality applications.
I think you are right on the effect. I bet a developer who hands over $50 will be a lot more uptight in delayed deployment of that app.
My main problem with the iTunes App Store from a customer point of view is I feel like I have tunnel vision and can't really see the app and comments. I wish I had something like the Amazon shopping experience.
Has this gentleman addressed why he's developing for the Pre in the first place? It seems like Android would be a much better fit for him. There are more Android handsets out there, multiple models with many more on the way, and the OS has a very clear future ahead of it. It feels like some self imposed torture on his part. Both Palm and Apple make their terms pretty clear -- there's no bait & switch here from what I can tell.
Has this gentleman addressed why he's developing for the Pre in the first place?
He's a long time Palm fan/user/developer from back in the 'good old days'. Also he's said that he thinks the Pre is an very nice platform to program for and finds it far easier than the iPhone. So basically he develops for the Pre because he likes the Pre, he just wishes it was easier to distribute the results for free to other Pre userd.
He doesn't trust google & won't create a google account. I'm not an android user, but I believe that this precludes a lot of the functionality on an android phone. Last week he was looking for an RSS reader replacement, but wouldn't consider google reader.
Sounds a little paranoid, to me. He could create a throwaway google account and buy a dev phone, or buy one of the many non-google-branded Android phones either already on the market or coming out this quarter, which can be used without a google account. Once you've got the phone, there's absolutely no requirement that you use a google account whatsoever. The only functionality which requires it are the google apps (gmail, maps, etc, and using the market). There's even a 3rd-party app market already out there (http://slideme.org/)
I don't see how letting google knowing who he is -especially when they probably ALREADY know- is any worse than letting Palm know who he is. For him to tear his hair out over Palm's bullshit, especially when in all likelihood Palm's will probably lose in the end, seems like a futile and masochistic exercise.
However, there is no "2nd citizen" app store. What Palm is doing is providing a link to your app that can be posted anywhere that will do exactly what JWZ wants: install the app on your phone when clicked. There is no charge for this link, and the app is not reviewed. Palm is simply hosting the app for you AND providing over-the-air updates for your app. What you don't get is the on-device distribution channel.
(Disclaimer: I work at Palm, but am not in developer relations. These are my opinions; I'm not privy to information on this topic outside of what you fine folks have.)