Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26
  1.    #1  
    Hi all,

    FYI.

    Take care,

    Jay

    For Apple, Yesterday’s Banned Apps Are Tomorrow’s Great New Feature
    By Eliot Van Buskirk June 10, 2011 | 1:27 pm |

    For Apple, Yesterday’s Banned Apps Are Tomorrow’s Great New Feature | Epicenter | Wired.com

    Apple deserves lots of credit for creating an entirely new market for mobile software in the iTunes app store, over which it justifiably reigns.

    But the army of developers who have created over half a million Apple iOS apps to date perform another valuable function, in addition to making Apple’s hardware more attractive to users and contributing 30 percent of their revenue to the company’s bottom line: Sometimes, they act like a big, unpaid R&D lab for incubating features that Apple can eventually incorporate into its own products — even after banning those same products from its app store (or, rather, “App Store”).

    Take Camera+, the camera app for the iPhone that has grossed $2.7 million in sales revenue for its creator Lisa Bettany (and her team). At the AdAge Creativity and Technology conference in New York City on Thursday, Bettany discussed the odd history of her app, which has been downloaded over three million times from iTunes leading to unexpected riches for its creator.

    Partner not foundLast August, Apple pulled Camera+ from iTunes because its new “VolumeSnap” feature allegedly violated Apple’s iPhone Developer Program License Agreement by allowing users to shoot photos using the iPhone’s “up volume” button. In its rejection notice, Apple explained, “Your application cannot be added to the App Store because it uses iPhone volume buttons in a non-standard way, potentially resulting in user confusion.”

    One reason the iPhone has been so successful is Apple’s tight control over its hardware — and indeed, Bettany told those assembled yesterday, the author included, that she doesn’t even consider it worthwhile to release an Android app because users on that platform refuse to pay for stuff that iPhone users gladly do. Apple was both her benefactor and her tormentor, until she pulled that feature, and her app was re-admitted to iTunes.

    On the left is Hughes' Wi-Fi Sync logo; on the left is Apple's Wi-Fi Sync logo (image courtesy of The Register).

    Earlier this week, Steve Jobs stood on a stage (watch) to announce a great new feature for the iPhone’s built-in camera app: the ability to take photos using the device’s up-volume button, which Jobs heralded as a fantastic new way to take capture a moment with a photo quickly, without hunting around for the camera app and waiting for it to load. In other words, one of Apple’s big new ideas is precisely the one for which it banned Camera+ last year.

    Another case of this curious behavior surfaced this week, as The Register reported the strikingly-similar tale of Greg Hughes’ Wi-Fi Sync app, which Apple rejected outright for its ability to sync iTunes music wirelessly to an iPhone using a local wireless network.

    On Monday, Apple unveiled, what else, a wireless syncing feature for moving music from iTunes to iOS devices — and, what’s more, it used a logo that’s practically the same as the one Hughes used for Wi-Fi Sync (available in the Cydia store for apps that can run on jailbroken iPhones).

    According to The Register, Apple asked Hughes for his resume while rejecting his app, but really, there was no need to hire him. They could incorporate his app — and even its name and, more or less, his logo — without paying him a cent.

    Like I said, it’s good to be king.
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  2. #2  
    Big corporations are fun aren't they? We may need another little guy start up soon. Google was one but now they are so big, they throw their weight around too.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  3. #3  
    Maybe Apple could incorporate a new logo - Why settle for 30% when you take the whole banana?
  4. ogeneo's Avatar
    Posts
    348 Posts
    Global Posts
    530 Global Posts
    #4  
    Maybe HP can copy their success?
  5. #5  
    The reality is that, as unscrupulous as this is, it happens all the time and the majority of users don't know or care about it. The same thing happened with the Spotlight feature in Mac OS X. I had been using Quicksilver for OS X for a while and then one day came Spotlight, a copy/rip-off of Quicksilver. Most people probably have never even heard of Quicksilver.

    While the internet has certainly democratized information (broad generalization) much more than in the past, it's still very much a game of who controls the flow of information controls the public perception. Small developer vs. giant corporation... guess who has more money to be the one claiming ownership/innovation?
  6. #6  
    Small developers may need to start applying for patents or something.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by hparsons View Post
    Maybe Apple could incorporate a new logo - Why settle for 30% when you take the whole banana?
    I wonder if Lisa could have made $2.7 million on Android or webOS?
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by un_designer View Post
    The reality is that, as unscrupulous as this is, it happens all the time and the majority of users don't know or care about it. The same thing happened with the Spotlight feature in Mac OS X. I had been using Quicksilver for OS X for a while and then one day came Spotlight, a copy/rip-off of Quicksilver. Most people probably have never even heard of Quicksilver.

    While the internet has certainly democratized information (broad generalization) much more than in the past, it's still very much a game of who controls the flow of information controls the public perception. Small developer vs. giant corporation... guess who has more money to be the one claiming ownership/innovation?
    Quicksilver is still better than Spotlight, if a bit bloated.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    I wonder if Lisa could have made $2.7 million on Android or webOS?
    Don't a lot of Android phones already have a camera button?
  10.    #10  
    Hi all,

    My point in posting it is as follows:

    for years Apple railed against MS for being unscrupulous and now they table have turned and Apple is doing the same things that Jobs himself was so angry at Bill Gates at....all is fair in love, war, greed, as well as M & A.

    take care,

    Jay
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  11. #11  
    Well I don't think MS ever forced someone not to do something THEN stole the idea to do it. I think all they did was say, "hey that's a good idea, let's steal it next time".
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Don't a lot of Android phones already have a camera button?
    Dedicated camera buttons, yes, but all Apple did here was make the Vol+ button the shutter button when inside the Camera app.
  13.    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Well I don't think MS ever forced someone not to do something THEN stole the idea to do it. I think all they did was say, "hey that's a good idea, let's steal it next time".
    Hi I agree what Apple did was horrible.....take care,

    Jay
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    Dedicated camera buttons, yes, but all Apple did here was make the Vol+ button the shutter button when inside the Camera app.
    Yea. But your question was could she have "made $2.7 million on Android or webOS". Obviously her app filled a missing feature that isn't missing on nearly as many devices for Android.

    As for webOS, were the APIs even available at the time to do an official app for that kind of function?
  15. #15  
    She says she refuses to make anything for Android. But it would depend on what her app does that would get those people to pay. Android still has free apps with a lot of functionality. However many people will still pay if they can remove ads, get more functionality, etc.

    Take Power Amp, so much better than almost anything out there in terms of music playback on Android. I don't know if they made $2.7 mil but people are certainly willing to pay them. If Player Pro fixes their equalizer sound enhancement, they'd be next in line.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Yea. But your question was could she have "made $2.7 million on Android or webOS". Obviously her app filled a missing feature that isn't missing on nearly as many devices for Android.

    As for webOS, were the APIs even available at the time to do an official app for that kind of function?
    There are COUNTLESS photography apps in the iOS app store that all let you edit, share, etc. photos. Lisa's was just the one that was done best.

    She initially tried to have the app approved with the volume button acting as the shutter release but due to it accessing private API's it was denied. Once she removed that single feature it was approved and became an instant success.

    There are still plenty of features that her app offers that the stock camera app does it; it still feels many voids that many of the 30+ million iOS users will find appealing.

    A company can't deny core features because it's already been done by a third party. They would be ignorant to NOT take the best from the app store and other areas and incorporate them into a core feature-set.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Phone Diva View Post
    She says she refuses to make anything for Android. But it would depend on what her app does that would get those people to pay. Android still has free apps with a lot of functionality. However many people will still pay if they can remove ads, get more functionality, etc.

    Take Power Amp, so much better than almost anything out there in terms of music playback on Android. I don't know if they made $2.7 mil but people are certainly willing to pay them. If Player Pro fixes their equalizer sound enhancement, they'd be next in line.
    It's funny the different mentalities other platform users have vs. iOS users. Even myself, when I was on Android I was always very reluctant to buy Android apps, and I really have no idea why. I'm not sure if it was the doubt in quality, compatibility, etc. or what.

    But even my cousin said the same thing when he got his iPhone 4 (he came from having an Evo). He never bought Android apps, but in his first month of owning an iPhone he spent over $100 on various applications.

    It's astonishing really.
  18. #18  
    Free apps that fully function, that's why. Why buy anything when there are free alternatives? But people do get sick of ads and/or limitation of functions that they need. They pay if an app is good.

    What Power Amp did was offer a trial so people can see how good it is. There are free alternatives but Power Amp has the sound and the equalizer to beat the others, even WinAmp. Plus features that music geeks love. FLAC support for one.

    SwiftKey, best keyboard replacement I've seen yet. They have a trial too, then you pay.

    People do pay if they want to continue using a good app. Some in the App Store have done this too. I notice a lot of early free apps are now paid.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    There are COUNTLESS photography apps in the iOS app store that all let you edit, share, etc. photos. Lisa's was just the one that was done best.

    She initially tried to have the app approved with the volume button acting as the shutter release but due to it accessing private API's it was denied. Once she removed that single feature it was approved and became an instant success.

    There are still plenty of features that her app offers that the stock camera app does it; it still feels many voids that many of the 30+ million iOS users will find appealing.

    A company can't deny core features because it's already been done by a third party. They would be ignorant to NOT take the best from the app store and other areas and incorporate them into a core feature-set.
    I actually just realized I was confusing her app with another one, the Camera Mic app that allows you to use the mic as a camera button. My bad.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by barkerja View Post
    It's funny the different mentalities other platform users have vs. iOS users. Even myself, when I was on Android I was always very reluctant to buy Android apps, and I really have no idea why. I'm not sure if it was the doubt in quality, compatibility, etc. or what.

    But even my cousin said the same thing when he got his iPhone 4 (he came from having an Evo). He never bought Android apps, but in his first month of owning an iPhone he spent over $100 on various applications.

    It's astonishing really.
    Sounds like a shopper's high.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions