Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 245
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    That said, there has to be some way to have some assurance an app will be accepted before putting 100's of hours in on it. Like submitting a business plan so to speak. Again, its not my field so no clue.

    So is the app too risky to install or is it more along the lines of palm not wanting an app that duplicates one of its core apps? Apple is upfront about it. I hope Palm will be too.
    While there is no assurance that your app will be accepted after all your work -- you can be pretty sure its *not* going to be accepted it you use private, undocumented APIs and you identify your app as "com.palm.appname" rather than "com.yourcompany.appname" in an attempt to get around the structure they put in place to keep these APIs private for now.

    Its not about functionality - its clearly a case of Palm not wanting to accept applications that use parts of the system that are undocumented and private. Particularly when these apps attempt to identify themselves as applications written by Palm to avoid the restrictions they put up to keep developers from using these private APIs for now.
  2. #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by rwatkinsthumbplay View Post
    While there is no assurance that your app will be accepted after all your work -- you can be pretty sure its *not* going to be accepted it you use private, undocumented APIs and you identify your app as "com.palm.appname" rather than "com.yourcompany.appname" in an attempt to get around the structure they put in place to keep these APIs private for now.

    Its not about functionality - its clearly a case of Palm not wanting to accept applications that use parts of the system that are undocumented and private. Particularly when these apps attempt to identify themselves as applications written by Palm to avoid the restrictions they put up to keep developers from using these private APIs for now.
    Media will trumpet that the app got rejected. The public, including myself, doesn't want to hear about undocumented private api's or other nonsense.

    Guess its not too private if the developer used them?

    It's just another case of Palm, get it done. Quit making excuses. If the app works, and does your core app better, then find a way to get it in there.

    Heck, this method seems right up Palm's alley since they do it to Itunes.
  3. #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Media will trumpet that the app got rejected. The public, including myself, doesn't want to hear about undocumented private api's or other nonsense.

    Guess its not too private if the developer used them?

    It's just another case of Palm, get it done. Quit making excuses. If the app works, and does your core app better, then find a way to get it in there.

    Heck, this method seems right up Palm's alley since they do it to Itunes.
    Can't be said enough. Most defenses of Palm in this thread ring mighty hollow when you consider the iTunes back and forth. The Where? app is yet another example of even the most resource-backed, official, and bigtime apps getting broken by updates anyway. Other apps apparently use undocumented APIs too.

    It should be Palm's priority to clear the roadblocks here. They should be courting new developers and apps with everything they have. Their app catalog is still crippled, and every rival ondevice app store has THOUSANDS and growing.
  4. #104  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Can't say i understand the whole process and especially using an undocumented api.

    That said, there has to be some way to have some assurance an app will be accepted before putting 100's of hours in on it. Like submitting a business plan so to speak. Again, its not my field so no clue.
    While you can never be 100% sure about how anyone will decide anything, its reasonable to assume that if an app relies on undocumented APIs it will be rejected. This may not apply to Android though since it is a true open source system so the concept of undocumented APIs doesn't really apply. For most platforms however, it would be unwise to develop a commercial application that uses undocumented APIs if you wish to sell it via vendor supported channels.

    Unfortunately the developer was unable to implement his application without using an undocumented API. This supports the view of many software developers (e.g. Kinoma) that the WebOS SDK is weak and the platform is not ideal for professional developers. The OP's decision to switch to Android development seems a wise one.
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    Media will trumpet that the app got rejected. The public, including myself, doesn't want to hear about undocumented private api's or other nonsense.

    It's just another case of Palm, get it done. Quit making excuses. If the app works, and does your core app better, then find a way to get it in there.
    "I dont care about details." "Just make it work." "I want it and I want it now!" "Waaaaa!" You sound like a child.

    There are reasons why its the way it is, but if you dont care to hear them and just demand you get everything right here, right now, regardless of the resources Palm has to spend and where to spend them, then there isnt much room for rational discussion.


    Guess its not too private if the developer used them?
    This is the beauty of a very open development environment - its easy to read thru the javascript source of applications and discover how things are done. Reading the source of the Palm applications has been very helpful when the SDK documentation is sparse.

    The "private" API was not hidden, it was just secured in a manner that an application had to identify itself as "written by Palm" to get access too. I imagine they knew developers would find these, but having to id themselves as Palm applications would make it easy to weed them out when they apply to the App Store.

    And then when the private APIs were ready for public use, they just document them and remove the identity restriction - making an easy path to put out new API features.
  6. #106  
    Very good analogy as to people acting like a child.

    Programming is about performing a task with a list of restrictions. That is true no matter what language and what environment. Using the documented API is a current restriction, unless you were one of the initial release partners.

    You contacted Palm about the music app 2 months ago. Did you ask if it is a problem to use unblessed APIs 2 months ago? They would have given you the same answer you just received.

    This whole thread just feels like a tantrum.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Can't be said enough. Most defenses of Palm in this thread ring mighty hollow when you consider the iTunes back and forth. The Where? app is yet another example of even the most resource-backed, official, and bigtime apps getting broken by updates anyway. Other apps apparently use undocumented APIs too.
    iTunes back and forth is much bigger than iTunes connectivity. It is about forcing openness and exposing a monopoly. It has nothing to do with App Store or App Catalog.

    Apple has the choice of what they want to release in their App Store to keep the reliability and future OS versions in sync. If you don't like it, release you App for use in Jailbroken phones. Apples rejection has been for reasons that aren't understandable by developers and often fickle.

    Palm has the choice of what they want to release in their App Catalog to keep the reliability and future OS versions in sync. If you don't like it, release you App in Homebrew for anyone to install. Palms rejection has a very easily documentable reason. You can try to work with them to get the API into the public or take your App and go home, while whining on here about it to stir up a public fever to get your way.

    Pesonally, I've waited working on a few app ideas that I have, because I don't have APIs for them yet. This seems more productive to me than fully developing them and then coming here an complaining that they were rejected after I know they are going to be.
    Last edited by sacherjj; 09/10/2009 at 08:53 AM.
    Your Pre wants Word Whirl from the App Catalog.

    It told me.
  7. #107  
    Tantrum? Child?

    We're talking about a company that misidentifies its own device to iTunes in order to hack sync functionality...then penalizes home developers for essentially doing the same.
  8. SHO_ONE's Avatar
    Posts
    179 Posts
    Global Posts
    182 Global Posts
    #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brain_ReCall View Post
    So are you using an undocumented/unsupported API, or are you using an existing API in an unintended way? Are they limiting only music file indexing, or file indexing in general?

    Sorry for sounding ignorant for this, but what is indexing do... I know I can look it up, but I'd like to hear what the community says..
  9. #109  
    Sucks it got denied Blubble, though I must admit I have to agree with Centro on page 3. Either way when you unleash it on the homebrew world I'll gladly donate to the cause.
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Tantrum? Child?

    We're talking about a company that misidentifies its own device to iTunes in order to hack sync functionality...then penalizes home developers for essentially doing the same.
    How did they penalize home developers? Did they force Precentral to shut down Homebrew? Did they sue to make WebOS-internal shut down? They have a choice for whatever they want to distribute in the App Catalog. There are legitimate business reasons for it.

    The iTunes sync is has no bearing on the App Catalog. Sorry you think so, but it doesn't. To make it a complete analogy, it would have to include Apple distributing the Pre and not wanting the iTunes hack installed on it when they distribute it. Otherwise it is a piece of software native to the system that Palm released. They are syncing with iTunes WITHOUT Apples blessing. You can run this app WITHOUT Palm's blessing. IT IS CALLED HOMEBREW.

    The rules for WebOS applications are pretty explicitly set for the Pay catalog beta. You may not use undocumented APIs. I don't know how much more explicit they need to be.
    Your Pre wants Word Whirl from the App Catalog.

    It told me.
  11. metdenn's Avatar
    Posts
    12 Posts
    Global Posts
    20 Global Posts
    #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Tantrum? Child?

    We're talking about a company that misidentifies its own device to iTunes in order to hack sync functionality...then penalizes home developers for essentially doing the same.
    You are ignoring several good points and just repeating a manta, which isn't produtive to debate.

    I won't go and reargue, but some posts stated the following;

    1. Itunes is being combated byu Palm itself, not by a single unincorp. dev.

    2. It's being done for publicity and to paint Apple in a poor light.

    3. It's not an app but a work around to an against-usb-standards Apple block, not a device.

    4. Apps breaking that people pay for is worse than free itunes breaking that has been consistantly fixed in an expedient manner.

    And so forth.
  12. #112  
    Quote Originally Posted by sacherjj View Post
    iTunes back and forth is much bigger than iTunes connectivity. It is about forcing openness and exposing a monopoly. It has nothing to do with App Store or App Catalog.
    Pffft. "Forcing openness and exposing a monopoly"? Are you serious? What monopoly? iTunes is optional software that syncs with a variety of devices already. Blackberry users can do it with MediaSync software from Blackberry.

    Apple has the choice of what they want to release in their App Store to keep the reliability and future OS versions in sync. If you don't like it, release you App for use in Jailbroken phones. Apples rejection has been for reasons that aren't understandable by developers and often fickle.

    Palm has the choice of what they want to release in their App Catalog to keep the reliability and future OS versions in sync. If you don't like it, release you App in Homebrew for anyone to install. Palms rejection has a very easily documentable reason. You can try to work with them to get the API into the public or take your App and go home, while whining on here about it to stir up a public fever to get your way.
    I absolutely agree that Palm has those rights. What I'm saying is that by carrying on the way they have with iTunes and releasing the Pre with such palty official app support, that they have not only erased any ethical highground with which they could deny this app without looking like hypocrites, but they have also created a situation in which they NEED apps like this and should be compelled to work with the developer to get it adhere to whatever double standard they are trying to uphold.

    Again, it's your right as a developer to sit quietly and wait for APIs to become available. Just as Palm COULD have worked out a legitimate sync solution to iTunes. But they didn't choose to wait because they thought it imperative to have this feature available, and even promoted it to their users without explaining the dishonest means through which they offered it.

    I would say a fully functional media player - whether by Palm or a third party - is at least as imperative. But that's my opinion. No whining.
  13. metdenn's Avatar
    Posts
    12 Posts
    Global Posts
    20 Global Posts
    #113  
    Quote Originally Posted by sacherjj View Post
    How did they penalize home developers? Did they force Precentral to shut down Homebrew? Did they sue to make WebOS-internal shut down? They have a choice for whatever they want to distribute in the App Catalog. There are legitimate business reasons for it.

    The iTunes sync is has no bearing on the App Catalog. Sorry you think so, but it doesn't. To make it a complete analogy, it would have to include Apple distributing the Pre and not wanting the iTunes hack installed on it when they distribute it. Otherwise it is a piece of software native to the system that Palm released. They are syncing with iTunes WITHOUT Apples blessing. You can run this app WITHOUT Palm's blessing. IT IS CALLED HOMEBREW.

    The rules for WebOS applications are pretty explicitly set for the Pay catalog beta. You may not use undocumented APIs. I don't know how much more explicit they need to be.
    QFT
  14. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #114  
    Sorry to see this happened. I can see Palm's point, but also understand why you'd be frustrated. I'd happily donate for a program like this. Hopefully once a more advanced SDK is put out and the API you used becomes public you can resubmit and get legitimately paid for your work.
  15. #115  
    Children, children there is plenty of time to compare each other to Hitler in another thread.
  16. #116  
    First and foremost, Blubble, I feel for you. I don't blame you for being upset. I hope that you WILL keep developing WebOS apps. I also hope that Palm works on the API to make it public. It sounds like they rejected you for a good reason, but on the other hand, their reason also rejects any other music or media or file browser type applications, and there would seem to be a whole lot in that category.

    From the public's point of view, all I can say is we should look at the incentives involved. Palm gets a cut of apps sold. It is in their best interest to approve good applications that will sell well, and Blubble's would certainly be in that category. We can only assume that from a pure business point of view, their incentive to reject apps using undocumented APIs is stronger. Why? Because they HAVE to keep WebOS maintainable, and because they have to make the user experience of the App Catalog as good and reliable as possible. They were willing to reject what would certainly have been one of the top sellers as a result.

    I hope they rectify the conflict for this app and others in its category--I want them to make money on good apps AND keep WebOS maintainable. It seems that this is do-able, it will just take more time. Yeah, I know, it gets said a lot, but Palm has a long term vision. We can choose to ride along now and enjoy the bumps or wait it out and get back on when the going is smoother. I kind of find the bumps interesting myself.
    Palm III-->Handspring Visor-->Sony Clie PEG-NR70-->no PDA -->Palm Treo 755p-->Palm Pre-->HP Veer
  17. metdenn's Avatar
    Posts
    12 Posts
    Global Posts
    20 Global Posts
    #117  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikah912 View Post
    Pffft. "Forcing openness and exposing a monopoly"? Are you serious? What monopoly? iTunes is optional software that syncs with a variety of devices already. Blackberry users can do it with MediaSync software from Blackberry.



    I absolutely agree that Palm has those rights. What I'm saying is that by carrying on the way they have with iTunes and releasing the Pre with such palty official app support, that they have not only erased any ethical highground with which they could deny this app without looking like hypocrites, but they have also created a situation in which they NEED apps like this and should be compelled to work with the developer to get it adhere to whatever double standard they are trying to uphold.

    Again, it's your right as a developer to sit quietly and wait for APIs to become available. Just as Palm COULD have worked out a legitimate sync solution to iTunes. But they didn't choose to wait because they thought it imperative to have this feature available, and even promoted it to their users without explaining the dishonest means through which they offered it.

    I would say a fully functional media player - whether by Palm or a third party - is at least as imperative. But that's my opinion. No whining.
    How do you know it's fully functioning? The author himself said it's not even ready for beta.
  18. TheCIArr's Avatar
    Posts
    42 Posts
    Global Posts
    55 Global Posts
    #118  
    Quote Originally Posted by Warblad13 View Post
    They are probably coming out with improvements and they don't mulitple music players out especally if is a paid app people might be mad
    I agree.

    Bubbles,
    Judging by the polish on this app, you have major skill. Please don't let this stop you from developing future apps. I think this rejection is just an issue that stems from WebOS' teething phase. I can only imagine how disheartening this must be for you but have too much talent to sit idle.
  19. #119  
    After reading through about ALL these replys, I think it was only mentioned briefly the bigger picture: Forget the API/Indexing smoke being blown...

    Palm wants to attract the big boys for right now. They want PTunes. Just like how they want the developer of the old PalmOS calendar, but they are stalling, "to see if there will be enough interest in the new webOS", which to me is complete BULL. These developers should back Palm irregardless since Palm has been using them! Anyways....

    Blubble, and everyone else, I believe that Palm is already in agreements with these other bigger companies and do not want to offend them by allowing another (probably better) player to come in and cause competition.

    NANplayer will probably be accepted after the other players have adequately established themselves in the app catalog.

    Palm probably didn't even want to make their own player, but was forced to because nobody else was either not ready yet, or not willing to develop for this fledgling OS.

    Blubble, keep developing other apps!! Keep developing and improving the NANplayer!! Put the NANplayer in the Homebrew!! I'll donate for sure... $20 even!! You're good! Do not be discouraged... It's business, not personal. Establish your player as a business so that it is better and eventually bigger than even PTunes!

    Be encouraged!
  20. #120  
    Quote Originally Posted by sacherjj View Post
    How did they penalize home developers? Did they force Precentral to shut down Homebrew? Did they sue to make WebOS-internal shut down? They have a choice for whatever they want to distribute in the App Catalog. There are legitimate business reasons for it.
    Again, for the cheap seats: From my FIRST post in this thread, I agreed that Palm indeed has the right to pick and choose. They can do so for reasons even flimsier than the "undocumented API" one. It's their App Catalog. Great.

    What I am contending is that by citing this particular reason with the implicit threat of the app not working once future updates happen to disable or change the API, that Palm has backed themselves into a hypocritical corner. The misidentification behind NANplayer to get access to the API seems - to my perspective. Feel free to convince me otherwise - IDENTICAL to Palm's own misidentification to get iTunes working.

    Again, if I am wrong about, please detail for me how I am, and I will gladly stand corrected.

    The iTunes sync is has no bearing on the App Catalog. Sorry you think so, but it doesn't. To make it complete analogy, it would have to include Apple distributing the Pre and not wanting the iTunes hack installed on it when they distribute it. Otherwise it is a piece of software native to the system that Palm released. They are syncing with iTunes WITHOUT Apples blessing. You can run this app WITHOUT Palm's blessing. IT IS CALLED HOMEBREW.
    That's great, but I'm pretty sure the developer didn't put in whatever time he put in for this to only be available to people willing to type the Konami Code, install apps on their PC, and go through multiple resets. I mean, to us, that's a fair price to pay, but it's a subclass within a subclass.

    Again, the OP/developer is technically in the wrong here, but Palm has created the environment in which he could freely assume no problems. There are multiple apps from developers in the "beta" App Catalog with undocumented APIs. Palm has Pre misrepresent itself to get iTunes sync capability. They seem to want apps badly. When I consider all of these things, I think Palm is obligated to clear the roadblocks here and work with the OP/Developer, rather than do an outright rejection.
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions