Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Software Apple

Why AppGratis Was Pulled From the App Store 146

Posted by Soulskill
from the stories-that-will-fit-your-preconceived-notions dept.
RougeFemme writes "By now, you may know that AppGratis, a popular app discovery app, was recently pulled from the App store. Apple listed violations of the following guidelines: '2.25 Apps that display Apps other than your own for purchase or promotion in a manner similar to or confusing with the App Store will be rejected. ... 5.6 Apps cannot use Push Notifications to send advertising, promotions, or direct marketing of any kind.' Now, the company's CEO, Simon Dawlat, has made a blog post with 'the rest of the story.'" As it turns out, AppGratis had been cleared by Apple for guideline 2.25 as recently as October, and its iPad version was approved less than a week ago. The brand new Apple review team member who contacted the company isn't able to explain what went into the decision to ban it now. Dalwat says the complaint about guideline 5.6 was 'another surprise for us since we only send one "system notification" a day to our users, coming in the form of a generic, opt-in only "Today’s deal is here!" message, which is precisely how Apple recommends developers to use its push notification service.'" However, the AllThingsD article cites sources claiming Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure." Dalwat does not address this in his post.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why AppGratis Was Pulled From the App Store

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Die by the walled garden.

    Develop open source if you don't want your hard work to live entirely at the whims of someone else, whose interests probably don't align with yours. All the worse if you put all your proverbial eggs in this basket, grew a bit, and had the carpet pulled out from under you (a 45-person company in this case).

    I feel sorry for these guys, but the problem is the walled-garden ecosystems which are - unfortunately - proliferating instead of dying out.

    They'll all die out eventually.

    • Die by the walled garden.

      And seek publicity for the walled garden (but remember: don't ever call it a jail, or even an internment camp!).
      According to TFA, their app got re-approved with a few tweaks. The whole thing reeks of being just another crapple crapvertisement from /.

      • Read the article... they had issues in the past, over-came them and believed to be in good standing, then they got pulled again.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by gnasher719 (869701)

          Read the article... they had issues in the past, over-came them and believed to be in good standing, then they got pulled again.

          It seems quite obvious that their app was very borderline, so getting pulled should not come as a surprise to them or anyone. There's also a small point in the guidelines that says "complaining about a rejection in public doesn't improve your chances of getting allowed back". In the end, iOS users will be able to survive without an app that makes purchase suggestions according to how much money they were paid.

          • by IronMagnus (777535) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @03:59PM (#43406087)
            No, I believe it should come as a surprise when you've been working with Apple Representatives, had an update approved by their review process, then have it pulled less than a week later. If apple wants quality apps in their store, they need to act in a predictable manner that businesses can work with.
            • by BitZtream (692029)

              It would be a surprise if you weren't trying to skirt the lines of the rules already, but they KNEW they were riding the line already. They've been rejected more than once before. It shouldn't really be a surprise when they ban it again, especially if it happens to be for reasons they may not have noticed in testing ... like say, notifications that weren't during the 'testing' phase?

              This isn't a quality app so this isn't an issue in that respect, no one is going to miss an app that recommends purchases ba

            • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward

              If apple wants quality apps in their store, they need to act in a predictable manner that businesses can work with.

              Cool story bro. Except that compared to the Play store and Amazon stores, the average quality in the Apple store is higher. We may hate it as geeks, but average users don't. So they're doing something right, even if it keeps me off their products.

              • The average quality of things that are available in the store might be, but a great deal of useful stuff is not available. And some stuff that is available is feature limited, so the assertion that it's higher quality is dubious (e.g. compare Kindle app on iOS and on Android).

                • You don't get to judge the entirety of the App Store based on a single app. If you did, I could write off Android a hundred thousand times over, where specific apps are either of poorer quality or not available on Android.

                  So, you can only narrow the question question is weather ebook readers on iOS are as good or better than on Android.

                  Amazon choosing not to take part in Apple's in-app purchase scheme is neither here nor there, other ebook apps do. Indeed Apple has a good one built in.

                  • I did get to judge the entirety of app store based on the whole selection available to me, and I pronounced it lacking. Kindle is but one example; anyone who owned both an iOS and an Android device can come up with plenty more. Sapienti sat.

            • This isn't a quality app. It's an app that essentially does paid recommendations, and nags people. Part of the reason why Apple's store does have better quality apps in it is because apps do get stopped when they overstep the mark of obnoxiousness.

          • "complaining about a rejection in public doesn't improve your chances of getting allowed back"

            What a petty little schoolmistress-authoritarian policy. Assuming app developers are cowed (and hey, they're developing for Apple! You bet they are), the rejection complaints we see are probably the top of the iceberg.

            • by BitZtream (692029) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @05:11PM (#43406871)

              What world do you live in that makes sense?

              You're arguing that Apple is petty for telling you that throwing a petty temper tantrum in public won't help you?

              Seriously?

              • by Vintermann (400722) on Wednesday April 10, 2013 @03:21AM (#43410057) Homepage

                You got to see this in context of Apple's policies. They've been known to exclude journalists from events because they've said things Apple didn't like.

                It's not just that Apple has a reputation for being petty and vindictive. Apple wants that reputation in the industry, so people dependent on them (or dependent on writing about them) talk them up on their own initiative, or at least abstain from criticism.

                In that light "complaining about a rejection in public doesn't improve your chances of getting allowed back" must be understood as what it is: a threat. If the app approval process was merely a matter of objectively interpreting the rules, the converse statement ("complaining about a rejection in public doesn't hurt your chances of getting allowed back") would be just as true, and why would they bother to say it then?

                But the converse isn't true. The app store guidelines aren't interpreted objectively or fairly, they're interpreted with the customary Apple vindictiveness and jealousy. And they want app developers to know.

                • You got to see this in context of Apple's policies. They've been known to exclude journalists from events because they've said things Apple didn't like.

                  It's not just that Apple has a reputation for being petty and vindictive. Apple wants that reputation in the industry, so people dependent on them (or dependent on writing about them) talk them up on their own initiative, or at least abstain from criticism.

                  In that light "complaining about a rejection in public doesn't improve your chances of getting allowed back" must be understood as what it is: a threat. If the app approval process was merely a matter of objectively interpreting the rules, the converse statement ("complaining about a rejection in public doesn't hurt your chances of getting allowed back") would be just as true, and why would they bother to say it then?

                  But the converse isn't true. The app store guidelines aren't interpreted objectively or fairly, they're interpreted with the customary Apple vindictiveness and jealousy. And they want app developers to know.

                  Wow. What a lot of anger. Can't you find anything interesting in your life to do other than rant against Apple?

                  • With that "Why do you hate America" answer, I think we can end the debate here.

                    • With that "Why do you hate America" answer, I think we can end the debate here.

                      Way to reply without anything. You spew about vindictiveness and jealousy. If you don't like them, fine - don't patronize them. But spending time ranting and raving accomplishes nothing. Chill out.

                • You got to see this in context of Apple's policies. They've been known to exclude journalists from events because they've said things Apple didn't like.

                  Oooh. Of course Samsung is known for inviting bloggers to international trade fairs, where they are forced to staff the booths. True story [thenextweb.com]. Not to mention suing journalists that say things they didn't like. Another true story [gizmodo.com]

    • by Minter92 (148860)

      Closed systems are bad um ok

      • by Karlt1 (231423)

        Closed systems are bad um ok

        So if open is so much better for developers, then why are iOS developers making 75% of the revenues from mobile app downloads?

        http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/11-quarterly-growth-downloads-leading-app-stores [canalys.com]

        • by Minter92 (148860) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @04:14PM (#43406211)

          Closed systems are bad um ok

          So if open is so much better for developers, then why are iOS developers making 75% of the revenues from mobile app downloads?

          http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/11-quarterly-growth-downloads-leading-app-stores [canalys.com]

          Money != morality

          • by TubeSteak (669689)

            Money != morality

            I would have gone with the much simpler answer:
            iOS devs make 70% from app downloads at Apple's forbearance.

            • by Karlt1 (231423)

              I would have gone with the much simpler answer:
              iOS devs make 70% from app downloads at Apple's forbearance.

              The same percentage that Google Play charges.

              • And it's more than ANY of the mobile app stores were paying before Apple came along. I was getting 57% on my Symbian apps.

        • then why are iOS developers making 75% of the revenues from mobile app downloads?

          The article you linked states that though Apple had the lion's share of revenue from priced applications, Google Play Store had more total downloads, paid and free, than downloads from Apple, Microsoft, and RIM stores combined. (Conspicuous by its absence from the article is Amazon, but that's beside my point.)

          Let me take a guess as to why Google wins downloads while Apple wins revenue. Apple never launched the iPod touch, iPhone, or iPad in a given country without support for iTunes payment. Google, on the other hand, chose to allow sales of devices with Android Market (now Play) in some countries to which it hadn't yet launched Checkout (now Wallet). To reach customers in those countries, developers had to make their applications available without charge and recoup their expenses through advertising. This set up an expectation among Android users that applications would have an ad-supported version. Didn't Rovio claim to earn more from advertisements in ad-supported versions of Angry Birds than from sale of priced versions?

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Karlt1 (231423)

            The article you linked states that though Apple had the lion's share of revenue from priced applications, Google Play Store had more total downloads, paid and free, than downloads from Apple, Microsoft, and RIM stores combined. (Conspicuous by its absence from the article is Amazon, but that's beside my point.)

            Let me take a guess as to why Google wins downloads while Apple wins revenue. Apple never launched the iPod touch, iPhone, or iPad in a given country without support for iTunes payment. Google, on th

            • [gigaom.com]

              Another article from the same site in September of last year states that iOS used to produce five times the revenue of Android, but the gap is shrinking [gigaom.com]. Even if iOS still draws 40 to 50 percent more revenue per user, acquisition costs per user tend to run lower on Android.

            • by Richy_T (111409)

              Alternatively, making the platform open to competition keeps app prices down. This, in turn makes the platform more attractive.

    • by MrEricSir (398214)

      "Develop open source if you don't want your hard work to live entirely at the whims of someone else..."

      That advice is all well and good until you want to actually get paid for your work.

    • by BitZtream (692029) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @05:07PM (#43406827)

      AppGratis is an app where developers pay money for getting their app in the Top 100 rankings and such. You pay them somewhere between 4k and tens of thousands of dollars, then you set your app to FREE for a day they tell you and the send a message to a certain number of users in order to get you pushed to the ranking you paid for on Apple's lists. Some of these users aren't actual users, just accounts used to inflate the rankings.

      This is the absolute scummiest type of 'marketing' in existence without flat out lying. Its manipulation of the system for financial gain based on bribes. Apple banning them is a GOOD THING. Might as well be Payola. Apple doesn't want their rankings or their users tainted by scummy advertising scams.

      Walled garden or not, you don't want this type of app or system to exist. Put down your apple pitch fork long enough to see the bigger picture.

      • by CHIT2ME (2667601)
        This is the absolute scummiest type of 'marketing' in existence without flat out lying. Its manipulation of the system for financial gain based on bribes. But, isn't that the Apple business model?
        • by mcmonkey (96054)

          But, isn't that the Apple business model?

          My first thought is Apple has it's own offering coming out that works exactly how AppGratis works.

      • What does paying to get "likes" from computer-generated accounts have to do with providing a list of free apps to iOS users?

    • by milkmage (795746)

      sure walled gardens have their pros and cons.. but the Play store would also SUCK if they let developers pay for placement

      http://allthingsd.com/20130408/confirmed-apple-kicks-appgratis-out-of-the-store-for-being-too-pushy/ [allthingsd.com]
      "In other words, app-discovery platforms built on paid recommendations aren’t going to fly with Apple."

      "app discovery" is different than "app PR" how exactly?
      some PR firms are into sketchy shit: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/09/08/25/1946230/gaming-the-app-store [slashdot.org]

  • Oh well...
  • Problem solved!
  • by TWX (665546) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @03:34PM (#43405831)

    Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure.

    As opposed to their somehow having managed to con local news into covering every stinking Apple Store opening even though retailers and service centers throughout Apple's history have provided the exact same services that the Apple Store provides, for the same price?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      CNN has mentioned linux on air 2 times in a decade.

      They've mentioned Apple about a googleplex...

    • As opposed to their somehow having managed to con local news into covering every stinking Apple Store opening even though retailers and service centers throughout Apple's history have provided the exact same services that the Apple Store provides, for the same price?

      B.S. Back in the day before the Apple store, it was nearly impossible to find a "brick and mortar" retailer that was knowledgable about their Apple products. The sales people would generally steer customers to PCs, and not even mention that they sold Macs. They carried very little if any Mac software if any at all. That's why everyone ordered through catalogs over the phone, from places like MacWarehouse, or directly from Apple. This lack of a physical presence is one of the reasons that Apple opened t

      • by cdrudge (68377)

        Back in the day before [new, obscure, inferior and/or unpopular brand] Store, it was nearly impossible to find a "brick and morter" retailer that was knowledgeable about their [new, obscure, inferior, and/or unpopular brand] product. The sales people generally steer customers to [other older, better known, superior, and/or popular competitor], and not even mention that they sold [new, obscure, inferior and/or unpopular brand products]. They carried very little if any [new, obscure, inferior and/or unpopula

      • by TWX (665546)
        citation PROVIDED [youtube.com]
        • "It didn't say advertising, so it must have been paid for."

          Are you advertising your own shitty Video Blog, or are you getting paid for it?

    • by Clsid (564627)

      You have to be kidding. How on earth whas the service or retailers before the Apple store the "exact same service". Besides, Apple Stores are like Gap for technology. The business model is being imitated already so please stop this nonsense.

    • Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure.

      As opposed to their somehow having managed to con local news into covering every stinking Apple Store opening even though retailers and service centers throughout Apple's history have provided the exact same services that the Apple Store provides, for the same price?

      Oh, so Apple cons the local news? Conspiracy theory much? Put down your tinfoil hat and open your eyes. You're blinded by your own hate.

  • I would probably find this app annoying, but so is Apple's schizo application vetting & approval policy.
    Animal entrails can be read more reliably.

  • by Attila Dimedici (1036002) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @03:40PM (#43405877)
    It is really simple to see what the problem was, if developers had money to pay to AppGratis to promote their app, they should instead be giving that money to Apple.
  • by girlintraining (1395911) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @03:44PM (#43405927)

    I've decrypted the Apple EULA. It says this:

    "Apple must make the majority of any profit to be had. Developers will be paid only a fraction of what their efforts are worth. Loyalty to the Furo--er, Brand is absolute. Apps which go against our brandalist(tm) propaganda are to be banned with immediate effect using one of the dozen or so vaguely-defined rules outlined below. Ka-Pla!"

    But more seriously guys... if you're developing for Apple, prepare to be raped. They don't give a flying fuck through a rolling doughnut about you, the developer. You should feel privileged to develop for the legacy of the Great Man Jobs. How dare you ask for a fair share of the profit! If you want that, go slink off and develop for (spits) that Anderzoid platform or whatever it's called. Apple is the future. Suck it up, cupcake.

    • How dare you ask for a fair share of the profit!

      I'm just curious--what do you consider to be a fair share of the profits?

      I have no complaint with Apple's policies for their App Store (it's their store, after all). My complaint with the App Store is mostly that it is the only way to get apps on your non-jailbroken iOS device, so there's no competition. If I want to distribute it myself and handle the infrastructure/support for my own store, too bad. If someone else comes along and wants to offer a differe

    • Re:Plain-text EULA (Score:4, Informative)

      by jo_ham (604554) <joham999@noSPaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @04:06PM (#43406149)

      I've decrypted the Apple EULA. It says this:

      "Apple must make the majority of any profit to be had. Developers will be paid only a fraction of what their efforts are worth. Loyalty to the Furo--er, Brand is absolute. Apps which go against our brandalist(tm) propaganda are to be banned with immediate effect using one of the dozen or so vaguely-defined rules outlined below. Ka-Pla!"

      But more seriously guys... if you're developing for Apple, prepare to be raped. They don't give a flying fuck through a rolling doughnut about you, the developer. You should feel privileged to develop for the legacy of the Great Man Jobs. How dare you ask for a fair share of the profit! If you want that, go slink off and develop for (spits) that Anderzoid platform or whatever it's called. Apple is the future. Suck it up, cupcake.

      Interesting, given that the split on revenue is 70:30 in favour of the developer and for that 30% they handle all of the hosting, distribution, updates, credit card payments and billing etc and just give you the money, greatly simplifying the process of online distribution involving small transactions.

      The App Store itself has been an enormous cash cow for developers, large and small alike.

      Apple's financial statements tell you exactly how much profit they make on the store (hint: it's extremely low, but it is above zero), and if you think they're lying about that as has been often suggested then file a complaint over fraudulent financial reporting - it's a very serious crime.

      Developers, on the other hand, are making hay on the store. I'd be interested to see how you justify Apple making "the majority of any profit to be had" with some actual numbers, or if it's just more rampant, ill-informed Apple bashing as usual.

      • 30% is far to much, and extremely in excess of any operation costs they may have.
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by jo_ham (604554)

          30% is far to much, and extremely in excess of any operation costs they may have.

          Does that apply to Google's store on Android too then?

          Can we have that on the record that if Apple's 30% cut is "extremely in excess of any operation costs they may have" that the 30% Google charges is also "extremely in excess" too?

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        A) You'll be surprised how you can mislead or completely lie. I mean, how many companies are saying most of their money from outside America for lower taxes? It's not illegal, but certainly "fraudulent"

        B) Hosting and distribution (on an electronic medium, this is the same): You can get 500GB for $100 from Dropbox, and this is a customer facing website (not a B2B). The cost of hosting a 100MB file (which is unusual for an application to be this large) would be about 2 cents. (2% of 99 cent application).

        • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

          by jo_ham (604554)

          Hosting costs based on a "customer facing site" from dropbox to describe Apple's situation regarding server requirements and bandwidth....

          Man, I'm crying with laughter over here. Please, keep going, oh mighty business expert!

      • The App Store itself has been an enormous cash cow for developers, large and small alike.

        Let's test that theory. First up, who's making the big bucks? corporations [theregister.co.uk]. In fact, over half make Less than $3,000 [tuaw.com]. There are other [thedailybeast.com] stories showing the lack of millionaires pouring out of Apple's "enormous cash cow" as you put it. I mean, besides Apple.

        Apple's financial statements tell you exactly how much profit they make on the store (hint: it's extremely low, but it is above zero), and if you think they're lying about that as has been often suggested then file a complaint over fraudulent financial reporting - it's a very serious crime.

        And as we all know, fraudulent financial reporting, because it's such a serious crime, doesn't happen very often. Like Enron, the subprime mortgage crisis, the "too big to fail" financial institutions, that debacle with Lloyds of London, and oh the list goe

        • by jo_ham (604554)

          Wow, I can see you simply don't live in the real world, and you accuse Apple users of being affected by the RDF.

          I see you left of payment processing and support, but those are zero costs of course. It doesn't cost you anything to support your customers or handle payments.

          As to "renting space in a data center", I imagine you know Apple's needs better than them, but they decided to actually *build* data centres of their own. I guess your armchair quarterbacking has analysed their needs perfectly though. You s

          • Re:Plain-text EULA (Score:4, Insightful)

            by girlintraining (1395911) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @09:52PM (#43408671)

            And now, GirlinTraining Eats an Apple Fanboy, Except For The Core Of Course ...

            Wow, I can see you simply don't live in the real world, and you accuse Apple users of being affected by the RDF.

            I accused them of adhering to their mission statement, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission.

            I see you left of payment processing and support, but those are zero costs of course.

            Considering that the developers only get paid when their balance reaches a certain threshold or a certain amount of time has elapsed, yeah, practically zero.

            It doesn't cost you anything to support your customers or handle payments.

            One of these things is not like the other. Can you spot it?

            As to "renting space in a data center", I imagine you know Apple's needs better than them, but they decided to actually *build* data centres of their own.

            Actually, I don't. But I do know them better than you [gigaom.com] apparently do. The app store alone brings in six billion a year. Go look it up, I'll wait. The data center, equipment, land, everything, cost 1/6th of that. New. From scratch. Obviously, day to day costs would be lower. A lot lower. You may remember another company that has a very large data center: It's called Google, and as I understand it, they're one of the biggest companies on the planet and they don't charge or take a cut of your website's fees to operate. Their profit margins aren't exactly... tiny. So margins for Apple here are huge. Massively huge. Triple digit huge. And with a six billion dollar market, we're talking holy-fuck I just won the lottery huge payout. Which of course, I know, and Apple knows, but you apparently, did not know. I ascribe this to the fact that you only read about technology on forum websites like slashdot, instead of busying yourself with inventing them, as I do. And possibly having not taken macroeconomics yet.

            My point about Apple's financial statements was not that fraud never happens../

            Back pedal any harder and you may solve the energy crisis. No, you said fraud is a serious crime and implied that any alleged impropriety that Apple could be accused of was likely false, because said fraud is rare. I responded with common-knowledge news events that stamped this with a giant "Bullshit" in 9 foot tall lettering.

            Also, I find it amusing that you consider the $99 annual fee to not only be "hidden" (seriously, wtf?) but that it is somehow crippling.

            Well, if your math skills didn't suck so hard they were in danger of creating an event horizon from which no clue can escape, you'd realize that $100 from a developer that's making less than $3,000 in the majority of the cases means Apple's cut from this alone is over 3%. That "Apple only takes 30%" is white-washed Grade A marketing bullshit. It takes more. In fact, when you add it all up, they take about as much as the recording industries do from their artists. Which, big surprise, since it's the same business model, but just has a trendy hipster icon plastered across the front.

            - the clear indication here is that hobbyist developers are actually finding success on the store.

            Your definition of success would be "made more than nothing." My definition of success is somewhat more mature, and reasonable: Makes enough to live on. When you get out of mom's basement, I suspect your definition of success will be less based on the brand of toys you own and more on your ability to get food into your mouth.

            What are the earnings of those same group of sub-3k developers on Android, for example? Or simply those releasing software for any platform via their own distribution method.

            We weren't discussing

    • by whoop (194)

      All this App-Store shenanigans, and yet time and again, developers refuse to port stuff to Android for fear of some extra work (fragmentation). Hitching your wagon to such an unstable horse seems awfully dangerous for a business model.

  • Seriously... you know what you're getting into when you develop for Apple's locked down ecosystem, and if you did not realize your survival there will forever be at the mercy of your corporate overlord's whims, you are to oblivious to succeed anyway.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Yo dawg!

    I heard you like apps, so I put app discovery in your app so you can discover apps while using your app!

  • by Quantus347 (1220456) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @03:55PM (#43406057)
    Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure."

    In other words they are disturbed by an advertising App whose business model is based on that of every other advertising firm on the planet?
    • by Anonymous Coward

      No, they have nothing against advertising, but it has to be them being paid for serving them, not competition.

    • by BitZtream (692029) on Tuesday April 09, 2013 @05:27PM (#43407011)

      The app basically allows you to pay between $4k and tens of thousands of dollars to 'buy' a slot in the apple top downloads rankings for a day.

      You give AppGratis 10K, and they tell you to put your app to $0 on next tuesday. Come tuesday you do your part, they notify a bunch of accounts (some real, some fake) about your app, these accounts then go download your free app, you climb up to number 80 on Apples charts for the day. The next day you put your price back up to something non-zero and hope that word of mouth and visibility give you an increased sales rate.

      THAT is the problem. Its manipulating the market numbers based on who pays the most. It's buying a spot on the rankings that people think are generated by some form of actual popularity. Its a lie.

      You would be pissed if Apple said '$100k gets you #1 app for a day, sign up here!' wouldn't you?

    • In other words they are disturbed by an advertising App whose business model is based on that of every other advertising firm on the planet?

      No, they're disturbed by the fact that every other advertising firm on the planet can compete under AppGratis' model. The Apple model has only one advertising firm: Apple.

  • "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin, writing an angry notice when his app was rejected by Apple.
    • by Clsid (564627)

      Sorry, I value my right to be free of advertising after paying for something. So you are saying that everybody has an essential liberty to splatter ads on my personal stuff? In law, your right to something ends where mine begins. And you have to work a balance out of that notion.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    .. but though luck! That's what you get for working with secretive company that retains absolute power over the device and your users. They should have not chosen Apple in the first place if they wanted a secure, business-friendly computing platform.
  • I realize that consistency is highly overrated... but is the CEO's last name Dalwat or Dawlat?
  • Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure."

    for a moment there i got confused into thinking apple was troubled by it's own app store

  • by AndyKron (937105)
    Why would anybody spend time making an app knowing it could be pulled at any time for any reason? That's just stupid.
  • And not a pretty HTML5 Web App?

    If all they are doing is presenting products to users, I am baffled why they need a native experience?
  • how do you make an add supported app? Or do you?
  • Did anyone else wince when they read 'app discovery app' ? I remember a time long ago when applications were called 'computer programs.'
  • Because of all the Apple hatred going on here, people fail to realize that banning applications that will use any means available to plaster you with ads it's a really good thing. You can argue about the technical details of how it was done, but in general I consider this to be a very good thing. And it is one of the reasons I miss my old iPhone after trying out Android.

    After reading about stuff like this, it makes me realize that even if Apple hardware is way overpriced, they are like an antivirus software

  • Stitcher takes people's free podcasts, cuts ads into them and then doesn't give one cent of ad money back to the podcast creators.

    I still don't see how this is even freaking legal.
  • I think you mean 'the Apple App Store'.

    Was this article submitted just to surreptitiously slip the phrase into current use to bolster Apple's bogus trademark application?

Brain damage is all in your head. -- Karl Lehenbauer

Working...