Closed Prediction
« Back to the top page

Apple’s iPhone SDK beta will include Apple as “gatekeeper”

The Standard
Submitted by The Standard03.03.2008
Categories
Comments 6
This prediction is closed and has been judged.
Like the story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address

While not nearly as dramatic as some of the rumors suggested, Apple will indeed be a "gatekeeper" of SDK-based software releases. The apps are only to be distributed through iTunes, and there will be some approvals set in place (no porn, no malicious app, etc.) but mainly for legal reasons. Overall, Apple's decision sounds relatively open, as long as you go through iTunes and carve out 30% of your sales. -- The Industry Standard

 

Jeremy Horwitz over at iLounge recently wrote that the “most controversial aspect of Apple’s SDK plan is its intention to formally approve or deny all SDK-based software releases for its devices.”

Silicon Alley Insider even goes so far as to say that “Apple's stamp of approval could be the most restrictive in the smartphone industry.”

The corollary, espoused throughout the blogosphere, is that this decision will dramatically favor applications from larger companies. Why? Because Apple will be overwhelmed with requests from the outset, and will thus give priority to organizations with a larger footprint as part of the triage.

On a related note, PC World outlines the 25 native iPhone apps they’d most like to see.

This is a prediction that Apple’s forthcoming iPhone SDK will require that Apple explicitly approve any applications before they are offered to users (most likely through the iTunes application interface). It will be judged on March 6, 2008.

Price History

Prediction Statistics
Betting Closes:Mar 06 2008Current Consensus:74.08%Total Bets:32
Today's Change:
0%
Life Time High:74.08%
Life Time Low:50.00%

Comments

does this include free apps? as I am sure apple will have to approve any software sold through itunes..

drew any
drew any Mar 04 2008 | 08:19AM #

Boy, this is challenging. “Will there be limitations? Of course. Some apps we won’t distribute: porn! Malicious apps!” This doesn’t sound like a controversial approach to me, nor “The most controversial aspect of Apple’s SDK plan,” as stated on iLounge last week. Are they really trying to be gatekeepers, or simply protecting themselves from liabilities?

Eric Hill
Eric Hill Mar 06 2008 | 08:10PM #

Actually, if you look at the entire quote, ""Developers can also give apps for free. No charge for free apps hosted through Apple. Limitations: Apple will not distribute porn, malicious apps, or ones that will invade privacy. But Apple wants to get a ton of apps out there." this sounds to me like they will control the distribution channel, but not gate the SDK. Anyone?

Eric Hill
Eric Hill Mar 06 2008 | 08:13PM #

You know, it's funny, seems like Apple purposely skirted the issue here in anticipation of revolt -- they probably have no idea whether they will be able to handle the volume. A $100mm fund! That is going to be a lot of apps to approve/manage. Doubt it would/could work like YouTube where you can upload, but then content gets policed after the fact -- very un-Apple. There is going to have to be some sort of mechanism. I suppose though, that if Apple makes an official list of rules as to what will and will not be allowed, this will become a much more manageable task. Hmm. . . .

Josh Dilworth
Josh Dilworth Mar 06 2008 | 08:27PM #

So Apple was obviously ambiguous with this one. And Eric, I agree with you that there is a difference between being a "gatekeeper" and simply protecting oneself, using reasonable measures. We were really torn on how to judge this, but then read a transcript of the Q+A, where Jobs was asked whether a VOIP app would be permitted.

He indicated that yes, for Wi-Fi, but not for EDGE.

As Jon Gruber over at Daring Fireball wrote, "Just how these sort of restrictions on EDGE use are going to be adjudicated and enforced aren’t clear, though. Given that Apple is emphasizing the location-aware features in the SDK, it seems as though access to EDGE must be at least relatively open. The restrictions are likely based on bandwidth needs, but that seems tricky to enforce once an app is out in the wild."

http://daringfireball.net/2008/03/iphone_sdk_impressions_and_questions

Tricky to enforce? Yes. Details TBA? Yes. But this kind of adjudication goes beyond self-protection in my mind, and therefore we are planning to make a judgment in favor of this prediction. Apple's exact role as "gatekeeper" is undefined, but it seems obvious that such a role will exist. If anyone else wants to argue their point to the contrary now is your opportunity, we're open to hearing you out, and we'll give it a few more hours before closing this one out.

Thanks!

Josh Dilworth
Josh Dilworth Mar 07 2008 | 03:45PM #

document (or URL) provided by Apple that define the rules for applications that they will or will not accept

Anonymous
Anup Apr 23 2009 | 11:59AM #

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Respectful debate is welcome, but comments that are defamatory, indecent, abusive, or in violation of any law will be removed.