Apple Literally Stole my Thunder

https://medium.com/wwdc-round-up/253aed27a455

by alariccole • 13 years ago

509 197 13 years ago

crazygringo2• 13 years ago

Gotta say... best post title I've seen in a while.

But still a very valid point. I would really support legislation governing online marketplaces, so that this kind of abuse couldn't take place. A company shouldn't have to be a monopoly, for anticompetitive behavior to become illegal.

dangrossman4• 13 years ago

Where does that stop? You have a nice little directory of apps you built at http://mjbaldwin.net. If monopoly is no longer a requirement before the government steps in, you could have to list my apps and anyone else's that wants to be included. Why should you have the editorial control over what's included in your site you want to take away from Apple?

paulgb• 13 years ago

I'm not necessarily in favor of government intervention here, but I do like the Android model: there is a sanctioned marketplace as the preferred distribution channel, but it's not the required distribution channel. This allows editorial control without creating a monopoly on app distribution for that platform.

ChikkaChiChi2• 13 years ago

it stops when you refuse to concede any sort of control in a vertical market you monopolize.

Zimahl2• 13 years ago

Your definition of 'monopoly' is not helping your argument.

Apple controls a very big portion of the handheld market and that portion is completely roped off by iTunes. Worse, if they see something they are doing, whether it's better or not, you can't get your competing app onto their device. Was this not the same issue with Sun's Java and IE back in the 90s?

Meanwhile, crazygringo has a website. Sure he controls the content of the site but doesn't prevent anyone else from publishing on the internet. If 'mjbaldwin.net' was one of only a couple portals on the internet, you might have an argument there.

MatthewPhillips3• 13 years ago

IANAL, Apple has an absolute monopoly on iOS, does this mean nothing?

crazygringo2• 13 years ago

Well thanks! :)

I'm not a legislator, of course, but in my mind it would run something like:

- if you have over x third-party selling participants (say, 50 or 500)

- and the marketplace provides services to the "general public" (e.g. the Apple Store, qualifies, an intranet market would not)

- and the marketplace has revenue over x per day (say, $10,000)

- then participation in the marketplace must be governed by a clear, unambiguous set of rules that gives no advantage to products made/sold by the owner/administrator of the marketplace, and all interpretation of the rules, or challenges to such interpretation, must be made by a neutral, third-party arbitrator without influence from or by the owner/administrator of the marketplace

- and additionally, rules of the marketplace must not be written in order to give any kind of explicit or "implicit" advantage to the owner/administrator of the marketplate (Apple can't always feature its own Maps application over Google's, for example)

These specific rules are totally off the top of my head, but it's just a kind of idea -- once any market reaches a certain size, it's in the general public interest to ensure a level playing field and due process -- I mean, that's what things like court-enforceable contracts, food regulation, stock exchange and public company regulation, etc. are all about.

jarrett2• 13 years ago

I would draw the line between platforms on the one hand and 3rd party products and services on the other.

Examples of platforms: A phone operating system, a desktop operating system, a browser.

Examples of 3rd party products and services: A site with apps reviewed and upvoted by users, a curated app review site, an app store that's not affiliated with the hardware or OS maker.

Controlling the former offers real opportunities for anticompetitive behavior. You have buyer lock-in, and you can dictate the terms on which others may develop for your platform. You can push people off your platform when their goals conflict with yours. This is a logical place for some regulation designed to protect and promote a free market.

With the latter, there aren't any special ways to be anticompetitive. By special, I mean distinct from the ways in which, say, a chemical company could be anticompetitive. Your example of a "nice little directory of apps you built" would fall into this category. No industry-specific regulation is warranted for this type of product or service, since you're not in a position to hinder the free market.

mikeash• 13 years ago

Apple should maintain full editorial control. It's their App Store, and they should be able to have it contain whatever they want.

However, it is not their iPhone in my pocket anymore. The ownership changed when they got my money. They should not have any control over what it runs, and yet it only runs those things which Apple puts in their store. This is the real problem.

eggbrain• 13 years ago

Unfortunately, this isn't the first time this happened. This also won't be the last time either.

When you build apps on a platform, be ready to run into brick walls if you start to enter (or have already entered) areas that the platform wants to get into -- that goes for Facebook and Twitter as much as it does for Apple as well.

zeugmatis• 13 years ago

I know people who have been royally screwed by exactly this - they give you an API, devs everywhere come up with ideas, do the hard work - and the platform picks the low hanging fruit. Not only do they get carte blanche to steal peoples ideas but the licenses often give them complete rights to steal your source code as well.

craigyk2• 13 years ago

Steal your source code? Examples please... maybe you mean steal designs? I won't argue that one.

rmrfrmrf• 13 years ago

A weather app is really a 3-hour project; a rudimentary exercise in retrieving and parsing some kind of structured data. To say that any part of this supposed app was "hard work" is disingenuous. Furthermore, the concept of photorealistic animations for weather isn't new, so really this person added nothing of value to the Apple ecosystem. And, wouldn't you know it, the App Store rejected this weather app for exactly that reason!

That's not to say that there aren't instances where this has happened to devs, but I feel like your indignation is a bit wasted on an app this inconsequential.

zobzu• 13 years ago

I think it'd be hard for me to call them out with much harsher words, if that happened to me. This stuff is as unfair as it gets, but then again, that's the norm today ain't it?

milesskorpen• 13 years ago

While I totally understand why you're angry, I'm almost certain Apple's app review team does NOT have access to pre-release versions of iOS, so this probably didn't happen because Apple was working on similar functionality.

quackerhacker• 13 years ago

I agree, while his posting is totally justified and I understand, I believe that their ui/ux dev teams are not apart of the app review processing.

Zimahl2• 13 years ago

I didn't get that he was hinting at that. The problem is what Apple thinks is significant to the platform when they develop it versus when it's an outside developer.

wilfra2• 13 years ago

When Steve Jobs was around all the really great ideas probably found their way directly to him. If he then decided to call any of those ideas his own and reject the apps, do you think anybody at Apple would defy him?

Whomever that person is now (Jony Ive?) probably got ahold of this app and did the same thing.

Very easy to hide all of this under the veil of 'we were already working on something like that'. The author even acknowledges as much. So blatant theft is basically impossible to prove. But it's pretty naive to think that does not go on.

blocking_io2• 13 years ago

I very much doubt the app reviewers have any better access to Apple executives than you or I. They are like call centre staff.

r00fus2• 13 years ago

What's frustrating, I bet, is that other apps had "useless" weather condition graphics as well. WeatherHD for example.

Now, Alaric's app is probably very interesting, but why block it when others existed (and did the animation more poorly)?

andmarios• 13 years ago

In this case however, if Apple wanted to be fair and demonstrate a consistent behavior, they would give every new version of iOS to their review team and ask them to apply the same logic they use when they (dis)approve 3rd party applications.

revelation• 13 years ago

HTCs custom Sense UI had this all along (even on Windows Mobile, I think):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlTOI7ZUziQ

It's, uhh, not exactly novel.

alariccole5• 13 years ago

That is a cloud graphic moving along an animated path. I'm talking about generated graphics--very different.

baby• 13 years ago

Still kind of the same idea. Nothing new.

joelrunyon• 13 years ago

Doesn't Haze already do this? http://gethaze.com/

Seems strange that they would let some animated weather apps through and not others...

austinl• 13 years ago

I think this got through too http://conditionsapp.com/

alariccole5• 13 years ago

Lots of them got through!

thret• 13 years ago

Obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/725/

205guy• 13 years ago

Indeed. At first, I thought the use of "literally" was hyperbole. Then it almost sounded like Apple had stolen his thunder graphic (in which case, it would've been an awesome title). But no, so back to hyperbole. I do feel for the OP, but given the number of other animated weather apps, I don't think he had any thunder to steal.

Dylan16807• 13 years ago

It's not hyperbole. Apple stole the place in the app store.

speeder• 13 years ago

I think the most weird part, is that I made a app exactly like that, but with cartoon instead of realistic, and it got approved on the first attempt.

For those wondering, it is this one: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/weather-and-clock-for-kids/i...

Granted, a bit more than a month ago, Apple rejected a update for it (because the message of it complaining of lack of GPS had a ok button that quit the APP), and it was really weird, because the thing they complained always existed on the app, and I on purpose proposed a terrible alternative, and they said they wanted THAT. So I DID made the terrible alternative on my point of view, and now the app uses that...

nemothekid• 13 years ago

The iOS 7 weather app looks like they just told Yahoo! to build the new app. Almost everything is the same down the typography, which isn't to say they stole it, seeing how iOS' weather is powered by Yahoo!

That said, I'm not sure there are too many ways you can innovate a weather app. HTC Sense has been doing animated conditions for over 4 years now.

andrewmunsell• 13 years ago

Way back in 2010, I developed an app called World Weather Watch for WebOS: http://forums.webosnation.com/webos-apps-games/231824-introd...

It had animations and an "overview" screen that had times, temperatures, and forecasts. Here's a couple of screenshots: http://us.appitalism.com/app/palm-webos/244623-world-weather...

I also developed World Weather Watch for Mac OS X: http://www.andrewmunsell.com/work/world-weather-watch/

(The animated weather concept was inspired by HTC's Sense UI, though as far as I can remember, the overview list was entirely my own concept and idea)

So, the concept of animated weather, or even Apple's overview list of weather and times, goes back much farther than a couple of months.

EDIT:

If anyone's curious what World Weather Watch for WebOS looks like in motion, I made a video a while back too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3tS7n4VAsk

dualogy• 13 years ago

This is why mobile apps just don't appeal to me -- the "approval" of what I create by any committee other than the actual-end-user marketplace. Having grown up sharing one's programs and work in a simple, radically open (if slightly risky for somewhat naive users) "download and install" or "install from floppy/CD" or "build from source" exploratory environment, I'd feel extremely foolish submitting my stuff for approval. I'd feel submissive. I don't want Apple's or Google's or Microsoft's or Facebook's permission to share software I make, only their users' choice for or against.

Firefox OS is my only hope but in mobile, they'd also need to get some significant traction going fast.

Chrome Apps are cool, Android is cool, but "Play Store" -- if it's just remotely as "submit for approval" as Apple, then thanks but no thanks.

Thankfully, we still have web dev, mobile web, and a huge base of non-mobile "desktop-OS" software users.

mdwrigh2• 13 years ago

Chrome Apps are cool, Android is cool, but "Play Store" -- if it's just remotely as "submit for approval" as Apple, then thanks but no thanks.

It isn't. There's no approval process. Pay your developer registration fee and start putting apps in the store.

Stevens• 13 years ago

This article has the best headline ever.

smsm422• 13 years ago

That's what you get for submitting to the development model controlled by faceless bureaucracy invested with monopoly power.

And now people are calling for government intervention there - because if you have a faceless bureaucracy with kafkian rules and rampant rumors of abuse, adding government to it always helps.

r00fus2• 13 years ago

I agree to all but the government part.

Government in this case is a set of rules, optionally with an enforcement body (e.g.: public utility commission) that puts fear into the provider.

The only problem with the above is that it requires sane and non-corrupt legislators. Those are getting fewer by the election season in the US.

smsm422• 13 years ago

Putting fear into people is, of course, a worthy goal. But I'd prefer making situation better instead, and making one bureaucracy fear another... well, you can see how well it is working now. No way two layers of stupid, obtuse and possibly corrupt bureaucracy can be worse than one for the people having to deal with them, right?

>> The only problem with the above is that it requires sane and non-corrupt legislators.

Yeah, there's a tiny-tiny problem with that... As soon as we solve it, everything else would be just peachy.

jussij3• 13 years ago

It always makes me sigh when I read stories like this.

For decades Microsoft was bashed for offering up a closed system, yet the reality was Microsoft would let you sell any type of software for Windows and they couldn't care less.

Then along comes Apple with it's tightly closed, highly controlled platform and no one raises a murmur, but rather everyone seems to celebrate the idea.

Watching on are the rest of the big players and they see how successful Apple has been, so they all start madly creating their own closed systems.

The reality is none of these issues existed in the old style Windows system, but thanks to the success of Apple, those days are now gone :(

Developers are now forever beholden to the big corporates.

Fomite• 13 years ago

You have an interesting definition of "no one raises a murmur".

harlanlewis• 13 years ago

For true. People have made noise about this since before OS X 10.2 Sherlocked Watson.

drivebyacct2• 13 years ago

When even the people who ought to care - the techies that know better - buy into it, I think it's fair to characterize an overall sense of acceptance.

enjo• 13 years ago

How is Android a "closed system" in this context?

barredo• 13 years ago

Google decides what goes and what does not in Google Play.

It's not the only way to install things in Android. But technically, neither is the AppStore in iOS.

mrmekon• 13 years ago

1. The general public won't install an APK outside of an "App Store" equivalent

2. https://play.google.com/about/developer-content-policy.html

3. Many of the devices are locked and can't be rooted

markdown• 13 years ago

For starters, you have to be in the US or a select few other 1st world countries to be able to publish in the Play store.

michaelwww4• 13 years ago

Developers are now forever beholden to the big corporates.

Not if FireFoxOS gets enough support

http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/partners/

TylerE• 13 years ago

Yes, and if Diaspora replaces Facebook. Fat chance.

catwell• 13 years ago

Firefox OS ? You mean that OS that basically doesn't allow to do anything at all outside of a browser?

Mozilla has ranted about Microsoft restrictions preventing them from making a decent competing browser in WP8. Well, go make a competing browser in FFOS...

Mozilla has tricked everybody into thinking "Web technologies" meant "open", but this is absolutely not true.

Oh, but maybe it will at least solve distribution of apps you can make? Because, you know, everybody knows there will be no distinctions between apps installed from their store and other places, right?

Yeah... Let me tell you how it actually works. Mozilla has finally figured that mobile security is hard, so they have decided to have permissions. There are two kinds of permissions. The first one is those that they think users can understand (for instance "use the camera"). For them, the device asks the user if they grant them, problem solved.

And then there is the second kind of permissions, those that they think are too hard to explain to the average user. For instance, "make a request to another domain" (systemXHR). For those your app has to be in their app store and validated by Mozilla. Does that ring a bell?

So no, Firefox OS is definitely not the answer. Android way is better on that front, actually. Another interesting project could be Sailfish.

alanthonyc• 13 years ago

Of all the criticisms of the Windows platform I recall, I don't remember anyone complaining it was "closed system".

In fact, the opposite problem made it a haven for malware and viruses.

reedlaw• 13 years ago

Did you never hear of the Free Software movement? The closed, or non-free nature of Windows was one of the prime motivators for lots of open source projects. See https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

dnautics3• 13 years ago

it was a closed system... I remember my dad shelling out $500 for MS Visual basic for me, and then $500 for MSVC++. Visual basic was fun, but I didn't do anything with it. I never got past MFC in VC++ and I wound up using borland's C++ instead for my science fair project.

Now, I can put ubuntu linux on my machine - for free (or in my case, preloaded from DELL at a discount over windows) and get a million different toolchains with free documentation online.

dsrguru3• 13 years ago

Perhaps you're not understanding the parent's use of "closed system"? It means a proprietary environment with no access to the underlying source code.

craigyk2• 13 years ago

You have a funny definition of "none of these issues existed in the old style Windows system" when MS was known to not just one-up third-party apps with built-ins, but to do so without actually ever producing said software (vaporware).

jussij3• 13 years ago

I can't recall a single application Microsoft banned from being run/sold for the Windows platform.

Can the same be said for Apple?

That's the issue I'm referring to.

mhw• 13 years ago

Developers are now forever beholden to the big corporates.

Same as it ever was...

Through the 90s and the early part of the 2000s, Microsoft had enough control of the market that it could often kill other vendor's products (or proposed products) simply by announcing that it was going to produce something in the same area of the market. So although the system was technically open, economically the market was controlled: there was only one platform that mattered at the time (Windows) and the prevailing view of the tech press, business buyers and consumers was that Microsoft produced the best software for Windows. So if Microsoft announced it was going to ship something in the future the general consensus was generally that the best decision was to wait and see what Microsoft shipped. It's fanciful to suggest there weren't issues with the old style Windows software market.

fauigerzigerk• 13 years ago

But you were allowed to compete and many did that very successfully. Having powerful competitors is fine, but having competitors who can legally block your access to the market is bad for everyone.

workbench• 13 years ago

Microsoft didn't handle payments, discovery or customer credit cards though…

Hardly the same

mhartl• 13 years ago

*its

inselkampf• 13 years ago

I really doubt somehow that app reviews in Apple are cahoots with the internal app developers.

Apple is too secretive for that.

rorrr22• 13 years ago

So did you learn your lesson?

DON'T DEVELOP FOR APPLE.

Considering how many horror stories we've seen, I wonder why anybody would waste their time developing apps for that weird company.

Develop for open systems instead. They will win in the end.

mahyarm• 13 years ago

Cause apple users pay more, a lot more. It usually comes down to money in the end.

The way to mitigate this risk is to create an MVP that you don't put a lot of work into. Then afterwards iterate and improve upon it.

parasubvert2• 13 years ago

Apple, Microsoft, not to mention Oracle, IBM, CA, etc. are still making money hand over fist. They all make money by selling closed source systems that may or may not have open sub-systems.

You have a curious definition of "win in the end".

rorrr22• 13 years ago

Microsoft OSes don't have any restrictions on what software to run.

Apple does make money, but Android and Microsoft are eating their market share like mad. Apple was smart enough to invent a new market, but isn't smart enough to keep it.

jsolson2• 13 years ago

Considering how many horror stories we've seen, I wonder why anybody would waste their time developing apps for that weird company.

Money? An enormous and dedicated user base? Users who expect high quality UX and are willing to pay for apps that provide it?

edit: Wait, I forgot a few: a very limited number of hardware platforms to target? The ability to target at most, two OS revisions and cover the vast majority of users?

It is, in many ways, an easier platform to build high quality software for. On top of that, the users there give a damn about the quality of the software (and not some ephemeral quality like "openness").

Develop for open systems instead. They will win in the end.

"In the end" is awfully open ended, and really there's very little to demonstrate that open systems always win in the end. Exceedingly closed systems sometimes fail fast due to lack of adoption, but that doesn't really hold in this case. Apple consistently releases hardware and software that, despite being closed, many users perceive as "best-in-class" (it does not matter whether you agree that they are -- the fact remains that many users believe that to be the case). Developers back that up by building best-in-class software for the closed platform because some of them also believe it to be best-in-class. As long as you've got that feedback cycle in place, I don't believe a case can be made for openness even being a substantial factor in the shape of the market.

dirkgently6• 13 years ago

You forgot another important one: Having no self-respect, and be ready to be bullied by Apple.

rimantas4• 13 years ago

The number of horros stories make a very very very small percent of all the "developed an app" stories. Apple paid out $10 000 000 000 for the developers, that's pretty big reason to develop for this platform.

  > Develop for open systems instead. They will win in the end.

Yeah, sure. They will win what? They will win why? Why do you constantly forget that the users of high tech are no longer programmers and sysadmins? They have other stuff to worry about not if your platform is open, closed, or punctured. The things that work will win.

ChikkaChiChi2• 13 years ago

it's not impossible that the Dev teams flag certain categories of apps shortly before launch dates to prevent similar applications from stealing their thunder so to speak. after all why get egg on their face when you violate the developer agreement retroactively?

signed0• 13 years ago

Somewhat related, the BBC launched a new weather app for the iPhone (and Android) today.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/appsblog/2013/jun/10/bbc-wea...

Perhaps the requirements are somewhat relaxed for large entities.

jonheller• 13 years ago

Outside App (http://www.outsideapp.com/) came out two years ago and did this. Not as nice, no question, but I think the guy's paranoia about the rejection is way off base. Though I do agree that there doesn't seem to be a good reason to reject it.

jdmaresco• 13 years ago

Is it possible that the app review teams were instructed to find a reason to reject all apps in a given category for a month or two leading up to the release of iOS7? Were other weather-related apps approved recently?

piyush_soni2• 13 years ago

People still don't take a lesson from this. They have done exactly the same thing before. Apple is EVIL, understand that. May be one of the most evil tech company out there.

eridius4• 13 years ago

Are you honestly calling Apple evil because they updated the built-in weather app to include realistic weather effects?

That sure sets a low bar for what it means to be evil.

piyush_soni2• 13 years ago

Really? That's what you understood from the whole article?

TheMagicHorsey3• 13 years ago

Look, man, I feel really bad for you. But there are lots of open platforms to develop apps for. You make a choice when you decide to specialize in iOS apps. The choice you make is to make yourself a bitch to the arbitrary whims of some goofball asshole sitting in Cupertino, who doesn't give a fuck about your aspirations or vision. You can complain all you want, but they made the garden, and they can do whatever the fuck they want with it.

It blows. But now you know why you need to support an open platform.

eropple5• 13 years ago

But there are lots of open platforms to develop apps for.

No, there aren't, because a critical part of "platform to develop apps for" is a user base. Specifically, a user base willing to pay money for things. On mobile, that means iOS and to a much lesser extent Android and Windows Phone.

"Develop for an open platform" is like telling somebody to grow a third leg. There are no relevant open platforms. Nor will there be, because consumers do not value openness and no other developers are going to damage themselves by only providing products on niche systems.

TheMagicHorsey3• 13 years ago

The web is an open platform.

Linux is an open platform.

Android is an open platform in the sense that, if Google blocks you from the Play Store, people can still install your APK off the web.

hawkharris• 13 years ago

In response to Apple's initial response to the "Images" app: I'm amazed by the disconnect between how people really feel about porn and how they purport to feel about it. Sexual desire is a basic human need. The vast majority of American men and women view pornography, yet few acknowledge it.

I appreciate that this is difficult to change because prudishness is deeply engrained in our culture, but I would like to see tech companies take a more progressive role in opening up a realistic dialogue about sex.

shabble• 13 years ago

It's a lot less risk for an organisation to appear prudish or paternal than to give their opponents a free attack ad about "corrupting our children/society".

The weird rules (apps vs browsers) likely just fall out from the "censorship theater", in a parallel with airport security. It's an escape hatch, giving the organisation an "At least we tried!" defence.

ethanazir• 13 years ago

Have a great idea? submit it to us. If we like it we will pretend its our own.

pablasso• 13 years ago

I get his frustration, but I don't think an animated weather on a weather app is such an innovation that someone else couldn't think of.

ozten• 13 years ago

The OP made the point that it was a commodity app. He didn't claim earthshaking originality.

He was proud of his superior execution and baffled at rejection.

JasonSage• 13 years ago

Thank you so much for pointing this out, apparently a lot of people missed this point. The topic of this discussion shouldn't be setting out to prove that the OP was not the first to bring this kind of app to the table, but rather how (un)justified it was to be rejected.

kschua• 13 years ago

I can empathize with you. Back in 2009, I created a call filtering app for Blackberry which had the ability to determine if a call is urgent based on the frequency of the incoming call and to block the call if it was not urgent.

Guess what, in 2012, Apple put in an uncannily similar feature called "Repeated Call" in iOS 6

bredren• 13 years ago

They built some of your app concept into the core of the phone. They rejected your app because they were about to debut their version. It makes sense why they did it, and it was fair of them to do it.

However, they should have let your app go into the app store. It is unlikely your app would have made techcrunch headlines or taken the world by storm (ha ha) but even if it had, Apple had nothing to fear.

Which makes it strange that the company rejected it.

They couldn't exactly say, "Sorry, but things in your app are going to be in a keynote. We're working on the same thing."

Situations of an app being rejected by apple due to a forthcoming release are rare. (though I do know of another example by a prominent developer)

Your story is a nice read, however your other experiences of rejection are not related to this one. They also speak to a different time for the app review team.

gridmaths• 13 years ago

Take the graphics, concept, UI and remake it as an HTML5 app.

You could even increase sales using "..stole my thunder" as a meme :]

eridius4• 13 years ago

"Months before"? If your weather app is only a few months old, then you are far from the first person to do what you're describing. I had an app on my iPad that provided exactly the experience you're describing, and that was I think at least 2 years old (I don't remember the name anymore).

mturmon• 13 years ago

Weather+ is somewhat like this. It uses HD video clips, not vector art, but it accomplishes a similar task. It has been around for a couple of years at least.

eridius4• 13 years ago

It looks like the app I was thinking of is called Clear Day[1], but it was known as Weather HD back when I used it.

[1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/clear-day-formerly-weather/i...

OriginalAT• 13 years ago

That's only one small part of the story. I think the main thing here is that he had an app that he worked on that was rejected because Apple felt nobody wanted it, and then a few months later Apple releases pretty much the same thing itself and everyone loves it.

alariccole5• 13 years ago

That's pretty much it.

eridius4• 13 years ago

It's not that Apple felt nobody wanted a weather app, it's that there are a lot of weather apps on the store already. The App Store guidelines do tell you that apps that replicate existing functionality may be rejected. And Apple already had a weather app, all they did was update it to be better.

alariccole5• 13 years ago

I can't claim I'm the first, but it's the first I've seen, as I did extensive research before I wrote a line of code. Send a link if you have one. I'm interested. I think a lot of people are misunderstanding that I'm talking about procedural graphics though, not a video or simple animation.

usaphp• 13 years ago

Can we see a working example of the app or at least screenshots? Because the execution of the concept can be bad and this is why apple rejected your app?

nleach2• 13 years ago

He links to it in the comments: http://horizonapp.com

dirkgently6• 13 years ago

My eyes! No, not the app, but the very tall form factor of that device!

drawkbox• 13 years ago

This does suck, I wish it was a true free market. But it still is more open than say console markets or even Steam. I am not sure why they don't fully trust the market to produce and choose the apps.

But in the end we are sharecroppers in a kingdom, they built the platform and have the last say. Diversify to other platforms (I am sure android or windows market would like to see this) but don't stop developing. Every once in a while they let you know with a rejection who's platform it is. In the future maybe it will be fully open, it is what drove Android markets in the early days. I am still surprised one of the competing markets hasn't been more open or taken less than 30%. They just line up behind Apple following suit.

Personally from a game developer perspective, Apple is the most open viable market that has been created for game developers and remade handheld gaming. From a web developer perspective it is more closed.

alexobenauer• 13 years ago

To be fair, the app review team is not the iOS development team, and they are not informed about the developments from the iOS team.

k-mcgrady• 13 years ago

I highly doubt that app reviewers had information on what was coming in iOS 7 and to bias reviews based on that.

coin• 13 years ago

Yet another site that disables pinch zoom on iOS. He develops iOS apps yet makes his webpage hostile to iOS browsing.

dirkgently6• 13 years ago

I am not sure, but doesn't Apple allow more than one browsers in their walled garden?

desireco42• 13 years ago

Who cares, you didn't have to develop for their closed system. You could make apps for macs that can be downloaded if you care so much about programming for macs. Honestly, who cares.

Also, whatever happens once, doesn't have to happen ever again, but if it happens twice, it will almost certainly happen again. You will get burned over and over, unless you get smart.

robterrell• 13 years ago

As a developer of a weather app myself, I seriously doubt that Apple refused your app due to its use of video clips & the possibility of its competing with iOS 7's weather app. Yahoo weather exists, after all, and it's really close in look & feel.

gboudrias• 13 years ago

Why in the hell do people still develop for Apple? It seems like an uphill battle...

ccera• 13 years ago

Apple's app store review "process" is complete bullshit, but this kind of weather app already exists for iOS and Android, and has for a couple years or more.

I've installed probably 4 or 5 of them between the two platforms, all with beautiful high-def animations, etc. (and uninstalled all of them, since I find the simpler WeatherBug to be more than adequate for me).

nleach2• 13 years ago

Sad story, but I think it's being blown out of scale. In the comments on his post, he linked to the app's teaser site: http://www.horizonapp.com

I really don't see how this app could "confidently" stand up to the new Weather.app

paul_f• 13 years ago

Your app probably sucked and Apple had to pick some reason to deny it. Any excuse will do, no?

thisisomebs• 13 years ago

How the hell are you guys viewing this site? I get a "sign in to collaborate" bullshit.

dirkgently6• 13 years ago

So from most of the defensive arguments here is in the form of classic... "well, that sucks... but... Apple must have a reason, so it's okay?".

Really? On a site full of tech geeks and nerds? When did majority of us lose our balls and become so meek?

rohamg• 13 years ago

but.. this isn't anywhere near a new idea.. Weather HD, now Clear Day, is by a team in Egypt and has been doing the animated weather thing for years: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/clear-day-formerly-weather/i...

inkaudio• 13 years ago

Perhaps not, Solar app: http://thisissolar.com has very similar effects. It was not rejected and it is still in the app store. Off course it does not have the full marketing of Apple behind it, but still.

hnriot• 13 years ago

I agree with apple, the world doesn't need another weather app that does nothing more than animate clouds and snow etc. the apple weather app that we all saw today is a world clock, has pinch to summary, a ton of more useful info and was layered both in visual appearance and functionality. By comparison your weather app was highly simplistic and looks like someone concocted in a weekend without being finished. I don't mean to sound harsh, but I wouldn't have given your weather app another look when you put it up against apple's new one one or yahoo's existing one. If anyone should be whining it should be yahoo, they even have the layers idea going on where the scroll panes slide at slightly different speeds. Very much like Apple's accelerometer driven panes.

par128• 13 years ago

Our weather app YoWindow features computer generated sky just like ios 7 app. Despite of this it was approved by Apple 2 months ago. https://itunes.apple.com/app/id606193225 Quick link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtD2VosqX3Y

Alaric, I know it's depressing to see that you idea is copied. But I think in this case Apple didn't sole. Be brave and move on. Eventually you win. Just a bad luck.

general_failure3• 13 years ago

Most developers are there to make a living. Expecting ideals from them is a little too much. They probably have ideals in others spheres of life. I wouldn't expect most devs to just follow the money and continue writing iOS apps until it gives them good returns.

kenneth_reitz• 13 years ago

I’m glad I’m not alone! I made a very very similar that did nothing but show you images of things you searched for.

Apple disabled my account one day, without explaining why to me. Today, they owe me $17,000. I contact them every few months, and never hear anything back but silence.

dave1010uk• 13 years ago

Come join us on the Open Web. It's actually really good now. There may be restrictions and difficulties but no one will stop you getting your hard work out there.

venomsnake• 13 years ago

I do hope that with PRISM revelations the walled garden system may be on its way to reforms.

If enough people wake up to the topic how important device and software control is for the owner there will be pure market pressure and current Apple kinda lack the salesman Steve that is able to override privacy concerns in the public.

Also we should have good streamlined legal process to declare software platforms "common carriers" when they are above certain size or market share with all the benefits and responsibilities that come from that. And lets hope cases like that will be greatly reduced.

alexscheelmeyer• 13 years ago

Given the sometimes arbitrary nature of these rejections, it would seem that a natural strategy would be to keep trying (with changes to meet their expectations) - at some point you should get it approved.

Is there some maximum tries that one get to show ones worth as a pubilsher?

grey-area• 13 years ago

This is why the web will win.

Not the web of FaceBook and twitter APIs, but the open web of documents and apps interacting without restrictions. There is a fundamental lack of control and instability in building on a platform owned by a corporation, be that on the web or mobile development.

sharninder• 13 years ago

I know there is no end to this discussion so I'll just put in my 2cents and GTFO.

As a user of Windows systems in the 90s, the so called "openness" was precisely the reason I moved to using Linux. Most software available for Windows, in those days was crap, and I as a user needed something that worked, not mostly but, all the time. Linux gave me that. Even if there was just one office suite (star office, remember?), it worked.

After using Linux for about a decade or so, I moved to OS X, since Linux wasn't really going anywhere. The fabled desktop linux wasn't coming and everything seemed in a limbo.

OS X and Apple, for all it's faults, works, for the most part, for the user and that's why the platform is popular.

We guys here are talking and thinking with our developer hats, but users think very differently.

crimsongene• 13 years ago

Ofcourse the have to do that now.. short of ideas they are!

Jleagle• 13 years ago

I hear these stories every month, just make your apps for a different OS if Apple don't want your business.

notlisted• 13 years ago

I'm sorry, but the app you seem to describe has existed for quite a while. Actually, there are several of them. I installed them on my first iPad (the original) way back when.

This is one of them: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/weather-live/id464770748?mt=...

trendspotter• 13 years ago

There must have been other reasons why his animated weather app was rejected by Apple. There are already very flashy iOS weather apps, just take for example a look at "Clear Day".

Apple Literally Stole my Thunder

Related Stories