Lakshmi Vyas's Profile

  • http://www.wannabesimple.com
  • Oct 02, 2008
  • 3
  • 0

Latest comments made by: Lakshmi Vyas

  • Chris, Here is my summary: 1. This stringent review / rejection process started after the I'm Rich episode(where apple had to refund 8 users). Most of the crappy applications got in before "I'm Rich" 2. Apps were rejected primarily for not doing enough("What's the point?" said SJ), ex: Pull my finger, Freedomtime 3. Someone / group is making subjective decisions about the utility of an application. 4. The above person / group thinks that providing the same features(in their opinion) as the Apple applications bundled with the iPhone and charging for them would cause user confusion leading to return / refund mess and lower the store quality. I will leave it at that as well. Like you said, intent aside, we are all in agreement regarding the outcome.
    United StatesLakshmi Vyas had this to say on Oct 01, 2008 Posts: 3
    iPhone Devs: Don't Bite the Apple that Feeds You
  • Chris, I think Apple's review process is screwed up and they are driving developers away with their bureaucracy. Rejecting applications on rules that have never been mentioned before is unacceptable. I am in no doubt that these have to change in order for the iPhone to be a successful platform. What I am arguing is the intent. There is very limited(almost negligible) evidence that suggests that these rejections are based on anti-competitive or monopolistic tendencies. 1. Exposure - Flickr client 2. Last.fm & AOL Radio - Free songs? 3. Sync In a Blink - Syncs gmail contacts Some apps that would fall along the same lines as Podcaster or Mailwrangler. MailWrangler & Podcaster are two applications that got rejected with several other applications after the "I am Rich" fiasco. Pull my finger was rejected for "Not having a point". I see these rejections as Apple playing the Big brother to protect the consumers from paying for applications that they would regret later because: 1. They don't want to handle returns and refunds and / or 2. They want to increase the quality of the store by increased policing @Beeblebrox "Wrong. APPLE itself said that the reason Podcaster was rejected was because it duplicated functionality already found on iTunes." Right! However, Your interpretation is one of the many. It can easily be read as: "You are charging customers for functionality that they get for free. What's the point?" The other applications that were rejected strongly reflect this sentiment. Once again, that reason would be wrong, cocky & misguided abuse of power. But anti-competitive, monopolistic? Hardly.
    United StatesLakshmi Vyas had this to say on Oct 01, 2008 Posts: 3
    iPhone Devs: Don't Bite the Apple that Feeds You
  • Mail-wrangler and Podcaster are nice applications and I would love to have them on my iPhone. But to say that they compete with Apple is outright ridiculous. While the entire approval process is questionable and the rejection is wrong, its because of its over-protective tendencies rather than anti-competitive or monopolistic policies. The fact that the whole slew of rejections started after I'm Rich provides enough evidence to argue that Apple started more stringent approval process aimed at protecting its hapless customers(the 8 that bought I'm Rich), apparent lack of ability to quick refunds. Once again, if you think MailWrangler & Podcaster compete with Apple you must be completely out of your mind. Please stop spreading the FUD. I have written more about this here: http://wannabesimple.com/2008/09/28/the-benevolent-universe/
    United StatesLakshmi Vyas had this to say on Oct 01, 2008 Posts: 3
    iPhone Devs: Don't Bite the Apple that Feeds You