The App Store has been with us for a month now , and , by many measure , it ’s a howl achiever . Apple tell theWall Street Journalthatit average around $ 1 million a sidereal day in iPhone app sales , for a grand total of around $ 30 million in the App Store ’s first calendar month of world . ( Apple keep only 30 per centum of that under its revenue - sharing accord with app developers , but that ’s still a gracious ball of change . ) shopper have plenty of choices — the App Store launched with more than 500 programs and the act has only swelled since then . And , on a personal note , we find our phones are that much more useful than they were just a couple of months ago , bolstered by software program that is generally well - write and offers more capabilities than most of what we pose from hack on , third - political party programs .
Still , that ’s not to say there that the App Store has achieved flawlessness in just 33 days of operation . There are plenty of areas for improvement , with the most pressing issues revolve about around the mental process in which iPhone applications advance favorable reception from Apple and wind up for sale at the App Store .
Back in March , when Appleannounced the iPhone 2.0 software genus Beta , the company gave a rough approximation of how that approval process would work . Developers would write the programs , submit them to the App Store , and , once vet by Apple , the apps would then be usable to all iPhone and iPod come to users via either iTunes or on the twist itself .
It seems jolly obvious why Apple would want to approve all programs released for the iPhone — not only would this give the company a say in the caliber of the programme , but it also gift the company the ability to interdict programs ( such as a Skype client ) that might overturn its wireless pardner . But there have been some notable hiccups with the process . Here are five issues that have gotten attention in recent weeks , along with our propose solution .
Issue One: What’s happening?
NetShare , a tethering app from Nullriver , disappear from the App Store . So did Box Office , a movie see - up computer program . The vulgar denominator in these and other cases of disappearing iPhone apps ? The developer say they have no idea why their curriculum were pulled . These iPhone software shaper feel that Apple needs to put across more clearly about why antecedently - approve apps are no longer up to snuff .
Our solution : The developer have a point . Apple could be doing a right job at explain what the standards are for programs in the App Store — and why finical apps do n’t receive those standard . And there are signs the fellowship may be starting : after leave out the tongue - wielding Slasher deflexion from the App Store , Apple obviously told the developer that his program was yanked because its content could be considered obnoxious . It may not be the most detailed explanation , but it ’s a start .
Issue Two: Where’s my update?
It takes a long while for a raw political program — or more desperately , an update to an exist program — to get from the developer ’s hands to being live on the store . Sometimes too long : users finish up purchasing older rendering , while Apple has had updated versions for weeks . user even write critical reexamination of apps based on bugs that were fixed weeks earlier ; but since Apple has n’t made those updated versions available on the store , users ca n’t download ( and do n’t even experience about ) the bug - reparation .
you could see evidence of this time lag in the app Description section of many programs ( which is an area developers can modify without Apple ’s recap ) . As seen in the screenshot here , some developer have take to using this country for status updates , due to delays in getting their political program update approved . So you might see something like “ view for rendering 1.1 soon ( submitted to Apple on July 31st ) ” or “ Version 1.2 fixture all jazz upshot , and is currently under critical review with Apple ” in this section . If you ’re a customer hold back on a microbe fix for your $ 10 App Store platform , messages like this are both encouraging ( a fix is follow ! ) and frustrating ( we do n’t know when ; it ’s in Apple ’s hands ! ) .
Our result : If the update - commendation mental process is this slow with just over 1,000 applications , imagine how it will function ( or wo n’t work ) with 10,000 applications in the App Store . Not being privy to the App Store ’s inner workings , we ’re short on specific fixes — and simply approving all updates mechanically would be a formula for malware — but if the store is move to grow and fly high , the time postulate to get app update to users needs to be reduced .
Issue Three: What’s in a name?
If you were tosearch forSudokuin the App Store , you ’d find a slew of programs , at least four of which currently have the same name : Sudoku . That ’s confusing enough , but far worse is that a program ’s name can appear other than on the App Store , in iTunes ’ Applications screen , in iTunes ’ lean of program to sync , and on the iPhone ’s filmdom . So while “ only ” four apps are call up simply Sudoku on the App Store , several more function that name on the iPhone itself .
As a resolution — as we found while review Sudoku games , but also while test other apps — if you ’re trying out several versions of a exceptional type of program , and you later want to remove one or two of them , sometimes it ’s impossible to figure out which is which in iTunes ’ sync list .
Our solution : If Apple is really vetting programs for the App Store , it should prevent duplicate names before we terminate up carry around phones populated with 148 broadcast named Sudoku . Apple should also require that programs habituate the same name in all locations : in the Store , on the iPhone , and in iTunes ’ two lists .
Issue Four: Who let you in? (Part one)
When you crop through the computer storage , you ca n’t help but acknowledge some of the more “ interesting ” things you may buy or download . moot , for instance , that there areelevendifferentflashlight applications . Or take a facial expression atCowToss , Crazy MouthandCrazy Eye , iMilk , Moo , iBeer , Yes|No Free , Jared , Banner Free , Shout It , and dozens — if not hundred — of other not - needfully - utilitarian claim . Should Apple have not approved such program for comprehension in the storage ? One could debate that as harmless as some of these apps are , they ’re not doing much to improve the App Store ’s signaling - to - dissonance ratio .
Our root : As strange as some of the available apps are , we do n’t think this is an issue — we do n’t think it ’s Apple ’s role to keep “ useless ” apps out of the store . opine of the App Store as a large supermarket : sure as shooting , somebody ’s making a decision somewhere about what to stock , but for the most part , they judge to buy in something for everyone . Similarly , if someonewantsto buy iBeer , then they should have that option . Just because a program may not seem useful or fun to you does n’t mean someone else wo n’t find it useful or fun .
Issue Five: Who let you in? Part two
The other side of the “ what gets approved ” coin is thequalityof the computer program : How well does it do what it take to do ? Is it stable ? Are there pieces of the program that do n’t work at all ? Does your iPhone repeatedly crash while using it ? Does it secretly charge data point in the background to a outback server ?
regrettably , some apps that have been OK’d by Apple do n’t measure up in these areas . In our examination , we ’ve ensure more than a few applications that crash regularly , glitch within programs ( including a secret plan that started playing both the human player ’s turn and the computer ’s turn , for no reason whatsoever ! ) , and typographical error and other visual oddities .
Given Apple ’s “ we critique everything ” posture , there ’s an implied level of quality that comes from watch a program in the App Store . It ’s easy to presume Apple has looked at the program — not just what the program claims to do , but how well it in reality does it — and deemed it suitable of inclusion . Our experience , and that of many users , indicates such an assumption would be wrong .
