FierceWirelessFierceWirelessEuropeFierceDeveloperFierceMobileContentFierceBroadbandWirelessFierceVoIPFierceIPTVFierceTelecomFierceOnlineVideo

Free Newsletter

About | View Sample | Privacy

Net neutrality debate spilling into Apple's App Store

Tools

Apple unleashed its unpredictable and capricious iPhone app policy on the wrong player this time: Google.

A firestorm erupted last week when Apple removed a pair of previously approved third-party Google Voice applications from its App Store and rejected Google's own client. Apple's reasoning: Google's GV Mobile application duplicates features that the iPhone already comes with, such as a dialer and SMS.

Interestingly, the FCC is taking notice (because of Google's clout on Capitol Hill?) and requesting Apple answer those questions every developer has wanted to know for a long time: What criteria does Apple use to accept and reject particular apps? What is the approval process for applications? What percentage of apps are rejected? And what are the main reasons why applications are rejected?

As it pertains to the Google app, the FCC wants to know, among other things, why that app was rejected, what other related apps have been rejected along with it and what role AT&T may have played in the decision. The FCC said it is questioning these companies in light of pending proceedings over wireless open access and handset exclusivity deals.

Let's hope the FCC makes these answers public. It would be like finding out why dinosaurs really became extinct.  

It seems like every week we hear about a disgruntled apps developer mystified as to why a particular app didn't pass Apple's mysterious criteria. Like a king who doesn't have to explain the rules, Apple accepts one application, while rejecting another that does virtually the same thing. For instance, an application from Manomio that emulates classic video games available via the Commodore 64 home computer system was rejected earlier this summer by Apple because an of an SDK clause prohibiting interpreted or executable code. But the company pointed out that the App Store includes a number of applications that essentially use those same types of codes.

Place-shifting technology developer Sling Media finally issued the long-awaited iPhone edition of its SlingPlayer Mobile video application in May, but the app does not include 3G support. AT&T took the fall for the resulting controversy, contending 3G streaming would consume too much network capacity. However, Sling noted the service is WiFi-only at Apple's request.

A lot of bloggers are debating about who is to blame for the Google app removal--AT&T or Apple--but the fundamental question is: What sort of implication does the FCC's action have on app stores in the future? There is a net neutrality issue that appears to be spilling over into the downloadable apps world that will impact both apps store providers and operators. Will Apple, AT&T and others be required to adhere to strict guidelines before they are allowed to reject a particular app?

I find it all ironic. AT&T has been praised for moving away from a walled-garden approach when it comes to content by ceding control to Apple and basically relegating itself to an access provider (well, except with certain applications that impact bandwidth). That's really when the mobile data market took off, everyone contends.

So now, what is Apple to do? Make up a policy by the FCC's Aug. 21 deadline? Because I would be shocked if it has an "official" one in place. If anything, the FCC's questions may finally give stated, concreted guidelines to those developers who have been lost in the dark for so long. --Lynnette

Bookmark and Share
Get Your FREE FierceWireless Email Newsletter:

Comments (5) | Post a comment
More stories about Voice Applications   open access   mobile application   iPhone   handset   Google   FCC  

Comments

yet another reason why I still hate Apple & iEverything...

I am not an expert on the jurisdiction of the FCC, but what do they have to do with Apples App Store. The FTC maybe but not the FCC. What am I missing here?

From the FCC's letter, it looks like applications are beginning to be viewed the same way as the Internet. The whole debate over net neutrality has to do with internet providers blocking, speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination.--Lynnette

It appears to me, that the FCC, Google, and Apple are part of ruse to get the Wireless operators data networks on the same field as the cable companies. Apple for certain will blame At&t for tying their hands and hiding behind the rules for limiting applications that hog data traffic. At&t will play dumb. I certainly hope the FCC follows the precedence set. If Comcast has to give unlimited access and not throttle certain traffic, so should the Wireless Data operators.

If consumers want to spend their high priced 5GB of limited wireless data usage a month on VOIP or Slingbox, or whatever, they should be able to do so.

Granted that At&t, VzW, and Sprint all claim their networks are being crushed by the data usage, but it is no surprise. They are selling data like it is open, un-capped, and just like being on your cable modem. Since they have marketed that way, they should have to play by the same rules as the fixed line guys.

Will someone explain what principle of retail fairness is violated by arbitrariness in selection of applications marketed through the Apple App Store. Retailers in other markets (department stores, home theater electronics, shoes, farm equipment, etc.) make decisions on what goods to carry without being called upon to justify them by the buying public or government. Manufacturers would love to have some justifications for such decisions, but what principle entitles them to any? Wal Mart makes manufacturers dance to whatever tune it calls without being hated by the buying public (at least not for that). Manufacturers hate to be walmarted, but no one thinks they have some right not to be. So, what is so different about the market for iPhone software? I'm sure someone knows what the important difference is, but it is not obvious to me.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

More information about formatting options

What is 4 + 63?
To combat spam, please solve the math question above.