gen 05

Apple refunding purchases of "prematurely" released GameStore app

Apple is sending out refund notices to iPhone users who purchased GameStore, the bizarre Apple app that briefly appeared in the App Store over the weekend.

You recently purchase the GameStore app. The app was made available for sale prematurely. We apologize for the problem and have refunded the purchase amount back to your account. These funds will be applied to your original payment method within 5 business days.

While GameStore showed a release date of Dec. 31, 2011 in iTunes deskstop, the on-device App Store showed a date of June 9, 2009, which suggested it might have been a beta app used to test the iOS 3 in-app purchases feature.

The refund language, however, clearly says “premature”, which would suggest it will be properly released at a later date.

Whether or not that’s accurate, whether or not a new app with the same name but more current functionality, or whether there’s a different explanation remains unknown.



Tagged with:
nov 29

iTether currently unavailable in App Store

iTether is currently showing up as unavailable in the iTunes App Store. iTether, which was approved and released yesterday, let users tether their laptops to their iPhones without having to pay any additional fees to carriers. Another tethering app, Netshare, was approved and then later removed in 2008.

Whether iTether has actually been removed by Apple or the developer, temporarily or permanently, remains to be seen but the developer has claimed they were in communication with Apple throughout the app approval process. If Apple couldn’t have, or simply didn’t want iTether in the App Store, it’s strange they’d approve it at all.

UPDATE: Tether just let us know they’ve released a statement, and confirmed Apple pulled the iTether app from the App Store. Their site is currently getting hammered so we’re reproducing it here. Please do click through and give them a comment with your thoughts. Tether.com:

Around 12PM EST, Apple called our head office to let us know they were going to go ahead and pull our app iTether from the App Store. They stated it was because the app itself burdens the carrier network, however they offered us no way to remedy the solution… We were very clear when listing the app what the primary function was and they even followed up with several questions and requested a video demo then they approved the application.

We strongly disagree that it burdens a carrier’s network, as from our own data history on more than 500,000 users we know the average user consumes less than 200 MBs of data per month on Tether. In comparison, one TV show streamed from Netflix, an approved Apple App, could easily be in the 300-400 MBs range. Sure, there are some users that will consume way more than the average however that’s the case with any of these types of products.

Our team is very disappointed in Apple’s decision; as we strongly believe we help carriers better monetize their data stream by pushing customers into new data tiers further increasing their bottom-line. It is very anti-competitive to not allow any Tethering application to enter into this space to innovate. Our team has created a lot of innovative solutions for the BlackBerry product, which we were hoping to port over to the iPhone like end-to-end encryption, compression, website filtering and port filtering.

According to Apple, users who purchase iTether before it was pulled will continue to be able to use the product.

Our team is evaluating all of our options… Stay tuned.



Tagged with:
apr 11

Apple rejects PopCap's Unpleasant Horse for mature content

Apple has rejected the first game out of PopCaps’ new 4th and Battery studio, Unpleasant Horse, for mature content. It’s unclear exactly what content Apple objected to but apparently it involved meat grinders. According to the New York Times:

The company went public with its rejection on Twitter with a tweet that read: “WTF? Apple rejected Unpleasant Horse cuz of ‘mature content?’ We thought horses dying in meat grinders was wholesome family entertainment!” The tweet was later removed. Since then, the studio has taken a more upbeat approach saying it would appeal the ruling and resubmit with a higher rating.

Plants vs. Zombies is currently rated at 9+ and is unliving happily in the App Store. If PopCap resubmits with a higher age rating, is it possible Apple will approve Unpleasant Horse?

[NYT via TUAW]

Apple rejects PopCap’s Unpleasant Horse for mature content is a story by TiPb. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

TiPb - The #1 iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch Blog


Tagged with:
feb 21

New Apple subscription service making software-as-service unfeasible on iPhone, iPad?

Readability, the service that takes the cruft out of online articles and gives you pure, gloriously legible text, has been rejected from the iPhone and iPad App Store due to Apple’s new subscription service and its policies. If you’re not familiar with Readbility, think Instapaper or the Reader button in the latest version of Safari (which ironically uses Readability’s technology!) However, this has far wider ramifications as it suggests all iOS software-as-a-service (SaaS) front ends might likewise be rejected. SalesForce anyone?

Readability, like the App Store’s own business model, takes 30% of subscription fees to pay their bills and gives 70% to publishers in payment for the content read. (Because Readability strips out ads, this still allows publishers to make money off their content). Since Apple requires a 30% cut of subscription revenue… well, you do the math. Readability would have to reduce the publisher’s cut to 40% or reduce their own cut to near zero. Neither is a workable solution for them.

To be clear, we believe you have every right to push forward such a policy. In our view, it’s your hardware and your channel and you can put forth any policy you like. But to impose this course on any web service or web application that delivers any value outside of iOS will only discourage smaller ventures like ours to invest in iOS apps for our services. As far as Readability is concerned, our response is fairly straight-forward: go the other way… towards the web.

Part of the problem here is that Apple, no doubt purposefully, hasn’t clarified what’s subject to in-app subscription policies and what’s not. If everything is subject to them than Apple needs the rate to remain 30%, same as app and in-app purchases. If subscriptions are only 10%, for example, almost every app will simply become free and offer a low-share subscription option instead (subscription Smurfberries, as we discussed on the podcast last night).

What this shows, however, are that there are clearly flaws in the current system that either Apple has to address or the market will with more apps like Readability abandoning native iOS apps for the web or other platforms. (Unless a new business model emerges that better leverages iOS’ distribution system). Bottom-line content creators, content distributors, and platforms all need to remain financially viable. Readability thinks Apple should split their own 30%, giving content creators 70% of that as well. (Sharing the pain, so to speak.)

What’s your solution?

[Readability blog via TechCrunch]

New Apple subscription service making software-as-service unfeasible on iPhone, iPad? is a story by TiPb. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

TiPb - The #1 iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch Blog


Tagged with: