Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonist
How about being the only mobile platform, where a developer has to gain approval from the OS provider AFTER an application has been completed, and has no concrete rules to go by in order to determine if their application will, or will not, be approved?
How about being the only mobile platform, where the OS provider vets every single application which the consumer has the right to install?
|
This is not particularly true.
Brew application on verizon phones all require Brew developer certs (which are far more expensive than an Apple developer membership) and admission to Verizon's (or the carrier's) app stores. That was one of the reasons why Verizon's phone OS stayed so similar for so long even though the devices were capable of radically improved functionality.
Until recently, a surprising number of phones were VERY locked down, such that one couldn't develop an application for them even if they wanted to. On certain platforms you could develop an app, but there was (1) no means for distribution or (2) the distribution network cost a fortune and required legitimate business backing, prohibiting exploration of the mobile space.
Android is the major competition for Apple right now in the app phone space, and it does a fantastic job of being open while providing a distribution mechanism.
Android is 3 years old. iPhone OS is a few months older, in the public eye.
I'm not arguing that it's great that you can't just install an app on your phone you downloaded off the internet. But I am saying that it is hardly unique to the platform, particularly in light of mobile OS history.