Apple’s infrastructure problem, ctd.

Well, that didn’t take long. Apple has released its app review guidelines for the Mac App Store, and sure enough, they’ve imported most of the iOS App Store guidelines over wholesale. (You needn’t go far to find out why I think this is a bad move.) Engadget’s Nilay Patel points out some of the more egregious offenders:

• 2.1 Apps that crash will be rejected.
• 2.2 Apps that exhibit bugs will be rejected.
• 2.6 Apps that are “beta”, “demo”, “trial”, or “test” versions will be rejected.
• 2.14 Apps must be packaged and submitted using Apple’s packaging technologies included in Xcode – no third party installers allowed.
• 2.19 Apps that require license keys or implement their own copy protection will be rejected.
• 2.20 Apps that present a license screen at launch will be rejected.
• 2.21 Apps may not use update mechanisms outside of the App Store.
• 2.24 Apps that use deprecated or optionally installed technologies (e.g., Java, Rosetta) will be rejected.
• 6.2 Apps that look similar to Apple Products or apps bundled on the Mac, including the Finder, iChat, iTunes, and Dashboard, will be rejected.
• 6.3 Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and icons, correctly and as described in the Apple Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines will be rejected.
• 7.4 Apps containing “rental” content or services that expire after a limited time will be rejected.
• 7.6 In general, the more expensive your app, the more thoroughly we will review it.
• 9.2 Apps that rapidly drain a products battery or generate excessive heat will be rejected.
• 11.1 Apps portraying realistic images of people or animals being killed or maimed, shot, stabbed, tortured or injured will be rejected.
• 11.3 “Enemies” within the context of a game cannot solely target a specific race, culture, a real government or corporation, or any other real entity.
• 11.5 Apps that include games of Russian roulette will be rejected.

I’ve left out Nilay’s commentary on each of these points — you can click through at the second link above to read his thoughts in the original post. But I’ll add a couple of thoughts of my own.

Read the rest of this entry »

Apple’s infrastructure problem

While tech pundits have long been anticipating some form of cross-breeding between OS X and iOS, not until today have we seen any real evidence for such a trend. And while I, as a Mac user, am excited to see Apple returning to its roots in the Mac, I found myself more troubled by questions about what was revealed than giddy with anticipation.

Much of my trepidation comes from the software side of the equation. OS X 10.7, or Lion, provides an intriguing look into the future of desktop computing. But I can’t help from feeling, to a certain extent, like Apple is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Granted, the enhanced multitouch features of Lion like Launchpad and full-screen apps — shamelessly ganked from iOS — provide a new and compelling raison d’etre to products like the Magic Mouse and Magic Trackpad that had previously lacked one. Given the apparent lack of a niche for those two products at their respective launches, and knowing that Apple has a plan for just about everything, it wasn’t unreasonable to expect something like this to happen.

But like the original MacBook Air, Lion seems to be ahead of its time — and not in a good way.

Read the rest of this entry »