Do you want to live in a world where the CEO of Apple has the ability to effectively shut down any web service at any point in its life cycle that tries to 'think different'?
Consider the reports of Tim Cook’s talk with Travis Kalanick over Uber’s iOS app in Mike Issac’s profile of Kalanick in The New York Times. Given Cook’s power as the ultimate arbiter of what will be made available to millions of smartphone users around the world, it’s hard to not cast Apple in the role of a feudal lord:
…when Mr. Kalanick arrived at the midafternoon meeting sporting his favorite pair of bright red sneakers and hot-pink socks, Mr. Cook was prepared. “So, I’ve heard you’ve been breaking some of our rules,” Mr. Cook said in his calm, Southern tone. Stop the trickery, Mr. Cook then demanded, or Uber’s app would be kicked out of Apple’s App Store.
For Mr. Kalanick, the moment was fraught with tension. If Uber’s app was yanked from the App Store, it would lose access to millions of iPhone customers — essentially destroying the ride-hailing company’s business. So Mr. Kalanick acceded.
Putting aside the specific issues with Uber (which Harlold Stark has addressed here on Forbes, and Jon Gruber has an analysis of what might be going on with the code on Daring Fireball). I’m more concerned about Apple’s role as the gatekeeper.
Lets be honest here, the smartphone is the dominant platform for accessing the internet and it already outstrips the engagement from desk-bound computers in some areas. The smartphone’s share of the access time is only going to increase over the next few years. Although Android has more market share, the focus of iOS is on the higher end of the market where apps are the way that services are accessed. Coupling this with the absolute love of Apple in the incubator of Silicon Valley means that a service launching without a presence on the iPhone is never going to be taken seriously.
There’s only one way to get your app onto an iPhone (or the iPad) and that’s if Apple grants you permission to be listed in the App Store. It does provide guidelines and feedback on submissions but it’s a pretty black and white route. You meet Apple’s expectations or you don’t get to play. And if you don’t get to play you don’t get access to the user base. And if you don’t get access why are you launching an online service anyway?
This is a situation that has been addressed by Google and Android. Yes, if you want to be listed in the Google Play Store you are going to have to follow the rules in place from Mountain View, but if a consumer has an application downloaded directly from a developer it can still be installed on their smartphone by flipping a visible setting.
Naturally you are discouraged from doing this, and it does open up security and malware issues, but Android does offer a way around the garden wall that is clearly signposted for developers and users.
Not so Apple. At the merest hint of a possibility of third-party code running on an iPhone that has not been approved by Apple an update to iOS is rolled out and pushed to everyone on the planet. This approach increases the security of the platform against malicious code and that’s a ‘good thing’ for the ecosystem, but it also creates a pinch point that every developer, app, and service has to go through. The fig leaf of using the web browser is the counterpoint, but it comes back to a question of perception. If you don’t have an app on the geekerati’s platform of choice, why would you even bother launching a service?
Any new online service has to be developed with half an eye on Apple’s demands and the hope that Apple doesn’t change those demands after it has launched. If you step out of line with a new idea, the headmaster could call the errant developer into his office for a quiet chat about how they are going about their business…
Now read about Apple's tricks to make you buy the new iPhone 7S....
