MailWrangler: Another App rejected for competing with Apple Apps

[Stella]

Unfortunately, Apple have chosen to reject another app that it deems to compete with Apple's in built applications.

http://angelo.dinardi.name/2008/09/20/mailwrangler-and-the-apple-app-store/

 

[markgamber]

"...which will lead to user confusion."

LOL...are iPhone owners retarded or does Apple just assume they are?

 

[hellomoto4]

Lol as, Apple are so dumb.

Wait, BRB.
Going to count how many Calculator Apps I can see in the App Store...

 

[Flhusky]

"...which will lead to user confusion."

LOL...are iPhone owners retarded or does Apple just assume they are?

Read some of the postings on this forum and the Apple boards and well...

* edit to add
After reading the story, WOW Apple needs an enema that is a great tool. Hopefully they distribute them selves or someone steps up to the plate for these guys and helps distribute rejected apps.

 

[Stella]

Apple seriously need to take a chill pill.

So what if it duplicates existing Apple functionality? If an app does it better than the original, then, it introduces competition and fresh ideas to build upon.

Many Apple applications provides basic functionality required ( given the target audience ) and leaves vast room for improvement. This is were 3rd party applications come in.

 

[Asha'man]

Does that mean that every single calculator has to get rejected as well?

On the other hand, if they are gonna start eliminating duplicates, maybe the count of flashlights and tip calculators will also go down...

 

[tallyho]

Nooooooo! I wantz 15 different flash light apps on miPhone. Curse you, Jobs...

 

[ruinfx]

Another app rejected for competing with apple

http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/08/09/21/122225.shtml

this time its duplicating mail.apps functionality

 

[sibruk]

Apple really need to give developers the opportunity to ask if their apps are likely to be approved upfront. Because this will just end up p!ssing off developers who will vow to "never code for the iPhone again" after wasting weeks and weeks of development time.

 

[Nipz]

Im in the middle of developing some apps and im *****ting it that they will be rejected! They are only games but still if the get rejected its a lot of money ive injected in to nothing...

 

[Elven]

It does seem that Apple want to shoot themselves in the foot, they let some garbage into the App Store, some real bloody trash, and yet things which are useful and people would enjoy to use, they block.

Freaking idiotic Apple.

 

[deimos256]

All Apple is accomplishing with these rejections is driving people to develop for Android instead.

 

[sushi]

I don't see this as a big issue.

Unfortunate for the developer, but understandable.

Apple is tightly controlling the iPhone and apps at this time. I would expect to see this change down the road after many issues and functions such as cut & paste are worked out first.

 

[ruinfx]

All Apple is accomplishing with these rejections is driving people to develop for Android instead.

agreed

 

[Nipz]

I understand they have to control it to an extent but they def need (as someone was saying) to have safe way to ask apple before you start to develop, almost like planning permission for a house.

Im not willing to waste time and money, however much i love the iPhone, on apps that could just be rejected.

 

[Interstella5555]

"...which will lead to user confusion."

LOL...are iPhone owners retarded or does Apple just assume they are?

You're kidding, right?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/567494/

(the number of identical threads that necessitated this sticky)
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/546874/

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/567267/

 

[MacRumors]

Another App Rejected from App Store



Angelo Dinardi wrote a blog post about how his MailWrangler application has been rejected from the App Store for duplicating the functionality of a built-in iPhone application.

So in July I wrote a small iPhone app called MailWrangler. Basically this app enabled a user to add their GMail accounts (standard and Google Apps For Your Domain) which they could load and switch between them quickly. It embedded Webkit in to the app and logged you in to the accounts automagically. Normally to check multiple Gmail accounts in mobile Safari you would have to log in and out of all of the accounts, typing the username and password for each. Using just the Apple Mail application you aren’t able to see threaded views, your google contacts, archive (quickly), star, etc without going through the hassles that are present when using Gmail’s IMAP on the iPhone.

Apple rejected the application due to the duplication of functionality of the built-in Mail application "without providing sufficient differentiation or added functionality". Apple also pointed out some limitations in the function of the application.

Apple has generated significant criticism due to their rejection policies, though this rejection offers some more direction than previous rejection letters.

Article Link

 

[hogfaninga]

I don't see this as a big issue.

Unfortunate for the developer, but understandable.

Apple is tightly controlling the iPhone and apps at this time. I would expect to see this change down the road after many issues and functions such as cut & paste are worked out first.

I agree.

 

[mackerman93]

funny, seems like everyone is watching the Emmys

seriously, this actually makes me think that apple IS becoming the new microsoft

 

[Beric]

seriously, this actually makes me think that apple IS becoming the new microsoft

Uhhh... they've been a mini MS for a decade at least.

 

[esquire360]

Apple this is re-tarded... I'm handicapped so i can say retarded.

 

[esquire360]

oh i guess no good camera apps are coming any time soon as iPhone has a LAME camera interface

 

[SuperMacMan]

Sounds like what happened to Podcaster... (http://almerica.blogspot.com)

Apple, let the consumer decide what they want. Not you. Please?

 

[swingerofbirch]

I agree, who wouldn't think this is lame of Apple?

And what is the big deal even if it did replicate built in fuctions.....like what if Eudora put out an e-mail client for the iPhone that lets you do what Mail does....or if Google put out Chrome for the iPhone..what's the big deal? Apple doesn't charge for the included apps so it's not as if they stand to lose money to competition. I guess they just don't want a dilution of their standard apps to maintain power or whatever. I'm not a lawyer, but when you make the phone, the phone's OS, much of its software, run the only store where software can be purchased for the phone, software which can only be developed after paying the company money to use their developer tools, are there any laws to protect developers or consumers?

Like didn't they go after Microsoft just for making Internet Explorer standard with Windows?

 

[mac 2005]

I'm not seeing the point of these posts. Apple is under no obligation to accept these applications and make them available in the application store. I applaud Apple for providing the developers with a courteous response that indicates why the app is rejected, but the company really is under no obligation to do so.

I'd love to have an article appear in the New Yorker magazine, but the fact that I spend x-number of hours writing it does not obligate the publication in any way to publish it.

If the message is: Apple, we'd like to be able to install apps of our own choosing on the iPhone, then have that conversation. Get enough people on the "petition" and get Apple to open the iPhone. At the same time, be prepared for the risk. Part of what makes Apple "Apple" is this attention to the details.

This ongoing whining, though, from "developers" whose apps were rejected strikes me as pointless.