Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source Not Welcome At Palm App Catalog

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the well-thats-not-very-friendly-of-you dept.

Programming 174

davidmwilliams writes "It appears Palm is seeking to follow Apple's footsteps in gaining a reputation for inconsistent and spurious rejections and removals of iPhone and iPod Touch applications. In this case, Palm has resisted including a free application because the source code is attainable elsewhere."

cancel ×

174 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (4, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606029)

From the article:

In September Zawinski was called by Joe Hayashi from Palm, formerly Senior Director of Product Management for Yahoo!. Despite the treatment from Palm over this matter Hayashi said "We aren't asking that you remove the binaries or source of your apps from your web site, and we aren't restricting anyone from distributing their source code, open source license or otherwise."

Yet the Palm SDK License [palm.com] (as linked to in the article) states under section 4. Developers' Ownership and Ability to Distribute its Applications:

4.3 Applications Can Only Be Distributed Through the Palm Application Catalog. Developer acknowledges and agrees, that absent a separate written agreement with Palm, Developer may not distribute any Application except as allowed by Palm's formal approved distribution process and channel (the "Application Catalog"). Developer acknowledges and agrees that (a) distribution of Applications will be subject to further terms and conditions, which may include a share of the revenue generated from sale of the Applications to be paid to Palm by Developer, where such terms and conditions shall be presented to Developer upon or before Developer's request for distribution of any Application, (b) because of certain laws, regulations, as well as contractual or other restrictions, Palm may refuse to allow the distribution of certain types of Applications, and (c) distributed Applications may be viewable or inspectable by third parties, and Palm is not obligated to take any steps to obfuscate the code associated with the Applications or take any other steps to prevent third parties from viewing or inspecting Application code.

Now this is assuming Jamie Zawinski used the SDK to produce the Palm Pre programs (I'm not sure what the Pre can run and these programs seem to be merely ports). After searching around for the terms of service for the application store for the Palm Pre, I came up pretty empty handed aside from the Developer SDK License. The fact that it says 'Beta' on the app store may make this forgivable but I'm not seeing a clear distinction on the fine details and legal on what you may or may not do when submitting an application. It appears there may be some internal conflicting views also -- considering what Hayashi said and what Palm did.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606107)

Yet the Palm SDK License (as linked to in the article) states under section 4. Developers' Ownership and Ability to Distribute its Applications:

So sounds like Palm just modified Zawinksi's license, assuming he used the SDK.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (5, Informative)

Kasracer (865931) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606187)

This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.
The App Catalog is still in beta so the latest terms, etc are not there. I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (2, Insightful)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606371)

Maybe some people on Slashdot can't wait to get developing for the palm pre.
But Palm has an uphill battle so it better get started on making a happy fanbase,
The G1 and the iPhone already have a head start.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (2, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606639)

Indeed, and the best way to do this is not to become the control freaks that Apple are.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (2, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606897)

Indeed, and the best way to do this is not to become the control freaks that Apple are.

Maybe yes. Maybe No. [wired.com]

"Tell me, do you know what this is?"

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (2)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607747)

Modded as troll? Come on. Apple is control freak, iPhone is a really locked up device and you can only get software from their store. On top of that they do not approve any apps that they dont like, even if there wasn't any reason for it. Best example is Google Voice and how FTC started investigating it too.

For that matter I like Windows Mobile. They will also roll out an official Store in 6.5 version, but you're still allowed to install any .cab you like and you are free to distribute your app elsewhere too, including it's source code. It's scary MS is actually supporting open source on phones more than it's competitors.

Same thing with Symbian platform. You have to get a certificate for your app so it can be installed on devices. And they do not even have an official store.

Hopefully Android will change some of that, but by far Windows Mobile has been the only actually open mobile OS.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (3, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607987)

Modded as troll? Come on. Apple is control freak, iPhone is a really locked up device and you can only get software from their store.

The Pre and the G1 are already doing it 'the best way', according to you, and they're being left in the dust.

I don't know if I would have modded your post 'troll', but it definitely wasn't very useful for doing much other than getting argued with by fanboys.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#29609603)

Modded as troll? Come on. Apple is control freak, iPhone is a really locked up device and you can only get software from their store.

The Pre and the G1 are already doing it 'the best way', according to you, and they're being left in the dust.

So you're saying that having market dominance means never being called a control freak?

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29608045)

Understand that Slashdot has no "-1 I disagree" mod and that "-1 Troll" is used in substitute. You don't agree with the practice, but it has been this way since the moderation system began.

Anyway, the moderator's issue is likely less to due with the assertion that the iPhone is locked down. It is. More with the idea that there is some better way to do it. Apple has more than 2 billion app downloads. They've sold a load of phones (relative to Palm and Android phones). No one else has started as quickly as Apple did and not one is on a track to catch up, or even come close.

Apple?? Control Freak? Really? (2, Insightful)

knarfling (735361) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608705)

Are we talking the same Apple? You know, the ones who sell the iPod Nano? Just because they updated the firmware on the iPod Nano, so that a third party docking station (Which only has two functions. 1. Charge the iPod. 2. Provide speakers. That's it, nothing else.) stops working and the iPod Nano suddenly reports an "unsupported device found" is NO reason to think that Apple is in ANY way controlling. What possible reason could there be to call Apple a control freak?

By the way, I understand that Apple has denied all rumours that they intend to come out with an Apple iCar specifically designed and approved as an authorized mobile listening accessory to the iPod and iPhone. The last I heard was that they were definitely not researching ways to seal the hood shut to prevent people from changing the iCar battery.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (1)

ksheff (2406) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608957)

Maybe some people on Slashdot can't wait to get developing for the palm pre.

What's stopping them? The SDK can be downloaded for free and has been available for a while now and is available on Windows, OS X, and Linux. There are several open source apps, patches, tweaks, etc on the various WebOS enthusiast sites. No jail breaking required.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29606649)

I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.

*gasp* jwz is GOD ALMIGHTY. Every move of his is WORTHY OF SCRIPTURE. Those denying any news about him to Slashdot are tantamount to HERETICS.

Begone, sinner! A hundred XScreenSaver modules as penance! And it had better be downloaded through the original Mozilla browser!

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29606833)

This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.
The App Catalog is still in beta so the latest terms, etc are not there. I don't even know why Slashdot accepted this article as it was already debunked and addressed by Palm.

Yes, but really, we already have a nearly two-year-old model to look at an learn from. Any company wanting to do an app store should already do what Apple has been faulted on. When I see an app store in "beta" I don't think that it's policies, no Apple has already given companies experience in what policies are good, what policies are bad, and what policies are stupid. Apple makes a ton of mistakes with the App Store, and there's no reason everyone else should make the same bloody mistake over and over again. Including the biggest complaint about the Apple App Store - inconsistency!

A "beta" app store means that it can go down and various oddball things can happen when using it, but developers should not have to repeat the same experience with the Pre App Store that they've had with the iPhone one. At least the iPHone one had growing pains because it hadn't been really done on such a scale before. Every app store nowadays should learn from Apple's mistakes and take advantage of it - that's business. Let Apple fumble policies while they learn what not to do.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (0)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607295)

This article is dumb. Palm is working hard on getting everything in line and many policies have evolved. They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.

For all they say, the applications are still not approved, and not available on their App Store. There's no reason why it should've taken that long in the first place, and absolutely no excuse to keep dragging their feet now.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29607541)

If you read TFA, you would have realized that Palm has been working with him but he had some items to change from the QA process. They're not dragging their feet and admitted he kind of got lost in the shuffle because they have, literally, hundreds of applications that are going through the QA process.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (4, Interesting)

oblivionboy (181090) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607305)

Ah. The Palm appologist fanboys are already out in force. Jump all over Apple sure, but if its Palm then "Noooes, Palm is just working out kinks", despite strong evidence that internally the whole Pre developer program is riddled (and I mean riddled) with schitzoid internal behaviour from executives and others within Palm. And I haven't seen any sign that its improving.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (5, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607331)

They have ALREADY said they're working with the developer and that it's okay that the source is available.

In private email, they did. And if you TFA (and the blog post [livejournal.com] ), they said that "it's okay" before they released a new version of SDK, the license agreement for which explicitly states that it's not okay (which is the one linked from GP's post). So their position is at best unclear, and at worst - if you consider chronological order - they've rescinded their earlier words.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (4, Informative)

SmokeSerpent (106200) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606747)

This is not the current developer agreement that you have to accept to submit applications. The developer agreement does include a clause allowing open source distribution as long as you do not distribute Palm's IP or charge a fee for that distribution.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (1)

SmokeSerpent (106200) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606821)

And as I mentioned in my response in the original slashdot thread linking directly to jwz's post, based on the time frame and description Jaime gives, he should have had the current agreement in his hands at the same time as he was throwing his fit about open source.

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (3, Informative)

metamatic (202216) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608531)

The developer agreement does include a clause allowing open source distribution as long as you do not distribute Palm's IP or charge a fee for that distribution.

So it's still incompatible with the GPL, then.

(GPL allows you to charge a fee, and doesn't allow you to impose additional restrictions on people such as prohibiting them from charging a fee.)

Re:Palm's Zawinski Contradicts Palm SDK License (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608071)

"The Application" could mean the application for Palm, i.e. I can't distribute the Palm Pre application file, but if I build a Linux version that is not a Palm Pre application and I can distribute that. Could. Weak legalese.

OPEN SORES ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29606031)

Ooo, that hurts !!

Actual blog post (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29606063)

Re:Actual blog post (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609251)

Good find. And now that I've RTFA, I disagree with the title of the /. post. It should be "jwz Doesn't Want to Follow Any of Palm's steps for Submissions, Equates Opening a Paypal Account with an Existentialist Nightmare, Even His LiveJournal Sycophants Call Him An Ass."

Buzzwords (4, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606067)

Is it possible for people to submit a story without loading it with buzzwords (Apple, iPhone, etc.) just to increase the chances of it being posted despite the fact that the story isn't actually about Apple, the iPhone, or anything of the sort. It's about Palm. Sure, I know that new cool thing is to hate on Apple, the iPhone, iTunes, and the like, but this story isn't about any of that. Want to post a story about Apple, the iPhone, iTunes, and the problems associated with them? Go for it - submit the story. But, if your submitting something about Palm (or Microsoft or whatever), let's keep it focused on the actual subject of the submission.

I know. I know. I must be new here...

Re:Buzzwords (5, Funny)

ElKry (1544795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606369)

You must be... oh.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606387)

Its hardly the cool new thing to hate on Apple here. Its just gotten much more virulent now that Apple is more and more in the media.

Re:Buzzwords (3, Interesting)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606451)

Compare Slashdot now to Slashdot from five years ago and try to tell me it's not the cool new thing to hate on Apple. The difference in just five years is night and day. Success makes a company worthy of being hated even when they have nothing to do with the story at hand (same applies to Microsoft and now Google).

Re:Buzzwords (2, Funny)

webheaded (997188) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606707)

Hey I've been hating Apple since WAY before it was the cool thing to do. I am now like all those douche bags that tell you how they totally loved that band way before you'd even heard of them, dude.

Re:Buzzwords (2, Insightful)

jpmorgan (517966) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607033)

Some people hate success. But success is also a powerful spotlight to illuminate a company's misdeeds.

Apple receives a lot more attention, from a lot more sources than it did five years ago. Many of those new interested parties are a lot less willing to put up with Apple's shenanigans than its traditional fanbase.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607057)

I loved Apple at first. Hated Apple since the Apple IIc. The Apple II+ was their best product.

Re:Buzzwords (3, Interesting)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607125)

well... apple did a lot less things to piss people off five years ago, while the ipod was a success they weren't actively trying to kill anything and everything that could interact with it by any means possible like they are now.

The only thing left still relatively 'free' in the sense you can do what you like with it is the mac computers, almost everything else they touch these days tends to have a horrible taint to it of 'you will not do what we do not want you to do'

While I'm a linux user there was once upon a time I'd buy mac hardware just because of the build quality, but with recent shenanigans I just can't justify it... the perception of them has changed in the last five years, but for good reasons. (depending on your qualification of 'good') Almost everything they sell is in a walled garden, to protect you from *gasp* running something useful.

Re:Buzzwords (2, Interesting)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608013)

well... apple did a lot less things to piss people off five years ago, while the ipod was a success they weren't actively trying to kill anything and everything that could interact with it by any means possible like they are now.

For me it's simpler. Diehard apple fans were a lot less numerous. I don't think they are any more rabid than they were - but there are so many more of them, and so quick to tell us how "if this was mac it wouldn't.. " or "on mac this isn't a ..." or... or...

I find the same attitude equally annoying from diehard linux fans, and diehard windows 7 fans. (I didn't see many windows fanatics before win7, not the way we do now.) There is no single operating system or platform that's a panacea. Stop trying so hard to convince everyone that yours is just that, because it just makes you sound like that annoying kid who plugs his hears and shouts "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

Erm... oops, that looks suspiciously like a rant. But there you have it... the dirty core of my own distaste for [vocal] mac [people].

Re:Buzzwords (2, Interesting)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607341)

Previously, the Apple hate was technical in nature: "Oh, Macs don't have pre-emptive multitasking, Macs don't have protected memory, Macs don't have any CLI-- they must be toys you can't use for actual work!"

(Which completely ignored the fact that back then, Apple's UI was *so much* better than Windows, Mac users were much more productive despite the lack of those OS features. Not as much now that Microsoft's UI people have more-or-less caught-up, and Apple's been making their OS less usable each version. Besides, it wasn't as if early Windows versions with pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory were immune to crashing or locking-up. But I digress...)

Anyway, with OS X, all those old arguments have been torn away, so now the new generation of Apple haters have to focus on other things-- and their complaints have become, well, really petty-seeming. At least to me.

Come to think of it, though, I used to know a Mac hater who's biggest criticism of the OS was that it rounded the corners of the screen instead of leaving them square. I can't imagine anything more petty than that.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608019)

Previously, the Apple hate was technical in nature

My loathing for Apple dates back to the infamous "look and feel" lawsuits. [wikipedia.org] (Yes, I'm old enough that one of my office mates in grad school had one of those " Keep Your Lawyers Off My Computer" [flickr.com] button stuck to the wall of his cubical.)

Yes, I hated the Macintosh, found it an annoying toy with a screen that gave me a headache, a poor keyboard, and a mouse with only one button. But that was merely dislike. My loathing comes from their corporate practices.

Takes one to know one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609105)

>- and their complaints have become, well, really petty-seeming. At least to me.

Its not that people arent petty, they are.

Its...how should I put it.... we cant stand listening to Apple and Prius owners talking over and over and over about their new toy.

STFU is not petty.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606511)

Its just gotten much more virulent now that Apple is acting like the Microsoft.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Buzzwords (5, Insightful)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606741)

Sure, I know that new cool thing is to hate on Apple, the iPhone, iTunes, and the like

I'm a middle-aged, overweight fat computer bloke that moans if he has to spend more than £8 (=$12) on a pair of jeans and listens to Jethro Tull in his spare time - believe me, I gave up on "cool" a long time ago...

I just don't want you getting the impression that most people like or hate things because it's "cool" to do so. In 30+ years of working and playing with computers, I've never found a single reason to own anything or buy anything made by Apple and that isn't going to change any time soon.

Yes, maybe if Apple were less proprietary and locked in than Microsoft, I might consider ditching both Windows and Linux for their products, but the fact is I don't like Apple because they charge far too much for something that looks nice yet doesn't let you do what you want with it... ...and my experience with most (but not all) Apple users is that they pay a premium price in order to join an exclusive little club where they are permitted to sneer at anyone who doesn't use Apple products without having any requirement to give any technical justifications for it. That, in turn, creates the anti-Apple backlash.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606869)

I'm a middle-aged, overweight fat computer bloke

You're posting on slashdot with a UID less than 890721. No need to restate an obvious truth.

Re:Buzzwords (2, Funny)

Steffan (126616) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606975)

> by Red Flayer (890720) Alter Relationship on Thu October 01, 09:01 AM (#29606869) Journal
>

> > I'm a middle-aged, overweight fat computer bloke

>You're posting on slashdot with a UID less than 890721 No need to restate an obvious truth.

Nice! It took me a second to figure out what your benchmark was...

Re:Buzzwords (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609161)

> by Red Flayer (890720) Alter Relationship on Thu October 01, 09:01 AM (#29606869) Journal
>

> > I'm a middle-aged, overweight fat computer bloke

>You're posting on slashdot with a UID less than 890721 No need to restate an obvious truth.

Nice! It took me a second to figure out what your benchmark was...

I thought it classy that he included himself in the derogatory UID comment rather than the other way around.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Captain Spam (66120) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608159)

I'm a middle-aged, overweight fat computer bloke

You're posting on slashdot with a UID less than 890721. No need to restate an obvious truth.

So... extrapolating slightly, I must be a couple thousand years old and weigh something in the range of several hundred tons! Sweet!

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Rob Riggs (6418) | more than 4 years ago | (#29609131)

Lightweight!

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 4 years ago | (#29609501)

This is in danger of turning into one of those "my ID is lower than yours" pissing matches, but I'm going to mix it up by saying that I agree with pandrijeczko: my dislike for Apple has nothing to do with it being "cool" or "uncool", but has everything to do with their corporate practices and pricing, and the fact that they're stuck in an old-school model of proprietary lock-in at least as much, and arguably more, that Microsoft. Yes, they do support a lot of open source initiatives these days, and I applaud them for that, but they also tweak around with their devices, especially their handheld devices, to keep them as incompatible as possible with open standards. Till they change that, I'll stick with HTC (and hopefully Android), Samsung and the like, and maybe even Palm, but I will be staying as far away from Apple as I can. Just as I have since my Apple II died. :)

(Like Mr. Slippery [slashdot.org] , I also remember the look and feel lawsuits which resulted in Apple being the only company ever to have been boycotted by the FSF. Even Microsoft hasn't achieved that level of perfidy! Apple has improved a lot over the years, but there's still quite obviously traces of that old, really horrible mindset lurking around in the company. I'm just glad Apple never did achieve a monopoly in personal computers back in the day, because I think they would have made MS look like saints.)

Re:Buzzwords (4, Insightful)

samkass (174571) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606881)

You haven't looked very hard. Most Mac communities are accepting folks who would rather generate content than tinker with their machines, but otherwise don't particularly sneer at anyone or act exclusively that I've seen.

Yes, maybe if Apple were less proprietary and locked in than Microsoft

When's the last time you recompiled your Windows kernel from its open source distribution, like you can with MacOS? Or used a Microsoft browser's nightly builds?

Anyway, I understand if you don't like the Mac or iPhone, but there's no reason to go around insulting those who do.

Re:Buzzwords (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609643)

When's the last time you *legally* installed your MacOS on hardware from any manufacturer other than Apple? Even with a few pseudo-open-source components, Apple is still vastly more "proprietary and locked in" than Microsoft (unless you are comparing Apple to Microsoft's console offerings, which, I guess, would actually be a pretty fair comparison).

You seem to think that "proprietary and locked in" is insulting to Mac or iPhone users; if you don't like using the most "proprietary and locked in" systems available in their markets, use something else. Seriously, can you think of anything more "proprietary and locked in"?

Jethro Tull (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608753)

What, you caught the virus Weird Al warned us about?
"(Look out!) And [the virus will] make your iPod only play Jethro Tull"

Okay, considering the content of your post,
s/iPod/$some_MP3_Player/g

j/k, I have a few Tull albums in rotation myself.

Re:Buzzwords (1)

Greenisus (262784) | more than 4 years ago | (#29609203)

It's a nice UI with no driver issues and a unix terminal. That's the only reason I switched.

Dupe (0, Flamebait)

Darth_brooks (180756) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606099)

More whining about the pariah who selflessly velcro'd himself to the cross because his tip calculator got rejected.

Re:Dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29606211)

And to add insult to injury, we get this guy submitting his own article that sounds like a he said/she said conversation overheard at a high school cafeteria...

It should only need to be said once... (3, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606153)

Palm, get your act together. Apple is "good enough," and the only way you can differentiate yourselves is by being substantially better. Treat developers like gold and get your story 100% consistent, unlike Apple, if you want to succeed.

Re:It should only need to be said once... (2, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606249)

Palm, get your act together. Apple is "good enough," and the only way you can differentiate yourselves is by being substantially better. Treat developers like gold and get your story 100% consistent, unlike Apple, if you want to succeed.

Market follower, get your act together. The market leader is "good enough," and the only way you can differentiate yourselves is by being substantially better. Treat providers like gold and get your story 100% consistent, unlike the market leader, if you want to succeed.

Yep, it works.

Re:It should only need to be said once... (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607007)

Erm. Define "good enough."

Re:It should only need to be said once... (1)

GuldKalle (1065310) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607381)

People buy it..

Re:It should only need to be said once... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29607773)

Good enough to distribute two billion applications.

Open source IS welcome at Palm (5, Informative)

krid (26077) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606161)

I've released an open source password management app for webOS (http://www.precentral.net/homebrew-apps/keyring), and a rep from Palm contacted me to offer help in getting my app into the catalog. They have no issues with open source, and no problem with the code being available elsewhere. The problem here is that jwz got his panties in a twist, and he needs to take a few deep breaths.

To be fair, panties were twisted (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607167)

The problem here is that jwz got his panties in a twist

Actually if you read his original post, that is most certainly not the root problem. He had very valid reasons to be upset, and only posted a long rant when the whole process had gone beyond absurd.

That said, as others have noted Palm has already stated they are clearing this up for him, and I really think Palm is trying to do the right thing in general - they just slipped up very badly here. But Palm has a history of treating developers well so I would cut them some slack now that they have addressed this problem.

Re:To be fair, panties were twisted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609473)

Jamie has moved to another industry and didn't want to put a lot of time and effort in this, he just felt like getting a couple of simple apps in the store for a laugh. And for reasons I can't quite understand, he's annoyed that they haven't tailored the process to people who don't give a shit about it.

They asked him to provide a Paypal account and he refused. But because of his celebrity he can twist their arm.

From what I can see their mistake was not kissing his ass enough. It'd be one thing if the store was the only way to get software on a Pre. It's not.

Ultimately Android (3, Insightful)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606193)

is going to grow up (it really is still stumbling along, show up on more phones and spread because the shenanigans of companies like this... When Android hits that critical mass and these companies start crying and whining about the implosion of their market share, I am going to laugh my ass off. While Google has punted some developers off their site, it's no where near what the other companies have done.

Re:Ultimately Android (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606351)

The problem with Android is it needs geeks to survive and Google seems to not welcome them. First off is the fact that your device must be "rooted" in order to have full control, really, all Google needed to do is provide some obscure command to root your device so the geeks can use the device how they wanted and the masses could be protected. Android isn't as shiny or as polished as WebOS or iPhone OS, it -needs- geeks to survive, but how does Google expect that to happen when they send takedown notices to Android modders?

Re:Ultimately Android (2, Informative)

Zencyde (850968) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606593)

Are you not even paying attention to that issue? Google sent the C&D because Cyanogen was distributing applications that are sold with the Google Experience. It's not so much that the users aren't allowed to download it as much as it is the distributor lacks a method for verifying that the users have the appropriate license to acquire such content. In fact, some Google employees are assisting with the project at this point.

Re:Ultimately Android (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607201)

Sure, but the community doesn't see it that way. They see Google as control freaks.

Re:Ultimately Android (2, Informative)

mafian911 (1270834) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608007)

I dont see why Google would be considered a control freak. Android is probably the most open mobile OS available. That is the premise behind Google's "Open Handset Alliance" after all. Considering the fact that you can put any application you want on the market, without fear of rejection (unless it gets reported, which is mostly a community decision), and the fact that their OS is open source itself, I think they've gotten pretty close to being truly open as it is. I don't blame Google for trying to protect the applications they require a license for. They really have done everything they can to make the platform otherwise open. I agree with Bullfish. I think Android is going to reach critical mass soon. In my opinion, it's the only phone that has a chance to close the gap between the iPhone and every other phone on the market.

Re:Ultimately Android (2, Informative)

Captain Spam (66120) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608253)

Considering the fact that you can put any application you want on the market, without fear of rejection...

I hate to be pedantic, but I'm in fact helping your case when I inform you that you don't even need to put it on the Marketplace if you choose; you can just point the browser to an .apk file hosted somewhere and the phone will offer to download and install it without problems (after you confirm you really want to do so).

Re:Ultimately Android (1)

Zencyde (850968) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608183)

Most of the "community" (see: people actually on the IRC channel) are well aware of the situation. The community you're referring to also sounds like the same community that can't be bothered to acquire information from anything other than second hand sources.

Re:Ultimately Android (1)

raddan (519638) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608345)

Your post doesn't compile. I think you need one of these:

)

Re:Ultimately Android (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29608703)

Please insert the closing ) after the word along, but before the comma

thanks

A Nigerian prince will soon be contacting you with details on how to claim your prize

Why bother developing for it then? (3, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606325)

Seriously people, you're the authors not them. You choose what rights others are offered -- that's the goal of Open Source: Giving you the choice, not them. But if you want to make bad choices about your intellectual property, such as signing all your rights over to a greedy corporation, we're not going to stop you. I fail to see why we're even discussing this, beyond pointing out so everyone knows Palm is not a company worth developing for.

If you're going to support open source, then do it already--stop complaining about companies that don't. In return, don't support them by buying their products. It's simple, really -- we like our freedom and we're willing to pay for it. Is there any other message we can realistically send as a community and have any credibility?

Re:Why bother developing for it then? (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606445)

One of the main advantages to open source is the ease of portability. Some open source application can work fine on Windows, OS X, Linux, a hacked Wii, a smartphone, an obscure Linux powered device, and so on. If people keep using non-free applications you get vendor lock-in. Just look at IE and ActiveX, if ActiveX was used even more than it was back before Firefox became popular, we might still be forced to run IE in an emulator layer just to use the web. If you can get open source out on every single platform for free, especially the newer ones where people don't have to "un-learn" something to use them, it helps spread open standards and in the end a better computing world.

Re:Why bother developing for it then? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29609261)

I read the "Applications Can Only Be Distributed Through the Palm Application Catalog" stanza as saying that you can't try to get around the Palm app-store (or whatever it is called), NOT that you can't use your code elsewhere, like in a port, etc.

Note that IANAL and I didn't RTFArticle, just what was reposted here; so I could easily be mistaken, but read that way it doesn't seem all that draconian or lock-in-ish as some people seem to be making out.

oh wait... I am on Slashdot... Now it all makes sense...

Re:Why bother developing for it then? (1)

JohnFen (1641097) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606551)

Just disappointment, really.

I was very excited about the Pre. I liked the idea of having a modern palmtop to develop for and have several projects in mind that I think would do very well.

Originally, I was looking at the iPhone, but I rapidly grew to dislike the way Apple was dealing with developers, and the recent problems with the store are the final nail in that coffin for me.

I liked the Pre better than the iPhone as a phone and a computing platform, and I'm a Palm developer with warm and fuzzy feelings about the company from way back, so that seemed the obvious way to go.

But, everything Palm is doing smells like what Apple is doing, so I'm very disappointed and am squealing about it.

But my real response is exactly what you said -- I'm not going to develop for the Palm (unless they make some sort of radical and surprising course correction).

Re:Why bother developing for it then? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607595)

I am glad that this story was posted because it convinces me that I am right not to buy a Pre. I can stop worrying about it while I know that Palm is just monkeying around, and go back to playing with the Android SDK.

Palm's only partially getting it (3, Insightful)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606531)

Palm is only partially getting the big picture of the iPhone's success. Admittedly, however, they're doing a better job of it than, say, the carriers supporting the Android initiative. The Pre is the closest thing to an "iPhone killer" out there.

But Palm, you need the apps. Nay, you MUST bring the apps if you want your phone to begin to compete on Apple's multiple levels.

I agree that the person involved in this Palm app flap is likely overreacting. And for the dweebs that don't seem to get it regarding Apple's vetting process for apps: Don't think the FCC wouldn't haul Apple to court (and the cell owners lynching any Apple employees they'd see) if Apple couldn't show that they've checked EVERY app they've allowed on their phone (and, as a result, into the international cell network) without reasonably ensuring that the app doesn't cause an individual's phone to die or, worse, infect the iPhone net (and others) with bad or malicious code that could compromise the cell networks. Sure, Apple seems sometimes political about the vetting (note a recent app about health care that Apple seemed to reject arbitrarily), but otherwise they're only hurting themselves if they don't allow most apps from being available.

The iPhone is (as a fan and an owner) an fair phone but a very powerful and extensible mobile computer and Palm must match that functionality. The Pre is it's only decent competitor in terms of its relative features, OS and flexibility based on its carrier's desire to support the hardware without butchering it down for carrier-only apps (**cough**Verizon**cough).

But the apps bring Palm only so far. They need a mechanism that isn't carrier marketing specific to support and augment the hardware features of your phone. For the iPhone, iTunes handles everything and fairly well. Palm must bring it's own iTunes-like PC/Mac application that handles syncs, mates with their new Amazon music initiative, can access their Palm app store, AND even (get this) use the approved Apple process for third-party iTunes library support that won't get them into trouble as they did with spoofing their hardware with iTunes itself.

Right now, Palm is shooting themselves in the foot if they are rejecting apps for any reason other than gross obscenity or copyright/IP issues. They'll soon headshot themselves if they don't get even a modest competitor to iTunes running, in my humble Mac-consultant opinion.

Re:Palm's only partially getting it (2, Interesting)

TheGatekeeper (309483) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608067)

if Apple couldn't show that they've checked EVERY app they've allowed on their phone (and, as a result, into the international cell network) without reasonably ensuring that the app doesn't cause an individual's phone to die or, worse, infect the iPhone net (and others) with bad or malicious code that could compromise the cell networks.

Android phones don't seem to have a problem, and as far as I am aware, there is no pre-screening process for apps. Granted, post-screening is done to remove certain tethering apps, but I am highly skeptical that it's possible to write an app capable to "infect the iPhone net".

Dupe (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606541)

Isn't this just the same story [slashdot.org] from two days ago?

Re:Dupe (1)

perbert (241785) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606697)

Yes. Must be a slow news day. Here's some follow-up [precentral.net] from the first time this appeared.

Re:Dupe (1)

Kasracer (865931) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606831)

Yes. What a surprise...

Homebrew apps are more popular than the app store (1)

plastick (1607981) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606641)

The app store is being replaced by Homebrew applications so it doesn't really matter what Palm does with the app store with the exception of having the application settings backed up. Furthermore, there are hundreds of free apps with new ones popping up every day.

http://www.precentral.net/how-to-install-homebrew-apps [precentral.net]

I love my palm pre.

Lots of open source apps on there (3, Informative)

darrenkopp (981266) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606673)

The twitter app i use (spaz) is open source and it's in the app catalog. and they were able to do it before the SDK was even available to the public. they got permission from palm.

Slashdot getting weak (4, Informative)

ConfusedVorlon (657247) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606783)

C'mon /.
Not only is this a rehash of an article posted before.
It is pretty clear from that article that Palm is doing nothing remotely deserving this title. /. can and should do better.

Re:Slashdot getting weak (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607759)

/. can and should do better.

Should, yes. Can... seriously? I'd give you a "Coffee-spewing Hilarious" mod if I had points.

Overblown story (5, Insightful)

El Royo (907295) | more than 4 years ago | (#29606867)

Seriously... Palm does get it. They've hired two outstanding people to lead the developer relations (Ben Galbraith and Dion Almaer). They've already reached out to jwz [twitter.com] , who just spit in their eye(s) [twitter.com] . This seems nothing more than an overgrown toddler having a tantrum because he doesn't get his way now. I wrote about this on my blog [pre101.com] . I tried to keep it a somewhat balanced article but seriously, his actions since just make him seem petulant. Is Palm without reproach in this? No, they're going through the pains of releasing an app catalog, SDK and an app approval process all at once. Things aren't as smooth as they could be but they're nowhere near 'kafkaesque'. This certainly didn't warrant a slashdot post and certainly doesn't warrant two of them.

Re:Overblown story (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607263)

Neither you, nor Palm representatives you link to, have provided a coherent explanation as to why JWZ's applications are not published yet. He's absolutely correct - this sort of thing shouldn't involve any "reaching out" or "going through pains". Just release it already, or say why you can't. Meanwhile, all I see is a bunch of marketing-speak with "fantastic experience" in every sentence - a sure sign that bending over is going to be involved.

Re:Overblown story (3, Insightful)

El Royo (907295) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607419)

JWZ already describes in his post why it's not released yet. Palm is under no obligation to change all their rules to suit one person. He wouldn't agree to cooperate with any of their requests. Palm should probably create more open-source friendly submission requirements but their requirements during the beta period are what they are and if he wants it released now he needs to play by their current rules. If he wants to wait to see if the rules change, that's fine, too.

Re:Overblown story (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607679)

it was in the first story. Palm wants $99 and a paypal account linked to a checking account to allow you to upload apps to their store. whether the apps are free or not. he thought he was above the rules

Re:Overblown story (1)

El Royo (907295) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607863)

Well, it's $5, but, yes.

Re:Overblown story (1)

jjo (62046) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608619)

Actually, JWZ is willing to pay to join the developer program, but he doesn't trust PayPal with his checking account. He invited Palm to say: "screw you, we won't change anything, you are not above our rules". It that case JWZ will simply walk away. Palm has not confirmed neither that they will change these rules, nor that they will keep them in place and JWZ should go and have a nice life.

Re:Overblown story (1)

NovaSupreme (996633) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607537)

Don't you think it's a problem if someone who voluntarily and freely worked for you, now hates you?
JWZ may be jackass (he is not), but you are shooting yourself in foot if you piss people like him.
Remember only think volunteers ask in return is happiness.

Re:Overblown story (1)

El Royo (907295) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607963)

Absolutely. You should never piss off developers. I've told Palm this myself. His approach seems to assume the growing pains Palm is having are malice. I choose to think it's that they're overwhelmed. This is why the program is still in beta.

Re:Overblown story (1)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607625)

Ben Galbraith seems like a sweetheart and everything, but his blog post was devoid of content. And so what if JWZ is an overgrown toddler. Most developers are overgrown toddlers. Their app store should work without phone calls. As per a thread in his LJ, if you've written a killer app or you are famous, obviously Palm wants your experience to be flawless. The whole point is that it should work for everyone else too. Even if Palm doesn't care about you specifically.

Re:Overblown story (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608769)

He posted his phone number on Twitter?! Heh. Gutsy.

One of the first applications was open source (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29607023)

Spaz, a twitter client, was on the pre from the launch, and it has been open source the entire time.

Old Palm vs New Palm (1)

ivoras (455934) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607343)

It looks like Palm seriously needs to find some old timer from the Days of IIIc and give him a blank cheque just to tell them what they have forgotten about the business of making a platform popular.

All this nonsense about a central app store (which was IIRC started by no other than Apple) needs to stop and stop soon because it's an unprecedented level of lock-in. Imagine if Microsoft announced every Application, every .EXE file running on Windows 7 needs to be downloaded from Microsoft Store [windowsmarketplace.com] ? (which, by the way, they look like they've already preparing to do something like that soon). At least Google had the decency to say that while they would prefer the apps go through their store, they won't go medieval on the developers and users who bypass it.

Seriously, when in the history of computing (except in game consoles - which is just another reason to avoid them) has a vendor of generic computers said that you absolutely must not install any software but the ones blessed by the said vendor? See IBM, 1981. and what came from the PC.

Palm hired Mozilla staffers for Dev relations 9/23 (1)

James McP (3700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608059)

Dion Almaer and Ben Gailbraith (worked on Bespin at Mozilla) are now Palm employees and in charge of developer relations. Obviously, Palm is taking the problems with their app store and developer program seriously.

And you know that it really breaks down to a distribution arguement, right? JWZ can distribute his apps through other channels all he wants. But for the official store, which is still in beta and therefore not a done deal, you have to agree to their hoops. Their hoops can, and have, changed.

The Pre's easy to unlock (enter the konami code in the global search) and then get the installer utility. Pretty much the same as Android.

Is the Pre as unlocked as Centros and Treos? No, it's not. And if you ask me, it's because 10-15% of PalmOS software was buggy and caused problems but end users didn't say "hey, Widgets2005 makes my phone unstable" they said "This phone suxxorz and crashes all the time. Stupid Palm." My boss had the same Treo 650 I did but his crashed left and right thanks to some crapware he installed. I had occassional crashes on my 650 but I knew how to check the logs to see which program caused it and I'd kill that program.

Palm saw that most phones have virtually no ability to install apps and the ones that did (iPhone, Android) are tied to an app store. Most people are happy with centralized distribution systems and Palm made sure the walls of their garden were really low but rather wide, so that anyone can get out but that they can't be unaware that they are going "off reservation" with all the insecurity that entails.

Moot point (2, Funny)

sbeckstead (555647) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607519)

The Pre is not exactly selling like hot cakes. So does it really make a difference that they have nine million free programs that all the other phones have too. They should be looking to lock developers into exclusivity just to be able to differentiate from the other phones.

Palm lost the plot in the early '00s (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#29607607)

I mean, the old PalmOS was all about supporting open source developers, with a free open source dev kit, emulator, all open source, no Tivoization. It's not Hawkins fault, the Visor was extremely open as well, I reckon it's those people from Be because the weird decisions started when they decided to dump the 68000 platform and build a new OS (that never got anywhere) with BeOS genes on the ARM so they could compete with Windows CE... despite the fact that they consistently outsold Windows-powered handhelds 4:1.

Idiocracy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29607781)

Please stop tagging everything as "idiocracy." Save it for stories which at least somewhat resemble the gradual decline of intelligence in modern civilization.

Attainable? (1)

DudeTheMath (522264) | more than 4 years ago | (#29608085)

I believe the poster means "obtainable."

Anybody watch "Castle"? "He also murdered the English language." LOL.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>