×

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!

Apple Blocks iOS Apps Using Dropbox SDK

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the protection-racket dept.

IOS 356

Barence writes with an excerpt from PC Pro: "Dropbox's latest SDK has incurred the wrath of Apple, because users who don't have the Dropbox app installed on their iPhone/iPad are instead pushed to Dropbox's website via the Safari browser. Here, they can click a link to the desktop version of the service, which allows them to buy extra Dropbox storage without Apple taking its usual 30% cut." Reportedly, Dropbox is attempting to strike a deal to resolve the problem.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

356 comments

How dare they... (1, Troll)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about 2 years ago | (#39868393)

How dare Apple disallow someone not following the rules.

Re:How dare they... (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868461)

Point missed.

Recap: Apple just used sledgehammer to solve problem that tweezers would of solved.

Conclusion: Apple just acted like a corporate bastard again and held up their user's legitimate business so they could get more cash.

Re:How dare they... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868557)

Analysis of your conclusion: You are a deluded idiot, continually suprised by for profit businesses seeking profit, which you equate with them being 'bastards'. Your delusion give a pass to Dropbox, presumably because they are 'the little guy', despite their acting in contravention of Apple's quite clear rules about in app purchases.

Re:How dare they... (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868587)

This -1 isn't really worthy of reply, but I will do it anyway...

You obviously are setting up a strawman. The problem here isn't seeking profit, it's holding users for ransom.

Re:How dare they... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868729)

and you aren't setting up a strawman!!?!??!?!

you apple fanboys disappoint me

Re:How dare they... (1, Funny)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868893)

i'm trying to abandon this thread, but I am confused as how calling Apple corporate bastards in this case makes me an Apple fanboi. I

Re:How dare they... (4, Insightful)

zr (19885) | about 2 years ago | (#39868811)

Who is the guilty party here, that which broke the rules or that which upholds them?

I dont know about the strawman, perhaps, but you're clearly misdirecting the blame here.

Re:How dare they... (4, Interesting)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868923)

My problem is that Apple is causing problems with 3rd parties that have nothing to do with this dispute. I never commented on whether Dropbox was right or wrong. Apple could of sent an email message that said "This is a TOS violation, fix it." They cut off API users instead. That's the criticism.

Re:How dare they... (1)

zr (19885) | about 2 years ago | (#39868997)

Right, but thats my question, was it apple who caused the problem or dropbox? So is it your criticism that they didnt give Dropbox the time to remedy the issue?

Re:How dare they... (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39869063)

Yes, that Apple involved 3rd parties in the dispute off the bat by cutting off access. It was a great disservice to people who rely on it and have nothing to do with the dispute.

Apple can do what they want to do. That's why I went to Android.

Re:How dare they... (2, Insightful)

zr (19885) | about 2 years ago | (#39869135)

a cab driver gets stopped for running a red light (or speeding, whatever). cop arrests him. the passengers are inconvenienced. do you blame the cop?

is that a disservice to the passengers or is this a service to the community who wont suffer another death from an accident this cabbie might have caused?

i think you're seeing this way too narrowly. apple are building an ecosystem. its easy to criticize their decisions out of context, but at the end of the day what they do works for a whole lot of people.

of course, it doesnt work for all, you are on android, and god bless. but with all due respect you're the one missing the point here.

iOS doesn't drive a cab. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39869207)

And having an application Apple says disobeys their ToS isn't a criminal charge.

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868703)

Pot calling kettle black.

Desktop version users shouldn't have to pay an Apple tax. Just because the Apple version can make use of the storage.

Your delusion is that Apple can do no wrong, so you defend their greedy bastard tactics blindly.

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868761)

So you agree that the user to whom I replied is a deluded idiot?

Re:How dare they... (1, Insightful)

zr (19885) | about 2 years ago | (#39868885)

Nor does dropbox have to solicit business from an app _around_ the well defined process per established rules. They COULD stop short of sending people to their site, couldnt they? They could also say hey, if you like to pay for your account upgrade here, its a 30% surcharge. Or absorb the difference. Or, in fact, offer a discount(!).

Bottom line, there is no "apple tax" there's just a company (apple) doing business the way they see fit. This is a free market, and they are NOT a monopoly. If apple's business doesnt suit you, dont buy, simple as that.

Re:How dare they... (1, Informative)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#39869235)

Analysis of your conclusion: You are a deluded idiot, continually suprised by for profit businesses seeking profit, which you equate with them being 'bastards'. Your delusion give a pass to Dropbox, presumably because they are 'the little guy', despite their acting in contravention of Apple's quite clear rules about in app purchases.

Sounds like another "Apple (Can do no wrong)" fan-boy is in our midst.

Re:How dare they... (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 2 years ago | (#39868765)

Still, not for nothing are they now one of the most profitable companies on earth. Kind of reminds me of that Bill Gates sketch in the Simpsons - "I didn't get rich by writing a load of checks".

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39869193)

No, he got rich by engaging in repeated shady business practices (DR, IBM, Compaq) and ripping off competitors (embrace, extend, extinquish).

Having been on the receiving end of Mr. Gates business acumen twice, I'm not a fan.

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868815)

would HAVE solved

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868981)

you wrote WOULD OF and that makes you a retarded shithead

stopped reading there

Re:How dare they... (1)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | about 2 years ago | (#39868601)

Apple makes you follow the rules they come up with too; not just the app developers. I sure hope you weren't fond of Dropbox.

Re:How dare they... (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#39868673)

I hope anyone isnt fond of dropbox. Its an easily replaceable service. Arent they using EC2 anyways?

Re:How dare they... (5, Interesting)

_8553454222834292266 (2576047) | about 2 years ago | (#39868771)

Ok. Link me to the software I can use instead on Windows, OS X, and Linux and has shell integration on all 3 and a free usage tier.

Re:How dare they... (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#39868969)

THe point of my comment was that any large internet company can do what Dropbox does and that dropbox rides the coattails of another service. Im glad you like it, but I dont see them surviving in the face of the big players rolling out storage. I used dropbox because they had a client for everything, but if they dont change their pricing soon, i'll be moving over to Gdrive.

Re:How dare they... (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about 2 years ago | (#39869125)

I agree with part A, Part B, I am unconvinced of. I have never used dropbox, at all. From the day I heard of it...I wanted something just like it, but not run by someone else, or at least somewhat secure.

I used UbuntuOne for a while, which fell apart when I had to start using a Redhat desktop on my work laptop. Oops... getting U1 on any linux other than Ubuntu isn't supported at all.... I could do it, but it was painful and was going to potentially be painful on every upgrade...

In any case, I have few requirements. A) whatever it is must transport data securely B) it must store data either entirely on physical hard drives under my control, or it must be encrypted on disk, such that only I have the key. C) I need it to work on Linux and Windows, optionally but desireably Android.

I am willing to use encfs and otherwise only store encrypted files, but even that is problematic since I want to access them from my droid. I gave up on that for now, and was happy to just be able to get at some of the encrypted files that I could then decrypt. (password store being the major "killer app" for me)

Anyway, my next attempt was webdav. I setup my own webdav server, and quickly found that I couldn't make it work through a proxy (a requirement for the environment I am in) with the Gnome desktop tools available in RHEL6 equivalents. (I haven't tried with newer versions)

Overall, its very simple what it does and it SHOULD BE very replacable. The main reason it exists is that there are many incompatible solutions that work in a subset of where they are needed. Though, the webdav solution is looking pretty promising, if I can get proxies to work through nautilus.

I really like the dropbox solution though, especially since it syncs local copies around, meaning that if the service should go away, I still have my data.... and thats very important to me. I don't even trust google to hold data that I care about without backups.

Re:How dare they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868745)

Apple makes users of a product on a different platform pay an Apple tax *just because* it might be used on an Apple product. TFTFY

So if I used a safari browser on my pc, I'd have to pay extra for the same storage to cover the *protection scam* payment to Apple? Fuck that.

That is what Apple is doing you know. Just because it's the Safari browser on an Apple product doesn't mean the storage will be used on said Apple product.

Why should Apple get a cut just because of the browser being used?

Re:How dare they... (1)

pegdhcp (1158827) | about 2 years ago | (#39868929)

Apple has every right to limit services they offer to both their customers, and their solution partners/providers. The interesting thing is that, Apple's business practices are still surprising some people after so many years. If the way they conduct their business is a problem, anybody/everybody is free to move away their own business from Apple platform.

I moved away from IOS to Android. I paid 50 bucks for a data recovery program by which I lifted all my SMS and similar data from my Iphone. The data I recovered includes the cache which keeps every location I went since the summer of 2010. Interestingly (for me at the least) 50 USD is more than I paid for programs in I-tunes during a period of four years. I paid something like 750 USD for a Sony Ericsson.

In short I am free from disturbing business practices by paying 800 bucks and have a better phone now. No one is forcing anybody to use Apple products, which has admitedly one of the best designs in market, but with lots of strings attached.

Re:How dare they... (4, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#39869051)

In a fair world, Apple's rules wouldn't matter. Anyone who wanted to could simply avoid using the App Store and use an alternative, which iOS users could happily use without problems.

That's how it works in the Android world. Don't like Google Play's rules? Well, there's the Amazon AppStore. And there's AppsDB. And, of course, you can just let users download the APK (nothing to do with HOSTS files, I'm referring to the file type of Android apps) directly. Why? Because Android acknowledges something that iOS doesn't: If someone BOUGHT the device. It's THEIRS. Nobody (outside of government and service providers you choose to work with) has the right to tell you what you can and can't do with what you bought after it's been sold.

That's how it should be. When Apple stops trying to control what you run on your own phone, Apple's choices about who it bans from the AppStore will cease to be controversial.

Re:How dare they... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#39869217)

>>>Anyone who wanted to could simply avoid using the App Store and use an alternative... That's how it works in the Android world. Don't like Google Play's rules? .....Amazon AppStore. AppsDB. And, of course, you can just let users download the APK directly.
>>>

Stop talking sense.
I need another dose of Apple Koolade.

Are users app-blind? (3, Insightful)

6031769 (829845) | about 2 years ago | (#39868399)

What's to stop an iP* user going directly to the dropbox website anyway?

Re:Are users app-blind? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868469)

Nothing, it's just that Apple's position has always been that if you want to sell anything through an app on their platform they get a 30% cut.

Re:Are users app-blind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868563)

Now that's a vig!

Re:Are users app-blind? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868827)

So what you're saying is that if I use Safari on an Apple product and I go to Amazon or e-bay and buy something, then Apple gets a cut?

This is what Apple is doing to dropbox. If they don't use the *app* to get it (who says they are buying it for use on the apple product to begin with) then why should they get a cut. Just because they use Safari on the iCrud(tm) product to make the purchase doesn't mean Apple gets a cut.

Dropbox is certainly within their rights to not pay Apple a fscking dime for browser buyers. There's nothing that states that buying through the website means that the storage is to be used on the Apple device. They could be buying for use on a PC or *gasp* android tablet.

If I were dropbox, I'd tell Apple to go fuck themselves. They get their cut for the *APP* purchase and nothing else.

Re:Are users app-blind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868899)

this is the kind of thing that gts antitrust people working - maybe not so in the US, but maybe in the EU, and they do not take crap from anyone

Re:Are users app-blind? (0)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about 2 years ago | (#39869057)

Apple wouldn't dare do it to Amazon or eBay - those two are big enough to beat Apple back to the Stone Age.

*wants Apple to try doing this to Amazon and eBay...*

Re:Are users app-blind? (4, Informative)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 2 years ago | (#39868477)

Nothing, but Apple have had a rule blocking this sort of action for a long while already - the issue is that Dropbox accounts allow then to up sell a user to a Pro account, outside of the Apple in-app purchasing ecosystem. This is an issue that has long been discussed before, and has previously resulted in apps like Kindle Reader removing their store functionality for the same reason.

If you are asking why a user needs an app, its because it does more than a website - its available off line for example (yes, a website can provide an off line mode, but the storage limit is very small compared to that of an actual app).

In this case, they are talking about third party apps integrating with Dropbox using the Dropbox SDK - so the primary reason to install the app is not to replace the Dropbox website, but for whatever the app does.

Re:Are users app-blind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868489)

I imagine the rules are specific to sales channeled through software on the idevices, automatically. I can't imagine that even Apple's reach is so long as to extort a percentage of sales that don't originate from "the garden".

Re:Are users app-blind? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868493)

Nothing. But they are dumb, herd-following sheeple, otherwise they wouldn't have bought an iPOS in the first place, so they will tend to follow the path placed before them.

Re:Are users app-blind? (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | about 2 years ago | (#39868731)

Why would they? If Dropbox were to charge more for in-App purchases than on their web site then there would be an incentive to, but just because 30% of your payment goes to Apple instead of Dropbox, how many people actually care? A few. Not enough to make Apple's share price plunge.

Re:Are users app-blind? (1)

6031769 (829845) | about 2 years ago | (#39869107)

Right, but that's rather the point, isn't it? I mean if Apple block the use of the app, but not the access to the web site then only they are losing out, and if users who would normally use the app decide to use the web site instead then they might not go back to using the app when/if Apple permits it again. ISTM that there's 2 ways a user can do the same thing, one way might get Apple some cash and the other way certainly won't. They've blocked the former. Have I misunderstood?

Apple Blocks iOS Apps That Use Dropbox SDK (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868401)

No, Apple did not use the Dropbox SDK to block apps,
Apple blocked iOS Apps that use Dropbox SDK.

Rules if iOS club! (3, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | about 2 years ago | (#39868409)

1. Do not talk about iOS club.
2. Do not compete with services offered by Apple.
3. Do NOT TALK ABOUT iOS CLUB!

Re:Rules if iOS club! (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39868577)

2. Do not compete with services offered by Apple.

Its spun as a "30% cut" story but an apple i-competitor to dropbox was the first thing I thought of when I saw the headline. Then I realized apple had i.mac or idrive or some such subscription thing just like dropbox except it costs money, that I never subscribed to, years and years ago. Does apple still have that? Perhaps they're planning a relaunch or rebranding and that's the real story of suddenly coming down on dropbox like a box of bricks.

(disclaimer, I like dropbox because of its flawless linux client. I like it alot, at least until GOOG releases a linux goog-drive client thats as good. Then its bye bye 2 gig dropbox hello 5 gig GOOG-drive. I also have stopped buying idevices and started buying android devices.)

Re:Rules if iOS club! (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868619)

It's not even competing with an Apple service... not after June 30 anyway.

Apple is canning idisk. I just had to deal with a user flying off the handle about that yesterday.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (0)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39868683)

It's not even competing with an Apple service... not after June 30 anyway.

Apple is canning idisk. I just had to deal with a user flying off the handle about that yesterday.

OK that settles it, I almost guarantee that something new is coming down from Apple around July 1st vaguely revolving around cloudy file storage.

Could be as simple as making dropbox the official replacement for idisk, maybe they're buying some cloudy company, something's almost certainly on the way...

Re:Rules if iOS club! (2)

larry bagina (561269) | about 2 years ago | (#39868993)

How's life in 2011? I ask because June 6th will be the 1 year anniversary of the iCloud announcement.

PS: Giants beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl, 21 to 17. You can give me 10% of your winnings :)

Re:Rules if iOS club! (1)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#39868739)

It's not competing with apple that's the issue – it's that there's a "buy pro" button that doesn't use apple's in app purchase API, and hence doesn't give apple 30% of the cash.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868665)

herpa derp! Android fanboy reporting in!

Re:Rules if iOS club! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868697)

Then I realized apple had i.mac or idrive or some such subscription thing just like dropbox except it costs money, that I never subscribed to, years and years ago. Does apple still have that?

Do you live in a cave? Sorry, but if you're even a casual Slashdot reader you should 1) know the answer to that question already and 2) know that you're wrong in your claim that Apple charges money for their cloud service (yes, it _can_ cost money but, just like Dropbox, they have a free version). Also, realistically, you should 3) know that Apple's cloud service is similar-but-not-the-same as Dropbox. They each have different strengths and weaknesses and actually have very little overlap. They may one day have overlap but, right now, they actually don't compete that much at all. SkyDrive and Box and Google's new offering compete with Dropbox considerably more.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | about 2 years ago | (#39868833)

Enough "online backup" services have gone south to make me not want to trust a single supplier - I have Dropbox and Google Drive, and anything that I care about goes into both. I tried SpiderOak but it's a lot less intuitive. Probably a lot more powerful and configurable if I were to spend the time learning it though.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#39869103)

At least with Dropbox, it makes little strategic difference (other than being a jump ahead if Dropbox drops out suddenly). All your data is on one or more hard drives. If Dropbox goes titsup, you just sign up with whoever is left standing and resync.

The only other bit of aggrevation would be dealing with the other services that use Dropbox as a portable storage medium - like 1password - and using another service to duplicate it's functionality.

That's why I think this model is just the best thing that's happened since the Palm Pilot. Data pretty much anywhere. I'd be more worried about having the same data in multiple repositories. I'd screw it up and delete or modify the wrong copy and you'd have a major annoyance keeping everything normalized.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | about 2 years ago | (#39868887)

2. Do not compete with services offered by Apple.

Its spun as a "30% cut" story but an apple i-competitor to dropbox was the first thing I thought of when I saw the headline. Then I realized apple had i.mac or idrive or some such subscription thing just like dropbox except it costs money, that I never subscribed to, years and years ago. Does apple still have that? Perhaps they're planning a relaunch or rebranding and that's the real story of suddenly coming down on dropbox like a box of bricks.

(disclaimer, I like dropbox because of its flawless linux client. I like it alot, at least until GOOG releases a linux goog-drive client thats as good. Then its bye bye 2 gig dropbox hello 5 gig GOOG-drive. I also have stopped buying idevices and started buying android devices.)

iCloud is basically their competition to Dropbox except "applefied" meaning it does a few specific things (and probably very well) but is not a generic utility like Dropbox is. Nevertheless, they would prefer users to see things their way and subscribe to iCloud instead of Dropbox, unless they are going to get their cut. I agree, Dropbox and other generic/multi-platform services are far superior to iCloud but that's just my opinion from outside the reality distortion field.

Also, if you didn't get in on the free +3gb offer for using Dropbox photo sharing (taking your total to 5.25 GB or more if you have referrals) then shame on you ;-)

Re:Rules if iOS club! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868671)

and if we take out the ios censors then there will be no censors any more.

Re:Rules if iOS club! (2)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 2 years ago | (#39868689)

App stores in one line:
"A nice app you got here, it would be a shame if something were to happen to it."

Web2.0 suffers from the second album syndrome.

Existing Apps (1)

flakblas (1366723) | about 2 years ago | (#39868437)

I hope they don't go after existing apps. Now I'm afraid to update anything. If all Dropbox enabled apps suddenly vanished or lost syncing ability I'm pretty sure there's be riots in the streets.

Re:Existing Apps (1)

Sharkus (677553) | about 2 years ago | (#39868551)

They probably won't, too much work involved to look at all existing apps to see if they contain such functionality. If you're submitting a new app then they'll look at that. They *might* if you don't make any changes to the rejected app, send you a note that they are pulling your live app unless you make the changes, if indeed you do need to do anything, it could be something that is changed on dropbox's end which you don't need to change your code to do anything with.

What happened at the end there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868457)

What happened at the end of the summary there?

Was the editor suddenly consumed with rage?

This is why I don't publish an app (4, Interesting)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 2 years ago | (#39868463)

This is why I don't publish an app for my web services. Safari's rich enough for an appropriately formatted and scripted web interface, and it avoids the 30% haircut.

Offline mode (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#39868657)

This is why I don't publish an app for my web services.

What problems have you run into while making sure that there is enough HTML5 application cache and HTML5 local storage to fit all the resources that your application needs when the web services are used offline? Or are people who commonly use applications offline (e.g. iPod touch or iPad while on a bus) not part of your target demographic?

Re:This is why I don't publish an app (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868817)

... scripted web interface ...

This is why I don't use your web services.

Re:This is why I don't publish an app (1)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | about 2 years ago | (#39868889)

Good for you. Apple was hoping everyone will think iOS apps are the real Web 2.0. "There's an app for that?" I'd rather write a website that anyone on any platform can use.

Also rejection for "Create Account" functionality (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868485)

More of a concern is that one of the rejections was due to the following: "Specifically, your app enables to user to create accounts with Dropbox and Google." (Apple's own words in the rejection notice). Thus can we expect any app that contains the ability to create an account / sign up for an account with any service to be rejected?

Re:Also rejection for "Create Account" functionali (3, Funny)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868565)

I think we need an offshoot of the The Fuckwad Theory [techybytes.com] .

Enough Market Share + Enough Fawning Press Attention on Devices + Gobs of Cash = Corporate Fuckwad.

Seems to be true of Google to some extent, too.

apple is clearly doomed (1, Flamebait)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#39868487)

i bet this is the last straw that will send everyone to android

apple will be like RIM by this time next year

Re:apple is clearly doomed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868539)

I just don't get why people care. Two businesses have a dispute, and appear to be working it out. GEEK RAGE!!!!!

Huh? The geek community gets stupider and dippier with every passing moment.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (2)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#39868785)

I wouldn't care normally. What gets under my skin is cutting off people using Dropbox SDK that have nothing to do with this.

Trivial example: what about photographers using it to upload their work. What if they were working today. They had nothing to do with this. What about people using the SDK to work on files on an office app?

I can understand how it might happen if it's an escalating situation, but causing 3rd parties problem is not the first action to take.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1)

hoggoth (414195) | about 2 years ago | (#39868861)

You don't get it? Two business have a dispute which they are working out. In the meantime Apple is stopping developers from incorporating Dropbox's API and stopping users from using those apps. The users suffer while the businesses argue.

A more reasonable response would be for Apple to tell Dropbox this particular element of their app is unacceptable and must be changed within one month or one week or some time frame WITHOUT holding the users hostage in the meantime.

(confession: I did not RTFA)

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1, Troll)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 2 years ago | (#39868941)

Who is holding users hostage - if the apps are an update to an existing app, the existing app doesnt get pulled from the store. If its a brand new app, the developers are in no different a situation than they were last week.

Dropbox already have a version of the SDK which removes the offending links - its available in the forum thread about the issue.

No users are suffering here.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868545)

You clearly underestimate Apple fan-boys.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1)

Tyr07 (2300912) | about 2 years ago | (#39868629)

I consider apple a religion.

It's all about control, doing it apples way or the highway, and no matter how completely silly a rule is, people swear by it without reason.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1)

jgagnon (1663075) | about 2 years ago | (#39868593)

This issue and ones like it will have to go viral and hit more than just tech sites for people to care. In other words, so long as Apple's products are a fashion/status symbol, their users won't care so much about other people's first world problems. :p

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#39868801)

I really dislike people who reduce the tools I use every day to run my business as a fashion accessory. A LOT of people buy it for the status, most denizens of this board buy it for other reasons.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868659)

Unless Android removes all the Java shit and rewrites everything against a faster subsystem then there will always be people using iOS.

Android is awesome for its open-ness, availability of devices, and just general hackability but it's performance sucks. Animations and other UI stuff all suffer from Java lag and general inconsistent performance (stuttering and such). Java really, truly, sucks. With that said, I use it because there isn't any other worthwhile choices.

Re:apple is clearly doomed (1)

BanHammor (2587175) | about 2 years ago | (#39868719)

I'm kind of 50/50 divided - are you serious? Are you not? I can't tell it clearly these days.

users are instead pushed to Dropbox's website (1, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#39868555)

What's wrong with that? The users don't have the app on their iPhone, so they are taken to the company's website. Is that so horrible? That's how every other browser in the world works. Are Apple phone/padd users now verboten from visiting company websites?

Re:users are instead pushed to Dropbox's website (1)

Vokkyt (739289) | about 2 years ago | (#39868709)

Apple's position seems to be the upsell for premium storage, not so much the fact that you're taken to the website. A few users on the Dropbox forum discussing the matter even mentioned that they weren't keen on how a lot of services did this. I have to agree with an earlier post that it looks like Dropbox and Apple are already figuring things out. The dev in question is more perturbed than Dropbox seems to be over it.

Re:users are instead pushed to Dropbox's website (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868781)

What's wrong with that? The users don't have the app on their iPhone, so they are taken to the company's website. Is that so horrible?

Yes it is horrible. I don't use and don't want to use dropbox. That's why I don't have it installed on my phone. When I am using an App I want to use that App not get kicked out of it to be sent to some website selling me something I don't want to use.

Re:users are instead pushed to Dropbox's website (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868805)

How is the user 'taken to the company's website' without an app on their phone? It's okay if they're using Safari. Apple has no issue with this.

Apple has a problem with users who HAVE THE DROPBOX APP purchasing additional storage without going through an in-app purchase.

Re:users are instead pushed to Dropbox's website (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868867)

This isn't about the Dropbox App. This is about the Dropbox Application Programming Interface (API). This is a set of libraries that devs can use to incorporate dropbox into their app.

You made your bed, Curated Computing serfs (1, Insightful)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#39868589)

Now fucking sleep in it.

Re:You made your bed, Curated Computing serfs (-1, Troll)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about 2 years ago | (#39868795)

Haha mod me down. You'll still have to reap what you've sown even if you could wipe that comment off the Internet. HAHAHA! Suckers.

Anti-trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868631)

Why hasn't Apple run afoul of anti-trust laws?

Surely their behavior is anticompetitive.

Re:Anti-trust (2)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#39868917)

Because they dont have a monopoly, thats why. Sometimes i think people forget how far MS went and how truly abusive they became. Apple is just guarding its slice of the pie, they know they will never reach MS's level of ubiquity (back in the day). MS tried to eat the whole pie, forever.

Article is completely wrong (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868743)

This article is completely wrong.

The word SDK is used improperly, and what Apple is complaining about is not at all what the article states. It sickens me that articles like this reinstill false ideas of what and why Apple does things.

Simply put, Apple's policy is that for any app in the appstore, if you desire someone to purchase additional features for your app, and you tell them about it, they must be done through in-app purchases. DropBox is not doing this. It's completely okay according to Apple for the DropBox app to not say anything about buying additional storage, and then selling this additional storage on their website, but it is NOT okay according to Apple to tell the user inside the app about this additional storage, and then bypassing Apple's in-app purchase system and giving the user a link to the website.

When do anti-trust laws come into effect? (3, Insightful)

milbournosphere (1273186) | about 2 years ago | (#39868763)

I know that a shopper could always choose to go another platform (Android, RIM, Microsoft, etc.), but at what point will there be sufficient incentive to allow for this behavior to be investigated as anti-competitive? Apple controls the only marketplace on their very popular platform, and is using that control to dictate how other companies do business and reach out to customers who are on that platform. Microsoft tried to do something vaguely similar in the late 90s and got called out for it. At what point do our current antitrust legislation come into effect? Is it a matter of platform market-share? Perhaps somebody with a greater understanding than I could enlighten me.

Re:When do anti-trust laws come into effect? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868891)

The entire app-store ecosystem falls apart if Apple does not have this policy.

Imagine a world where all the apps are free trials. To get the full version, the app tells you to go to a web site and purchase it for say $9.99. Now, the app is 'registered' and works. Apple gets not a single cent of the $9.99 purchase price. But Apple servers hosted the app, and had to pay to transmit the app to you. The appstore will be no longer. Now where do you get your apps?

This is much the same as Best Buy selling television sets for FREE, and after you purchase, you must call Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, etc. for an 'activation code' and pay $1,000 or so to get your TV to work. Best Buy would not survive in this model, correct?

Apple are missing a trick here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39868869)

You buy something off Amazon on your ipad , Apple should get a 30% cut, same with any purchase as really it is the same as dropbox

highway robbery (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39869001)

30% of the gross is ridiculous. I don't know how anyone thinks they can build a business on that. Perhaps a few are able to do it but the risk is so high.

Free as in Freedom. (1)

Sav1or (2600417) | about 2 years ago | (#39869183)

This is the kind of disgusting money grabbing that makes me glad I have never owned an apple product, and never will.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...