Apple rejects update to CastCatcher iPhone app
The latest update to Return7's CastCatcher iPhone application has been rejected for supposedly using too much bandwidth.
(Credit: Return7)Updated 5:15pm with comment from Return7.
The fourth time was definitely not the charm for the developers behind the CastCatcher streaming radio application for the iPhone.
Apple rejected CastCatcher 1.3 from the App Store on Monday, according to Return7 developer Amro Mousa. The reason? "CastCatcher Internet Radio cannot be posted to the App Store because it is transferring excessive volumes of data over the cellular network, which as outlined in the iPhone SDK Agreement section 3.3.15, is prohibited."
If that's Apple's policy regarding streaming radio applications, Mousa is a little puzzled, because he has already released three versions of CastCatcher with no problems since it was first released to the App Store in September. And there are several other streaming radio applications on the App Store, such as the one developed by CBS subsidiary and CNET corporate sibling Last.fm, that also operate over the cellular network using the same amount of bandwidth as CastCatcher, according to Mousa.
Mousa says he's trying to get an answer out of Apple, and I'll update this post if and when he updates the company blog or responds to an e-mail inquiry. CastCatcher 1.2 is still available on the App Store as of this writing, so perhaps there is something specific to the latest update that triggered the bandwidth concerns, although Amro said in the comments on his blog that he left the bit transfer rates unchanged on the new version.
The CastCatcher incident has to once again bring up questions about how Apple is handling App Store rejections. Earlier this year Apple killed an application called Podcaster that let users download podcasts over-the-air directly to their iPhones without using iTunes--a feature Apple did not offer at the time but reportedly plans to offer with the OS X 2.2 update.
Should we soon expect to see an iPhone version of the streaming radio channels offered on iTunes?
UPDATED 5:15pm - Mousa responded to an e-mail asking for further details, quoted in part below.
At any rate, some of my thoughts on why this might have happened are (purely speculation):1) Their review process might have been outsourced and some decision tree is being taken too literally
2) An honest mistake
3) They're adding support for streaming audio in iPhone 2.3 or thereabouts
I honestly have no idea why this has happened. There were no changes to the streaming code since 1.2 (really nothing significant outside of metadata parsing since 1.0). Bandwidth used depends entirely on the stream provided by the user (i.e. 128kbps streams require that much bandwidth).
For the record, it's not been a terribly long time since Apple rejected the app -- roughly a week and in the past they've been helpful. Lately, not so much though.
Mousa wanted to point out that he holds no grudge against Apple, but is frustrated that he is unable to deliver the bug fixes and feature upgrades that his users requested.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
Now, Apple may very well have made a mistake, or misunderstood some part of the application, or something else. But until they tell developers--before they create their application--exactly what is permitted on the store, and what isn't, publicizing application rejections is the only way to know how Apple evaluates applications for inclusion in the App Store.
The advice for the producer(s) of CastCatcher, as with any professional relationship, would be best to stay out of the media unless it is truly a last resort for a resolution. By this story getting printed, at this early date, simply heightens that chance of damaging CastCatchers' relationship instead helping it. This of course is all under the assumption that nothing significant did change, and it was a mistake.
Bottom-line, speaking to the media first, will not help anyone, in any professional relationship. No matter who is right, and who is wrong, doing so burns bridges.
Question for Tom: So is apple switching gears on the I'm a PC/I'm a mac commercials? What I'm hearing on the radio is I'm a phone/I'm an iphone.
I place partial blame on the authors. They should have realized that sooner or later they would be competing with Apple; they are in the music selling business. Allowing an app to stream music is a conflict of interests.
You are allowed to program and make your own UI and if blizzard likes it they will add ************** or ask if they can use your code or something similar. But in this case Apple claims all rights instantly befor or after you create the code and you are not allowed to sue them in court for any damages or loss of sales. They can easily claim copyright over any application sold and they always will say a similar app has been under development for the past 2-5 years. Heh.... yeah show us the prior art APPLE! this is how Intellecual Property is being squeezed by apple.
However, they do state, that in an informal process when asking questions (this is outside the application submission, approval process), that you should never submit ideas to Apple. Sort of a catch-22, but a necessary evil to cover ones butt from future litigation.
Anyone who claims this is unusual is full of crap, and never wrote software for large corporations before. The reason being is, if they didn't there are litigious predators who simply would love an easy way to send an email to a company like Microsoft, Apple, IBM, etc., then sue the crap out of them anywhere from months to a decade down the line for millions.
If Apple keeps this up with my other streaming tools I'll just choose another provider.
While the programmers in question would be specific about the exact reasoning for the podcaster rejection, the programmers did say that it's not why people think. He then went on to comment on how had the developer simply chose to communicate with Apple, instead of taking the issue to the media, he could very well have gotten his app on the App Store. Instead he chose to break the NDA he had agreed to between him and Apple. As soon as he broke the NDA, there is nothing Apple can do. Policy is they're cut-off cause they can't be trusted to be confidential.
So with that said, the developer of CastCatcher is essentially making it much harder on themselves by using the media to apply pressure on Apple. Based on personal knowledge this could all be resolved with simple networking techniques. Go to Apple's Developer Conferences. They have 1 big one every year and many small ones around the world the rest of the year. Not only do you learn great techniques and best practices, but the best asset is the direct networking with Apple. The people that create and run the systems. They help you get through that system when you need it.
Fact is, when you buy into a hyper-closed platform, no matter how popular, you have to be prepared for being completely shut out of some really great functionality for no apparent reason...
Harks back to standard oil, where you either sold your oil according to Rockefeller's terms or not at all..
I predicting sooner or later that Apple will have to remove the approval process.
I thought that apple have remove their NDA from software developers. Whole those who said about networking sound all very good in theory and may in practice but for small teams of programmers it could just be to much to travel to a conference.
- by Sppiiff November 26, 2008 7:51 AM PST
- Here's another iphone app rejected yesterday from Amazon - http://emptyfactory.com/mazo
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(21 Comments)