[Messany]

If you missed it, this weekend a fascinating interview was published with Apple's senior vice-president of worldwide product marketing, Phil Schiller. This morning, MacRumors is covering the conversation in some detail.

Defending the App Store and its controversial app approval process, Schiller served up some insight on a bizarre pattern of seemingly hypocritical rejections and approvals that have confounded many developers and forced some to wash their hands of Apple altogether.

"We've built a store for the most part that people can trust. You and your family and friends can download applications from the store, and for the most part they do what you'd expect, and they get onto your phone, and you get billed appropriately, and it all just works."

That much is true. For consumers, the app store - much like all things Apple - work extraordinary well and efficiently. But the App Store is ultimately only as good as the thoughtful, clever apps of the world's best and most inspired developers. And, right now, many of those developers want answers about the internal workings of the app approval process.

Most are approved and some are sent back to the developer. In about 90% of those cases, Apple requests technical fixes—usually for bugs in the software or because something doesn't work as expected, Schiller says. Developers are generally glad to have this safety net because usually Apple's review process finds problems they actually want to fix, he says.

Incredibly, up to 10% of the time when an app is sent back, its a result of the app presenting or being based upon "inappropriate" content. From attempting to steal personal data to putting forward material unsuitable by community standards, Schiller reports that numerous apps are submitted and quickly rejected for patently endeavoring in some capacity to break or violate known laws. One example given is an app that helps gamblers cheat at casinos.

"We had to go study state and international laws about what's legal and what isn't, and what legal exposure that creates for Apple or the customer," Schiller says. The verdict: Apps that help a user learn how to play are O.K.; those designed to help a person cheat don't make the cut.

Overall, Schiller gives the approximate rundown on rejections:

• 90% of rejections result from technical errors or bugs
• 10% of rejections are caused by illegal or inappropriate content.

And less than 1% of app rejections are reportedly caused by applications that fall into a "legal gray area" requiring further investigating and potentially legal counsel before such an app can be permitted to enter the App Store.

To check out more of Phil Schiller's interview with BusinessWeek, click here.

Image via BusinessWeek

[bbillh77]

First.Something doesn't smell right here I think he left out the part about no new taxes

[Aleckloss]

The way people go about getting apps really shows what their aptitude is. People who want it fun and safe look to the app store because everything is there for them. People who see this device is a personal computer and want to make it as efficient as possible take a little extra work and jailbreak it. People need to realize that if your sick of the app stores rejections to just keep pushing on and get it into cydia, rock or icy

[hacker555]

I mean 1% of 50k or w.e absurd number of applications is still a pretty decent number. Take a look at the facebook application. The lead developer quit solely because of the approval process. Google as well is having problems with apple, causing tension between the two companies.

I wonder if apple is even legally allowed to restrict iphone programs to only app store apps. The iphone is not a cell phone.It is a mobile personal computer. If apple only allowed you to install certain programs on ur Mac people would sue, so why is this ok on the iphone???

apple argues that it alters their code and thats illegal, SO WHAT ? honestly we spend 500 bucks on this device, you cant restrict what we do with it, if u dont want people to modify your code, then dont sell it. I mean honestly why are we putting up with this crap. and it is crap i tell you.

The politics behind this have dire implications on the future of apple. I cannot see apple surviving in a world without the help of Google. Remember all of us here love OS X and apple products, but we are a VERY VERY small minority. dont be confused by commercials and the media, we are TINY. With google releasing a Chrome OS many of the OS X users are going to leave if treated badly. A faster and more secure OS that offers cheaper and simpler usability might grab the biggest percent of OS X users. Additionally Google is becoming more and more involved with the mobile market. If for example google blocked all of its services on the iphone, google maps voice, email everything, not one person would buy an iphone. Now lets say that google phones offer an unrestricted application process. Lead developers are going to PEACE OUT of the app store, and go to a venue that is more curtious and developer friendly. With less restrictions we will see what jailbreaking and cydia has attempted to achieve in full effect.

There is NO WAY that the iphone would survive against a phone with comparable specs and a open source or unrestricted OS.

Bottom Line for all of you who dont wanna read. Apple is PISSING on its customers and its LEAD Developers. If you push people too far, they WILL leave. Apple is a small company, and other companies can EASILY surpass and DESTROY what dominance the iphone holds over the market.

[pbateman420]

while for the most part, i agree.. But the last part made me chuckle...

"Apple is a small company"

even compared to the juggernaut that is Google, Apple is no small company.. and regardless of what the self-admitted minority think of it, Most iPhone owners have no clue this community even exists and are perfectly content.. what was the last figure? only 10% of iPhones are jailbroken.. Most of those people could care less..

The point being.. Apple's decision to restrict what happens on its hardware (which it has always done with all its products) is perfectly legal.. you cant sue someone simply because they wont let you do what you want.. But thankfully for the minority (myself included), we can jailbreak our phones and do as we please.. I dont see why anyone gets all uptight about it, save for developers out for profit...

[rwin84]

the approval process is at this point fatally flawed. without review and revision there will be a fall-off of quality apps created...

[rhekt]

Originally Posted by Aleckloss

........People need to realize that if your sick of the app stores rejections to just keep pushing on and get it into cydia, rock or icy.

uhhh. no more icy

[NessLookAlike]

Originally Posted by pbateman420

The point being.. Apple's decision to restrict what happens on its hardware (which it has always done with all its products) is perfectly legal.. you cant sue someone simply because they wont let you do what you want.. But thankfully for the minority (myself included), we can jailbreak our phones and do as we please.. I dont see why anyone gets all uptight about it, save for developers out for profit...

I was under the impression that the opposite was at the very heart of jailbreaking: it's not their hardware once an individual purchases it, it becomes the end-user's. What they do in their store is one thing, but what they do to systematically deter the actions of the end-user that owns the device is entirely another.

[pbateman420]

that is true.. But it doesn't make my statement untrue.. lol..
Apple decided at launch to only run apple-approved apps, for obvious monetary reasons.. also to insure the end user's experience doesnt suffer..

ever had a non-jailbroken iphone crash? i havent.. and thats the entire point of it.. Sure backgrounder is cool and should have been added by apple. but run more then 1 app and depending on whats running, you will crash springboard.. Making their product look unstable etc..

While we have every right to defy their wishes once we own said product (morally, not legally) but you cant ***** at them for wanting their product to be operated as designed..

Its like saying "i want my PC to run OSX and i'll sue Apple if they dont make it happen".. lol.. If they can stop laughing long enough, they'd tell you to go F yourself...

[thegs68]

Sorry pbateman420

As to the comment "ever had a non-jailbroken iphone crash?", I have and they replaced it. But my wife's 11 month old 3g 8gb is crashing, locking up and overheating. She does accounting, web banking and games, the system can't keep up. It is not jailbroken and never has been, but Apple is refusing to honor the warranty at this time.
So what they are doing at this point to me... IS "telling me to go F myself".

When the contracts are up for the phones I will send the phones to the garbage.
At present I have the new 3gs 32gb and had this happened before I bought it, I would not have bought the iphone.