Being "the guy" who solves "the problem" that everyone has is really tempting. Everyone will say things like "Oh you should install that app by Des Traynor, it lets you do X (where X is anything everyone wants to do)
Its great for a short term publicity kick, to get your name out there. It's just not something to build a business on.
Why do people think this is endemic to desktop software, or even just Apple? Web developers are as much at risk of a major player, like Google, moving into their product space and "stealing" their business away.
I'm not defending the practice and saying that it's right or justified. I'm just pointing out that Apple isn't the only company that does this, and Mac OS X and iOS aren't the only platforms where this can happen.
It's a bit different to have Google begin competing with you, unless you've built your product on Google's APIs.
If you're competing with your provider, you're probably not on an even playing field. They can use internal APIs or just completely lock you out if they choose to.
On the flip side, Apple has been thinking this way for years, as Steve Jobs tries to minimize Apple's external dependencies. (Adobe Flash, PPC, etc)
I'm not a developer, but i think it's the "that won't happen to me " syndrome that humans tend to suffer, just to deny reality. We do it in our lives everyday, till it happens to us.
So what is reality? That this will happen to majority of developers?
It's the same as with app rejections: if you were listening to the tech media it was like every other app was rejected. In reality there are 425 000 apps in App Store and developers have been paid $2.5 billion.
Sorry i didn't explain well, i don't mean it will happen to everyone or that all the developers are denying reality, what i meant is that everyday we take decisions and even when sometimes the risks are well known we decide to not see it, it's someone else's problems i'm different, i think there are iOS developers that know that problem can happen and make a bet knowingly , but other just prefer not to see the "danger" and then act like it was a surprise , and that happens in all aspects of our lives. And if i were a developer i would probably make the bet, i think the risk is valid.
But how big is the risk really, unless you are thinking about living all your life with income from just one app, or if you spend to years working on it and then Apple makes it obsolete before you had a chance to release your work.
Otherwise you make some money, then make another product and make more money from it. Or is my thinking completely off the track?
I don't think you are off the track, from what i understand of this market (and maybe i'm completely wrong) , you are right, no one can think about solving his life with one single phone/pad app, and if you have success with one i like to think that even before that you are preparing another one. It would be like being "one single hit song" band or singer, you can get a lot of money but if you want to live you need more than that, and i think software market is harder than music. There's no magic but i can understand that people can risk a lot of work to give a step so they can make a second one and so on. But i think no one can say that if the land lord fires you from his land is a big surprise, you are the servant and have to pay your tithe while he's interested in you.
What's their alternative? Not work with Apple? Are any of the other vendors any better about this (i.e. "let's not implement good features in our OS because some of our third party devs might be upset")?
How would they "stop" Apple from doing this to them?
Should they ignore the iOS market and let someone else pick up the money they're leaving on the table, or try to own their idea by patenting it and suing everyone else?
That is the wrong question to be asking. A better question is: why do most developers let themselves work on software that is not defensible and/or not disruptive?
