Apple accused of iPhone ban on 'all single-station radio apps' Update: This story has been updated with comment from Apple and had been updated in other places to reflect that statement and further conversations with Jim Barcus. Jim Barcus – the president of DJB Radio Apps, an outfit that has long helped build iPhone apps and other mobile apps for radio stations across the country – says …
All decisions made by Apple are made exclusively so that Apple can make more money.
While this is not unusual, and, in fact, most business schools preach this very sermon, this revelation does comes as somewhat of a surprise for all of those Apple-lovers who seem to continue to have an irrational expectation that their love will be returned.
No, sad little people. Your love is wasted on Apple. They care not how deep your love is for them. As long as your pockets remain similarly deep, they have no motivation to try to understand or please you.
Better to love Wall Street, as it has demonstrated greater responsiveness to its customers and interest in its customers' desires than Apple ever will. As long as Apple remains a who-gives-a-rats-ass-what-the-idiots-who-pay-our-obscenely-unjustified-prices-think corporation driven by Mephisto's minions, you'll not hear a single word of affection from the aloof object of your desire.
Time to take the poison. Forever there will you remain with worms that are thy chamber-maids.
I don't own an iPhone and probably never will, however whenever this sort of story comes up everyone suddenly starts shouting about 'Apple = Fascism', 'Jobs is a nutter' and 'It's just not fair!'
Hate to make it clear again but IT'S STEVE'S TOYSHOP HE CAN SELL WHATEVER HE LIKES!
If you don't like the way the app store is run, then like me, don't use it!
If you don't like Jobs' or his company, then like me, don't buy into the Apple cult!
Much as I like to have a pop at Jobs whenever I can, at the end of the day if he wishes to cut his nose to spite his face, that's his loss. Although there appears to be enough party faithful to make sure Steve has a comfy life until the end of his days.
Does this DJ guy really think Steve Jobs sitting on $100bn ( whatever it is now! ) , gives a shit about his radio apps? Steve has never given a monkey's about what anyone else thinks, do you think he will start now just 'cos this guy and his radio station mates have a problem?
It is his toyshop until he is determined to yield significant market power in the context of competition law.
Once that has happened it is still his ToyShop, but he will have to offer space on the shelves to both what he likes and what he dislikes without discriminating between the two or face the competition authorities.
C'est la vie, we no longer live in the world of Pacific Railroad and Edison Electric Company when you could charge anything you want for any of your goods and services regardless of your market size.
Now is Apple a significant market power or not is an interesting subject. IMO it is. The test here is simple - if "its rule changes" are sufficient to force a "full market" rule change this means that it is. As far as mobile applications are concerned it clearly passes that test with flying colours and it knows it. It has backed off every time the FTC has made even the slightest hum about investigating the app store practices.
All decisions ever made by any business with the cheek to list on a stock market, anywhere in the world, are made with increasing profit and driving shareholder wealth as the primary consideration. That is their raison d'etre.
Just because Apple have been excepionally good at this in recent times is no reason to criticise. Unless, or course, you are a fully paid up Socialist.
Honestly, with growing examples of this, it's a wonder any developer wants to take the risk on the platform.
As Barcus points out (though admittedly he's massively biased), there are radio apps out there for stations precisely because they pay for their development. You're not going to see Magic clubbing together with Capital to make an app - and they'd probably have something to say about a 3rd party tapping into their webcasts and making money out of an app that does it.
Sadly I'm glad I skipped the v4 phone from the 3G, and starting to survey the rest of the market for alternatives these days :-(
Gotta love the guy who downvoted you for your honest and straightforward comment. I can’t see anything wrong with what you wrote – save that someone evidently took objection to the fact that you are surveying the market for an alternative replacement to your aging iPhone.
Really?
Are we become so petty that we downvote an individual simply because they have decided they wish to explore options beyond the carefully manicured, glass-backed walls of Cupertino? Exercising personal choice in which vaguely poisonous built-using-nearly-slave-labour-import-elctro-toy to use is now a reason to downvote someone?
Develop some platform agnosticism, people. It’s just a bloody phone! It has an OS. It consumes power and connects via radio to distant devices. You can run applications on it. Who bloody cares who makes it…and why downvote someone simply because they might be considering that they are possibly disenfranchised with the current pop culture cult?
Not new...but growing increasingly disenfranchised. There was a time that insightful, logical posts which contained vast amounts of information were made by knowledgeable individuals on these boards. It still happens occasionally…but to my perception the absolute percentage of such posts seems lower. Perhaps it’s a function of age – becoming jaded? – but I do miss the days when we IT folk were a bit more pragmatic.
Jihads were what Slashdot was for. It magazines like El Reg were for open discussion of technology with as little bias as possible. Attacking the tech, not the people. Poking holes in corporate structures, political decisions and bad engineering choices. Even Ars Technica has fallen a few notches towards Slashdottian misanthropy…something that makes me sad in a way I lack words to properly describe.
Tell me then, good sirs: where in this world might I find such a place any more? Online or off…where is this land where people are critical and suspicious of all things, think for themselves and only truly accept something once it has been thoroughly through the wringer?
I like hanging out at those places; critical nit-pickers have a tendency to select “best of breed” devices and software on a consensus basis. Lots of people get hold of the alternatives and tear them to shreds. The least crap X…wins. When did we stop looking at technology dispassionately? When did it stop being merely a tool with which to accomplish a task? When did technology become a badge we wear that displays “who we are?” Wearing a corporate logo is now the definition of the individual? What to you use has become a means of self-identification?
Stop the world please…I want off.
In the meantime, I will lament the steady decline of online nerd communities as they slide away from critical thinking towards base tribalism.
On the contrary, the original post opens "Honestly, with growing examples of this, it's a wonder any developer wants to take the risk on the platform." — it therefore takes one factor in the decision process and proceeds to a conclusion with no further evidence. The post alone doesn't make a complete argument and I guess that somebody (not me, by the way) didn't like that.
If I were to suggest that because Oracle are suing Google over Java, it's a wonder any developer wants to take a risk on the platform then I would much more obviously be talking biased rubbish but would have stated exactly as much of an argument.
But it IS a wonder why people continue developing for that platform. Examples of exactly this sort of thing would make me very twitchy about putting my efforts into it. I like the concepts behind things like “freedom to write what you want” and “freedom to run what you want.” As a developer that would translate into “people are free to run what I write and nobody can tell either of us “nyet.”
So I can’t speak for you, but I personally do wonder why. That isn’t a bias thing…it’s honest pondering. Similarly, the whole Oracle/Google thing would make me think twice too. Microsoft’s got some very restrictive policies as well…Symbian’s dead…Meego doesn’t have market share.
So it’s a question of picking the lesser of various evils. Thus: I do wonder how various people make those choices. What drives a developer to one platform over the other?
That doesn’t indicate to me any bias, and certainly not a reason to downvote the guy for his post. It means he’s asking the right questions about the environments on offer without simply drinking /ANYONE’S/ kool-aid.
Hey though, it’s the internet, let’s use our nerd-rage cannons, eh?
...radio stations only got popular in the first place because you can listen to all of them via one interface (it's called a 'radio', hence the name 'radio station'; little tip-off there if you're paying attention!) this is actually a case where Apple being the big bad bully will probably help people out overall: for the benefit of the platform Apple will be able to use its strength to force the radio stations to all sign up for some kind of unified interface, and we won't have to install five hundred stupid variations on the same codebase just because radio stations can't see it's in their own long-term interest to be part of a shared platform.
of course, Apple will probably fuck up the benefit to the wider market (y'know, the one including people who *don't* use iphones) by making said platform accessible only via iOS, but sigh. can't win 'em all.
All of Apple's other App Store restrictions I've been able to understand the position they're coming from (usually some mixture of this way is better for our customers and this way is better for our reputation), but this one is pretty baffling to me. What's next? No more book apps unless they contain multiple books?
Luckily, this one doesn't actually effect me because I get all the streaming radio I need from TuneIn Radio, so I don't need to make a big dramatic production of leaving the walled garden.
So, they force you to download a bloated, buggy app (wait, buggy apps aren't allowed in the iStore....) that has 1001 stations you DIDN'T want to listen to, and the off-chance they can stream/play the ONE station you actually listen to. <sarcasm> Of course, if it's a local station, you could just use the FM tuner... </sarcasm>
Question is, why do they still have 3000 fart apps if Apple considers them spam? Number padding perhaps?
Not all newspapers do pay, and besides what about radio apps which include advertising through Apple's own service.
The cold fact is that once again Apple has decided it knows best and to hell with radio stations. To hell with them even if they have invested significant time and effort in producing an app which adds value to their broadcasts.
Newspapers do pay to play. By your own admission, if not all, then some.
However, what you miss is the obvious fact that newspapers are as integral to the iOS as they are to Kindle. Further, Apple produce no competing product to newspapers, therefore they view newspapers as a truly value-add service that doesn't detract from any of their own lines of revenue. The fact that Apple is trying to cozy up to the publishing industry doesn't hurt, either.
Now, and think rrreeeaaalll hard here, what service does Apple run that could possibly be considered a competitor to radio stations? Could it be the one that's allowed them to single-handedly have their way with the record industry, in the way which they're attempting to do with publishers? You know, the one called iTunes! Yeah, that one! That basically is the precursor to all of this app madness? To completely spell it out for you: they sell mp3s. They don't want you listening to radio. They want you buying mp3s. I am sure Apple has taken the exact same stance on OTA TV apps, as they sell tv shows and movies, too.
In the end, though, it all comes down to Apple wanting to deal with content creators (the studios, labels and publishers themselves) or distributors (such as Amazon and Netflix), not content retailers (such as radio stations and random podunk whogivesashit affiliates from Timbukfuckingtu). No one cares about radio stations, at all. Especially not when every single one has their own app despite having the exact same playlist. Do you really want to have to download eighty different apps, or do you want to just download one for CBC, one for BBC, one for NPC or one that combines them all? I know which one I'd pick.
Not saying Apple are good/evil/Marmaduke for this, just trying to explain the logic behind it.
If you are listening to a radio station, you aren't buying as much on iTunes.
It creates a larger barrier to entry for potential competitors to iTunes.
Small inter-competitive stations wont be available but large commercial operators will be.
The workaround is to make a "Radio Station Info app" provides information and just happens to include the radio station as a feature
There are a couple local stations that have (well, had) apps for the iPhone; I have an Android, so I still have said apps installed. I'd much rather be able to "open... go" than "open... search... wait... filter... sort... ah, there it is, go"; I know what I want to listen to, and so I listen to it. It's like not changing the radio dial in your car; I like the station it's on, so I keep it there.
Why the heck would you want a single-station radio app anyway? All thats gonna happen is that the radio station will start shoving in-app spam in your direction.
There are quality internet radio apps for the iphone that allow you to listen to almost any radio station worldwide. TuneIn Radio is excellent. No, its not free, but a quid is hardly going to break the bank!
I *like* the fact that Apple has some controls on the stuff that can get into its store. They could do with being a bit cleverer in their selections though - there is some utter sh1t that has made it through and some excellent apps have been rejected (the rejected mxtube is a case in point). The free-for-all in the Android Market Place ensures that average app quality there will be lower than average app quality in apples store.
Nigel
Perhaps because people have a fidelity to a particular radio station? On FM in the UK I listened to one, and now via Shoutcast I listen to one. And only one. Because it plays the sort of stuff I like to hear.
Shoutcast is a good example. I found the station, out of many, stuck with it, and then I took apart the control file (.pls or something? I forget) so I could program it directly into WinAMP. All I do now is fire up WinAMP and click the play icon. It's a hell of a lot easier than navigating my way around something like Shoutcast where the sheer number of stations is overwhelming. Isn't the Apple UI paradigm supposed to be about simplicity? How is it better to take one app offered by your chosen favourite station and replacing it with a generic multi-station app which may or may not even include your favourite?
.
Oh, and Nigel, you can't really state anything using "average app quality" as an indicator. There is an awful lot of stuff in the Ubuntu package manager and while I won't make any comment on the quality of it, the quality of everything *else* is irrelevant so long as your are able to find and install decent stuff that does what you want it to do. Look on-line, go Google. There's a thousand Notepads, some amazingly worse than the original. And then there's OpenOffice. Statistically, OpenOffice is crap (1 vs 1000), but because it isn't, the 1000 crap things don't matter. It isn't about how many and how good, it is about basic bottom line CHOICE. But, reading El Reg for the past year, I'm not certain Apple fans entirely understand the concept of choice, unless it is "that which is chosen for us by Apple Corp".
Apple fans do seem to absorbed the meaning of choice, it's just unfortunate that they seem to have absorbed S Jobs version of 'choice'.
As you say, do I give a monkeys if there's 1000000 apps if it doesn't contain the one I want? Coversely, do I care if there's only 5 apps in the store so long as I want at least one of them?
At least in California, in WinAmp there is a Shoutcast "file" and an AOL radio "file", that seems about the same as CBS radio's I-app. iTunes has very similar functionality if you dig deep enough into the directories downpage.
The main reason I bought an iPod Touch is to use it as a radio tuner. It certainly wasn't for the uber-klunky music player. Apple is the dreaded "Nanny State" writ large.
Your question leads me to ask: "Why would anyone want an app icon that leads to only one app? Heck, let's just make it that so that there is only ONE icon on your iPhone... click it and then scroll until you find the app that you want to use that time."
While I no longer live in the UK, I DO remember being about to count all the available radio stations on one hand and with fingers or at least a thumb) left over. Come to think of it, an official BBC radio app will never be allowed. It doesn't offer "hundreds" of stations as the BBC doesn't have hundreds of channels.
The stations here may have advertising, but just in my local area I can choose from about 40 local stations. Out of those, I rarely listen to more than just one of them. So I'm a lazy sod and would much rather press one icon and immediately get my one station.
Great, so now the large radio groups who are already in bed with Apple, such as Global Radio whose stations like LBC have presenters and technology 'gurus' constantly plugging Apple products and advising any PC problem be solved by going out and buying a Mac instead, will be able to add Iphone apps that list their scores of stations, whilst the smaller independent radio stations are shafted.
While it is silly to some extent that radio channels need their own unique apps, it's also clear that many of them link to content on their site and provide additional value add. And even if they don't why impose this on just radio stations?
After all, how many bloody apps are there which are glorified feeds to a single source. That would include the likes of The Times of course, but would include other news sites, weather sites, TV listings, TV channels, and so and so forth.
The answer of course is if someone wants an app which is tied to a site, why the hell is Apple interfering with their choice. It's just more meddling for the sake of meddling. I hope some of the radio stations tell Apple where to get off - they're not the only show in town anymore and perhaps a concerted boycott might make them see sense.
OK thats it... Stupid crap Iphones... sorry, iPhones... WHATEVER..... I have one of these retarded things and I hate it. And I am stuck with it. Along with the tariff till 2012. I have always considered Apple crap and overpriced. Its entirely my fault. I am aware of that. I saw the bandwagon and jumped. And now I want to get off. What right does anyone have to tell me what I can and cant put on MY phone?? I dont remember renting the thing from Apple. I don't remember saying "oh can I be told what apps I can install please"... And now this.
So as soon as I can afford some other phone my iPhone is gone, although its starting to look like one overblown shitfest on the phone front. Hey, heres an idea how about making a phone that makes phone calls properly and not have to reboot the thing every FUCKING DAY.
I call PEBCAK on that. A daily reboot? wtf? You do know that's not normal, even for "buggy" (according to you) iphones? Your phone is fecked, or you fecked it.
The first is an easy fix - trot into the shop and get a replacement under warranty. The other...well...
Or you're a troll. And I just fed you. Dammit!
..but my phone (SE Satio, not an iPhone) was crap too with 8 months of contract to run, despite SE dropping support for it after about 6 months with a "final ever update".
So I used http://www.orangerecycle.co.uk , got over £120 and bought a budget Android handset.
Pulling the SIM, selling the phone and buying an el-cheapo Android handset (see http://www.reghardware.com/2010/11/16/ten_essential_budget_android_smartphones/ ) might just be a way out for you too!
There seem to be lots of single-store shopping applications too. Target, Walmart, Sears, and plenty more all have their own one-store applications. Perhaps Apple should declare these to be farty too and demand that there just be one giant shopping application? They could even roll the Apple store application into it too.
This post has been deleted by its author
Can't see the point myself. If there are people out there who listen to *both* Radio 2 and Radio 4, then stick them in the same app.
After all, Radio 1 listeners won't be using iPhones/iPads until they evolve opposable thumbs, Radio 3 listeners won't give up their valve-driven wirelesses and surely there's no-one reading here who would listen to a commercial station with all those ads being pushed at them and no possibility of filtering them out?
This explains Tim Berner-Lees recent rant about the closed nature of this new app trend. Seeing that lots of those silly one purpose apps are just fancy wrappers around mobile safari for accessing a singel site.
Personally i don't like those apps, but the market seems to demand them. It's the same thing with radio stations. Which station would put an App Store link on their frontpage without being absolutely sure that the app won't drive their listeners to a different station.
I'd love to write such an app for my favorite station. However the app store rules have made me look elsewhere a long time ago. It's not like I'm going to pay apple just for the privilege to release opensource software through their store. Them adding DRM to apps (even in cases where the developer clearly did not intend so) was just the start of what has slowly evolved into one of the craziest business models out there.
He is saying 'no more please' but my understanding is that if an app is updated it has to be submitted for approval again. For those with an app already in the store that means they will have to either never update again or risk updating the app only for it to be rejected and then lose their itunes presence.
I think it is a good idea. Port all radio through Itunes. Listening to shoutcast broadcasts has nothing to do with it via Winamp as its a windows only app. Itunes gives you convenience and ease of use and as a computer user that is what I want. I agree hole heartedly with Nigel4. I dont want Spam and other "value added" bollox. I just want to listen to radio from time to time EASILY.. Annonymous Coward should get a new job where he/she does not have to use Apple hardware.
All the best.
...if Apple are trying to sell this as "improving the user experience by removing spam apps" (whether anyone believes that or not), why not start with the genuine dross? (The fart apps, the sexual positions apps, the mirror apps, the apps that clog up the new app feeds day-in, day-out, and that you can tell instantly are just low quality junk.)
Apple's sales figures have bred an arrogance that may not cripple them in the near future, but surely only the most naive business would deliberately bite the hands that feed it.
I have an iPhone and like it, but I'm not blind to the ridiculous actions Apple take, and I'm gobsmacked as to why a company seemingly goes out of its way to make people dislike it for little or no reason. Particularly when it would be relatively easy for them to make some good, sensible decisions that don't alienate customers or developers. Isn't this basic business sense?
Not surprised that Apple don't like Radio given their iTunes business!
Was surprised, however, to hear of Apple including an FM receiver/transmitter in the lastest edition iPhone? Really? Why? Would have thought this was a pretty logical no-no for Apple?
My guess is Apple are increasingly looking to exploit control over ALL media channels to market: to monetise themselves, protect own revenues and control flow of information in terms of Apple media shilling.
If navigating the store were a little less like pulling teeth, a few extra applications wouldn't cause so many problems.
Break down the categories a bit more, make the view all button obvious and make it show everything, not just the first 200. Make the search a little more advanced.
I find everything about the itunes store difficult to get at what i want. Even if i know the exact application but not it's name I struggle to find it
Libertarians? Proletarians, surely...:-)
Freedom? Or Risk? Depends on your experiences and your point of view...
If your walled garden is resplendant with heavenly orchids and angels, it'll be "risk"...if it's full of weeds, needles and tramps and the gate is locked...*then* it'll be "freedom".
"Rumors have long suggested that Apple is building its own FM radio app for the iPhone"
Wouldn't that be even *worse* than Microsoft's default bundling Internet Explorer in Windows ... until eventually being forced to give equal prominence to competing browsers.
Banning competing radio apps would be far *worse* because MS wasn't actually *preventing* competing browsers, it was just abusing its dominant position by giving its own product a preferential position in its showcasing.
Maybe its time the anti-competition authorities took a hard hard look at Apple and set up an independent arbitrator that could instruct Apple to remove any of its own apps that are similar to those which Apple has prohibited others from offering.
"...why I will never buy anything Apple. People should have the freedom and right to run whatever they want on hardware devices they have paid for. Period."
What's with people on this, supposedly, technically orientated site?
FFS - am I the only person here who who knows how to jailbreak an iphone and run whatever I want on a hardware device I have paid for?
I would agree with this if Apple have a proper clear out of dross based on ratings or having nobody download the apps.
if the app just opens a stream that you could open in Safari and displays a logo then why bother?
There are single station apps like Radio Javan, which cover just that station, but a truly fine examples of how value can be added to a 'single station app, without it becoming a bloated portal.
...... Apple are annoyed that they get no benefit from advertising revenue.
Commercial radio stations charge for advertising based on listener figures. Through normal means there is no way to give a specific number for the amount of listeners they have so it has to be generalised.
A radio station with its own app could show the number of app users as confirmed listeners, therefore giving them the ability to charge more for advertising. Apple will not get any benefit from this and also wouldn't want someone improving their revenue stream in such a manner.
By lumping all such radio stations into one app they cannot get specific listener figures therefore removing this additional revenue stream for the stations. The only advertising Apple wants is their advertising.
...then one would probably really like their one-station app.
For example, if there was a BBC World Service (single station) app, then I'd be very happy. Same thing for any of the other world broadcasters.
It seems a bit over-zealous to restrict one-station radio apps, considering that they're not really bothering anyone, roosting quietly in the depths of the App Store.
I'll have to have a close look at Android phones when the time comes. It seems clear that they're coming up fast.
Like many things Apple does, this move is divisive but it's easy to understand the reasons behind the decision. People talk about Android Market being full of rubbish but Apple has its fair share of shovelware, too (of which single-radio station apps are not the worst offenders by any margin out of the 250,000 apps).
I think, however, there should be an exception made for single-station apps which add unique and meaningful content, e.g. webcam pictures from the recording studio, details and trivia about the song and artist playing, traffic information in your area or the radio station's Twitter stream. If all the app does is play radio, then there's no point having hundreds of these apps clogging up the App Store. There has to be some genuine value added.
As for Jim Barcus's comment that having all the stations in one app "just [isn't] going to happen", well Apple's actions mean that it now will because it's the only way radio stations can find their way on to the iPhone/iPad/iPod. Technically-speaking, it can't be that hard to make such an app. Barcus could probably do it in a heartbeat.
Only Apple is going to win this battle.
I'm finding it hard to understand Apple's thinking on this. I mean, behind what they're saying -- not what they're doing. It's almost always easy to see Apple's motivation behind actions: market hegemony and vertical control that reaches down into the customer's psyche.
But what they're saying just doesn't really make much sense from a PR rationale.
I guess they just feel so confident in their control of their customer base as well as their minions in the tech press that they now feel they can use any old rationale and it will fly...
There are times when I think an iPod wouldn't be a bad thing to have... but then I remind myself that I'd be inviting Apple into my life.
No thanks.
Think about why this has happened. Do you think Steve Jobs looks at ever app or gets involved in the App Store? I doubt it, only when something gets escalated to him.
I can imagine it's due to complaints from other developers about how long it is taking for some updates or new applications to appear in the store. After analysis someone at Apple has looked for something to "chop" or be given the blame and radio apps are it.
It is becoming really difficult to find decent apps amongst all the junk. If anything there hasn't been quite enough applications rejected IMHO.
Question: Do I buy a separate radio receiver for each different radio station I listen to? Answer: No.
I don't think there are any radio sets on sale that are fixed-tuned-into one station.
So why should I have to download a different app for each station I want to listen to?
Sounds like Apple have taken a sensible stance here. An app for everything is becoming a bit ridiculous when many could simply work within mobile versions of websites in Safari.
I also have an ageing but trustworthy Nokia N82 - there is only one radio app - the Nokia Internet Radio Application for receiving thousands of stations. Having them all in one place makes searches for genres, keywords, by country possible, that couldn't be said with a separate app for each station.
As for profits, remember that is not only Apple's interest, it is the interests of Jim Barcus, the president of DJB Radio Apps in the article.
It's very easy to set up a .m3u stream to stream mp3 audio online for your station - I've set it up for one station, and Safari will pick this up just fine.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
