Podcaster Developer Uses Little-Known "Ad Hoc" Mode To Distribute Banned iPhone App
Over the weekend, a debate raged across the tech blogosphere concerning the risks involved in developing for the iPhone platform.
What prompted the debate in the first place was Apple's decision to reject an app known as the Podcaster, which would have permitted you to listen to podcasts without first downloading them in iTunes. Because the app "duplicates the functionality of the Podcast section of iTunes," says Apple, they decided to reject it from inclusion in the App store.
To get around what many people consider to be an unfair ban, Alex Sokirynsky, the developer of the Podcaster app, decided to utilize a little-known feature of the iPhone/iPod Touch: "Ad Hoc App Distribution." This largely unknown feature allows any developer to distribute apps themselves, without using the App Store to do so.
Unfairly Rejected?
On almerica.blogspot.com, Sokirynsky wrote how he doesn't understand why Apple can reject his app for duplicating iTunes functionality when similar apps do the same. Specifically he mentions how any calculator app duplicates the functionality of the Apple calculator. Yet what's even more strange, he notes, is the fact that there are already several apps that allow you to listen to a podcast outside of iTunes. For example, popular apps like Diggnation and Mobility Today are designed just for streaming podcasts. Those apps are not banned from the App Store, so why is his?
Working Around Apple: Ad Hoc Distribution
Designed for use in the enterprise environment, Ad Hoc distribution was created so I.T. departments would have the option to distribute apps from their company's own servers. This allows a business to maintain security and save on external bandwidth, while making it simpler to update and remove apps from users' phones. In order to utilize this method for distribution, a developer needs to register 100 iPhones and/or iPod Touch devices.
Obviously, an app distributed this way will have less chance for success than one made publicly available in the App Store, but it appears to be not only a perfectly viable workaround for getting past the Apple censors, but a perfectly legal one as well.
How To Sign Up For Podcaster
Alex has set up a web page at www.nextdayoff.com where he's signing up those interested in downloading the app. Here you must enter your email address and UDID as the first step in the Ad Hoc distribution process. The UDID, or Unique Data Item Description, is available from within iTunes. To see your UDID, you have to click on the word "serial number" which displays beside the picture of your iPhone/iPod Touch when it's connected. The UDID is a long string of alphanumeric characters which will appear in place of the serial number. You can copy this number to your clipboard by using "Ctrl + C" or "Command + C."
After you enter your email address and UDID on the nextdayoff.com web page, you'll receive a confirmation email within 24 hours. (Mine came much quicker - only minutes). Upon receiving confirmation, you can then return to the nextdayoff.com web page and re-enter your email address. At this point, you'll be prompted to make a donation of $9.99, payable via PayPal. After the donation is received, you'll receive an email with a download link to the application, which is distributed as a .zip file. Installation involves unzipping the files and dragging them to iTunes, but be sure to read the included instructions, especially if you're a Windows user, as there are some technical details you'll need to know.
Will Apple Shut This Down, Too?
Alex appears to be the first application developer who thought to use the Ad Hoc method to distribute a banned app. (If you know of others, please comment). However, given that Apple has confirmed the existence of a "kill switch," we wonder if they will start using it to wipe banned, but distributed, apps such as this from our iPhones. If that's the case, you can bet the uproar over that decision will be even greater than it was over the original ban.
It seems like Apple is stuck between the proverbial "rock and a hard place." If they choose to ignore this, Ad Hoc distribution will almost certainly become the method of choice for distributing banned apps. But if they pull the "kill switch," they could then potentially alienate their community of developers. What do you think Apple will do? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
To learn more about what the Podcaster app does, you can view this video:
ShareRelated Entries
2 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4907
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
link no work anymore...does the trick though?
Posted by: Josh Lowensohn
|
September 14, 2008 9:30 PM
Someone needs to do this with NetShare. Tethering would be awesome! I never got my hands on it. Would this be possible or does NetShare fall under another category that this may not work for?
I think that nextdayoff will become a huge website where everyone will go to Alex Sokirynsky to host their apps - making it the alternative App Store - and making him millions.
I think you are right that Apple is caught between a rock and a hard place and if they start messing with peoples phones via a kill switch it will have a massive outcry and turn their users against them.
I'm not getting an Iphone. If you have a problem with Apple's draconian rules, you should not get one either. Vote with your dollars.
Is it me or does Dave Winer just whine too much?
I agree Apple kinda irks me with their rules, but we have the choice to choose a different phone. I agree with Henry above me.
I think we should re-learn here in America that if we don't like something, then choose not to support it. No reason to sue to change what is their prerogative. If you don't like IE embedded in Windows, don't use Windows.
Anyway, thanks for the articles
Wow, some rational people. I bought a Samsung Instinct instead. Happily shooting video, watching live TV, browsing at 3G everywhere, and downloading music without being near a wifi hotspot... Why would anyone pay twice as much plus another twice as much over the contract term for an iPhone?
@mark and henry...
Do you actually understand the issues? Podcaster does not violate any published rules for what's acceptable to the App store. It was rejected after being developed, that is the developer had to put all of the work into it, then see that work wasted had they not found this workaround.
I'm predicting two things - this decision will be reversed Monday and whoever is running the approvals team at Apple will be brushing off their resume.
"Some developers demand Apple try to communicate better, lest they assume the worst of the platform vendor. While that sounds plenty reasonable at face value, given the curatorial demands on the fledgling state of the App Store platform and Apple's overall reliance on product-plan secrecy, we shouldn't realistically expect Apple to 'open up' anytime soon," as I explain in:
Resolved: Apple is right to curate the App Store
http://counternotions.com/2008/09/15/app-store/
wow.. talk about bullies..
Steve jobs is so uncool
@Dan Grossman Samsung Instinct?!?
*quivering lower lip* But.. but.. it's not Apple!
Even if they flick the kill switch, all you will get are a few techs blogging about it. The large consumer group, knowing that Steve Jobs is there for them, will 1. never find out and 2. actually not care, since they go to the App Store and never question if there could be a world outside the iSphere.
I've been beta testing an app that's waiting on copyright approval... It was my understanding that Ad Hoc distribution isn't "little-known", but rather is a common practice for beta testing apps prior to submitting them to Apple for approval.
@Dan Grossman
I was a nay sayer from the start and had been on Pocket Pc platform for years- even developing apps for it. I got the iPhone because at the time, it was $50 cheaper per month for a data plan with Verizon. Also, I was impressed with the mobile web. While I do not like Apple's stranglehold over how things are developed, I do believe it is a solid platform and I like the possibilities for apps on it compared to other phones.
Can I get a little more clarification on the ad-hoc method?
"In order to utilize this method for distribution, a developer needs to register 100 iPhones and/or iPod Touch devices."
So can only 100 people use this application?
@amit - Actually, the developer can only signup 100 devices *total* to use *any* of his applications. To gain access to another 100, he would need to signup for the program again under a different AppleID.
To clarify what this means even more: if the developer has 3 applications, and has 10 people beta testing each of them (using adhoc distribution), he then only has 70 slots left for either those apps or future applications he develops.
So in short, this isn't really that great of a distribution method. Apple also still controls it, as they can just pull his portal account. They also create the certificate that the developer has to distribute with each copy of the application.
PS - @justin - you are correct, this is a pretty common thing. It's just largely unknown for non-developers, simply because it serves no purpose outside of beta-testing. It's simply a pain in the ass to distribute adhoc applications.
And then there's always jailbreaking. Tons of terrific apps via that route. Before you say that's even more niche than ad hoc, I'd tell you there's an entire cottage industry out there with kids jailbreaking phones for everyone from other kids to bank executives. A friend met a kid who does this in my state and he had a line of cars going down the street waiting for him to do it...
Can't wait for Android to be released and mature a bit so the Android Market provides some "real" competition to the App Store. Sort of.
@Victor The biggest thing the jailbreaking community has to overcome is the misconception that jailbreaking an iPhone is a "bad thing". Once people realize that jailbreaking isn't "hacking", and doesn't actually "break" anything, perhaps the average consumer will be more receptive to it.
After all, the main difference between a liberated iPhone and a non-jailbroken iPhone is the presence of an unofficial distribution channel (Cydia or Installer) and the rest of *nix.
This is fantastic! Apple jilted the wrong developer.
I'm sure they'll be quick to figure out how to stuff the genie back in the bottle (they always do). But, it DOES go to show the developer community (and hopefully the consumers) will find alternate means of routing around the damage.
It's also clear now... If Apple DOESN'T reign this in quickly THEY are the ones who allowed the fracture to create the schism with their iPhone developers.
I support everything Alex Sokirynsky has done. Apple has handled the iPhone app store poorly from the beginning. More power to Alex and all the other developers out there. Apple is on the wrong side here. The store needs to be open.
If Ad Hoc is the "limited to 100 seats" method, then we're really not yet talking about the third method of distribution: Enterprise. How will someone like say NASDAQ or another large company who decides to deploy more than 100 iPhones distribute apps?
The only thing I can think of as a problem would be that "wipe" capability. The customers would have to join an "enterprise" and trust the developer not to wipe their systems afterwards, either maliciously or otherwise... Nope, won't work :-)
I guess Apple did think this through a little bit!!! The only thing outside their walled garden is... (wait for it...) "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!, uh, I mean, JAILBREAK!!!"
Wow - there sure are a bunch of whiners out there. And everyone seems to think that they can do this better. Yet not one of you have ever created a phone or a market to sell it or an app store or a developer platform for a phone and tried to manage the product line and make it profitable enough to keep developing for. Sounds like a bunch of liberals out here with their hands out wanting everything to be their way and to be paid for.
If this is truly a problem people want fixed, then Apple will fix it. They most always do. That is how a large, popular company stays in business. Apple is one of the best at keeping their user base happy. Name another company who does better over all? HP? IBM? Microsoft? See, you can't.
Stop with all the "Apple's Draconian rules" crap. It is a business and it is there to sell products - in this case, cool products that change the world.
It's real simple... if you don't like how the BMW drives, go buy another car. Isn't that how it works? And if you buy a different car, whine to yourself how you wish you had a BMW because nobody wants to hear your whining!
@ Dan Grossman
Instead of thinking the millions of people who use an iPhone are crazy, maybe you should focus your energy on figuring out what you don't understand, that we all do. Otherwise you just sound silly saying, what would you want a car for when these horses are such fine animals.
@Martin:
The problem is that with Apple as the gatekeeper, a developer can spend months and a small fortune building an app, only to have Apple deny access to their platform at the last second. That's seriously going to limit 3rd party innovation. Who's to say that Apple won't cull the best ideas from "denied" applications, and then release them as feature enhancements to the iPod OS down the road?
Except if you actually download and read the iPhone SDK agreement there are at least two clauses in it that prohibit exactly this kind of app and this kind of functionality (3.3.3 and 3.3.11); unfortunately the very same document is under NDA so you'll have to look up their wording yourselves. But they are very explicit and would certainly seem to at least make this app questionable, if not out-and-out against the T&Cs. Perhaps the developer should have paid more attention before starting work, rather than trying to raise grassroots support from people in a position of ignorance as to what Apple has already stated is allowed and not allowed.
hahahaha just keep buying iShit from Steve :D
Dude, Ad Hock totalyl RULES!
Jiff
http://www.privacy.cz.tc
@andy W
Your "developer should have paid more attention" to the SDK argument does not hold water since the app store agreement states that Apple can reject any app for any reason at any time ( even after its approved and folks are using it). - this is what has Dave Winer and other app makers jumping ship
@justin (@victor) - "jailbreaking community has to overcome is the misconception that jailbreaking an iPhone is a "bad thing".
truthfully as long as Apple make jailbreaking illegal, Apple has made it a bad thing (no warranty fixes without unjailbreaking, the risk the next itunes update will break something jailbroken which is exactly what every update does). Apple has to allow 3rd party in - the jailbreaking thing is one form of 3rd party but Apple, just like the RIAA (if not worse) just keeps firing it's legal and software cannons at it
If it was up to me - all should jailbreak, non should buy from apple store products until apple allows a real 3rd party in ( w/ commence abilities).
obviously the next version of the OS will not have Ad Hoc. they will allow the Ad Hoc distro until they release the new version. i guess they'll sell the Ad Hoc stuff to businesses....
I would not download this app anyways, but what Apple is doing with their approvals is not cool. Me and my team of developers are going to stay away from Apples SDK.
maybe a little more explanation is needed:
apple does not want to alienate it's devs so it can't do anything to this dev while the public is watching so closely; plus they're starting to gain the same reputation as microsoft with buggy software and release issues. so as aggressive as apple pretends to be, it has to walk away from this battle with its tail between its legs and plan for the next release
All you Apple developers are like abused spouses. Coming up with all sorts of reasons why its not really Apple's fault. You all just fell and hit the doorknob right?
@steved, quote > "Your "developer should have paid more attention" to the SDK argument does not hold water since the app store agreement states that Apple can reject any app for any reason at any time ( even after its approved and folks are using it). - this is what has Dave Winer and other app makers jumping ship"
However, your argument holds even less water. In order to develop for the App Store, the developer had to sign up and pay for the ability to get the app added to the store. That is more than a simply submission to a site like MacUpdate or VersionTracker, for example. And even then, no one would even flinch if MU or VT removed an app that violated their terms of service and policies.
The fact that the app store developers are PAYING for the ability to post their apps to the store makes it even more important that the developers themselves read and understand the TOS completely and adhere to it. But yes, in the end Apple has the right to reject whatever they want. If the developers have an issue with that, why did they pay to get into the dev program to begin with?
Actually, Apple officially recommends Ad Hoc to rejected developers, so I'm sure that's where Alex got the idea. When one of my apps was rejected for not being polished enough (*sigh*), this was the last line of the email they sent me:
All these will end in people cracking the iPhone OS more & create another & more popular app. distribution website.
"All these will end in people cracking the iPhone OS more & create another & more popular app. distribution website"
Hasn't that already happened with the jailbreaking? Even then, the majority of iPhone users won't go to that. It is the same mentality with the iTunes DRM. We here on the blog-space seem to think that the distain for Apple's DRM is a majority ideal, but when you look at the sales figures that doesn't hold up. iTunes is the #1 music retailer. Sure, Amazon is closing in, but they are still not close enough for that to matter just yet.
The true majority of people out there could care less about the iTunes DRM, and in the same respect, could care less about the iPhone App restrictions.
I find it hysterical how many people post comments to negative iPhone articles who hate Apple, don't own an iPhone, and better yet proclaim the joy of owning some OTHER phone altogether.
And those same people post to the positive articles, too, and call everyone fanboys.
LOL.
@Rick
Yeah I understand the issue. But in the end, it's apples perogitive to do what they will with their product platform.
I personally think it's dumb, but other than complain, deal with it, or choose another product path both consumer and development.
Apple has never been externally friendly. Xsan discontinuation anyone? I don't think they'll change paths for developers.
This is an obvious case of double standards and changing the rules of the game AFTER the game has started. I cannot return my i-Phone even if I wanted. Not without paying penalties that is.
As I suggested to the author Apple should accept application' description and evaluate upon that description whether the application will be accepted or not.
I agree, many developers tend not to read long and formal documents. I am one of those.
But I wonder whether those documents, full of "it is forbidden" can be easily put in an ordered list, with less lawyerish jargon and a more effective communication.
Given the cost of an application, especially in terms of time, developing an iphone app is getting a sort of bet: will my app be accepted. Won't they blacklist it?
Buy 2 Get 1 free, and also get 1 free apple ipod 80gb........This is our company monthly Bonnanza.
Nokia N96.........$500
Nokia n95..........$350
HTC................$680
SAMSUNG........U900$650
SONY ERICSSON G900$650
Sont Erricsson ExplorierX1$400usd
Apple iphone 16gb$400
Aple iphone 8gb$300usd
Playstattion Games........... for sale..Ps1 Ps2 Ps3 console.
PlasmaTv For sal L CD..
lAPTOPS FOR SALE .Petium M
iPODS fOR SALE.80gb
pam Tops for sale.complet accessories
Dop 8800 ..for sale
eletronics for sale..
Contact : the 3 valuables Emails.
And this is our company Full contact.
HARRISON & MAGERY TECHNOLOGIES LTD
Britannia House 111, Glenthorne Rd
W1J 6BD LONDON
Fax: +447005981961
Tele:+447035923267
Email..Harrisson_mag@hotmail.com
Email..khaliquk.electronics@live.com
Email...Dealersofphoness@gmail.com
by the way.
Also this application for tethering has been banned.
http://mobilecrunch.com/2008/09/15/netshare-gone-from-the-app-store-for-good/
Of course I have nothing against Apple. If they say in advance no tethering, those who work on that should expect to be banned. Just adding more food for thought.
Bye.
I have personally donated money to the developer and recieved Podcaster as a gift. It is an excellent piece of software that deserves to be used by any & all who choose to do so.
Something tells me that the developer of Podcaster can continue to distribute his application Ad Hoc for as long as he wants.
Just make sure you turn off Apple's kill switch: http://gizmodo.com/5038079/how-to-disable-the-app-store-kill-switch-using-your-jailbroken-iphone
And something tells me that Apple won't use their switch often, if at all.
Oh yea, everyone get off their high horse and talk about whats at hand. If you don't have something of value to say, move along.
I'm really happy that somebody, like Alex, has taken a stand against Apple's high-handed tactics. A long time fan of the company and its products, I've become increasingly worried about what this company would be capable of once in a position of unassailable market dominance. Someone needs to bloody Apple's nose a little before they forget that they need customers to survive. I'm particularly irritated by the entire NetShare episode and I hope that Null River will use the ad-hoc method to distribute that app, too, in order to put right the tragedy of needing a iPhone 3G AND a separate 3G modem to get mobile broadband. Talk about epic failures and missed opportunities.
As a happy iPhone user I am grateful that Apple took this position and tries to keep this platform clean and without needless duplication. If that means a few developers who seem to have jumped before they looked get hurt well life is tough.
And all of you "developers" who are just going to take your "great product ideas" elsewhere, that is so sad. Don't let the screen door hit you on the way out.
We are nowhere near having a drought of truly great developers or great ideas for products here in iPhone land. In fact, we could use a bit more culling if you ask me. There is still lots of crapware clogging up the App Store. I hope they start jettisoning a few of the useless apps that got through earlier.
I bought an excellent phone from a company that has excellent taste. I trust them implicitly to provide me with excellent applications from their store.
Well put, Ted
I was very disappointed with the iPhone and how much of basic functionality I take for granted in my little Nokia was purposely crippled.
'd do this simply in protest, event though I don't listen to iTunes. In fact, would it be great to set up an AdHoc "storefront" for multiple aps?
Some sort of "iPhone Applicaiton Coop".
It would mean I don't have to jailbreak the thing.
I think this is great that there is an alternate means of distribution. I for one have been waiting for an app like Podcaster (not sure why Apple hasn't added this function already). If they choose to play big brother when it comes to usage of their product they I think many users would be turned off and move to other products. I for one would do so.
"As a happy iPhone user I am grateful that Apple took this position and tries to keep this platform clean and without needless duplication."
Really? As an iPod Touch user and my wife as an iPhone user, enlighten me as to what application is available on these platforms that does just this? Oh wait, there isn't one.
Podcaster allows one to download podcasts straight to their phone and use them. Which would be handy, if one were say, in an airport or a bus for example...
Apple's alternative would be for a person to download and sync through iTunes on your computer and then transfer them via USB. Wow. Just what I consider the height of convenience; let me sign right up to have to lug out a laptop, plug in my cellular modem (as the tethering app is gone, and AT&T isn't allowing anything of the sort, even though other smart phone platforms allow it), download my podcast, plug in my iPhone via USB and load up iTunes and transfer it and then disconnect and close down everything.
If this *is* a part of a future iTunes on iPhone/iPod Touch release, it's incredibly unfair to make a developer work around potential products your company may or may not release someday. And if it's not, then let Podcaster be distributed since it's functionality isn't duplicated on the iPod/iPhone.
All these will end in people cracking the iPhone OS more & create another & more popular app. distribution website.
This is "the App" I have been claiming for since I have my 3G iPhone.
If it does not come native with he iPhone, there's probably a reason. I can't believe Apple would have overlooked how convenient "Podcast over the air" would be.
In europe, other phones usually come with a Carrier customized firmware. And guess what:
in these customized firmwares, the native Podcast applications provided by Samsung, Nokia or SonyEricsson generic firmwares is removed.
So more than Apple, I firmly believe that just like for tethering it's operators who don't want to hear about podcasts. Probably due to the huge traffic this kind of App might generate.
I'll never download an application as it keep eating up the memory in my phone.I'll prefer a web application where you can do everything and we can avoid installing the application on our phone. I like the following web site a lot
http://www.fonet.mobi
which has lots of features like-
- Mobile Web directory
- RSS reader with bookmark Manamgement
- Social bookmarking
- Social Networking
- Mobile Blogging
- ToDo List
- Personal Contacts Management
- File Management
- Photo Sharing and Management
- Google Calender
- Groups/Network
- Message Management
- SMS
- Map/Directions
- Online Status Management
1 2 Next