toggle

AAPL Stock: 493.42 ( + 0.25 )

MacNN News

Apple bans game after developer criticizes App Store

updated 05:15 pm EDT, Fri March 19, 2010

Dev kept raising app price up to $400

Apple pulled one of Tommy Refene's iPhone apps following the developer's public criticism of the App Store, according to Kotaku. Refenes spoke for several minutes at the recent Game Developers Conference, saying he "absolutely f***ing hate[s] the iPhone App Store." He reportedly compared the iPhone gaming market to the low-quality Tiger handheld platform of the '80s and '90s.

Although the developer believes Apple pulled his pimple-popping app, Zits & Pimples, due to the GDC rant, the removal might also be related to excessive pricing. The developer allegedly kept raising the app price, all the way up to $400, as an experiment.

Apple several years ago pulled I Am Rich, an app that carried a $1,000 price tag and only displayed a glowing gem. Although Apple did not give a reason for pulling the title, many believed the company was trying to prevent unwitting users from accidentally downloading the app.

Refenes five months ago raised the app price to $15, leading to three purchases on the same day. Bringing the price up to $50 allegedly resulted in four sales, while fourteen people are said to have bought the game when the price escalated to $299. One person even bought the game for $400 on the same day it was removed.

"They gave me no explanation at all as to why they took it down," the developer said. "I'm guessing they are mad that I said their store sucks and the iPhone is a Tiger handheld and they took it down."

It is unclear if Apple may have also reconsidered the app's initial approval due to decency concerns. The company has been in the process of purging inappropriate content from the App Store, including thousands of apps deemed "overtly sexual."

Refenes has asked Apple to clarify if the pricing experiment violated the App Store policies. The company has yet to respond to requests for comment.

by MacNN Staff

(29)

TAGS :

iPhone, developer, App Store, Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

elroth
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2006

+1

03/19, 05:41pm | report spam | (1 reply) close Reply |
what?

Forget the developer - anyone who bought his app (Zits & Pimples?) should be banned from iTunes for life.

rvhernandez
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

+8

03/19, 05:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
Good riddance...

Anyone who is making a crappy app like this, screws around with pricing, then rants about being able to make money on Apple's back, well goodbye! We don't need you. Go buy some Clearasil with the money you made and get a life. Maybe try a different profession.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

+9

03/19, 05:59pm | report spam | (3 replies) close Reply |
Re: slimeball

How could anyone with an ethical bone in their body charge hundreds of dollars for a pimple popping game?

What in the h*** does ethics have to do with it? Here's a simple lesson in economics. You charge as much as people are willing to pay. Apple could charge $1000 for an iPad and garner a ton of sales. Would it be unethical for them to do so? No. Why don't they? Most likely because they determined a sweet spot which would maximize their profits without overloading inventory.

Feathers
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: Oct 1999

+15

03/19, 06:00pm | report spam | (2 replies) close Reply |
Quashing dissent?

I sincerely hope that Apple have a legitimate reason for pulling the app. Silencing dissent, caprice and spite would be yet another worrying argument against the closed model of the Apple iCosystem.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

-3

03/19, 06:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: what?

- anyone who bought his app (Zits & Pimples?) should be banned from iTunes for life.

Yes, now we have the elite fanboy crowd who are telling us what who should and shouldn't be using an Apple product, and what they should be allowed to do with said product.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

-4

03/19, 06:02pm | report spam | (2 replies) close Reply |
removal

Although the developer believes Apple pulled his pimple-popping app, Zits & Pimples, due to the GDC rant, the removal might also be related to excessive pricing. The developer allegedly kept raising the app price, all the way up to $400, as an experiment.

It couldn't be due to excessive pricing. Apple in no way tells developers what they can charge for their apps. Right?

And of course it's for his rant. Didn't he read his developer agreement? You're not allowed to say anything about anything related to the app store, esp. if it is critical.

Comment buried. Show

solefald
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2008

-11

03/19, 06:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
ha

whoever bought this s*** for $400 is going to get in a whole lot of trouble with the parents....

Foe Hammer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2005

-1

03/19, 06:13pm | report spam | close Reply |
Uh ...

So this guy writes a zit-popping app (literally, just to be clear), starts raising the price to wacky levels as an experiment, then rants against the store that sells his app. Whether his app was destined to be pulled from this point or not, I'd say his solution his fairly direct: if you don't like the store, don't write apps to sell there.

Comment buried. Show

Constable Odo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2007

-14

03/19, 07:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
I sincerely hope he starts

developing for the Android platform where this sort of freedom nonsense it welcomed with open arms. Can you believe that? And the pundits think it's wrong for Apple to be a gatekeeper. Maybe the person that bought that app for $400 thought it was $4.00. Good riddance to this dude.

darkelf
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2003

+9

03/19, 11:11pm | report spam | (1 reply) close Reply |
what a f***ing...

what a f***ing professional.

ggirton
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 1999

+4

03/20, 12:52am | report spam | close Reply |
ok, I think we can agree

I think we can agree that a zit popping app is probably not worth
$50 bucks, let alone $400, indeed what iPhone app IS worth $400?

However, it does not seem reasonable to ALLOW the price to be set
to $400 in the first place, and then throw the app off the store
when the $400 price is set.

So we can assume that the app was not thrown out because of the
ridiculous price.

And it doesn't seem right that it would be thrown out because of speech,
notwithstanding whatever throttling-of-speech language may or may not be
within the developer agreement.

Thus, all that is left is that the zit-popping app was thrown off the app store
because it was REALLY REALLY GROSS!

Doesn't that seem obvious to you, too?

heh.

nat
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2002

+8

03/20, 08:28am | report spam | close Reply |
oh testudo

"- anyone who bought his app (Zits & Pimples?) should be banned from iTunes for life."

"Yes, now we have the elite fanboy crowd who are telling us what who should and shouldn't be using an Apple product, and what they should be allowed to do with said product."

you really - REALLY - missed the humor in his post didn't you pumpkin. but hey, it was an opportunity to use the word fanboy!

ViktorCode
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2006

+5

03/20, 08:57am | report spam | close Reply |
Scam gets banned

Scam "game" gets banned from AppStore - that's how headline should read. Tommy Refene did a good job of going further on the path of pushing scam apps through AppStore than his previous peer, author of "I Am Rich". He called his scam "an experiment" (the same could be said about "I Am Rich"), he increased price gradually to avoid Apple's attention. And then after his "game" finally gets banned he uses his badmouthing incident no one knew or cared about as a defence in a publicity stunt.

Only problem Tommy is that you were trying to sell sh*t. Even hardcore Apple haters (hello Testudo!) won't side with you. Though I believe some weak-minded people would buy the idea of evil Apple listening intently to the rant of random devs nobody knows about to punish them later.

Anyway, there are still lots of mobile platforms where people can get any sh*t various Tommys want to sell them, so freedom of choice FTW! I for one choose to remain in my prison at least for a while :)

kerryb
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

+6

03/20, 09:12am | report spam | close Reply |
It is not in the US constitution

People seem to forget that the App store is owned and operated by Apple. What that means is they have every right to decided what products sit on their shelves and are available to their customers. If any of you owned your own business you would understand that. Vendors in this case the pimple app developer has not rights to shelf space in the App Store, unless he has a contract with Apple he is out of luck and the App Store.

vasic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

+4

03/20, 12:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Fraud is the reason

Here is the original description of the game:

"Will you continue to embrace good taste and sensibility, or will you have the courage and the fortitude to go above and beyond your duties as a patriotic citizen? This cultural milestone is not only the FIRST* but the MOST ADVANCED dermatological simulator ever released on the iPhone and iPod Touch."

Most of us can see the dripping sarcasm from this. However, many people will read this and, when they see the price of $400, actually believe they're getting a highly advanced DERMATOLOGICAL SIMULATOR. They buy the game, try it and realise that they've been duped. Most likely, those who paid $300 (about 15 of them, apparently) would likely return the game and get their money back, if it were possible.

When you make a product that is returnable, you can advertise it anyway you want (within limits, of course). However, if your product cannot be returned, advertising and not delivering something is fraudulent.

It is fairly clear to me what was the reason. Apple would have likely yanked this as soon as it went above $10; they just haven't noticed what's happening (probably until his rant).

Darchmare
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2009

0

03/20, 02:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
kerryb

kerryb - While you're technically correct, the flip side is that as a company what Apple does can be (and should be) open to criticism from 3rd parties. Its customers, shareholders, developers and critics alike have every right to express an opinion about the way they operate their business. And Apple would do well to listen to them.

The troubling thing about this is that it's yet another in a long line of cases where Apple has made decisions with regard to App Store content that are - at best - questionable (Google Voice, anyone?). Say what you will about this particular case, arbitrary, poorly communicated acts that impact developers are par for the course for Apple.

Anyone who was paying attention could tell that the app was a joke, and those who didn't (or mistakenly bought it, to whatever degree that's even possible) could have asked for a no-questions refund. If Apple had a problem with this, they should have contacted the developer and brought them to his attention first. Instead, they essentially just reinforced the point he was making.

Apple is positioning iPhone/iPod touch as a platform, and with that comes a set of responsibilities. They can (legally) abdicate those responsibilities, but making developers fear for even speaking out or criticizing them isn't going to grow the platform in a healthy way. That "chilling effect" will hurt them in the long term.

As a consumer, a shareholder, a developer and a life-long Apple fan I don't consider that a good thing. Just my opinion...

(...not signing my name, for obvious reasons...)

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

-5

03/22, 10:18am | report spam | close Reply |
oh nat

you really - REALLY - missed the humor in his post didn't you pumpkin. but hey, it was an opportunity to use the word fanboy!

Yeah, I did miss the humor. Probably due to the lack of it's existence.

But, hey, it did give you a chance to show your elitism again by using 'pumpkin'. You do enjoy that, don't you. The ol' "Someone doesn't agree with me, I'll treat them like a child" attitude. Same one Steve Jobs has, if I'm not mistaken.

JTh
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2007

+3

03/23, 02:39am | report spam | close Reply |
What's not pointed out

Apple is on the hook for credit card payments. It's not entirely out of the question for someone to complain loud enough to their credit card company that an application was misrepresented (or simply lie that their card and/or phone was stolen and purchases made without consent). While Apple doesn't lose $400, they do have chargeback fees associated (not to mention, fees to process the original purchase anyway). And if they've already paid the developer, it can get messy trying to get the money back.

To me, Apple is simply protecting itself; I doubt the dev's opinion of the app store is an issue. I think it's perfectly reasonable.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/12	Google said building huge facilities...
02/10	Apple sells scaled-back 13-inch MacBook...
02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Jobs did serve on Bush export council...

Show All

02/12	Google said building huge facilities...
02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Amazon could have Kindle Fire 9-inch...
02/09	Google said making self-branded wireless...

Show All

02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...
02/08	Paul McCartney to perform live concert...
02/06	Microsoft prepping Dynamics CRM apps...
02/03	iBooks Author update clarifies EULA...
02/02	Bug in iTunes Match may switch 'explicit...

Show All

02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...
02/07	Refurb. Olympus 14MP Digital Camera...
02/06	17-inch, 2.2GHz MacBook Pro, cut to...

Show All

toggle

Apple bans game after developer criticizes App Store

updated 05:15 pm EDT, Fri March 19, 2010

Dev kept raising app price up to $400

what?

Good riddance...

Re: slimeball

Quashing dissent?

Re: what?

removal

ha

Uh ...

I sincerely hope he starts

what a f***ing...

ok, I think we can agree

oh testudo

Scam gets banned

It is not in the US constitution

Fraud is the reason

kerryb

oh nat

What's not pointed out

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

Apple bans game after developer criticizes App Store

updated 05:15 pm EDT, Fri March 19, 2010

Dev kept raising app price up to $400

Related Articles

Recent Articles

what?

Good riddance...

Re: slimeball

Quashing dissent?

Re: what?

removal

ha

Uh ...

I sincerely hope he starts

what a f***ing...

ok, I think we can agree

oh testudo

Scam gets banned

It is not in the US constitution

Fraud is the reason

kerryb

oh nat

What's not pointed out

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace