[Nogrentain]

I came across this article today showcasing the attempt of a developer to create apps for playbook, and his resulting frustration at what appears to be a ridiculously unfriendly and dev hating process. I understand that it is one person, but it appears to be a long, ponderous, drawn out process, and the cost of putting up apps on appworld appears to be ridiculously high compared to apple and google. Thoughts?

p2pnet news � Blog Archive � Canadian developer to RIM: ‘I concede defeat.’

I concede defeat. I no longer want to attempt developing an app for the Playbook. Are you happy now? Surely you must be. Considering how terribly designed the entire process is, from the registration right through to loading an app into the simulator, I can only assume that you are trying to drive developers away by inconveniencing them as much as humanly possible. Just in case you�ve forgotten, let me give you a little recap of the process you�ve put together.


Living in Waterloo, it�s hard not to be reminded of you. I walk by your campus every day, most of my friends have worked for you at some point, and you are the largest supporter of the university I attend. So it seemed like a rather good idea to at least attempt to write an app for the Playbook, your shiny new tablet that you hope will be able to compete with the extremely popular iPad and the up and coming Honeycomb tablets. Having already developed apps for the iPhone and iPad, I had a little experience with the process of signing up for developer programs, and naturally I assumed that yours would be different, but fairly straight forward none the less. Well, you know what they say about making assumptions!

First, I had to fill out a form with my personal information. No big deal, pretty standard. I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. Now just in case you�ve never looked in to competing developer programs, Apple charges $99, and Google charges $25. Considering you are by far the underdog in this game, how do you justify charging double the price of the market leader? Also, with the $99 or $25 charge, Apple and Google let you publish and unlimited number of apps on their stores. You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps. On Twitter, I believe that would colloquially be referred to as a fail.

After getting all my personal information in, and being thoroughly disgusted with your ignorant pricing scheme, I�m now ready to start the actual process of developing. With the iPad, all I need to do is download a single installer that contains the IDE, the SDK, and the simulator. You�ve decided that it�s better to make me download the Adobe AIR SDK, the Playbook SDK, and the Playbook simulator in three separate downloads. It�s not optimal, but I�m sure you have your reasons, right? RIM? Bueller? So I go ahead and download the Adobe AIR SDK. Of course, I�m a little confused when it doesn�t come with an installer, but is simply a collection of libraries and binaries. It reminds me of the good old days of command line Linux installs, but it�s about as far from user friendly as you can get. Just in case you forgot, RIM, developers are users too. Next up, is the Playbook SDK. For some reason, you want me to fill in an entire form of personal information. That�s odd, considering I did already when I first signed up. I guess I�ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your database crashed in the interim. So I fill out the form, and start the SDK download. Now I need to download the Playbook simulator. Again, you ask me to fill out a form of personal information identical to the one I just filled out to download the SDK. At this point, RIM, I seriously think you should get checked for some type of anterograde amnesia. Onward I go!

As I stated before, the Adobe AIR SDK didn�t come with an installer, but being a developer I obviously have a lib folder hanging around, so I just drop it in there. Next, I go to install the Playbook SDK. For some reason, it thinks that the optimal place to install software on a Mac is my home directory. Not /Developer, not even /Applications, where 99.99% of software is supposed to be installed. But whatever, I guess you have your reasons, right? RIM? Bueller? So I just manually change the default install folder, as any user friendly installer should require. Then I move on to the Playbook simulator. Oh, I forgot to mention that you also told me I had to download VMWare Fusion to run the simulator. Nothing says user friendly like making me buy an additional piece of $80 third party software to run YOUR simulator. Luckily, VMWare offers a free trial, which by the way, comes in a single installer (see what I did there?). I�m kinda of confused at this point though. The docs say that I need to install the .iso image into VMWare, but the file I downloaded from you was an installer? I decide that maybe the docs are outdated, and you�ve come up with a nice installer for the simulator that wouldn�t make me use VMWare. So I go ahead an optimistically run the installer. Turns out, you�ve decided to put the .iso image in an installer, and just have the installer copy the .iso into a folder on my sytem. Cause you know, that�s so much simpler than just letting me download the .iso directly. The next part turns out to be pretty simple, having to just create a new VM in the usual way. VMWare gets the credit for that though.

Ok, so to recap, I now have the Adobe AIR SDK sitting in a lib folder, the Playbook SDK is installed, and the Playbook simulator VM is installed into VMWare. Obviously the first thing I want to do is to boot up the simulator and play with it. So I click the nice little Play button inside VMWare, and am greeted by what I perceived to be a 1000000000 page license agreement in a DOS-like console window. So after having scrolled through the whole thing page by page with the spacebar, I am now greeted by the actual Playbook UI! My reaction is similar to that of Kristen Wiig when she plays the Target cashier on SNL. Since there�s only a web browser available, I launch it so I can see if the browser lives up to your claims, RIM. However, it seems that I can only get to about two pages before it stops responding all together. Oh well. I figured, at this point, I should try to get an actual app loaded on to the simulator. So I head back to the docs to learn how. First up, I have to put the simulator into development mode, which makes total sense because of those times when you don�t want to use the simulator for development. For instance, sometimes you�re obviously gonna want to load up the simulator on your laptop and use it like a Playbook, right? RIM? Bueller? But before I can do that, you tell me that I need to set a password, which is obviously very important, because if someone steals my laptop, that last thing I would want them to do is be able to put my Playbook simulator into development mode without my permission. Good thinking RIM! Next, I need to get the IP address of the simulator, because it�s running in a VM, and as far as my OS is concerned it�s an entirely separate device. Good design RIM! Making things easy and integrated (like Apple and Google have) only encourages those �artsy� types to try to develop software, which clearly should be left only to unix loving neck beards (I use that term endearingly).

Now I get down to the real work. Compiling and sending an application to the simulator. As your documentation suggests, I go ahead and download the sample app from your website. Your docs now tell me that before I can create the application package, I need to first create an application archive. Ok, that sounds alright with me, because obviously you�re going to tell me how to do that. Wait, you�re not going to tell me how to do that? Ok, well let�s just assume I figured out how to do that on my own. Now I need to go back to the command line, and type in a big command with lots of non-descriptive command line options that will transform my archive into the application package which can then be loaded on to the device. With package in hand (hehehe, I�m here all week folks!), I now need to type in another long command which will send the application to the simulator running in the VM at the IP address I had to get earlier.

At this point, I feel the need to compare and contrast to the Apple and Google way of doing things. If you are developing for iOS or Android, you can replace the entire preceding two paragraphs with one sentence: Press the button that says Build and Run (or the equivalent button within Eclipse for Android). Sarcasm aside, as it stands, the Playbook SDK is complete crap.

So it was at this point that I decided to surrender. Knowing what a pleasure it is to use Apple and Google�s tools, there was no way I could justify continuing with Playbook development. I thought this story would end there. Unfortunately, there was one more little jab you were still able to get in, RIM. This afternoon, Google Notifier informs me that I�ve received an email from you. Naturally, I assumed that it was just a confirmation that my App World account had been approved, considering I had filled out your forms truthfully and completely, just as you had asked. However, I was surprised to find that it was, in fact, a request for more personal information. You wanted me to print off a notarized statement of identification form, fill it out, take it to notary with government issue ID to have it notarized, and then return it to you so that you could be absolutely sure with 100% accuracy that I was who I said I was. I think it goes without saying at this point, but neither Apple nor Google require you to do anything even close to that.

So, my dear RIM, primary supporter of my local economy, I bid you adieu. You have succeeded in your quest of driving away a perfectly willing developer from your platform. On a more serious note, being the underdog, you need to make your process AT LEAST as simple as Apple�s or Google�s, if not more so. You need to make your tools AT LEAST as good as Apple�s or Google�s, if not more so. You have failed at both.

[peter9477]

That post seemed merely over the top, and the views of a development newbie, until I looked at some of his past posts. Look at those and I think you'll see there's an obvious bias involved, too.

[Rickroller]

That post seemed merely over the top, and the views of a development newbie, until I looked at some of his past posts. Look at those and I think you'll see there's an obvious bias involved, too.

You do realise that post contained the excerpt from the provided link..right? Bueller? and was not his own personal findings..

Anywho..if that truly is the way it is set up..sounds like a complete PITA. The whole getting a piece of ID notarized I could understand though..this is RIM..and they are all about security.

[peter9477]

You do realise that post contained the excerpt from the provided link..right? Bueller? and was not his own personal findings..

Anywho..if that truly is the way it is set up..sounds like a complete PITA. The whole getting a piece of ID notarized I could understand though..this is RIM..and they are all about security.

I totally realize that "that post" (the one I responded to) contained basically the whole (not an excerpt) "that post" to which I was referring. Is that clearer? Sorry to confuse you about which "that post" I meant.

And yes, many of the things he (not "he" the guy who posted the post to which I responded, but "he" the guy who wrote the original post which was reposted in the above post) describes are accurate, basically. He presents them as a rant, so he's a bit too emotional about it for you to take them all without a grain of salt.

And yes, I believe given the focus on security, RIM is doing things that the others, who obviously are less concerned about security and privacy, don't want or don't have to do.

[Nogrentain]

I can see the security thing considering whom RIM caters to, but charging 200 to put up 10 apps seems a bit much. I doubt there is any sort of security justification for that. While it's free right now, it's a matter of time unless they change their minds. And yeah, seems like a major PITA.

[whocaresit]

Absolutely disagree with the article.

You don't need VMWare Fusion, you just need the free VMWare PLAYER for running the simulator.

The process is very automated in Windows. There is also a "Build and run" option in Flash Builder Burrito, absolutely no need of a commandline.

However I agree that RIM's $200 fee + 10 app limit is absurd, considering they are the underdog.

[Nogrentain]

So could RIM make the process simpler, or give better instructions? The guy was ranting of course, but unless he's completely incompetent, it seems that RIM could streamline a lot of the process.

[barrist]

Sounds like the guy is just pissed he couldn't fire off an app easy to win a free playbook. The guy's an Apple fanboy if you check his other posts. What else is new?

[sf49ers]

I can see the security thing considering whom RIM caters to, but charging 200 to put up 10 apps seems a bit much. I doubt there is any sort of security justification for that. While it's free right now, it's a matter of time unless they change their minds. And yeah, seems like a major PITA.

charging for money for uploading apps can't be avoided and it is not that RIM wants to make money out of it but to avoid spam and crap apps being uploaded into the app world. Lately, it was brought to notice in one of the blogs that a developer had uploaded 4000+ apps in the form of ebook or ebook links which are very much spam or crap apps, had RIM enforced this rule much earlier it would have avoided a lot of spam in the app world. Even Apple and Google are doing it for the very same reason.

[Nogrentain]

charging for money for uploading apps can't be avoided and it is not that RIM wants to make money out of it but to avoid spam and crap apps being uploaded into the app world. Lately, it was brought to notice in one of the blogs that a developer had uploaded 4000+ apps in the form of ebook or ebook links which are very much spam or crap apps, had RIM enforced this rule much earlier it would have avoided a lot of spam in the app world. Even Apple and Google are doing it for the very same reason.

Hmm I see. Never thought of that one. I guess it just falls to what the sweet spot is for the optimal amount to charge to block off spammers.

[drjay868]

I wonder if the author of the post would have a problem with the $200 if it was unlimited apps? Or if it was $99 for 10?

[Shao128]

First, I had to fill out a form with my personal information. No big deal, pretty standard. I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. Now just in case you�ve never looked in to competing developer programs, Apple charges $99, and Google charges $25. Considering you are by far the underdog in this game, how do you justify charging double the price of the market leader? Also, with the $99 or $25 charge, Apple and Google let you publish and unlimited number of apps on their stores. You, on the other hand, have decided that for $200, a developer should only get to publish 10 apps, and it will cost $200 for every additional 10 apps. On Twitter, I believe that would colloquially be referred to as a fail.

The article is full of inaccuracies, but Ill just point out this one, there is no charge currently to submit apps to AppWorld.

[Rickroller]

Or if it was $99 for 10?

That sounds reasonable to me..

[Nogrentain]

The article is full of inaccuracies, but Ill just point out this one, there is no charge currently to submit apps to AppWorld.

"No big deal, pretty standard. I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. "

The author does state that it is currently free.

[Shao128]

"No big deal, pretty standard. I do, however, notice that although it is currently free to register with App World, in the future there will be a $200 USD charge. "

The author does state that it is currently free.

Read the rest of the quote...

[Nogrentain]

I read the whole thing. He complains heavily that it will cost 200 for 10 apps. That's the caveat to the free apps for now part.

[TheScionicMan]

The process works perfectly! It already weeded out someone who wasn't that serious...

[Witmen]

Ive invested literally $5 in developing apps for the PlayBook. I got all of my tools for free (and no they weren't pirated) ,registering to become a vendor was free and even the signing keys were free. I never even attempted to develop prior to the free PlayBook offer and I found the process very easy and straight forward.

My first app was accepted into app world on Jan 19 th. It was submitted on Dec 8th. That wait was the only issue I had and it was a very minor issue. By no means anything to whine and cry about lol. Just a result of me being impateint.

I don't know what was up with the aurthor of that article. But I see it like this. I spent $5 and around 20 hours of my time to get a PlayBook. I think that was more than a fair trade. At no point was I cursing RIM. Even during my waiting for approval. He must just be a big cry baby lol.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[BBThemes]

ok then, so i figured id have a bit of a say, because as pointed out there are a few inaccuracies in the article. i`ll try break them down into relevant bits.

Appstores:
so currently appworld is FREE to sign up to, it used to be $200USD which also gave you 10 `credits` which could be used to upload and/or update an application. currently those applying during the free timescale also get 10- credits so even when/if it goes back to paid, you`ll be covered for the next 10 releases. now its important to note that the split is 30/70 in favour of the dev, but i`ll get back to that later on.
the Apple appstore is NOT $99. lets be very clear about this, its $99 PER YEAR. so if your a dev who`s in it for the long haul (not just to get a playbook or whatever) then thats a hundred bucks a year, so in 3 years being an apple dev the store has cost you $297 where appworld costs $200. as far as i know theres no limit on uploads or whatever but fact remains its $99 a year, not a one off like appworld. a KEY point they fail to observe. apple i believe also operate the 30/70 split.
Mobihand, now currently appworld will be the only place to get playbook apps at launch, but id imagine mobihand and other stores will be able to at some point so its only fair to mention them. they are free to sign up, no annual costs and no upload/update costs either. where they do differ however is the developer split. if the app is purchased through mobihand, then its 20/80 split, however if the app is downloaded thru a `partner` store, such as crackberry etc. then its 40/60 split. now from experience the majority go through their partner stores, so id say its probably really about 35/65 split, for myself at least.
this brings me back to the $20 per app to upload. upload something and sell it on mobihand at say $3 a pop, and sell 100 units. at 40/60 split thats $180 to the dev. do the same on appworld and at 30/70 split thats $210 less your $20 fee, so $190, or in real terms, $10 up on the equivalent of mobihand. so that $20 while its i guess annoying, is actually worth it (should you do enough volume i guess).

development tools:
apple as stated is an all in one soloution, i cant say thats true as i havent used it, but i have no reason to doubt it.
the article makes out that what they downloaded was a) nessecary and b) PlayBook only. both of these suggestions are false. the 3 things they mention is the ADOBE (yup, not RIM so they shouting at the wrong person) Air SDK (2.5), this is needed for ANY mobile development of Air apps, not just for the BlackBerry platform, but also android / iOS. its downloaded from Adobe and is not included in the android SDK either. far better to get the adobe tools from adobe right? i think so.
installing the Air runtime is a simple process, same as any other runtime. sure i wasnt too up on it, so i googled it, found a video showing a step by step (less than 3 mins video) and bam i was done. really not that much of an issue.
The PlayBook SDK. now this is downloaded from BlackBerrys site, yes they ask you to fill in a form, however its the same form as should you wish to download firmware, and as we all know theres a `remember me` option. hit that and you wont look foolish complaining youve filled in your details more than once. it should also be noted that the PlayBook SDK (much like the Air SDK) isnt acutally needed, its a plugin for Adobe FlashBuilder, however if you have enough knowledge you can compile an app with simply a text editing program.
and lastsly the PlayBook Simulator. again download from BlackBerry, now if ya hit `remember me` like i said, then you just click `yes this is me` and your away (much like if you download more than one firmware). the simulator needs VMware to run, as it runs as a virtual machine, VMware is a FREE download, and theres full instructions on the BlackBerry site on setting it up (even a download link) so its quite painfree (note: make sure in admin mode on most windows PC`s for ease of install).
now, the main question, why arent these all in one? well thats easy, as i mentioned all you really need is the simulator, the SDK`s for Air and PlayBook are adobe tie-ins, so if your not using Adobe tools then they arent needed, do you want to download stuff you dont need? also what happens when (and they already have) they update the Simulator? should you have to fully reinstall everything? using far more bandwidth, time and effort than is needed? no. just the same as those developing for BlackBerry phones dont re-download the relevant SDk each time they download a new phone simulator. that just wouldnt make sense.
so the way its laid out is actually the most logical and effiecent.

so could they make it a `one time download` well yes, they could. thats if they included the Air SDK which isnt theirs and the VMware player which isnt theirs. would it make sense to do this though? no, for the reasons iv already said. you dont want to have to download everything just to update one part.

also for those of you thinking `oh no, adobe stuff aint cheap` well yess, its not, but they offer you a 1 month free trial so you can `test the waters` and see how you feel, so effectively it would be totally free if you did it within a month.

so thats pretty much my thoughts, if you feel me wrong on any points then gladly point them out. but just look at it like this, i make 10 apps, they work on iOS too, appworld was free and im in the game for 3 years, Apple was $99 a year, so apple has cost me $297. appworld has cost me nothing.

also apple/google/mobihand arent going to be gicing me a free device for just making one app either.

[icesteve]

I think rim has waived the app world fee, they want as many apps as they can get before launch.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[BBThemes]

I think rim has waived the app world fee, they want as many apps as they can get before launch.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

yes Appworld has been free since Devcon2010.

code signing keys are now free also (previously $20 onetime payment). it should be noted a $1 non-used fee is applicable for the keys, basically just to prove your info is correct but they never acutally take the money.

[Intosh]

ok then, so i figured id have a bit of a say, because as pointed out there are a few inaccuracies in the article. i`ll try break them down into relevant bits.

<...>

You should post this as an "open letter" to the Apple fanboys turned dev wannabes.

By the way, don't you need to buy a Mac for iOS app development? All-in-one indeed.

[howarmat]

just for another reference, the android app market is $25 to get in and then 30/70 split. All the dev tools are free also since is open platform but you can pay for some like adobe if you would like, same as PB

[BBThemes]

You should post this as an "open letter" to the Apple fanboys turned dev wannabes.

By the way, don't you need to buy a Mac for iOS app development? All-in-one indeed.

haha i have no need to try and validate my feelings, just felt my experiences would help `right` things lol

as for iOS development, possibly im not sure, but that would be Xcode only, as you can cross compile through adobe which would allow windows users development access

just for another reference, the android app market is $25 to get in and then 30/70 split. All the dev tools are free also since is open platform but you can pay for some like adobe if you would like, same as PB

nice to know, i wasnt sure so avoided posting it. also should be noted you can use Air SDK and android adobe plugin with flash builder to make for android, so literally same process as for PlayBook.

also lets now hear from a developer on how developing for Playbook was for him, as you can see the app works thru FlashBuilder for android, desktop, iOS, PlayBook and others.

1:09
Getting started was very very easy, RIM has done a great job of making the setup process as simple as possible

i think that person just about puts it as clear as anyone needs it to be


also going back to the storefronts.
Apple: curated and apps are reviewed and checked before being made live
Appworld: curated and apps are reviewed and checked before being made live.
Android Market: apps are available as soon as posted, although it seems they are checked at some point as some get pulled etc.
Mobihand: apps are available when posted and not curated at all.

while im not going to say which is a pro/con. the curated ones are ensured to have no copyright/trademark violations, the non curated arent (hello kitty being the perfect example as thats got a worldwide copyright but many themes in mobihand).

[Nesquik]

so uh. why are we even debating this? for those who havent developed for the playbook yet, please dont be ignorant and take his blog entry with a grain of salt. after you do that, read the rest of his entries on his "blog". you'll see what he's more of a "fan" of.

and for those who have developed, they know the real story behind this. im not going to say it was the easiest process in the world, but it wasn't overly difficult either. if you put some time and effort into it, its easy to get over and do. he expected a walk in the park.

and to be fair this is a fairly new platform. the SDK is still in the beta stages and needs work obviously. and the entrance has no fee (for now since devcon). and there are several free tools out there that maybe less convenient for the author but they are there for him to use.

and the support forums for developers is OUSTANDING. people are willing to help you left and right with any problems you are having. some spend hours trying to help you through it. and most of the times they do. if you still feel that RIM is evil then so be it. suck up your tears and let people more willing handle the job do the work.

this guy has a something for nothing kinda of attitude and it shouldn't fly.

jeez.