I think tech writers, even really good ones like Jason Snell, forget that nerds like us are still very much in the minority, and we overestimate the general public’s awareness of all this flak about App Store rejections, “closed” vs “open”, etc. People watch iPad commercials, and they go out to a store to buy one. Their man interaction and learning experience prior to purchasing is via an Apple rep at the store. There is no equivalent “Android” rep to sway the purchase away from Apple (since Google has no retail presence), so there’s little chance of Apple losing a sale there. They don’t read tech blogs; they just buy apps. Even if you told them that a few developers (literally a handful out of thousands) had their apps rejected by Apple, they wouldn’t care, unless they really, really wanted that app, and there was no other app just like it.
When Apple is dumb enough to reject a Lady GaGa app, then they will be in trouble. Until then, it’s in Apple’s best interest to keep the store tightly controlled. That control has attracted far more developers than it has repulsed, because it offers a much better chance of profit and low levels of piracy than anything else out there.
Everyone talks about the “open” Android approach being superior in geek circles, but from a business standpoint, “open” has no advantage. I’m always going to make more money in a walled garden. And money is what brings developers.
I agree with John Gruber on this issue; Apple would be better off fighting the “closed” argument by promoting HTML5 and web apps better, which they seem to be doing lately.
