MacRumors is reporting that one developer's app has been rejected for being "of limited utility." The app appears to be a simple gag app, but as I've not downloaded it, I cannot be completely sure as to its utility. If Apple is indeed starting to reject apps that have less-than-great functions, then it signifies the start of a huge shift in how developers will approach the iPhone platform and the App Store.
I can't really say anything good about this move on Apple's part. While Apple's guidelines have never really been specific, it wasn't hard to come up with app ideas that would get through. Now, Apple is signifying that they are going to apply a purely subjective decision making process, while simultaneously withholding information about what their criteria for "utility" is. I can honestly say that this is an unacceptable practice. Its one thing to have rules, even general rules like no porn or no bandwidth hogs, but another completely to reject apps based on Apple's idea of utility or fun.
Apple has really thrown the developer community to the dogs with this decision, and the current lack of communication from them about their guidelines means that developers have no idea what it takes to be accepted now. If this continues, I'm afraid developers will refrain from putting time and effort into iPhone apps because the risk of being rejected has become an unknown variable. At the very least, Apple needs to move fast to publish some formal guidelines and set up a decision making process that will allow developers some feedback on how to meet those guidelines.
This a huge step backwards for Apple, and one that could have been avoided by other means, such as making a new category for the App Store or revamping their review system. Instead, they've taken consumer protectionism to a new level, a dumbass level in my opinion. Trust me Apple, I don't need to be protected against a silly Pint 'O Beer application, and neither does anyone else.
