oh calm down. I'm not missing a damned thing.
1) The APIs are in flux. Since Palm controls both APIs and the player, it can ensure that every update of the APIs will not break user experience.
API changes have traditionally been managed through communication through developer documentation. Palm saying "trust us to communicate internally (between our WebOS team and our App teams) better than we communicate to our 3rd party developers" tells you the following: (A) - Palm reserves the right to communicate less effectively to its 3rd party devs than to its internal app devs. Also, Palm internal apps get the ability to test against new WebOS updates prior to general distribution, but 3rd party devs might not. (B) - Palm reserves the right to make certain APIs private which can possibly be used as a competitive advantage.
2) Palm rejected the app from the palm store. Not banned the app from being used on webOS. In other words if I want to I can still install it, just not via. the app store. This is a huge difference from "apple app store or hack the firmware".
I never said Palm was evil and their device was locked down. Don't infer into my posts. If I meant to compare Palm to Apple, I would have.
3) Palm immediately responded with details on how to fix this rejection.
I never said Palm behaved badly in its rejection process. Don't infer into my posts. If I meant to compare Palm to Apple, I would have.
4) The response time was quick.
I never said Palm responded in an untimely manner in its rejection process. Don't infer into my posts. If I meant to compare Palm to Apple, I would have.
5) Should we go on? You missing the point of the article.
No need to go on. There was also no need to infer what you have into my original post either.