Apple needs to sort out its App Store review system

[Rogifan]

From Marco Arment's blog. The way this developer was treated is disgusting. I don't know who's ultimately responsible for App Store approval/rejections but heads need to roll somewhere.

http://www.marco.org/2014/12/09/get-the-word-out

 

[rhett7660]

During [a conversation with someone at App Review], I also asked specifically why Launcher was removed from the App Store after 9 days when other similar apps are still available weeks later. The answer to this question was the most interesting and informative response I had ever heard from them. They basically said that Launcher was a trailblazer in uncharted territories and that they felt that they needed to make an example of it in order to get the word out to developers that its functionality is not acceptable without them having to publish new specific guidelines. And they said that the fact that they aren’t seeing hundreds of similar apps submitted every day is proof to them that taking down Launcher was successful in this regard.

This was a pretty big revelation to me. After Launcher was rejected and the press picked up on it and started writing articles which painted Apple in a bad light, I was afraid that Apple might be mad at me. But it turns out that was actually the outcome they were looking for all along. They acted swiftly and made me the sacrificial lamb. And after that, removing other apps with similar functionality became a low priority for them.

Hmmmmm... this seems to be more conjecture than fact.... Interesting none the less.

I am also really curious to hear about this trailblazing conversation. I hope he recorded it. But I doubt he did, but it would be his word against Apple's. This sounds more like a scorned developer to me. But that is my opinion.

 

[Rogifan]

Hmmmmm... this seems to be more conjecture than fact.... Interesting none the less.

I am also really curious to hear about this trailblazing conversation. I hope he recorded it. But I doubt he did, but it would be his word against Apple's. This sounds more like a scorned developer to me. But that is my opinion.

Seems like a cultural/org issue to me. One, App Store is spread across multiple orgs. Developer relations and app approvals are under Phil Schiller, but the rest of App Store is under Eddy Cue. And then you have Craig Federighi overseeing software. I get this feeling there are some in Apple that think change is good (e.g. Federighi, Ive) and others who are still stuck in old Jobsian ways (Schiller). So you get Federighi introducing all these really cool features (many of which already existed on Android) but then when developers try to take advantage of them, and perhaps use them in more creative ways another part of Apple says no, no, no you can't do that. The problem is when things get approved and then removed days or a week later. It makes Apple look like it doesn't have its you know what together. I agree with Rene Ritchie, Apple needs a high profile VP responsible for all these different pieces. Let them own developer relations, App Store approvals and editorial. And they should be joined at the hip with software engineering, not marketing.

 

[Tech198]

Well.. all i know is, when Apple introduces new stuff into the App Store, they also introduce new guidelines develops must follow (eg. only certain things in the notification area of iOS 8) now you have a more "open" iOS

However, with this, comes a burden of crappy decisions, un-decisiveness , lack of communication (one person agrees, while the other one doesn't), all cause the end result to be screwy, more than previous times.

So ya..... I think "changes" are making Apple go down hill fast. And explains why apps are pulled, then put back a few days later.

No one has a clue what's going on now.

 

[maflynn]

Seems like a blogger writing an opinion piece, without much concrete examples. Just the type of fluff you see on the internet. I don't think that one article is an indictment on Apple's App store review process.

 

[Rogifan]

Seems like a blogger writing an opinion piece, without much concrete examples. Just the type of fluff you see on the internet. I don't think that one article is an indictment on Apple's App store review process.

It's not just one developer. They talked about this on MacBreak Weekly yesterday, Marco Arment and Jason Snell have blogged about it. Rene Ritchie wrote a piece about Apple needing a VP to oversee app store and developer relations. One gets the feeling that either policies aren't well thought out in advance or the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Or even worse, that Apple intentionally designed these new features for extremely limited use and aren't willing to be flexible when developers find a way to do something Apple hasn't thought of (but would be something useful for consumers). I agree with Jason Snell:

http://sixcolors.com/link/2014/12/this-weeks-baffling-app-rejection-transmit-for-ios-111/

The issue is that nobody (except perhaps someone at Apple) seems to understand what the rules are regarding what apps can and can’t do. Maybe it’s time for a clear rewrite of the App Store guidelines, or even—dare I suggest it?—a blog where Apple can communicate with its developers about where it’s drawing the rules for new technologies such as iCloud Drive and Notification Center widgets?

Because right now, developers are reluctant to work to support new Apple features, because of the high risk of rejection. That’s bad for Apple, the platform, and the users, too.

Apple created a lot of goodwill with developers at wwdc this year. It's probably the most excited we've seen an audience since Apple announced iPhone at Macworld. At the beer bash at the end of the week both Craig Federighi and Jony Ive were there mingling and taking lots of selfies with developers. Shortly after Apple started a Swift blog. It seemed like a change tone from Apple's typical relationship with developers. It would be a shame to lose some of that good will because of arbitrary App Store review decisions and treating some developers like crap. Perhaps developer relations and App Store review need to be pulled from marketing and moved under software (since the software team is the one that creates these features/api's in the first place).

 

[TimelessOne]

Apple entire review process is beyond crap.

Reasons you get rejected is insane.
Their is never an excuse for taking more than 24-48 hours to have you app go from submitted to approved. Big time when there are major bug fixes but you have to wait for approval and what stupid reason will apple rejected it for this time. 9 times out of 10 it is on stuff that the pasted 4-5 reviews of the same app it was fine on.
It should be hours turn around time. Not days to over a week like now apple.

 

[Rogifan]

I've been seeing some rumblings on Twitter from app developers who are cautious about developing for Watch (or not developing for it at all right now) because of issues with app policies/reviews. I think Apple needs to nip this in the bud before it becomes a real issue, before a few whiny developers becomes developers going Android first.

http://blog.jaredsinclair.com/post/104802712015/all-these-app-rejection-stories-in-one-headline

I fear that Watch apps will be subject to the same capricious rejections and inscrutable policies that are already spoiling what should be a renaissance of fresh ideas. Between the lack of sustainable productivity app pricing (subscriptions, trials, paid upgrades) and the unpredictable threat of an App Review rejection, I personally can’t summon any excitement whatsoever about WatchKit. Why should I give a s--- about sassy new hardware if the only apps worth building either can’t make money or might get rejected?

Unless something changes at Apple, I predict that we’ll mostly see two kinds of Watch apps next year: hobby apps by curious solo developers, and play-it-safe, free apps for business like Twitter or eBay. And it will be a shame, because the Apple Watch will deserve better.

 

[Rogifan]

App Store rejections now making their way to the mainstream media. Of course Apple refused to comment. Pretty bad though when they reject widgets that profide similar functionality to what Apple showed off at WWDC.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/11/apple-ios-app-developers-discontent-rules

 

[rhett7660]

For some reason this seems to happen when ever a new version of the OS comes out. Not saying it is bad or good, but it happens. I remember all the threads about how apple is going down and it won't recover when they rejected an app from Rogue Amoeba. God the outcry and the comments of Apple better get it ***** together or else. It will pass and work itself out.

Heck just do a search for it on this board and you will see what I mean. You can pretty much see this with every iteration of the software.

Then of course there was the dreaded walled garden approach! Apple is going down hill again. Apple will loose droves of developers again....... And yet, those developers are still developing. Their product may not be in the app store but you can still get the products and you can still run the apps.

 

[Rogifan]

Good article from Adam Engst over at tidbits.

http://tidbits.com/article/15297

 

[Rogifan]

Here's another app that Apple forced the developer to remove functionality only to later reverse course. It was a keyboard extension that also had a calculator. The developer was told that "completing calculations" was not an appropriate use of app extensions. WTF? Tim needs to put app review under someone who actually understands the features announced at WWDC. Obviously the current app review team doesn't.

http://www.cultofmac.com/306819/apple-forces-nintype-drop-one-ios-keyboards-signature-features/

 

[Rogifan]

In Marco Arment's podcast app he had links to other podcast apps in system preferences. So if you clicked on say, Downcast it would take you out to the App Store where you could download it.

Well Apple just rejected that feature and are making him remove it.

Marco Arment (@marcoarment) tweeted at 9:34pm - 10 Jan 15:

Well, Overcast linking to competing apps is over. I knew it would get rejected eventually.
Not mad, just annoyed at the resubmission delay. (https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/554119074893275137?s=17)

Marco Arment (@marcoarment) tweeted at 9:39pm - 10 Jan 15:

Rejected for rule 2.25: developer.apple.com/app-store/revi…
I always knew the feature was living on the edge of this rule’s interpretation. (https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/554120308303867905?s=17)

This is the rule Apple cited:
2.25
Apps that display Apps other than your own for purchase or promotion in a manner similar to or confusing with the App Store will be rejected

I'm not sure what "confusing with the App Store" means but I'd love to know why Apple thinks an app redirecting you to the App Store is a bad thing. And when App Store search is so poor (search for 'podcasts' and you get results for Flipboard, TuneIn Radio and HD alarm clock apps in the top 10) it's nice to have an app that says 'hey if you don't like my app, here are some good alternatives'.

And since this just pushed you to that app in the App Store I think Apple's interpretation of this rule in this case is completely wrong. Marco's not re-creating the App Store in his app, you can't purchase these apps from his app. All it does is re-direct you to that app on the AppStore. I swear Apple has some of the dumbest rules that make iOS worse, not better.