Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

notes.alinpanaitiu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 364 posts

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#81

Post by worble »

SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #60
smoldesu wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Apple has every right to tighten up their first-party App Store, but they should also acknowledge the user's right to install what they want. Maybe some people do want a "too simple" app, and I don't think Apple has the right to tell the user what is-and-isn't appropriate. It's common sense. This would be a great time for them to add a Developer Mode a-la Android, and also start purging their own shopfronts.…

> Maybe some people do want a "too simple" app In fact, aren't these preferable? I just want a weather app that shows me the current weather and a forecast, without any social bullshit, accounts, ads, etc. Also, if iOS users have that "one app" they can't live without, surely it makes them stickier? Why would Apple want to limit the chances of hitting that spot with their users by curbing the number of apps available…

Exactly this, one of the things that really struck me about apps on fdroid is just how simple they are.

They do one thing, and (usually) do it pretty well, probably because the developers probably don't have the time and resources to do anything more than that. But that's perfect for someone who just wants the thing on their phone to do what it says on the tin.

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#82

Post by [deleted] »

wswope wrote: post #10

Apple, by walling their garden, have essentially used their hegemony to steal billions of dollars in potential revenue from developers. Think of how much innovation has been blocked by them intentionally gimping iOS Safari to prevent web apps from competing with native ones. Remember this when reviewing job applications, folks. Apple, Google, and Facebook employees, current and former, are morally derelict and have p…

[deleted]

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#83

Post by yazzku »

smoldesu wrote: post #43
yazzku wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, though thankfully we have the alternatives.

"You won't be able to imagine the things we have in the future. Supercomputers in your pocket, the size of a candy bar!" > "Cool, does it play Doom?" "Funny thing, that..."

It's always bothered me how they call it a "supercomputer in your pocket".

Not very super if it doesn't do the things I want, sigh.

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#84

Post by perfectstorm »

fevangelou wrote: post #53

Out of curiosity, since iOS seems to have a ~20% share in Romania, why not launch on Android first (which makes business sense at ~80% market share)? And if Apple keeps dicking around, at least make it easy for the mobile site to be installed as a web app to iOS homescreens. @Apple Seriously?

maybe there's an app on Android already or maybe OP wants to learn iOS programming/SwiftUI/Swift.

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#85

Post by CharlesW »

koheripbal wrote: post #34
nate wrote: post #15

Ran into the exact same problem with a very simple camera app I made. Camera app was completely gesture based. So you never had to find a button to quickly flip the camera to the other side of the phone or find the button to start/stop recording. It made using a camera a lot quicker to get multiple shots of a scene and your reaction shot. Also added in stabilization to the front lens, which was easy but wasn't enable…

The real reason is that they don't want more apps. There are too many, so any small independent dev has an uphill battle getting their app approved.

> The real reason is that they don't want more apps. There are too many…

Is your thought process here that 3.7 million apps is where Apple decided to draw a line in the sand?

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#86

Post by smoldesu »

haunter wrote: post #67
fevangelou wrote: post #53

Out of curiosity, since iOS seems to have a ~20% share in Romania, why not launch on Android first (which makes business sense at ~80% market share)? And if Apple keeps dicking around, at least make it easy for the mobile site to be installed as a web app to iOS homescreens. @Apple Seriously?

Android users are significantly less likely to pay for an app because by default you can install any apk file on Android. Basically piracy is rampant. On iOS you have to go through the jailbreaking process first to do the same.

> Basically piracy is rampant.

This is true in a limited sense. Pretty much any app that relies on Google Play Services has a sort of DRM built-in, you can package it into an APK but it won't let you use the app without buying it. Installing it on a device without Google Play Services won't let it run at all.

Kinda scummy, but a decent tradeoff to keep pure AOSP devices without DRM.

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#88

Post by dylan604 »

domador wrote: post #46
kjoedion wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple, by creating the iPhone and a standardized App Store, have essentially created billions of revenue for developers throughout the years. I find your sense of entitlement morally derelict.

Let's see if I can paraphrase your argument: "The iPhone and the App Store exist, therefore developers should be thankful they exist regardless of how Apple treats them as they try to get their apps approved."

What would that dev do without their 80% they are making now if there was no iDevices? That 80% looks pretty good compared to 0%

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#89

Post by strongpigeon »

This sucks... I'm sorry you had to go through this. The App Store review process is just pretty bad. It's especially frustrating when you see downright shitty apps on the store. The "black-box" aspect of it makes it that much more kafkaesque too.

When I first submitted my app on there, they rejected it and complained that I used HealthKit but didn't mention it in the app description. The thing is, I did. My app description had a list of "highlighted features", one them being "Apple health integration".

I was about to file an appeal, but then I saw a couple other apps with "Integrates with Apple Health" on its own line in the description. Figured that's probably what they were looking for (even though the guidelines don't explicitly say that) so I changed it and boom, the app was approved. I hate it, but it's not worth my time or the risk to fight it.

For what it's worth, I think your app looks really good!

Re: App Store doesn't accept “too simple” apps

#90

Post by SturgeonsLaw »

yazzku wrote: post #20
user3939382 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are living Stallman's Nightmare where some supernational empire decides what programs we're allowed to run on our computers.

Indeed, though thankfully we have the alternatives.

Which is why Microsoft's attempts to make UEFI their own little fiefdom need to be resisted.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/security-measure-forces-wi...

Even aside from the most egregious cases like that linked above, operating systems like Linux need their bootloader signed by Microsoft in order to boot on a Secure Boot enabled PC. The conflict of interest is obvious.

Post reply on HN