201–210 of 364 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ran into the exact same problem with a very simple camera app I made. >[...] >(Just by posting this, now I fear I broke some kind of TOS, and can never publish an iOS app again?) This is how your loyalty to Apple's racket is rewarded. This is your prize for buying hundreds of dollars of their equipment and paying hundreds to license their development kit and get your software reviewed for their locked-down phones.
[deleted]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm honestly blown away that Apple approved an app to suggest "funny" tip amounts in a thread where we're complaining that that Apple's standards are too high.
It's not hard to comprehend. Apple has a huge pool of apps to deal with. Enforcement is inconsistent. There are apps that are being overpoliced while bait-and-switch scams are floating to the top of the ratings. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31005708
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well there is an alternative solution. That alternative solution being to force Apple, under threat of legal action and massive fines, to do what we want them to do (using the legal and legislative process).
Giving nation-states control over how Apple runs their business in their countries based on what a tiny sliver of the most technically-adept users wants will somehow engender freedom. Is that the pitch?
If you don't like the political process then you can vote for someone else, who will pass the right laws, or appoint the right people to make such laws.
If you don't like the legal process, then do that, leave the country, or do business elsewhere.
Countries have a right to have laws that regulate companies. The population does not belong to Apple.
That population has a right to run their country how they see fit, regardless of the objections of Apple.
And if Apple tries to get around the law, you can expect them to suffer billions and billions of dollars of fines, or further legal consequences. Countries do not belong to Apple, and they have no right to get around the legal process.
This sucks as a developer and I sympathize. But, I absolutely hate when I have to download an app for something that could have been a website.
Guess you can't make everyone happy
Yep, I got this rejection when I made this tipping app ( https://apps.apple.com/us/app/tip-69/id1460610078 ). I went on to add OCR detection for receipts so you don't have to type in the amount, I added more tipping modes, I added split bill functionality, and eventually added an entire social network with the ability to share your receipt for the world to see, like or comment on. Must have spent months trying to get…
I have no love for Apple's walled-garden, and I absolutely appreciate 69 jokes, but this app is stupid.
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…
One way to get around this might be to have a mandatory tutorial that must be executed on first install. At least you know the random reviewer assigned to your product will be aware of all the features available, and as a benefit you have a way to onboard new users who might be mystified about why this product is useful. This might be a hassle for new users, but after your first approval, you can add a skip option in an update.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no love for Apple's walled-garden, and I absolutely appreciate 69 jokes, but this app is stupid.
the first apps I remember on iOS were a beer glass that poured out beer when you tipped the phone, and a lightsaber app that made sheeewwwww sounds when you swung the phone around. We loved them It's ok to make stupid apps as long as you're not scamming. The oh-so-serious nature of the current online experience sucks
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The user has no "right" to "install what they want". Words have meanings. If I own a gadget, I own it. That means that I _have the right_ to do whatever I want with it, including jailbreaking it, disassembling it, or throwing it from a cliff. Apple might not like it, and might take punitive action. Void the warranty, maybe even cancel your Apple account. But they can not send me to jail.
Relax. Nobody is talking about sending you to jail. What's at issue is whether you have the right to force Apple to carry any apps you want, in their App Store. And you don't. It's really that simple.
The EU has decided that Apple doesn't have that right, just as companies don't have the right to enforce a contract which requires that the signer becomes their indentured servant. We don't accept slavery of meatspace humans, so it is only consistent that we don't allow companies to own our digital selves too.
Android is not perfect, but at least I am able to, you know, use my phone as I see fit.
And that's why we should open up stores by law if necessary. Apple shouldn't be the one to tell me what kind of apps I can have on the device I've bought with my money.
> Apple shouldn't be the one to tell me what kind of apps I can have on the device I've bought with my money. I'm confused. Did you buy an iPhone not knowing that it's not a general purpose computer?
For example, when I purchased my device, Fortnite was still available on the device, and Apple wasn't actively blocking Xbox's Cloud Streaming (back then it was xCloud Beta)