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

281–290 of 364 posts

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

#281

Post by 29083011397778 »

CharlesW wrote: post #202
Apocryphon wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

100%. Humans and processes are fallible.

And algorithms have no humanity. Between Google Play's automated rejection, and Apple's people rejecting you manually, somehow neither works quite as well as it should.

For the record, I will continue to point to this as an argument in favour of being able to load ones own software without needing approval from a third party.

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

#282

Post by goerz »

Even as a consumer, Apple’s arbitrary enforcement of made-up rules is infuriating. One of my most-used apps is a radio streaming app “MusiCharts”. It hasn’t been updated in years because (according to the developer) Apple refuses to let him update the app since they think it’s too trivial. Yet, it is the only radio streaming app I’ve found that can scobble to Last.fm, and it provides huge value to me. Hopefully, it will survive a few more iOS updates.

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

#283

Post by yellowapple »

CharlesW wrote: post #172
stale2002 wrote: post #152

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?

Apple - like every corporation incorporated here in the United States - would literally not exist if it wasn't granted recognition as such by at least one nation-state. God forbid there be some conditions on that massive privilege.

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

#284

Post by fishfood23 »

nine_k wrote: post #151
xwdv wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor software developers, how could they ever afford to overcome these massive barriers to entry. Every. Year. If only they had a decent source of steady income.

Snark aside, I suppose that most independent iOS developers don't receive enough in sales to offset the $99 entry fee. I suppose that the kind of enthusiast Apple prefer to see on their platform is an enthusiastic consumer. Which very much aligns with their desire to keep their gadgets in the class of locked-down home appliances, like a TV or a gaming console.

This is true. It’s very hard to make a consistent buck these days.

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

#285

Post by guessbest »

julienmarie wrote: post #265

Weirdly a few years ago (7?) I made the most stupid app for a friend. The app was really bad and coded with my feet as I never did a mobile app. It was based on Ionic and just had one screen. It was a feeding calculator for horses for a brand of horse feeds. You input the weight of the animal, the age and it's level of activity and it calculated how much feed to give daily and what type of feed. The app was clunky, o…

My experience is that if they don't understand the market, they tend to approve. But if they understand the market, the reviewer might make the determination that market is overcrowded, so the appeal they are looking for is "differentiation". Yes, I don't work for Apple.

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

#286

Post by zamalek »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #112
awinter-py wrote: post #98

US legislature has been flirting with 3rd party app stores for a while https://www.macobserver.com/news/open-app-markets-act/ As an alternative, would be interesting to offer third party review for the existing store. Offer pay-to-expedite, more transparency, preapproval before people start building, clearer guidelines on competition ('too many flashlight apps already').

Let's ditch the stores entirely.

Or give people the choice to use zero or more stores. I for one really enjoy consistency when it comes to automatic updates (and would actively seek apps on the Windows store for this reason, before switching to Linux, partially for this reason).

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

#288

Post by xwdv »

nine_k wrote: post #151
xwdv wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor software developers, how could they ever afford to overcome these massive barriers to entry. Every. Year. If only they had a decent source of steady income.

Snark aside, I suppose that most independent iOS developers don't receive enough in sales to offset the $99 entry fee. I suppose that the kind of enthusiast Apple prefer to see on their platform is an enthusiastic consumer. Which very much aligns with their desire to keep their gadgets in the class of locked-down home appliances, like a TV or a gaming console.

I’m tired of people acting like this $99 entry fee is insurmountable. It should not even be a thought. Easily spend more than that on food every week, half of which probably gets thrown away anyway.

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

#289

Post by oneplane »

strongpigeon wrote: post #89

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 descr…

I wouldn't be too surprised if they simply hire armies of reviewers that simply work through a checklist with limited room for interpretation/personal evaluation.

I a way, they could just publish their internal checklist to make this process better for everyone, but I suspect it might cause bad actors to find ways to comply with the rules and still deliver crap to the store; almost like the rules they currently use are security by obscurity (with the side-effect of rejecting apps for seemingly random reasons).

Post reply on HN