> I literally haven’t changed the text in my marketing description in many months. After 5 years in the App Store, and having my app featured in the Accessibility section, we were flagged for a characteristic that had remained unchanged since launch. In almost every case, our rejections were not related to newly-added features.
Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
41–50 of 99 posts
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#42The little experience I had with AppStore approval is that it’s mostly a game of persistence. They probably see some benefit from a little friction to prevent spam or perhaps it’s just pure stupid bureaucracy. I was rejected for asking access to the camera. The App applied filters to images taken. I stated as much in XCode, something along: this app needs access to the camera in order to apply its effects. Rejected f…
The trick is to plan well. Assume delays and the need for re-reviews and don't tie anything to when you think it might be approved.
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#43Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#44Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn’t this only a good thing if the human being on the other end makes reasonable decisions in the interest of (1) the App Store and (2) iOS developers? I understand I am biased by only seeing stories from developers who have issues getting apps approved, but these stories rarely end with a reasonable outcome.
Do we get to read the stories that end with a reasonable outcome? I highly doubt it.
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#46The little experience I had with AppStore approval is that it’s mostly a game of persistence. They probably see some benefit from a little friction to prevent spam or perhaps it’s just pure stupid bureaucracy. I was rejected for asking access to the camera. The App applied filters to images taken. I stated as much in XCode, something along: this app needs access to the camera in order to apply its effects. Rejected f…
You also need to have a little understanding. It's never going to be a perfect process when you have people who aren't technical making sometimes subjective decisions. The trick is to plan well. Assume delays and the need for re-reviews and don't tie anything to when you think it might be approved.
This also, you know, sucks majorly when planning anything. If Apple had to deal with this kind of review when releasing iPhone they’d put a billion dollars into lobbying it away.
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#47What I find interesting is that we seem to perceive the App Store Review process as some kind of black and white thing, while it isn't. Like a pure function that only works with the input variables provided and no side effects. Guess what, there is an actual human on the other side that is reviewing your app (with support of automation tools obviously). That person will make mistakes, will bring his/her own opinion a…
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#48Update from original tweeter: > Long story short: Two features (one from iOS 12, one from iOS 16), and one name: Continuity Camera. https://twitter.com/eternalstorms/status/1560304401922854920...
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is for Mac though, the App Store is not obligatory.
I do wonder what makes people voluntarily publish their apps there. It's not like they can't DIY Mac app distribution.
Also, if you already have iOS App Store versions of your apps, then Mac App Store is not much of a stretch.
Re: Got a rejection for mentioning Apple pre-release software, but I am not
#50What I find interesting is that we seem to perceive the App Store Review process as some kind of black and white thing, while it isn't. Like a pure function that only works with the input variables provided and no side effects. Guess what, there is an actual human on the other side that is reviewing your app (with support of automation tools obviously). That person will make mistakes, will bring his/her own opinion a…
No, it's a distopian fucking horrorshow. You're right, of course. Humans are involved, it's not consistent, you're witnessing a state machine where 'opinion and carefulness of the human(s) that are part of this process' is a significant chunk of how it works. But, __the escalation features__ are clichéd Catch-22-esque lunacy, and the actual information you receive in order to ascertain which part of the big state mac…
Because these posts have been here for over a decade and will be here for decades to come. Because the App Store is not about developers. It's about users. And being a human-curated process there will often be mistakes and people on Twitter complaining. But users really like curation and so the status quo is very much likely to remain.