Live data from Hacker News

App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

daringfireball.net

201–210 of 232 posts

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree! But what's Grandma supposed to do in the meantime?

Tell them she doesn't own any devices that could connect to the internet. I'm sure they'll figure something out. They have to have procedures for this sort of thing.

> They have to have procedures for this sort of thing.

"Sorry, try somewhere else" is the procedure.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#202

It's a fine app, but I'm not sure why gruber is glazing it so hard... is he not able to spot something so clearly built by AI? it's one of the better ones but it's got all the hallmarks. I'd be surprised if it's maintained a year from now.

Is Gruber actually against AI-built apps? He was against the unofficial Mac port of Notepad++ but that had many problems other than being AI-assisted.

it feels odd to me to praise it as beautifully crafted without mentioning that it's essentially stock AI aesthetics

to me craft is a human quality, I don't look at Ikea cabinets and praise their craft for example, and I'll admit that some of them are quite nice... it's just not the same process

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#203
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe Gruber's view is that the market forces in question are between iPhone and competing smartphones.

No. It’s broader than that. The market forces are the entire realm of what’s possible, now and in the future. When Windows seemed entrenched forever, the platforms that eventually surpassed weren’t the competing desktop OSes (Mac and Linux). It was the web first, in the late 1990s-2000s, then mobile (iPhone and Android) in the 2010s. Necessity really is the mother of invention, and the more we need something new, the…

The question is whether it's possible for a genuinely new competitor to arrive. Back in the earlier days, before Apple and Google were so entrenched, competitors weren't able to do it.

The modern smartphone became popular and dislodged the previous status quo because they were genuinely new form factors and interfaces. They didn't just steal the market away from Blackberry and Windows Phone, they invented a new one and starved out the previous.

And if a new platform were to arrive, they're so broad that it's entirely possible they wouldn't even compete on the App Store. When companies squeeze out and screw over others, and the market isn't able to signal that its not good, it's time for regulators to step in.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#204
Stuff like this is always why I ruthlessly and aggressively push back against any Apple fanboyism claiming that the App Store protects users or makes them safer somehow. This kind of behavior from Apple is unacceptable. Sideloading needs to be forced upon them.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#205
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other side of your coin is that I need to periodically visit my relatives and remove all sorts of malware and adware from their phones. Just like I've done with PCs over the past few decades.

Then Apple should do its fucking job correctly. It is not a poor little company, they have no excuse for this rank incompetence. None.

The problem is largely structural. Debian has huge repos and swaths of maintainers, and it works out because they read and audit source code to a degree. The end-result is that the Debian repos definitely have much less malware than either the play store or the Apple app store.

Apple does not audit source code, they do very simple behavioral analysis. And, evidently, even get that wrong, this post serving as an example.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an easy solution to this: Allow the user to decide whether they want to allow for apps from outside a particular ecosystem. Then Johnny can set up Grandma's phone and (in a deep byzantine menu where she will never accidentally stumble on it, maybe locked behind a pin), Johnny can set it so that Granny's phone can only install software from "Super premium, high class, curated, guaranteed not to hack your phon…

There are two big problems with this (not that Apple’s caprice is the only alternative): 1. The vast majority of people are Grandma, and they do not have a Johnny available to administer their tech. Most people are not technical. 2. The vast majority of Grandmas will follow instructions on a “how do I share cute photo” website even when that website directs them to dig deep into configuration settings and ignore six…

I think the bigger question is whether this is even worth solving. If people really want to give someone root access and do it willingly, maybe we just say this is out of our purview and allow it. And then, slowly, people will learn. They will be hard lessons but evidently baby proofing the entire world is not really working, so we might just abandon ship on that idea.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#207
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your solution is to ban the sale of any kind of knife. Sucks that people can't really cook at home anymore, but do we have to make it trivially easy for murderers?

> So your solution is to ban the sale of any kind of knife. If you give a toddler a butcher's knife to play with and they get hurt, you'll likely get in trouble for child endangerment. Using my car requires it be registered, pass my state's safety standards, and that I possess a valid license and follow a wide variety of rules. Maybe a certain level of protection is, at times, acceptable?

> If you give a toddler a butcher's knife to play with and they get hurt, you'll likely get in trouble for child endangerment.

Right but granny is not a child, she is kind of the opposite of a child.

You're essentially saying we should child proof the entire world, right. Appeal to the lowest common denominator and DO NOT offer back doors. But that's a plainly ridiculous notion and everyone knows it. This argument only works on smartphones right now because it's the status-quo. As soon as you extend it to literally any other domain, it immediately crumbles and falls between your fingers.

Yes, there IS a certain level of protection that is acceptable at all times. But that level is absolutely not "maximum protection, no other options sorry". Which is what Apple is trying to do. This really is "no sale of knives" type stuff. That sounds ridiculous, right? Because it is, and we let Apple get away with murder.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#208
post #39

> But that’s not what happened at all. Godier proceeded through a series of escalations up to the App Review Board and the Review Board responded that they determined the original rejection was valid because, I shit you not, “We understand that the app includes a live tarot reading feature.” > It has no tarot function, no horoscopes, and nothing that I, or anyone else I’ve asked, would associate with astrology. I hav…

But then you're lying. Why not add the comment "no tarot function" without reference to whether it existed in the past? A bit confusing because it's a trivial and seemingly unrelated statement but at least then you wouldn't be lying.

The endgame is that all apps publish a list of the functions they don’t have, to appease a baroque and obtuse review system.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#209

In my last SRE role I was the unfortunate victim of having to maintain a mobile app submitted to both the Android and iOS app stores. I would never wish it on my worst enemy. It was the one thing that I could absolutely _not_ guarantee any sort of reliability with. It was all up to the random person who happened to review the current release and the release process could be as quick as a day in the best circumstances…

They’re bureaucrats interpreting the law as they see fit. We’ve had updates blocked because the word Android was mentioned in our in-app change-log.

Re: App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours

#210

In my last SRE role I was the unfortunate victim of having to maintain a mobile app submitted to both the Android and iOS app stores. I would never wish it on my worst enemy. It was the one thing that I could absolutely _not_ guarantee any sort of reliability with. It was all up to the random person who happened to review the current release and the release process could be as quick as a day in the best circumstances…

This was my biggest shock when I decided to publish an app...there's no SLA they just do it whenever they feel apparently. Excitedly publish a very simple app to have it sit in queue for like 6 days was surprising.
Post reply on HN