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

JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

jwz.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 71 posts

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#11

Post by franzus »

leviathan wrote: post #2

Their approval process has been so random and stubborn lately. I've been struggling with a submission for 2 months now where they keep rejecting the app cause they want me to change the text on a button.

Heh, I've been rejected for 2 weeks because their caching server fucked up and though I uploaded a fixed version of the binary they kept getting the old faulty one.

The reviewer wasn't even capable of telling me the build number of the binary they were reviewing and kept redirecting me to Apple's DTS.

So after using one of my paid DTS inquires for this nonsense the problem got fixed and I had to wait only 2 more weeks for the next review date. The Apple engineer was very capable and friendly though - so no criticism there.

The problem is that the reviewers have no idea of development. They are clueless and I guess Apple hires some low paid college students for these positions. It's like talking to some immature AI or a 5 year old kid. They have their guidelines and rules and aren't capably of any interaction outside of this framework. Wasting our time and money.

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#12

Post by spoonmonkeyuk »

LinaLauneBaer wrote: post #9
zapu wrote: post #4

It is named ScreenSaver, when it clearly does not function as "screen saver" on iOS device. Apple is right.

How are they right? I really want to understand your point of view. Do you mean they are not right because the app does not save a screen from anything? What if you are using your iPhone to project something on an plasma screen where a screen saver can save a screen from "burn ins". I am really interested in your thoughts.

The app cannot function as you'd expect a screen saver to do: it won't start running after a period of inactivity. That is outside the scope of functionality available to apps.

As such, yeah the name is a little misleading.

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#13

Post by sanxiyn »

spoonmonkeyuk wrote: post #12
LinaLauneBaer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are they right? I really want to understand your point of view. Do you mean they are not right because the app does not save a screen from anything? What if you are using your iPhone to project something on an plasma screen where a screen saver can save a screen from "burn ins". I am really interested in your thoughts.

The app cannot function as you'd expect a screen saver to do: it won't start running after a period of inactivity. That is outside the scope of functionality available to apps. As such, yeah the name is a little misleading.

United States of America is a misleading name. It is not united.

My point is that XScreenSaver is a proper name, and by now should be considered to have earned its name.

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#14

Post by LinaLauneBaer »

spoonmonkeyuk wrote: post #12
LinaLauneBaer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are they right? I really want to understand your point of view. Do you mean they are not right because the app does not save a screen from anything? What if you are using your iPhone to project something on an plasma screen where a screen saver can save a screen from "burn ins". I am really interested in your thoughts.

The app cannot function as you'd expect a screen saver to do: it won't start running after a period of inactivity. That is outside the scope of functionality available to apps. As such, yeah the name is a little misleading.

Hm. But you can still use it for the purpose screen savers were originally designed to do: save screens from getting burn ins. But agreed: it can't run automatically after a period of inactivity.

Off topic: As a child I loved to look at screen savers that I manually started for hours wondering how they work and how long it took to build them...

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#15

Post by king_magic »

sanxiyn wrote: post #13
spoonmonkeyuk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app cannot function as you'd expect a screen saver to do: it won't start running after a period of inactivity. That is outside the scope of functionality available to apps. As such, yeah the name is a little misleading.

United States of America is a misleading name. It is not united. My point is that XScreenSaver is a proper name, and by now should be considered to have earned its name.

Last time I checked, I lived in a country composed of 50 states, united into one nation.

iOS does not support screensavers. The app's name is misleading. It seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#17

Post by brudgers »

zapu wrote: post #4

It is named ScreenSaver, when it clearly does not function as "screen saver" on iOS device. Apple is right.

The Fart App doesn't fart. It is not possible to make an iOS device produce flatulence. Therefore, it is misnamed and the name is confusing to users.

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-fart-app/id370742001?mt=8

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#19

Post by cmadan »

Does it even matter whether Apple is wrong, unreasonable or irrational? Just like I reserve the rights of admission to my house, Apple reserves the right to accept or reject applications from the app store.

If you really want Apple to change, how about NOT developing for iOS? Articles like this aren't really going to make them change their policies.

Re: JWZ ported XScreenSaver to iOS - keeps getting rejected by Apple

#20

Post by mhd »

zapu wrote: post #4

It is named ScreenSaver, when it clearly does not function as "screen saver" on iOS device. Apple is right.

It doesn't work as a "screen saver" on most devices, as the risk of phosphor burn in is pretty low nowadays. Isn't it still called that in OS X regardless of display type?

Also, a "fart button" is not physical object, can we still call it a "button" (Ceci n'est pas une bouton de pet.)?

Post reply on HN