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

We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

huemanapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 319 posts

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#301

Post by MAGZine »

mjolk wrote: post #180
veeti wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HTC. Sony. Moto. Just ignore Korean trash completely.

I bought the Motorola flagship phone[1] of last year and it's just as bad as he's describing, if not worse. Unfortunately, it goes way beyond just small UI and physical design issues: -The "Play Store" is filled with low-brow, tacky crap (above and beyond that of Apple's "App Store"). -Even though my phone has multiple cores, the audio output is seemingly competing for resources with events like changes in network or…

If you go into something hating it, you're destined to not enjoy it. At any rate, I wouldn't have recommended you buy that phone last year. Stock Android, IMO, is always best. Anyhow. My considerations on your points:

> The "Play Store" is filled with low-brow, tacky crap (above and beyond that of Apple's "App Store").

Low barrier to entry means you get a bit of everything. There are quality apps in there, too.

- Never experienced this. This seems to be a motorola complaint, not an Android complaint.

- No idea what this is about. My phone application has a list of contacts built into it.

- My Nexus 5 (nor my Nexus 4, nor my Nexus S) has had bloatware. Again, a motorola complaint...

- Never experienced these issues. Particularly media--there has always been three volumes for me: Alarms, ringtones/notifications and media (games, music, video).

- The softbuttons on the front of the device work just as well as a physical, tactile button. Just because a button is physical does NOT mean that it gets any special treatment by the OS. In android, if you hit the "Home" softbutton, you go home immediately. The softbuttons work on a plane off of that crashing apps run on ;-)

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#302

Post by jigneshlg »

I really like the idea behind the app but we also need to follow quality criteria set by Apple team to stop non productive app being listed in appstore.

As suggested by Crazygringo, they can improve the app by including some functionality. I am eagerly waiting for this app to get approved !

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#303

Post by SixSigma »

zachrose wrote: post #134
crazygringo wrote: post #48

First of all, that sounds like a really cool idea for an app. I want it. But secondly, of all the app rejection stories I've ever heard... this one is the easiest to fix. Just add some more features, who cares, and resubmit it. Ideas: annotate/categorize the things that are making you happy/unhappy. Maybe have categories/icons for them. (Friends, party, loneliness, exercise, ate well, ate bad, had sex, no sex, fought…

Have you ever seen a good movie? Think for a second about that movie. What made it good? Now imagine if you could make that movie even better for yourself. Imagine this movie was distributed along with a plastic box with a few knobs and dials on it. Wouldn't it be a better movie if you could turn the knobs to adjust the parameters of the movie -- there really aren't that many fundamental parameters to movies. You cou…

It would probably work out awful. To quote Ford :

"If I'd asked people what they wanted, they would have asked for a better horse"

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#304

Post by sxtxixtxcxh »

Tweedle wrote: post #127
crazygringo wrote: post #48

First of all, that sounds like a really cool idea for an app. I want it. But secondly, of all the app rejection stories I've ever heard... this one is the easiest to fix. Just add some more features, who cares, and resubmit it. Ideas: annotate/categorize the things that are making you happy/unhappy. Maybe have categories/icons for them. (Friends, party, loneliness, exercise, ate well, ate bad, had sex, no sex, fought…

Sounds familiar.. I made a similar app last year, and had to add features - the ability to track a number of questions, curved thumb sliders, social media integration, etc. but it did get accepted, and has been doing pretty well. Like this, it started as something I wanted to use, and grew from there. slidersapp.com if anyone is interested. (I am wondering where to go with it next... online platform, android port, et…

that looks great, and if you don't have a browser accessible way to consume that data, i'd suggest going that direction.

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#305

Post by levosmetalo »

clarky07 wrote: post #266
levosmetalo wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you refund those people automatically after removing the feature they use? Since this is not anymore the same value proposition as before. One small feature can make the whole app not anymore worthy those original 1.99$ user paid for.

Can we get rid of the absurd disgust over the huge price of 99 cents people pay for apps? If he thinks the app is better being simpler, let him make his app better. It doesn't matter if he "offers" a refund or not. They can ask Apple for one, and Apple will give it to them. Don't act like the guy is a jerk for removing a feature he deems unnecessary because someone might be upset over the 12 cents of value lost when…

Noone is complaining about 99¢, but the principle stays. One small feature that noone except me uses if removed makes the product/service unusable for me. I could have paid 99€, I could have paid 99$ or 999%, it doesn't matter for the topic.

If you remove that one feature under my feet, the app is to me worth nothing. I would be ok using the old version of application that still has that feature, but in case of a service or phone app where I simply can't use the old version or easily rollback to the one, I would ask for refund, regardless of the original price.

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#306

Post by Tweedle »

sxtxixtxcxh wrote: post #304
Tweedle wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds familiar.. I made a similar app last year, and had to add features - the ability to track a number of questions, curved thumb sliders, social media integration, etc. but it did get accepted, and has been doing pretty well. Like this, it started as something I wanted to use, and grew from there. slidersapp.com if anyone is interested. (I am wondering where to go with it next... online platform, android port, et…

that looks great, and if you don't have a browser accessible way to consume that data, i'd suggest going that direction.

Yup, the browser based graphing of sliders and how they correlate to each other might be the next project... simple authentication, etc.

We'll see. Thanks!

Re: We made something. We use it. We love it. Apple rejected it

#308

Post by snowwrestler »

myko wrote: post #243
mattmanser wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was so original. I can't believe anyone contests this. I remember seeing an iPhone for the first time. Compared to all other phones it was 10 years ahead in vision. All other phones were suddenly ludicrously laid out, with stupid designs. Even the settings section for the iPhone blew every single other phone in existence out of the water. Something that simple, that essential, had been revolutionised by this thoug…

This is complete bollocks. http://www.osnews.com/story/25264/Did_Android_Really_Look_Li...

It's not bollocks; we now have Google engineers on record that they had to substantially rethink Android in the wake of the iPhone announcement.

> Chris DeSalvo’s reaction to the iPhone was immediate and visceral. “As a consumer I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought ‘We’re going to have to start over.’”

> On the day Jobs announced the iPhone, the director of the Android team, Andy Rubin, was six hundred miles away in Las Vegas, on his way to a meeting with one of the myriad handset makers and carriers that descend on the city for the Consumer Electronics Show. He reacted exactly as DeSalvo predicted. Rubin was so astonished by what Jobs was unveiling that, on his way to a meeting, he had his driver pull over so that he could finish watching the webcast.

> “Holy crap,” he said to one of his colleagues in the car. “I guess we’re not going to ship that phone.”

http://m.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/the-day-...

This is not one of those Apple vs Google fights; it's straight up well-sourced journalism.

Post reply on HN