Sign In
Register
Help
I'm not a developer of software, just a user. I would hope that Apple works with the developer whose software had been rejected in a manner that doesn't waste the developers time and money. For example: explain to the developer what changes need to be made to the software in order for it to become acceptable. As a user, I would be upset if an app I liked was yanked out of my hands with no explanation, but, a "because I said so". But, for all I know, Apple does communicate with the developer and just doesn't tell the whole world about it.
More senseless iPhone app rejections tarnish the App Store
MultiQuote
#30
crosby 
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 22-May 09
Posted 22 May 2009 - 06:26 PM
From personal experience Apple unfortunately does not communicate with developers at all. They neither respond to emails or are available by phone. We spent over 8 months working on a nice app and have spent a couple months trying to get it approved.
They are rejecting the app for a reason that doesn't make sense to us at all and we can't even discuss the issue with someone there. We don't believe at all we are doing anything objectionable. We sent numerous professional emails responding to their rejections and only ever received a canned email response. Quite disappointing and frustrating.
They are rejecting the app for a reason that doesn't make sense to us at all and we can't even discuss the issue with someone there. We don't believe at all we are doing anything objectionable. We sent numerous professional emails responding to their rejections and only ever received a canned email response. Quite disappointing and frustrating.
#31
Tipadoo
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 75
- Joined: 16-October 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 12:50 AM
crosby said:
From personal experience Apple unfortunately does not communicate with developers at all. They neither respond to emails or are available by phone. We spent over 8 months working on a nice app and have spent a couple months trying to get it approved.
They are rejecting the app for a reason that doesn't make sense to us at all and we can't even discuss the issue with someone there. We don't believe at all we are doing anything objectionable. We sent numerous professional emails responding to their rejections and only ever received a canned email response. Quite disappointing and frustrating.
They are rejecting the app for a reason that doesn't make sense to us at all and we can't even discuss the issue with someone there. We don't believe at all we are doing anything objectionable. We sent numerous professional emails responding to their rejections and only ever received a canned email response. Quite disappointing and frustrating.
It seems to me that the developers are just as much customers as someone buying an iphone. The developers software makes apple money and keeps the consumers coming back for more. Maybe Apple is so full and bursting at the seams that they don't have time for your app. Now isn't that the chapping of the hide right there. Since this IS an issue with developers AND consumers, Apple needs to pull their heads out and put out the fire. It doesn't take much to communicate with the customer. Oh, excuse me, I suppose it does. Some of that profit margin they gained by manufacturing overseas. I hate to sound cynical but damn, it's so obvious.
Quote
>
#32
heisetax
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 743
- Joined: 02-October 03
Posted 23 May 2009 - 02:42 AM
Just the fact that there is only one source for iPhone/iPod Touch applications is enough reason to stay clear. How can it be legal for Apple only to allow sales of software for the iPhone/iPod Touch through the App Store?
#33
Macalways
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 21-July 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 05:05 AM
heisetax said:
How can it be legal for Apple only to allow sales of software for the iPhone/iPod Touch through the App Store?
The same reason in most states why you can only buy liquor in State run liquor stores. Or many vintages that can only be purchased directly from the respective winery. Or software from?
Need more examples? VDQ
#34
ChrisLJ
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 440
- Joined: 26-May 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 05:58 AM
The States regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages. That has nothing to do with software. I'm starting to feel the same way about this issue. The iPhone and Touch are basically handheld computers. Owners should be able to install third party applications just as they can on any computer. And just like with a desktop or laptop, if something goes wrong, it's your problem. I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up in the courts. Apple's attitude is wearing thin for this longtime supporter.
#35
Macalways
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 21-July 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 06:49 AM
ChrisLJ said:
The States regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages. That has nothing to do with software. I'm starting to feel the same way about this issue. The iPhone and Touch are basically handheld computers. Owners should be able to install third party applications just as they can on any computer. And just like with a desktop or laptop, if something goes wrong, it's your problem. I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up in the courts. Apple's attitude is wearing thin for this longtime supporter.
Like computer game software? Where have you been? I have bought tons of software that can only be acquired directly from the developer. I can't install any one of them on just any computer.
In Courts? You would be alone.
WAFI
#36
ChrisLJ
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 440
- Joined: 26-May 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 07:04 AM
I'm afraid I don't really understand your response.
"Like computer game software?"
What about game software - what are you implying?
"I have bought tons of software that can only be acquired directly from the developer."
So what? I said nothing about buying software. What's your point?
"I can't install any one of them on just any computer."
If you buy software made for a Mac, you should be able to install it on any Mac capable of running it. If you buy software made to run with Windows, you should be able to install it on any PC that meets the requirements.
As for the "courts" comment, I don't think I'm alone in this belief.
If you would like to reply with a more clear and lucid explanation, I will be happy to read it.
"Like computer game software?"
What about game software - what are you implying?
"I have bought tons of software that can only be acquired directly from the developer."
So what? I said nothing about buying software. What's your point?
"I can't install any one of them on just any computer."
If you buy software made for a Mac, you should be able to install it on any Mac capable of running it. If you buy software made to run with Windows, you should be able to install it on any PC that meets the requirements.
As for the "courts" comment, I don't think I'm alone in this belief.
If you would like to reply with a more clear and lucid explanation, I will be happy to read it.
#37
Macalways
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 21-July 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 09:19 AM
ChrisLJ
Let's go back to the original comment:
Like just about anything, you can dictate where your product or services are available or from where it is distributed. Even software.
Thousands of applications are sold through exclusive distributors; some only directly from the developer. I, as a developer do it all the time. I don't allow my applications available to just anyone or installed on just any computer. Sure, one could attempt to install the software on an unauthorized machine, it won't work properly, if at all, and no law in the land could force it otherwise. In fact, we have built systems that are totally locked out for specific functions or client use.
Apple could sell iPhone or iPod touch apps outside the App Store. However, as a developer, I would hope, never. As is evidenced, the Apple App Store is set up as such to basically guarantee that we are compensated justly and are virtually impervious to the dictates of pirates.
Considering that nobody else has come close in providing a better means for third-party programmers, to develop, to distribute or to be compensated for, I would, as part of the developing community, attest to the fact that the handful of rejections, slow approvals or obligatory nature of the SDK agreements are rare, seldom or restricting.
What I find senseless here is the idea that one could conclude as such in this article and some of the comments made thereof, based on hearsay. Thirty thousands apps and counting, and over a billion downloads in less than a year. And yet, we are quick to tar and feather because of a handful of total or temporary rejections, or for that matter, a delayed response that our mothers would be glad to hear, no matter how long it took to get.
Let's go back to the original comment:
heisetax said:
How can it be legal for Apple only to allow sales of software for the iPhone/iPod Touch through the App Store?
Like just about anything, you can dictate where your product or services are available or from where it is distributed. Even software.
Thousands of applications are sold through exclusive distributors; some only directly from the developer. I, as a developer do it all the time. I don't allow my applications available to just anyone or installed on just any computer. Sure, one could attempt to install the software on an unauthorized machine, it won't work properly, if at all, and no law in the land could force it otherwise. In fact, we have built systems that are totally locked out for specific functions or client use.
Apple could sell iPhone or iPod touch apps outside the App Store. However, as a developer, I would hope, never. As is evidenced, the Apple App Store is set up as such to basically guarantee that we are compensated justly and are virtually impervious to the dictates of pirates.
Considering that nobody else has come close in providing a better means for third-party programmers, to develop, to distribute or to be compensated for, I would, as part of the developing community, attest to the fact that the handful of rejections, slow approvals or obligatory nature of the SDK agreements are rare, seldom or restricting.
What I find senseless here is the idea that one could conclude as such in this article and some of the comments made thereof, based on hearsay. Thirty thousands apps and counting, and over a billion downloads in less than a year. And yet, we are quick to tar and feather because of a handful of total or temporary rejections, or for that matter, a delayed response that our mothers would be glad to hear, no matter how long it took to get.
#38
ChrisLJ
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 440
- Joined: 26-May 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 09:41 AM
Macalways,
I agree that the App Store has to be an awesome undertaking and that it works quite well for the most part. But I'm not talking about putting an app onto something it wasn't intended for or that the developer doesn't want it to go onto.
I'm talking about an app that someone creates that will actually work on the iPhone but they don't want to go through the App Store. Or, one that Apple has deemed offensive to them and won't allow. I'm not referring to something that could cause actual harm to the iPhone.
On my Macs, I don't need Apple's permission to install third party apps. They don't have to be approved by Apple and be downloaded only from Apple. If I want the Kama Sutra, that's my business. Likewise, if I install something bad, on purpose or inadvertently, such as a worm, then that's my own problem.
I originally felt that Apple had the right to restrict anything they wanted to, but after hearing other people's viewpoints, I have altered mine. Maybe eventually they will relax restrictions like they have with iTunes. That is simply my opinion. No offense intended.
I agree that the App Store has to be an awesome undertaking and that it works quite well for the most part. But I'm not talking about putting an app onto something it wasn't intended for or that the developer doesn't want it to go onto.
I'm talking about an app that someone creates that will actually work on the iPhone but they don't want to go through the App Store. Or, one that Apple has deemed offensive to them and won't allow. I'm not referring to something that could cause actual harm to the iPhone.
On my Macs, I don't need Apple's permission to install third party apps. They don't have to be approved by Apple and be downloaded only from Apple. If I want the Kama Sutra, that's my business. Likewise, if I install something bad, on purpose or inadvertently, such as a worm, then that's my own problem.
I originally felt that Apple had the right to restrict anything they wanted to, but after hearing other people's viewpoints, I have altered mine. Maybe eventually they will relax restrictions like they have with iTunes. That is simply my opinion. No offense intended.
#39
Macalways
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 191
- Joined: 21-July 08
Posted 23 May 2009 - 10:52 AM
ChrisLJ
First of all, less than a handful of applications out of more than 30,000 have been rejected or deemed to be rejected. For whatever reason, we are here because of one application that has been allegedly rejected because it has allegedly been deemed offensive. Just how does that make the process so restrictive to receive such vilification?
I am happy that Apple 'restricts' how I build my iPhone/iPod touch apps or how I distribute them, and how I am not just given carte blanche to do whatever, whenever and however I want. Why? Because it helps ensure me that I won't corrupt the system or any other developer's app, or vice versa.
However, I don't profess that the system is perfect. As I don't condemn it because of one weak link. And, certainly not because of the yahoos that continually chastise Apple at every turn, or the ones here of which many don't even own an iPhone or an iPod touch that could use the software in the first place. No offense intended.
First of all, less than a handful of applications out of more than 30,000 have been rejected or deemed to be rejected. For whatever reason, we are here because of one application that has been allegedly rejected because it has allegedly been deemed offensive. Just how does that make the process so restrictive to receive such vilification?
I am happy that Apple 'restricts' how I build my iPhone/iPod touch apps or how I distribute them, and how I am not just given carte blanche to do whatever, whenever and however I want. Why? Because it helps ensure me that I won't corrupt the system or any other developer's app, or vice versa.
However, I don't profess that the system is perfect. As I don't condemn it because of one weak link. And, certainly not because of the yahoos that continually chastise Apple at every turn, or the ones here of which many don't even own an iPhone or an iPod touch that could use the software in the first place. No offense intended.
