Apple's campaign to win the App Store publicity battle

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 55
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Yes, I'm an Apple fanboy. Apple makes it damn easy to be one.



    That is very well put! I feel the same way -- it's all Apple's fault!
  • Reply 22 of 55
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post


    I don't believe there is a need for Apple to do much by way of PR because the masses do not have a problem with the app store. This is about appeasing a few vocal tech journalists who care more about getting page views than selling iPhones.



    the trouble is that those vocal folks can get the word out and make it seem like more than it is. and that causes trouble. it can even cost sales. all because some couple of dozen pissed off app developers posted their woes and it spread. (keep in mind that for every one of them there were probably 100 rejections that didn't say anything and another 100 apps that were approved no problem)



    Quote:

    As for restrictions, it appears that Palm will be just as restrictive, if not more, with its app acceptance process than Apple. It is easy to find fault when you don't have a business to run. Those who get in the game are actually discovering that Apple's model isn't so bad after all.



    it will be interesting to see if Palm is just as raked over the coals as Apple is being. probably not. cause they are Poor Palm and not Run by Satan Incarnate Apple.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    Stripped of the spin by all parties, this is yet *another* story about a high-profile app store rejection that turns out to be almost entirely the fault of the developer,




    yep. it would seem like most if not all of the reasons Patsay had his app rejected were things that would have been spelled out by the terms and conditions (worth looking into for sure). so why the moaning by him if he didn't check things out ahead of time. and if something changed between submission and approval, it sucks but you deal with it.



    also, all the folks griping about the time it takes. yes in the early days the likely 20-30 folks that approve apps could turn around approvals within a week. but not they are getting like 50 a person a day. so it's going to take time. get over it.



    Quote:

    Certainly Apple's poor "people skills" are at fault also,



    this is likely true. and probably a fault of the attempt to turn around apps as quickly as possible. so they use form letters and such.



    what Apple would benefit from is a tiered system where there is one group doing the initial tests and reviews and another group who can be contacted for more information. then when someone like Patsay gets a rejection for "inappropriate rating' and there doens't seem to be any guidance, they can reply to said group, with a 'case number' and find out that they rated it X when due to ABC it must be Y. and so on.



    and perhaps more information for developers. like a kind of SDK support site, that spells out the rules so they can vet things before they send them.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jon T View Post


    And why does Apple need to spell out to these guys what 'mature' means. 12 years of age is not mature or adult.



    it's not 'mature' so much as having to COA on the issue of Parental Controls working the way the parents that would use it want it used. if Daddy blocks Little Johnny from using Safari but then Little Johnny can use another app to pull up those pics of girl's vay-jay-jay's and ta-ta's, Daddy is going to be pissed. and Daddy might be pissed enough to call his brother the lawyer who then files a false advertising suit against Apple over the claim that Parental Controls allows parents to restrict access and protect kids like Little Johnny from 'bad things'. but in fact it doesn't.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by salmonstk View Post


    The App store is just that a retailer. All retailers must choose what to stock.



    [sarcasm alert]Not Apple. they don't get that kind of right. They are too special for that. they don't have the right to do what they want. not with the App Store, their software, their hardware, nothing. [/sarcasm alert]



    Quote:

    The problem is how to screen when you have so many developers. I think Apple might take a cue from Walmart and slow the process down. It takes a long time o get a product in a wall mart. Perhaps Apple could limit the complaints if developers had an expectation that it may take as long as a year to get a product on the App store.



    they have already been forced to slow down due to the number of submissions but some developers are still screaming. because they just won't admit the math has changed.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    if they knew what the criteria for approval was ahead of time.



    you think they really don't have a clue. have you actually applied to the program and seen a lack of criteria being given.



    sure they might not have every last detail spelled out but I'm sure they have some of this information. and get more every day.
  • Reply 23 of 55
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,744member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    the trouble is that those vocal folks can get the word out and make it seem like more than it is. and that causes trouble. it can even cost sales. all because some couple of dozen pissed off app developers posted their woes and it spread. (keep in mind that for every one of them there were probably 100 rejections that didn't say anything and another 100 apps that were approved no problem)



    So, they should just shut up and deal with it? If Apple hypes the Apple store, they have to accept that that means they will get press. And not all of it will be positive.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    it will be interesting to see if Palm is just as raked over the coals as Apple is being. probably not. cause they are Poor Palm and not Run by Satan Incarnate Apple.



    yes, developers put in the work and are upset not because the apps were rejected, but because the hate Apple. That's why the bothered developing for the iPhone to begin with.







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    ..... it sucks but you deal with it.

    ....get over it.



    Well, perhaps how they 'deal with it' is to contact Apple for a reason for the rejection and how they might change their app to be approved. If that fails (repeatedly) they might actually let other know. How rude.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    and perhaps more information for developers. like a kind of SDK support site, that spells out the rules so they can vet things before they send them.



    This would be nice. It would be good to know all of the rules ahead of time.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    it's not 'mature' so much as having to COA on the issue of Parental Controls working the way the parents that would use it want it used. if Daddy blocks Little Johnny from using Safari but then Little Johnny can use another app to pull up those pics of girl's vay-jay-jay's and ta-ta's, Daddy is going to be pissed. and Daddy might be pissed enough to call his brother the lawyer who then files a false advertising suit against Apple over the claim that Parental Controls allows parents to restrict access and protect kids like Little Johnny from 'bad things'. but in fact it doesn't.



    very good point.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    [sarcasm alert]Not Apple. they don't get that kind of right. They are too special for that. they don't have the right to do what they want. not with the App Store, their software, their hardware, nothing. [/sarcasm alert]



    You make too much of Apple being a victim here. If any other very large company had similar practices that appeared to be unfair or arbitrary, they would be chastised too. Some <ahem>MS</ahem> might even be investigated and charged for unfair practices.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    you think they really don't have a clue. have you actually applied to the program and seen a lack of criteria being given.



    sure they might not have every last detail spelled out but I'm sure they have some of this information. and get more every day.



    They have lots of information available as to their rules. But there are lots of examples of apps being denied without any real information given as to why. The GV apps were a good example. After the official app was denied, the other, previously approved and for sale apps were suddenly pulled. No reason given. So, if no rules were broken previously, leading to the acceptance, why were they suddenly pulled? No reasons, just pulled.



    So, yeah, I do think some of the do not have any idea why their apps were denied. I have not submitted an app. But then, I am not accustomed to having to have some external entity approve my work and deciding if I will be paid for my work, after I have completed it. The developer in the office next to me did submit an app he worked on and had no major problems with the approval process (though he did run into some issue with the department that handles paying devs for sales, which delayed his app 2 or 3 additional weeks).



    Over all I think the app store and the approval process has been very positive. This does not mean there is not room for improvement nor that the developers that have had problems do not have legitimate complaints.
  • Reply 24 of 55
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    Agreed.



    Stripped of the spin by all parties, this is yet *another* story about a high-profile app store rejection that turns out to be almost entirely the fault of the developer, and who's popularity comes down to the fact that said developers are publishing one-sided grievances, *before* knowing the facts, and that those grievances are being promulgated around the web by other tech-friendly web sites.



    Certainly Apple's poor "people skills" are at fault also, but pretty much every single rejection I've ever heard about eventually has a very rational and reasonable explanation at the end that simply doesn't justify the outrageous remarks of the developers in their original criticisms. Unfortunately, the resolution to these stories is only reported on a fraction of the time whereas the initial complaint is trumpeted from the rooftops.



    You seem the be missing the point of all the outrage. It's not about the rejection itself, it's about the inconsistencies. For example, why is it that apps like youtube and MLB baseball are allowed to stream media over 3G, but apps like SlingMedia and Qik only work over Wifi? Why was google voice rejected when there are other apps that can send free sms? Why are apps rejected under the pretext that they allow access to mature content, whereas Safari allows access to far worse things?



    All Apple has to do establish certain guidelines and be clear about them; if your app contains or does X, then it will get rejected. As it stands, it seems to be a crapshoot, and that's what's gotten a lot of people perplexed.
  • Reply 25 of 55
    filburtfilburt Posts: 398member
    Actions speak louder than words. Publish App Store approval guidelines and put Google Voice and Google Latitude apps on the app store now.
  • Reply 26 of 55
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tiroger View Post


    You seem the be missing the point of all the outrage. It's not about the rejection itself, it's about the inconsistencies. For example, why is it that apps like youtube and MLB baseball are allowed to stream media over 3G, but apps like SlingMedia and Qik only work over Wifi? Why was google voice rejected when there are other apps that can send free sms? Why are apps rejected under the pretext that they allow access to mature content, whereas Safari allows access to far worse things?



    All Apple has to do establish certain guidelines and be clear about them; if your app contains or does X, then it will get rejected. As it stands, it seems to be a crapshoot, and that's what's gotten a lot of people perplexed.



    What the issue is, my friends, is that the communication from apple to the developers about what it is the application is being rejected for is not often clear. So the developer has no idea what it is failing on so it can make the necessary changes to make the application compliant.



    Applications can take over a month to go from reviewed to accepted for instance with no communication to tell what the hold up with the review is etc. Its not about the actual rejection of the applications, its the lack of clear communication about why it was rejected and what is needed to remedy why it was rejected.



    I have been an apple user since the Apple 2. While I am a huge fan of the apple products they are by no means infallible. Not everything they do is perfect. Not everything they do is in the consumers interest. The fanboys above me who have written its all the devs fault are missing the point of the article. A developer can spend hundreds of hours on some apps only to be rejected on a technicality they have no idea about (such as all applications with web browser functionality having to be rated 17+. There is no documentation or specification from apple that makes this clear to the developer). With a response telling the developer the age rating is not appropriate without specifying why it is not appropriate (such as "We require all applications with web browser functionality to be rated 17+, please resubmit the application with a 17+ rating or remove web browser functionality"). Everytime an application is rejected, or more info is requested from the developer the application in question goes back to the bottom of the review heap again. So another 2 weeks+ each round. From one apple devotee to the rest of you. "Cut the crap, while Apple create great products, not everything they do is perfect and yes Apple has its faults it needs to address."



    Just my 10c.
  • Reply 27 of 55
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,744member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gingofthesouth View Post


    What the issue is, my friends, is that the communication from apple to the developers about what it is the application is being rejected for is not often clear. So the developer has no idea what it is failing on so it can make the necessary changes to make the application compliant.



    Applications can take over a month to go from reviewed to accepted for instance with no communication to tell what the hold up with the review is etc. Its not about the actual rejection of the applications, its the lack of clear communication about why it was rejected and what is needed to remedy why it was rejected.



    I have been an apple user since the Apple 2. While I am a huge fan of the apple products they are by no means infallible. Not everything they do is perfect. Not everything they do is in the consumers interest. The fanboys above me who have written its all the devs fault are missing the point of the article. A developer can spend hundreds of hours on some apps only to be rejected on a technicality they have no idea about (such as all applications with web browser functionality having to be rated 17+. There is no documentation or specification from apple that makes this clear to the developer). With a response telling the developer the age rating is not appropriate without specifying why it is not appropriate (such as "We require all applications with web browser functionality to be rated 17+, please resubmit the application with a 17+ rating or remove web browser functionality"). Everytime an application is rejected, or more info is requested from the developer the application in question goes back to the bottom of the review heap again. So another 2 weeks+ each round. From one apple devotee to the rest of you. "Cut the crap, while Apple create great products, not everything they do is perfect and yes Apple has its faults it needs to address."



    Just my 10c.



    Exactly.
  • Reply 28 of 55
    I am so tired of a few developers whining about their apps getting rejected. Are we really supposed to think that 65,000 app applications are going to be handled smoothly? What if every time your boss asked you to go back to the drawing board on a project, you went to the press? Ha. I realize it isn't always clear to developers why their apps get rejected, but it seems like they usually get it worked out. We're all human and nobody expects Apple to be superhuman.
  • Reply 29 of 55
    I'm still confused as to why I'm going to pay Apple a fortune for a device which doesn't let me use the applications I want to use. I'm not talking about weirdness over the AT&T connection, but yeah, heaven forbid we have an application which allows people to share books.



    I mean, my god, what would that lead to? Perhaps people would build whole buildings full of books which could be shared by one an all. The horror!



    The developers are the hand that feeds Apple. Keeping them happy is a good thing. Even if you're going to have your absurd rules, you could at least explain them all to the people who are trying to make you (and them) money.
  • Reply 30 of 55
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gingofthesouth View Post


    What the issue is, my friends, is that the communication from apple to the developers about what it is the application is being rejected for is not often clear. So the developer has no idea what it is failing on so it can make the necessary changes to make the application compliant.



    Applications can take over a month to go from reviewed to accepted for instance with no communication to tell what the hold up with the review is etc. Its not about the actual rejection of the applications, its the lack of clear communication about why it was rejected and what is needed to remedy why it was rejected.



    I have been an apple user since the Apple 2. While I am a huge fan of the apple products they are by no means infallible. Not everything they do is perfect. Not everything they do is in the consumers interest. The fanboys above me who have written its all the devs fault are missing the point of the article. A developer can spend hundreds of hours on some apps only to be rejected on a technicality they have no idea about (such as all applications with web browser functionality having to be rated 17+. There is no documentation or specification from apple that makes this clear to the developer). With a response telling the developer the age rating is not appropriate without specifying why it is not appropriate (such as "We require all applications with web browser functionality to be rated 17+, please resubmit the application with a 17+ rating or remove web browser functionality"). Everytime an application is rejected, or more info is requested from the developer the application in question goes back to the bottom of the review heap again. So another 2 weeks+ each round. From one apple devotee to the rest of you. "Cut the crap, while Apple create great products, not everything they do is perfect and yes Apple has its faults it needs to address."



    Just my 10c.



    I'm not sure, but I believe you agree with me. Maybe you meant to quote the person I'm quoting.
  • Reply 31 of 55
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quagga View Post


    I'm still confused as to why I'm going to pay Apple a fortune for a device which doesn't let me use the applications I want to use. I'm not talking about weirdness over the AT&T connection, but yeah, heaven forbid we have an application which allows people to share books.



    I mean, my god, what would that lead to? Perhaps people would build whole buildings full of books which could be shared by one an all. The horror!



    The developers are the hand that feeds Apple. Keeping them happy is a good thing. Even if you're going to have your absurd rules, you could at least explain them all to the people who are trying to make you (and them) money.



    I'm sorry but the comments here are reaching the point of absurdity.



    1. Out of 65,000 apps there aren't any that you want to use?



    2. I don't think it's anything new that companies make an effort to reduce theft. Do you walk in a department store and complain about the security sensors at the door?



    3. Just because you pay a lot of money for a device doesn't give other third parties from enabling you to do whatever the hell you want with it. I paid a ton of money for my Samsung TV, but it doesn't mean Samsung is going to allow other manufacturers to produce hacked on-screen-display firmware for it...or if we're comparing apples to apples, Samsung is certainly not going to sell it to me.



    4. Developers are not the hand the feeds apple, in the case of phones...the iPhone was quite popular even before they opened it up to developers. You're not God's gift
  • Reply 32 of 55
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quagga View Post


    I'm still confused as to why I'm going to pay Apple a fortune for a device which doesn't let me use the applications I want to use.



    That doesn't make any sense. You have your pick of 65,000 apps. Or are the applications you want to use not on the App Store?
  • Reply 33 of 55
    [QUOTE=Jerry602;1467764]I'm sorry but the comments here are reaching the point of absurdity.



    Quote:

    1. Out of 65,000 apps there aren't any that you want to use?



    There are plenty I want and do use. there are also plenty more that I can't even though they exist. And there are some I want to use again.



    Quote:

    2. I don't think it's anything new that companies make an effort to reduce theft. Do you walk in a department store and complain about the security sensors at the door?



    Bookstores don't prevent you from using the library, nor do they prevent you from using another store. They instead compete.



    Quote:

    3. Just because you pay a lot of money for a device doesn't give other third parties from enabling you to do whatever the hell you want with it. I paid a ton of money for my Samsung TV, but it doesn't mean Samsung is going to allow other manufacturers to produce hacked on-screen-display firmware for it...or if we're comparing apples to apples, Samsung is certainly not going to sell it to me.



    If I have a device I have every right to complain privately and publicly about its problems. Samsung doesn't say you aren't allowed to watch movies on Comcast or limit the features of some content (this is a Slingbox reference) on the TV you bought. Apple/AT&T do that. The e-book reader was selling legal content through a legal channel with a deal they brokered, isn't that what content owners want us to do, buy from legal sources?



    Quote:

    4. Developers are not the hand the feeds apple, in the case of phones...the iPhone was quite popular even before they opened it up to developers. You're not God's gift



    No, the iPhone was pretty popular before they opened it to developers. Developers are not Apple's gift, they're partners.



    scosee
  • Reply 34 of 55
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,744member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jerry602 View Post


    I'm sorry but the comments here are reaching the point of absurdity.



    1. Out of 65,000 apps there aren't any that you want to use?



    2. I don't think it's anything new that companies make an effort to reduce theft. Do you walk in a department store and complain about the security sensors at the door?



    3. Just because you pay a lot of money for a device doesn't give other third parties from enabling you to do whatever the hell you want with it. I paid a ton of money for my Samsung TV, but it doesn't mean Samsung is going to allow other manufacturers to produce hacked on-screen-display firmware for it...or if we're comparing apples to apples, Samsung is certainly not going to sell it to me.



    4. Developers are not the hand the feeds apple, in the case of phones...the iPhone was quite popular even before they opened it up to developers. You're not God's gift



    1. With 65,000 apps, does this mean that no other apps might be useful of desired? If not, then you might as well let Apple know. They can stop accepting new submissions ASAP.



    2. I would complain if they sent an employee home with me to monitor how I used MY purchase.



    3. Really bad analogy. Closer, would you be ok with Samsung told you what cable or sat provider you were allowed to use? Or more similar, if they told you what movies and shows you could watch? Better analogy: iPhone is a computing device. You sound like you would accept Apple telling you what you are allowed to buy and run on your Mac.



    4. And its popularity exploded when the released the SDK and app store. Apple is not stupid. They know they need developers, even if others here might think otherwise.
  • Reply 35 of 55
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,283member
    At WWDC, Apple announced that 98% of all apps were accepted within two weeks of submission, 95% within one week. I honestly fail to see the problem here. I doubt that they can do much better than 98%. I have no doubt that most of the outright rejections are justified. We are talking about a diminishingly small percentage of legitimate complaints. If your pet app is one that has been rejected and you are convinced that it is the killer app, get a Pre. Frankly, I am amazed at how many apps Apple has managed to vet and approve in such a short time. The griping makes it sound like every other app is arbitrarily rejected. The actual numbers tell a very different story. When the facts show a demonstrable problem, then I will complain just as loudly as the next person. Till then, the facts, until proven false, are on Apple's side. Everyone should turn down the volume.
  • Reply 36 of 55
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,744member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post


    At WWDC, Apple announced that 98% of all apps were accepted within two weeks of submission, 95% within one week. I honestly fail to see the problem here. I doubt that they can do much better than 98%. I have no doubt that most of the outright rejections are justified. We are talking about a diminishingly small percentage of legitimate complaints. If your pet app is one that has been rejected and you are convinced that it is the killer app, get a Pre. Frankly, I am amazed at how many apps Apple has managed to vet and approve in such a short time. The griping makes it sound like every other app is arbitrarily rejected. The actual numbers tell a very different story. When the facts show a demonstrable problem, then I will complain just as loudly as the next person. Till then, the facts, until proven false, are on Apple's side. Everyone should turn down the volume.



    the 98% and 95% figures are percentage of actually approved apps. That is, of all apps approved 98% were approved in 2 weeks and 95% were approved in just a week. This are good numbers but tell you nothing as far as what percentage of submitted apps are actually approved.



    It is a very lazy argument to say 'if you don't like it buy a pre'. I do like the iPhone. I am just not vacant enough to think there aren't apps that would be useful and might actually improve the experience for users. Some of these may even have been rejected. Perhaps for good reasons. Perhaps not. Acknowledging there are problems or even, heaven forbid, seeing the dev's side of things, is important. Hell, it might even illicit a response from a SVP or lead to positive policy changes.
  • Reply 37 of 55
    I agree that Apple's App Store problems are often blown out of proportion by the media, however, that doesn't hide the fact that there are fundamental problems in poor communication. In the case of this app, they just tell the developer their age rating is inappropriate. Would it really have inconvenienced Apple that much to add "please make the rating 17+" to the rejection explanation? That simple sentence would have saved the developer and Apple time resubmitting, re-reviewing, and re-rejecting the application due to wrong age category again. The same thing with rejecting the app for being of a type that has the potential for copyright infringement. If Apple would have simply added "we have concerns about the ability to share files between iPhones", it would have avoided another submission, review, and rejection.



    Apple complains that they are overworked dealing with the workload of iPhone submissions. But, if they simply took a few more seconds and added an extra sentence to clarify their rejection, it can only benefit Apple by avoiding having to review repeat rejections. Is this really so hard to implement? Or is it more worthwhile to have Schiller and Shoemaker being forced to personally deal with each case once they blow up.
  • Reply 38 of 55
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    [QUOTE=scosee;1467770]
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jerry602 View Post


    I'm sorry but the comments here are reaching the point of absurdity.







    No, the iPhone was pretty popular before they opened it to developers. Developers are not Apple's gift, they're partners.




    Apple owns the app store .

    And they protect it for the benefit of all

    including the programers.



    anything else is bollocks
  • Reply 39 of 55
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    the 98% and 95% figures are percentage of actually approved apps. That is, of all apps approved 98% were approved in 2 weeks and 95% were approved in just a week. This are good numbers but tell you nothing as far as what percentage of submitted apps are actually approved.



    I stand corrected. I also agree that communication could be improved. But I wonder how we would all feel if Apple actually revealed the other side of rejections as publicly as the developers complain. I bet there would be a lot less sympathy for the jilted devs. Apple grew this store from 0-65,000 in a year. Did Palm do so well in its early days? Who else is facing this challenge and who is doing better. We do not hear about the rejections from BB, Palm, Android, and MS apps stores mostly because no body cares. I do not believe Apple is doing any worse than anyone else as far as rejections go. There is just a bigger microscope aimed at them and more people who have an axe to grind with them. As I stated in a previous post, Palm is taking the same approach as Apple. It seems all the other companies even agree on the 70-30 split. Go figure.
  • Reply 40 of 55
    Quote:

    Apple owns the app store .



    Agreed.



    Quote:

    And they protect it for the benefit of all



    I think they protect it for the good of Apple first, then the "good" of the content producers with which they have agreements, then us users, and then the developers. Although the last two may be in the wrong order, but who knows. Most of us customers don't really need their protection from the content we want, just from malware. We, except maybe for you, are capable of deciding for ourselves what content we'd like, in what form, and from whom we'd like to get it.



    Quote:

    including the programers.



    Bullsh!t. If they did this wouldn't have become the issue it has become. That could be changing, but we'll have to wait to know.



    Quote:

    anything else is bollocks



    Whatever. At least we agree that Apple owns the App Store.



    scosee
Sign In or Register to comment.