I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc.
I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection:
1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking?
2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all).
I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.
1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.
2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish. 2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.
At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.
That's not my experience. I had an app rejected once and the reason given was specific, but in my opinion incorrect. I made an official complaint/escalation and within a few days the app was approved. I'm the smallest of the small fish and didn't make any sort of public appeal. I am certain that the mistaken rejection of the latest AI app update would have readily and quickly corrected by following the normal channels. I'm not buying the "if it weren't for our bully pulpit, Apple would have done us wrong" angle. I'm sure the publicity didn't hurt you, but it might not have actually helped, and I certainly don't think it was required.
Given our position as a publication, and how many developers we talk to about this exact sort of thing ... do you think it's maybe possible that we have a little more of a solid idea of the realities on this one? You're entitled to your opinion, but maybe consider your sample size.
Thank you for entitling me to base my opinion on my own personal, direct experience. So, yes, I believe with certainty that anyone who had a minor update to an already-in-the-App Store app rejected based on the easily disproved assessment (by first pass of the review process) that the app "contained" information about jailbreaking would readily get that corrected by simply asking for a re-review, costing no money and no more than a short delay. I'm sure a most of people complaining to you about App Store decisions have less open-and-shut cases than you have.
I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc.
I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection:
1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking?
2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all).
I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.
1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.
2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish. 2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.
At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.
That's not my experience. I had an app rejected once and the reason given was specific, but in my opinion incorrect. I made an official complaint/escalation and within a few days the app was approved. I'm the smallest of the small fish and didn't make any sort of public appeal. I am certain that the mistaken rejection of the latest AI app update would have readily and quickly corrected by following the normal channels. I'm not buying the "if it weren't for our bully pulpit, Apple would have done us wrong" angle. I'm sure the publicity didn't hurt you, but it might not have actually helped, and I certainly don't think it was required.
Given our position as a publication, and how many developers we talk to about this exact sort of thing ... do you think it's maybe possible that we have a little more of a solid idea of the realities on this one? You're entitled to your opinion, but maybe consider your sample size.
Thank you for entitling me to base my opinion on my own personal, direct experience. So, yes, I believe with certainty that anyone who had a minor update to an already-in-the-App Store app rejected based on the easily disproved assessment (by first pass of the review process) that the app "contained" information about jailbreaking would readily get that corrected by simply asking for a re-review, costing no money and no more than a short delay. I'm sure a most of people complaining to you about App Store decisions have less open-and-shut cases than you have.
Your experience is the same as two friends of mine. Their app was rejected and then accepted when they asked to get it reviewed again. They didn’t need to publish a letter of complaint to do it either.
I don't use your app but I've obviously been a long time user of the site and the forums. I would hope you would use this as an impetus to really dig into Apple a bit this year and how they've been off their game. Software-wise be it releases or vetting software they've had several public and ugly episodes this year. (The mistaken rejection of your app is just another symptom of that in my opinion) There is the battery/slow down concern which is software related though could be a symptom of a deeper hardware issue regarding the batteries. Homepod has been delayed. Apple has had to spend considerable PR time declaring the neglected Mac line still even matters, etc.
While it can be argued about the degree and severity of these issues and their outcomes, they don't speak to a company that really has their ear to the wall anymore. Apple isn't indifferent yet but they are increasingly reactionary and having to fix problems that shouldn't come up in the first place from a defensive position on their heels.
That personally has me much more concerned than at any point in the last decade. Apple is a massive company and inertia alone could keep them going for a decade or two alone.
Given the nature of this year some problems should be pinpointed and some heads should roll.
I don't use your app but I've obviously been a long time user of the site and the forums. I would hope you would use this as an impetus to really dig into Apple a bit this year and how they've been off their game. Software-wise be it releases or vetting software they've had several public and ugly episodes this year. (The mistaken rejection of your app is just another symptom of that in my opinion) There is the battery/slow down concern which is software related though could be a symptom of a deeper hardware issue regarding the batteries. Homepod has been delayed. Apple has had to spend considerable PR time declaring the neglected Mac line still even matters, etc.
While it can be argued about the degree and severity of these issues and their outcomes, they don't speak to a company that really has their ear to the wall anymore. Apple isn't indifferent yet but they are increasingly reactionary and having to fix problems that shouldn't come up in the first place from a defensive position on their heels.
That personally has me much more concerned than at any point in the last decade. Apple is a massive company and inertia alone could keep them going for a decade or two alone.
Given the nature of this year some problems should be pinpointed and some heads should roll.
That seems a bit excessive. After all, it was only a matter of a few days between the AI app being rejected and the app being re-reviewed and approved. Apple is probably dealing with hundreds, if not thousands of app approvals and related issues every day. I think they're doing a pretty damn good job.
Comments
Great Christmas gift to the app devs and the AI staff!!
I'm mostly in front of a computer so I don't use the app much. However I plan to start using it from the new year.
I check out headlines and the occasional story of most Apple sites on the MacHash App, but AI is the only site I read in detail.
I love the stories, editorials and the discussions here.
While it can be argued about the degree and severity of these issues and their outcomes, they don't speak to a company that really has their ear to the wall anymore. Apple isn't indifferent yet but they are increasingly reactionary and having to fix problems that shouldn't come up in the first place from a defensive position on their heels.
That personally has me much more concerned than at any point in the last decade. Apple is a massive company and inertia alone could keep them going for a decade or two alone.
Given the nature of this year some problems should be pinpointed and some heads should roll.