PDA

View Full Version : How soon should developers fix bugs in their Apps?




zentraedi
Dec 12, 2008, 10:33 PM
Just wondering what the consensus is here...

Apple seems to view within 2 weeks as a bit too soon. :confused:

Personally, I would welcome faster updates.



Rayfire
Dec 12, 2008, 10:35 PM
I hope they do it as fast as they could. Especially if the
app is paid for.

But imagining how many apps are out there, plus more
incoming and undergoing reviews, I'd say Apple's review
team/screening are really bombarded.

firewood
Dec 13, 2008, 12:27 AM
Apple wants to encourage developers to get it right the first time, and test, test, test, before submitting an app. Not to expect to bombard the review team with fixes every few days because the developer didn't spend a few days (or weeks) carefully testing to make sure they got it right.

Ad Hoc allows a developer to have as many as 100 beta testers.

.

italiano40
Dec 13, 2008, 12:31 AM
Apple should make a beta market place that you can download at your own risk, i think it would make the process go faster

firewood
Dec 13, 2008, 12:44 AM
Apple isn't interested in speed as much as quality. They should have no interest associating their name with apps that a developer hasn't tested to prime time quality. There are already thousands of mediocre apps in the store... Apple certainly doesn't need many more below average quality apps.

.

Michael CM1
Dec 13, 2008, 05:22 AM
Good question. I spent $5 on a new gas mileage/auto maintenance tracker because the old one hadn't been updated in a long time. The old one didn't even tell me my MPG on each tank, which I figured was something pretty simple to do. So I picked up Gas Cubby after reading some good reviews.

I do wonder what motivation someone has to update after releasing a hot-selling app. You could just do nothing and still rake in some cash or do a little and probably rake in about the same. At some point, developers will have to make 2.0 products to have incentive to really fix some stuff.

firewood
Dec 13, 2008, 01:11 PM
When Apple fixes the review system so that bad reviews of old versions are clearly labeled as such, developers will have a lot more incentive to update their apps with fixes to any bugs that were reported in these old reviews. Then potential new buyers will see that the version numbers are different from the old bad reviews.

Right now, it's confusing because a developer can fix a bug, but still have the top review denigrate the app because of a bug that was fixed in an update a long time ago.

.

zentraedi
Dec 13, 2008, 11:58 PM
I hope they do it as fast as they could. Especially if the
app is paid for.

But imagining how many apps are out there, plus more
incoming and undergoing reviews, I'd say Apple's review
team/screening are really bombarded.

Apple wants to encourage developers to get it right the first time, and test, test, test, before submitting an app. Not to expect to bombard the review team with fixes every few days because the developer didn't spend a few days (or weeks) carefully testing to make sure they got it right.


Fair enough, but I just don't understand going so far as to punish a developer for releasing an update with 2 weeks. If a developer does this, they take current version off the store and tell people with the current version that they should revert. If a developer gets a bad review for the "downgrade" or broken features, Apple doesn't care.

Wouldn't a better system be to keep the current version up during the review process, but lower the priority of the update in the review queue?

Apple isn't interested in speed as much as quality.

Looking at the number of 1 time gimmick apps on the itunes store, I have a hard time believing their is much concern about quality.

firewood
Dec 14, 2008, 03:20 AM
A lot of the the 1-time gimmick apps spent over a month in review, so Apple was even less interested in time-to-market.


.

DreamPod
Dec 14, 2008, 03:47 AM
What I think is developers of paid apps (not free) should be given one "free" fix. Often their app took a couple weeks (or longer) to get approved, in that time they found/fixed bugs, or in the first couple days of an app's release people complain about bugs that the developer can fix quickly and safely. In that situation they should be allowed to put up a fixed version within the first week of an app's release without having to be re-approved. And if anybody abuses this (by adding material that Apple doesn't allow in the non-approved "fix") they should be immediately banned from the service and forfeit any sales amounts (Apple can just add that to the legal agreement they already make developers agree to, to make it all legal).

While it would be best if apps weren't released until they were bug free, that's just not possible. *All* software released contains bugs - including ones that the developer knows about. But there comes a time in the development cycle where they have to determine whether a bug is worth fixing, because the fixing of that bug could cause more bugs, some which could be worse than the original. As well, unfortunately not many developers have full dedicated testing teams, even some large developers. And with the extremely low prices iPhone apps sell for, I could easily see developers wanting to put more money to making their app more useful and full-featured than into testers.

firewood
Dec 14, 2008, 11:48 AM
What I think is developers of paid apps (not free) should be given one "free" fix. ... In that situation they should be allowed to put up a fixed version within the first week of an app's release without having to be re-approved. And if anybody abuses this (by adding material that Apple doesn't allow in the non-approved "fix") they should be immediately banned from the service and forfeit any sales amounts...

That would be way way too easy for someone with only one free app, or with a compromised dev account, to abuse.

As a customer, I would like Apple to review and inspect everything as thoroughly as possible before any App store distribution to my device.

.

DreamPod
Dec 14, 2008, 02:58 PM
That would be way way too easy for someone with only one free app, or with a compromised dev account, to abuse.

As a customer, I would like Apple to review and inspect everything as thoroughly as possible before any App store distribution to my device.

.

That's why I said paid apps only; for paid apps developers have to agree to a number of legal agreements and actually have registered with the government as a business. It would take an incredibly stupid person to go through all that, and pay the $99 to Apple, to try and abuse the system. Remember, even if an app sells $50,000 worth on its first day, developers are only paid once per month; plenty of time for someone to complain and Apple take all that money (give it back to the customers) before the developer got one cent.

And I don't get why you are bringing "compromised" dev accounts into this - a compromised account would already be a problem, and is VERY unlikely it would end up with an app submitted, let alone updated. First off, you cannot change the email address or identity of an account without talking directly to someone at Apple, and any attempt to submit would end up with an email sent to the account holder. Second, to test any app on your device you need to give Apple your device ID, from which they could get the serial number and find out who bought that device. And finally, it's a completely separate account with separate password for submitting apps than creating them.

Delirium39
Dec 14, 2008, 04:34 PM
for paid apps developers have to agree to a number of legal agreements and actually have registered with the government as a business.

Actually, individuals can sell on the App Store as well. They just need to fill out the tax and banking forms.