PDA

View Full Version : Facebook iPhone Application Developer Quits Over Apple's Review Process




str1f3
Nov 11, 2009, 09:48 PM
The developer behind the Facebook app says he's quit the project because off App Store policies. To TechCrunch he said:

"My decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple’s policies. I respect their right to manage their platform however they want, however I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process. I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.

The web is still unrestricted and free, and so I am returning to my roots as a web developer. In the long term, I would like to be able to say that I helped to make the web the best mobile platform available, rather than being part of the transition to a world where every developer must go through a middleman to get their software in the hands of users.”

The Facebook app is one of the most downloaded apps and is well-respected. Apple cannot afford to lose really good developers because of their lousy policies. This is going to have to cahnge because clearly there is something wrong here.



bruinsrme
Nov 11, 2009, 09:52 PM
I do recall reading other developers expressing similar feelings.

macfan881
Nov 11, 2009, 09:59 PM
wont miss him I think the Facebook app could be much better

IronLogik
Nov 11, 2009, 10:02 PM
wont miss him I think the Facebook app could be much better

Wow. Hewitt is one of the big developers on the iPhone. That's a pretty big loss for the iPhone man. Some seriously big shoes for the new developer to fill.

str1f3
Nov 11, 2009, 10:06 PM
wont miss him I think the Facebook app could be much better

That may be true about the bugs but it's considered to be the best Facebook app on any mobile platform and he alone worked on it. He does say in his Twitter posts (@joehewitt) that bug fixes were already submitted and I believe push notifications as well.

When you hear stories, like this week and the political bobble head fiasco, you really wonder what is going on at Apple.

Supa_Fly
Nov 11, 2009, 10:21 PM
I see this as an excuse for the developer to explore new horizons. Was it not the same "middleman process" when he first submitted the FaceBook app?? I'm sure it was; however maybe the recent changes are slowing final development to fruition & consumption.

Still the web still has a LONG way to go to become so called "best mobile app" because not all data should be sourced in real time or pulled/pushed when needed by the user. Many places where wireless provider data is STILL not truely unlimited & thus restricted (Canadian providers ALL the incumbents STILL charge & cap a specific ceiling of 1-2GB monthly with few % on the offered/pulled 6gb of data; along with tethering restrictions/allowances and so called "fair use" policies).

There are many applications that serve just as well or better with a single burst of data for 1 time & initial requests. Only specific changes in data which wold affect users are required and incremental.

Some applications, like stock data for trading applications, world news events/reports - need and require a continuous stream of data. Issue is web based cloud "apps" (more like interfaces) change not only the data presented to the end user, but many times augmenting the GUI layout which most of the times is not needed; this lacks in efficient data streaming, and more data bucket usuage & costs to the end user.

There is a HUGE reason why WML/WAP1.1 failed, and why WAP2.0 is in a static state of developmental evolution and suits feature phones, and not smartphones.

Yes I'm aware of HTML5 and what GoogleWave presents - but it proves that the GUI layout consistently changes due to new data streams and provides great event notifications - but its NOT suited for a battery packing handheld smartphone/feature phone device. To put it simply developers that code specifically to the web think of Desktops/Laptops (and recently MIDS) First & Foremost; mobile is thought up of only after mass consumption of their work is taken noticed. THAT is the issue.

Smartphones are THE MOST PERSONAL and trusted computing platform and thus heavily guarded by the end user. As such there NEEDS to be some kind of regulation, to what extent can be argued and never resolved for the next 10yrs - but it cannot nor should NOT be left to the end user!

At one point in the future, a smartphones evolution as a mobile device to a lifestyle personal companion should be as easy, as free, and as care free to use as our voices, words and hands (in any language, context & intent) and evolve as such. The only limitations are common sense, experience, and specific laws & moral aptitude for their uses.

Wow, that is thinking different. I think I'm high!!
:apple:

iFerd
Nov 11, 2009, 10:21 PM
I regard this as a loss if true. The Facebook application for iPhone is one of the most elegant I know of in terms of providing function in a nicely integrated package that is also nice to look at. Count me among those who thinks this is bad.

Compile 'em all
Nov 11, 2009, 10:26 PM
wont miss him I think the Facebook app could be much better

Do you actually know anything about him? He is a high profile developer that worked on the original Firefox and the firebug extension. If he quits, it means something is VERY wrong with the Apple approval process.

I have a strong feeling Apple gave him a hard time with an update to the app so he was like **** that, it is not worth it.

return7
Nov 11, 2009, 11:31 PM
All software has bugs. It's a matter of prioritizing new features vs. bug fixes when one puts out new releases. For many (maybe even most) features or bug fixes you wanted, chances are he had thought of them and prioritized them rationally. I wouldn't burn him at the stake for not implementing something you wanted sooner. :)

str1f3
Nov 12, 2009, 12:45 AM
Reading some of the posts about this on Twitter, it may (or may not be) about the Three20 project (Objective C library for developing iPhone apps) that was developed by Hewitt. It apparently was using private APIs and may have been getting other people's apps, who were using the code, rejected. Conceivably, the Facebook app could have been using the same private API calls and was continually getting rejected. Supposedly, Apple has some new way to check out if you're using these APIs. Hewitt may have just got fed up with the situation and decided to quit.

Pika
Nov 12, 2009, 12:47 AM
Let the other developers make apps better then the facebook app.

Daremo
Nov 12, 2009, 01:21 AM
I respect the fact that he and any developer can do what ever they wish, and move on to do other things, but to use the review process as your excuse is lame. Sure, everyone knows and agrees it's a bit harsh of a process, but he's leaving exactly why? Because it's a 2 week wait for approval? Because Apple polices content to make sure it won't hinder performance on the device? The developers all know the rules, and not much has changed from day one. I understand frustration, but this is a bit extreme to prove a point. There are better ways to go about it.

Just my opinion...


I think he did a great job on the app, and I'm disappointed he's walking away from it.

edesignuk
Nov 12, 2009, 10:18 AM
We always said that if Apple's arbitrary, inconsistent, and quite frankly baffling approval process didn't get straightened out soon, the defections were going to pick up pace -- and what do we have here? Joe Hewitt, the developer of the well-loved and highly regarded Facebook iPhone app, has flipped the script and rejected the App Store. And, as you'd expect, our man is not mincing his words, stating that his "decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple's policies," and that he's "philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process." While Hewitt can't comment on specific future projects (he's still at Facebook, but the app itself has been handed off to another developer) he has mentioned that he'll be devoting his time to web development for mobile devices. As you know, there is no approval process for the world wide web (which is apparent if you've spent any time on Geocities back in the day). Way to give 'em hell, Joe!Engadget (http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/).

Pattycerts
Nov 12, 2009, 10:20 AM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=818566

I really hope Apple makes some changes, anyone who has developed or listren to developers knows what a stupid process this is to get an app approved.

megapopular
Nov 12, 2009, 10:30 AM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=818566

I really hope Apple makes some changes, anyone who has developed or listren to developers knows what a stupid process this is to get an app approved.

What will actually make developers happy? Free run? I respect Apple's right to try to keep their platform within the guidelines that the determine. Apple isn't perfect but the Facebook developer did the right thing... He tucked his tail between his legs and ran... It's cool when people give up. (sarcasm intended) He's a developer, he's gonna deal with different platforms with different rules ALL THE TIME! Soon the internet will start "locking down," then what will he do? I think the Facebook app could be a lot better, I'm not claiming to be able to code it and what-not but the apps shortcomings can't be all linked to Apple's approval process. That's what I think this developer should have focused on: making the app as amazingly good as possible within the "confinements" that are in place.

venasque
Nov 12, 2009, 10:32 AM
I'm a little disappointed. I would like updates to the Facebook app, which I use every day. =(

nehunte
Nov 12, 2009, 10:46 AM
Anybody having issues with Facebook at all? It redirects me to mobile facebook half the time. I hope Apple can resolve these issues. They need people like Facebook on board with them.

Kilamite
Nov 12, 2009, 10:51 AM
Gutted.. the Facebook app since the 3.0 update has really been looking good, and I'd love to see Hewitt evolve it even more.

Think Phil Schiller should send him an email just to thank him for developing so gracefully for the iPhone, explain the review process and reasoning behind it and then just wish him well in the future.

This is a PR blow, and Phil will have to do something or this could be damaging to the platform's future development.

STEVESKI07
Nov 12, 2009, 10:51 AM
Soon the internet will start "locking down," then what will he do?

How will the internet start "locking down"?

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 10:54 AM
I respect the fact that he and any developer can do what ever they wish, and move on to do other things, but to use the review process as your excuse is lame. Sure, everyone knows and agrees it's a bit harsh of a process, but he's leaving exactly why? Because it's a 2 week wait for approval? Because Apple polices content to make sure it won't hinder performance on the device? The developers all know the rules, and not much has changed from day one. I understand frustration, but this is a bit extreme to prove a point. There are better ways to go about it.

Just my opinion...


I think he did a great job on the app, and I'm disappointed he's walking away from it.

I can totally understand his frustration. His job is to make his application better. When there is a big bug that sneaks into the application but isn't caught before the release of the app. You discover it after several people complain (and several in FB terms is probably thousands) but you can fix the problem in an hour. But then you need to wait 2-3 weeks for the application to be approved by apple. In the mean time you can't do jack **** because the app store is completely controlled by Apple. Oh and the user has to deal with the bug until Apple approves the update which at the current rate can be anywhere from a week to three weeks (or more as noted below).

His job is made harder because of Apple's BS. Why would you want your job to be harder than it needs to be? Of course you don't want your job to be harder. So why say that his job should be any different than your own.

Nevermind the other developers out there like Cerulean Studio's who haven't heard a single peep from Apple about their Trillian app for the iPhone for over 3 months. THREE MONTHS.

It's pretty clear that while one developer has the capability to be reassigned to better things, not all developers are. As a result he chose to make his life easier. Others can't, but my guess is that if they had the choice they too would switch away from the App Store.

Look at Steven Frank (from Panic) who tried to ditch the iPhone for philosophical reasons as well. He wasn't able to leave. But my guess is his success rate would be higher now with the newer Android devices (Droid and Droid Eris/Hero).

This isn't just one developer having problems. It's a LOT of big developers who are seeing issues. meanwhile more fart apps, flashlight apps and trash are loaded up on the store for no good reason. But those who actually want to make your life easier are getting nothing but grief (or in the case of Cerulean Studios' NOTHING).

Look at the bigger picture is what I'm saying.

jmpage2
Nov 12, 2009, 11:02 AM
The trade off is performance.

Certainly a lot of applications for the iphone could be moved to a web front end, however the applications would be far less sophisticated and would run much slower.

The choice of letting everyone run wild and do whatever the hell they want with the phones is a bad choice. Just look at all the wankers down in Australia who were too lazy to change ssh passwords on their phones and got pwnd by a worm.

If you want to do whatever the heck you want then run a jailbroken phone and take all of the risks.

I do think that Apple needs to work harder on App approval, and I believe the best thing for them to do is have a gold certification level for developers who are trusted. Those developers would be allowed to make as many changes to their applications as they wanted without any interference or approval from apple.

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 11:04 AM
How will the internet start "locking down"?

This was an asinine comment by the OP that you replied to.

Joe Hewitt said that the App Store is setting a precedent that the Store for a particular handheld device needs to have a review process. Other companies are following suit. IF this process becomes more and more common then the platforms suffer due to the lack of innovative fun new pieces of software.

The Internet isn't locked down because anyone can purchase a server or rent one toss it on the internet and run custom software. You can distribute your information, you can sell your products, you can link friends together without another company telling you yes or no (like the App Store). It's open.

That's what Joe Hewitt likes about the internet. The openness. The close mindedness of the App Store is what turned him off to the development process.

And losing him is huge. He's one of the biggest developers for the platform. More people use Facebook I think than just about any third party application.

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 11:09 AM
The trade off is performance.

Certainly a lot of applications for the iphone could be moved to a web front end, however the applications would be far less sophisticated and would run much slower.

The choice of letting everyone run wild and do whatever the hell they want with the phones is a bad choice. Just look at all the wankers down in Australia who were too lazy to change ssh passwords on their phones and got pwnd by a worm.

If you want to do whatever the heck you want then run a jailbroken phone and take all of the risks.

I do think that Apple needs to work harder on App approval, and I believe the best thing for them to do is have a gold certification level for developers who are trusted. Those developers would be allowed to make as many changes to their applications as they wanted without any interference or approval from apple.

No one is saying that they want to do whatever the heck they want. The developers are saying they want to distribute their applications themselves without Apple having to Approve them. Sure, you can distribute applications on the store. It's a great thing. But you should ALSO have the choice to download an application from the internet from a companies website.

The "wankers down in Australia" are running jailbroken phones and clearly didn't read the farking directions. You do that, serves you right to have your phone infected with a worm.

But no one is saying everyone should have complete control over the phone. They're saying they want to distribute the applications themselves if they so choose to.

Palm and Android both allow this if I recall.

Pattycerts
Nov 12, 2009, 11:19 AM
What will actually make developers happy? Free run? I respect Apple's right to try to keep their platform within the guidelines that the determine. Apple isn't perfect but the Facebook developer did the right thing... He tucked his tail between his legs and ran... It's cool when people give up. (sarcasm intended) He's a developer, he's gonna deal with different platforms with different rules ALL THE TIME! Soon the internet will start "locking down," then what will he do? I think the Facebook app could be a lot better, I'm not claiming to be able to code it and what-not but the apps shortcomings can't be all linked to Apple's approval process. That's what I think this developer should have focused on: making the app as amazingly good as possible within the "confinements" that are in place.

LOL, do you think Apple is rejecting the app because its not 'good enough' when there are 1000's of useless apps?

You apparently are missing the point. The approval process is not STRICT, its INCONSISTENT. Read support forums for all of these apps, their approval process is a joke. They update something that's causing an issue in their app then Apple finds another reason to reject it, a reason that wasn't an issue the first time, causing devs to work just that much more work.

If you're going to create an app for THEIR phone I can understand Apple making sure they accept it, but they need a better policy.

Konz
Nov 12, 2009, 11:37 AM
Where's the irony? :confused:

dejo
Nov 12, 2009, 11:41 AM
Joe Hewitt said that the App Store is setting a precedent that the Store for a particular handheld device needs to have a review process. Other companies are following suit.
What other companies? Seems to me the new "kids on the block" are touting their openness as an advantage vs. the App Store.

If you're going to create an app for THEIR phone I can understand Apple making sure they accept it, but they need a better policy.
I'd say the policy is OK, they just need to apply it much more consistently.

alent1234
Nov 12, 2009, 11:52 AM
No one is saying that they want to do whatever the heck they want. The developers are saying they want to distribute their applications themselves without Apple having to Approve them. Sure, you can distribute applications on the store. It's a great thing. But you should ALSO have the choice to download an application from the internet from a companies website.

The "wankers down in Australia" are running jailbroken phones and clearly didn't read the farking directions. You do that, serves you right to have your phone infected with a worm.

But no one is saying everyone should have complete control over the phone. They're saying they want to distribute the applications themselves if they so choose to.

Palm and Android both allow this if I recall.

there was a thing last week where tweetdeck's new app was pulled because it crashed constantly. most of the problems with Windows over the last 20 years have been third party apps and drivers and not the OS itself, yet MS got the blame. Apple learned a lesson from that. it took MS years to change the architecture to limit bad code from developers

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 11:55 AM
there was a thing last week where tweetdeck's new app was pulled because it crashed constantly. most of the problems with Windows over the last 20 years have been third party apps and drivers and not the OS itself, yet MS got the blame. Apple learned a lesson from that. it took MS years to change the architecture to limit bad code from developers

By offering applications both ways you have an advantage. Apps that want to be listed on the App store need to pass all the usual tests and review process.

By offering applications via your own website you get a warning saying the app wasn't reviewed by app, use at your own risk blah blah blah.

thelatinist
Nov 12, 2009, 12:09 PM
Where's the irony? :confused:

Nowhere. It's not ironic. It may be unfortunate, but not in any way ironic.

dejo
Nov 12, 2009, 12:11 PM
Where's the irony? :confused:
This tweet (http://twitter.com/counternotions/status/5639310946) might explain it.

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 12:14 PM
This tweet (http://twitter.com/counternotions/status/5639310946) might explain it.

Walled garden is what makes it work. I don't want everyone in the world to see me on there. I don't want my information on facebook outside of facebook.

It's better because of the walled garden. Sure it might be better functionality-wise if it was open. But my identity is sort of important to me and if that was compromised that doesn't benefit me at all.

So, sure. Irony. But there's a good reason for the walled garden.

Starfall
Nov 12, 2009, 12:19 PM
Walled garden is what makes it work. I don't want everyone in the world to see me on there. I don't want my information on facebook outside of facebook.

It's better because of the walled garden. Sure it might be better functionality-wise if it was open. But my identity is sort of important to me and if that was compromised that doesn't benefit me at all.

So, sure. Irony. But there's a good reason for the walled garden.


I think the irony has to do with the approval process for Facebook applications (like all of those games people play on Facebook), not access to personal information.

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 12:24 PM
I think the irony has to do with the approval process for Facebook applications (like all of those games people play on Facebook), not access to personal information.

I suspect a lot of that approval is related to security of the personal information obtained within Facebook. Don't applications have some access to that information? As a result, yea. The approval is pretty important.

The sandboxing done on the iPhone means no application can access other applications data, and the only access they have is to the address book. This could be mitigated by prompting the user to allow an app to be granted access to the address book in cases where the app wasn't approved by apple.

Security reasons are pretty small on most iPhone applications.

milani
Nov 12, 2009, 12:38 PM
http://www.tuaw.com/2009/11/11/facebook-app-developer-is-through-with-the-iphone-blames-app-st/

The original article, which makes a really great recommendation for Apple to remedy the absurdity of the review-process:


How about trying this: review after release for vetted developers. Once your first app has successfully made it through traditional review, you're marked as legit; subsequent upgrades and new releases go out without prior restraint, except in a few categories where Apple has to work within contract agreements (carrier restrictions on video or tethering, for example, or explicit sexual content). No more bug fixes waiting for weeks, no more wondering whether an innovative idea will ever see the light of day after spending months of effort and lots of money.

Starfall
Nov 12, 2009, 12:47 PM
The sandboxing done on the iPhone means no application can access other applications data, and the only access they have is to the address book. This could be mitigated by prompting the user to allow an app to be granted access to the address book in cases where the app wasn't approved by apple.

Couldn't Facebook also approve all of their applications by default, and only be given access to a user's personal information by explicit consent of that user?

megapopular
Nov 12, 2009, 01:08 PM
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=818566

I really hope Apple makes some changes, anyone who has developed or listren to developers knows what a stupid process this is to get an app approved.

http://www.tuaw.com/2009/11/11/facebook-app-developer-is-through-with-the-iphone-blames-app-st/

The original article, which makes a really great recommendation for Apple to remedy the absurdity of the review-process:

That can be abused, too!

megapopular
Nov 12, 2009, 01:12 PM
Couldn't all Facebook apps also be approved by default, and only be given access to a user's personal information by explicit consent of that user?

Like the world has done such a bang up job of being trustworthy, lol. Apple has to do what they believe they have to do to survive and thrive. They haven't done it by the conventional/popular ways of thinking. I never said that Apple is perfect or that their approval process is just right. But it is what it is. People aren't all trustworthy, that's probably a reason why they clamp down (whether right or wrong in certain instances) on app approval.

Starfall
Nov 12, 2009, 01:17 PM
Like the world has done such a bang up job of being trustworthy, lol. Apple has to do what they believe they have to do to survive and thrive. They haven't done it by the conventional/popular ways of thinking. I never said that Apple is perfect or that their approval process is just right. But it is what it is. People aren't all trustworthy, that's probably a reason why they clamp down (whether right or wrong in certain instances) on app approval.

That's exactly the point I was making, by pointing out how Facebook also has an approval process for their applications (Like those games people play from their Facebook pages). I was not advocating that Apple approve iPhone apps by default.

IronLogik
Nov 12, 2009, 01:37 PM
Couldn't Facebook also approve all of their applications by default, and only be given access to a user's personal information by explicit consent of that user?

The problem is that Facebook has much more sensitive information in it than your iPhone address book card. Not only that but significantly MORE information in it.

It's difficult to compare the address book on your iPhone to that of your entire friends list, including possible relationships (family, friends, peers), your phone number(s), your friends phone number(s), their family members, my website address for both personal and professional uses, email addresses for personal and professional use, birthdates, favorites (books, music, movies), etc.

Think of how that could be used.

My iPhone address book card has my emails, address, phone numbers. While those are important it doesn't tell you nearly as much about me that could be used in extremely bad ways. Think more than spam and sales calls.

MacRumors
Nov 12, 2009, 01:49 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/12/facebook-iphone-application-developer-quits-over-apples-review-process/)

TechCrunch reported yesterday (http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/11/joe-hewitt-developer-of-facebooks-massively-popular-iphone-app-quits-the-project/) that Joe Hewitt, the developer behind the popular Facebook iPhone application, has resigned from the project over his dissatisfaction with the "gatekeeper" model of Apple's App Store review process. In response to a request for comment from TechCrunch, Hewitt explained his views:My decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple’s policies. I respect their right to manage their platform however they want, however I am philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process. I am very concerned that they are setting a horrible precedent for other software platforms, and soon gatekeepers will start infesting the lives of every software developer.

The web is still unrestricted and free, and so I am returning to my roots as a web developer. In the long term, I would like to be able to say that I helped to make the web the best mobile platform available, rather than being part of the transition to a world where every developer must go through a middleman to get their software in the hands of users.”Hewitt remains employed at Facebook, but declined to discuss his new role in the company.

Apple has received significant criticism over apparently inconsistent review standards and impersonal communications that have left developers frustrated with the process. Hewitt's comments reveal, however, that his dissatisfaction extends beyond the simple mechanics of the process to the overall model used by Apple, clearly showing his preference for an open system unfettered by reviewers deciding what may and may not be included on the iPhone platform.

Article Link: Facebook iPhone Application Developer Quits Over Apple's Review Process (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/12/facebook-iphone-application-developer-quits-over-apples-review-process/)

Darth.Titan
Nov 12, 2009, 01:56 PM
I predict this will be a hot thread for discussion. I'll admit that the app approval process leaves me a bit cold, and is in dire need of some changes.

Perhaps devs jumping ship will spur Apple to action.

maknik
Nov 12, 2009, 01:56 PM
Well put. What makes Apple richest isn't necessarily best for users or developers.

A question for Apple defenders: the quality of applications and security from malware would greatly increase if Apple starting gatekeeping everything that could run on your Mac. Are you in favor of them starting such a policy? If not, why is that different from the iPhone?

stridemat
Nov 12, 2009, 01:59 PM
Fair comment, I thought something was up as he has not posted anything on twitter for ages, until today.

When one developer leaves many more will take there place.

runeasgar
Nov 12, 2009, 02:06 PM
Apple's approval process aside - he was doing a pretty second rate job.

Detlev
Nov 12, 2009, 02:06 PM
Paraphrasing: I don't like being told what I can and can't do. :rolleyes:

Starfall
Nov 12, 2009, 02:11 PM
The problem is that Facebook has much more sensitive information in it than your iPhone address book card. Not only that but significantly MORE information in it.

It's difficult to compare the address book on your iPhone to that of your entire friends list, including possible relationships (family, friends, peers), your phone number(s), your friends phone number(s), their family members, my website address for both personal and professional uses, email addresses for personal and professional use, birthdates, favorites (books, music, movies), etc.

Think of how that could be used.

My iPhone address book card has my emails, address, phone numbers. While those are important it doesn't tell you nearly as much about me that could be used in extremely bad ways. Think more than spam and sales calls.

An iPhone can know its current location. Most people would consider this to be sensitive information. You might say, "Yes, but the iPhone asks the user's permission to use their current location", in which case I'd point out that Facebook applications could behave the same way.

Again, Facebook could theoretically approve all Facebook applications, but still only allow applications to have access to their users' personal information with explicit approval of the user, or even forbid certain kinds of access altogether. Regardless of where a Facebook application runs, doesn't it still have to make requests of the Facebook servers themselves for personal information? And yet, Facebook still explicitly approves Facebook applications. And I think it is reasonable for both Facebook and Apple to do so.

maknik
Nov 12, 2009, 02:14 PM
Paraphrasing: I don't like being told what I can and can't do. :rolleyes:

The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, liberalism, libertarianism... A pretty good definition, really.

bbotte
Nov 12, 2009, 02:26 PM
It has always been dumb only 1 person at Facebook works on the iPhone app.

BrianKonarsMac
Nov 12, 2009, 02:28 PM
Paraphrasing: I don't like being told what I can and can't do. :rolleyes:

does your eye roll imply that you like being told what you can and cannot do? I imagine, strangely, that you do.

He's a developer, who writes applications. If he wants to write applications his own way, he should be allowed to. The approval process should come from the iPhone users themselves.

If he writes an app how he wants, and it sucks (as posters here have implied), then nobody will use it and it will die with or without Apple's involvement. If nobody is using his apps, and that is his means of employment, then he will either 1) adapt and survive or 2) push the unemployment in this country beyond 10%.

XciteMe
Nov 12, 2009, 02:30 PM
Paraphrasing: I don't like being told what I can and can't do. :rolleyes:

Paraphrasing: I love shiny Apple products! Apple can do no wrong in my (small, illustrated children's) book!! Go Apple! Death to all naysayers! :rolleyes:

elmancho
Nov 12, 2009, 02:31 PM
FFS, when will the qq stop about the app approval process, like it or leave it, no one is forcing them to develop for the iphone...

cgurr1
Nov 12, 2009, 02:34 PM
In all honesty, he took the job knowing that he has to submit all his software he makes for facebook to Apple. I don't understand why he has to make a public comment whining about why he doesn't want to submit his software to a "middleman". Cool, next week I'm going to go whine to my boss saying I don't like him telling me what to do. I'm sure my boss, i.e. Apple, doesn't give a ****! It's a job!!!! If you want to be your own boss then do that, but don't whine about the role of employer/employee when you took the job!

jonny
Nov 12, 2009, 02:35 PM
facebook is garbage anyway. so, good riddance. :P

that said, he does have some very valid points. :|

leandromp
Nov 12, 2009, 02:37 PM
the app store with more than 70,000 apps out there, doesn't give a rat ass about a developer leaving the App store. wrong, but they still don't care.

besides, what are you talking about?
thats one of the best apps!

ChrisA
Nov 12, 2009, 02:39 PM
In a way he is right. why bother writing a iPhone app if you can do the same job with a web based app? If it is web based it runs on any phone and there is no risk of rejection by Apple.

That is the worst part and the biggest reason why no one puts to much effort into iPhone Apps: Risk. How would want to put much effort into anything if it could be rejected for any random reason?

arkmannj
Nov 12, 2009, 02:46 PM
You know, If I had to guess, I'd say that most folks aren't so upset about submitting their apps as they are upset about the somewhat seemingly arbitrariness in what get's approved, and what doesn't and how long it takes, the vagueness of many of the reasons for declining an app, etc.

NightStorm
Nov 12, 2009, 02:48 PM
How is Apple's application approval process any different from what Microsoft, Nintendo, or Sony do with their game consoles? Why doesn't anyone seem to care about open development for those platforms? :confused:

utwarreng
Nov 12, 2009, 02:52 PM
FFS, when will the qq stop about the app approval process, like it or leave it, no one is forcing them to develop for the iphone...

I believe that was the developer's exact point. He's leaving so he doesn't have to complain about it anymore. Nobody is forcing him to, so he's decided not to. Do you develop iPhone apps or have first hand knowledge about how arduous the process is? If not, then feel free to take your ignorant opinion elsewhere. Personally, I don't develop iPhone software, so I will say that I do not know how arduous of a process it is, but I can imagine that after putting all of that work into something and having them take weeks to decide to tell you that you can't make it, based on some asinine reasoning, it seems ridiculous.

This sort of totalitarian control is why there will always be a community of jailbreakers out there who want to use the hardware to its full capabilities.

the-oz-man
Nov 12, 2009, 02:58 PM
While I'm no fan of Apple's "random" app approval, I am glad that it does have some standards. The last thing I want is for the app store to be overrun by malware and virus coded apps, not stop pop-ups, system grossing apps, and (what is 97% of the internet) porn apps. Sure these can be found in safari, but i don't want to have to sift through all that when I'm just trying to find a game or a navigation app.

Liquorpuki
Nov 12, 2009, 03:04 PM
I thought he was gonna share a specific experience or incident that got him fed up

Instead he's just vehemently opposed to the model, which means he should have never started coding in the first place. When you code a release up to 3.0 and then quit on basic principle, that's retarded

macUser2007
Nov 12, 2009, 03:12 PM
Amazing, how many half-wits are out there!

There is a larger issue in Hewitt's statement, which seems to totally go over some people's heads.

And to the "Facebook sucks" crowd: may be so, but there are a lot more Facebook users, than iPhone users. So it's still important.

And really, over the last few years, my otherwise beloved Apple has turned into the George W. Bush of PC companies. Look at their newly found moral stance, regarding applications. Or their strong-arm tactics. Or the picking of wars not likely to be in their own interest - like the ones with Google, and Adobe.

Or, the fact, that the truly religious (and uninformed), blindly follow, no matter where.

Compile 'em all
Nov 12, 2009, 03:16 PM
I thought he was gonna share a specific experience or incident that got him fed up

Instead he's just vehemently opposed to the model, which means he should have never started coding in the first place. When you code a release up to 3.0 and then quit on basic principle, that's retarded

It probably has to do with the three20 project incident a couple of days ago. Basically some devs had their apps rejected because they were using three20 which had some private API calls.

Michael Belisle
Nov 12, 2009, 03:22 PM
Unfortunately, I don't think the silent majority of drones who use the facebook app care about the approval process. All that matters to them is that they get their facebook.

So let's say facebook were to pull the app in protest, or development stalls indefinitely. Who'd get blamed by the population as a whole? Facebook or Apple?

michaellinehan
Nov 12, 2009, 03:23 PM
"...clearly showing his preference for an open system unfettered by reviewers deciding what may and may not be included on the iPhone platform."

I think if you asked most of the population, the vast majority would find it 100% reasonable and appropriate that any retail company, in any business sector, decides what they will or won't sell in their store - be it WalMart, The Gap, Starbucks, or your local corner grocery store. Apples retail store is just that... a retail store --- and the norms of business retail don't go away, to be replaced by a magical la-la land where people get to do whatever they want.

KP Nuts
Nov 12, 2009, 03:35 PM
Amazing, how many half-wits are out there!

There is a larger issue in Hewitt's statement, which seems to totally go over some people's heads.

And to the "Facebook sucks" crowd: may be so, but there are a lot more Facebook users, than iPhone users. So it's still important.

And really, over the last few years, my otherwise beloved Apple has turned into the George W. Bush of PC companies. Look at their newly found moral stance, regarding applications. Or their strong-arm tactics. Or the picking of wars not likely to be in their own interest - like the ones with Google, and Adobe.

Or, the fact, that the truly religious (and uninformed), blindly follow, no matter where.

very well put. it's the human condition commercialised. if only apple could step back and see itself for what it has become aside from very rich.

Liquorpuki
Nov 12, 2009, 03:40 PM
When I look at Apple's app reviewing, I think about how Nintendo did gatekeeping in the 80's in order to maintain the quality of its game library. A few third party developers got pissed, you had the black cartridges, but it worked out in Nintendo's favor.

To me the gatekeeping is just a business decision. It's not perfect but it does filter out a lot of crap out there. Apple just has to streamline their review process to be more consistent

vestigefilm
Nov 12, 2009, 03:49 PM
I don't understand why people complain about the closed nature of the app store. They usually point to the web as the alternate: a glorious world of completely open development where there is no Big Brother vindictively squashing would-be developers hopes and dreams.

Point taken, but let's be honest about the pros and cons of this panacea. Where do trojans, worms, and viruses live? On the web. DDoS attacks? Web. XSS? Web. Without any sort of approval, all of the good and the bad finds its way onto your devices. So yes, perhaps there are some good apps out there that were rejected by Apple. But that approval process keeps those 30+ million iPhones and iPod Touches humming along without data being corrupted or stolen (Rickrolling jailbroken iPhone worm notwithstanding. Again, once you go outside of this "overbearing" control-freak company, you're vulnerable).

kmac12
Nov 12, 2009, 03:53 PM
I think if you asked most of the population, the vast majority would find it 100% reasonable and appropriate that any retail company, in any business sector, decides what they will or won't sell in their store - be it WalMart, The Gap, Starbucks, or your local corner grocery store. Apples retail store is just that... a retail store --- and the norms of business retail don't go away, to be replaced by a magical la-la land where people get to do whatever they want.

In your case though, companies have alternatives to get their product out. The App store is virtually a monopoly. So, a company could spend months developing an app and have it rejected for any reason. Then, they would have no alternative to make the development cost back.

We were affected by the Three20 project rejections also. It cause a delay for us which in turn caused a delay to a client. They weren't too happy about it. That said, we tell all clients that we do not control Apple's process and the risk of delays is there.

It is frustrating and hopefully they make a change soon to alleviate some of these problems.

Transeau
Nov 12, 2009, 03:56 PM
Apple's approval process aside - he was doing a pretty second rate job.

I read it as... "I want to do a crappy job and not be called on it"

kmac12
Nov 12, 2009, 03:58 PM
BTW - The people saying he did a second rate job or is a crappy developer, obviously are not familiar with iPhone development or the code that he created. The Three20 project was very good. I understand his frustration and am not surprised by his decision.

Liquorpuki
Nov 12, 2009, 04:21 PM
It probably has to do with the three20 project incident a couple of days ago. Basically some devs had their apps rejected because they were using three20 which had some private API calls.

That's pretty understandable then. Having not only your work but other devs work rejected because they used your library - that's your reputation at stake

He should have just come out and said it

Michael CM1
Nov 12, 2009, 04:24 PM
there was a thing last week where tweetdeck's new app was pulled because it crashed constantly. most of the problems with Windows over the last 20 years have been third party apps and drivers and not the OS itself, yet MS got the blame. Apple learned a lesson from that. it took MS years to change the architecture to limit bad code from developers

Add the jailbroken iPhone hack and you've got a couple of good reasons for Apple to put on the Big Brother hat. I totally understand the frustrations and drawbacks to such a system, but apps for the most part don't totally bring the device down. A few may crash, but the phone still works and the apps get fixed.

If you like an open platform better, you have plenty of choices. Nobody's forcing you to stick with an iPhone (unless you signed a contract). I'm a geek, but I'm not geeked out to the point where I get all hot and bothered about OPEN SOURCE! Oooooooh! Yeah, Linux has been going with that for my whole lifetime and has its piddling little market share.

ogdogg
Nov 12, 2009, 04:32 PM
I wouldn't know who Joe Hewitt is without the iPhone app. Enjoy this final moment of attention Joe, you are now nearly irrelevant. I wonder how many Twitter followers he's lost in the last 24 hours...

caligurl
Nov 12, 2009, 04:42 PM
i'm in the camp that doesn't care if this developer wants to take his toys and go home. i'm not a huge facebook user... heck... i pretty much only have a facebook account so i can "fan" people or companies to keep up on stuff. i can't be bothered with all that wall posting and the games... OMG the games :rolleyes: i just don't have the time for all that nonsense... so he can go ahead and take his toys.... i'll just read what i need to with the version i have or read it online later when i think about it (which is pretty much what i do now... i'm lucky if i check facebook once a week.)

w00master
Nov 12, 2009, 04:50 PM
Some of you people amaze me. It's time to STEP AWAY from the koolaid and look at this from a broad perspective.

Oh that's right, you're in bed with Steve. *sighs*. Some people will seriously never learn.

Please remember this folks (especially the EXTREME Apple Fanboy): Apple is a company that is looking to make money. That's it.

Ultimately, this is bad for us as iPhone users. Bad for the future of software as a whole.

w00master

HyperZboy
Nov 12, 2009, 04:55 PM
Ironic that FACEBOOK is one of websites that most OFTEN CRASHED Safari 4.0.3!

I'm not sure who's to blame for that, Apple or Facebook, but since many other websites don't crash Safari 4.0.3, doesn't this seem like the little stubborn child refusing to do his homework properly?

Btw, I've yet to extensively test Safari 4.0.4 on Facebook, but my past experience was that Facebook has always been buggy on Macs, and every new update to the site always seems to cause a Mac-specific problem.

And recently with Safari 4.0.3, it was crashing Safari 3 times a week.
Other websites were crashing Safari 4.0.3 too, mostly those that were Javascript or FLASH intensive, but Facebook was one of the worst offenders.

I'm anxious to see how Safari 4.0.4 does, so far so good as far as crashes on any website (knocks on wood). :)

Blacklabel34
Nov 12, 2009, 04:57 PM
apple's review policy is a joke...
APPLE you made your cake and now you want a piece of it too....:apple:

Compile 'em all
Nov 12, 2009, 05:00 PM
Ironic that FACEBOOK is one of websites that most often CRASHED Safari 4.0.3 OFTEN!

I'm not sure who's to blame for that, Apple or Facebook, but since many other websites don't crash Safari 4.0.3, doesn't this seem like the little stubborn child refusing to do his homework properly?

Btw, I've yet to extensively test Safari 4.0.4 on Facebook, but my past experience was that Facebook has always been buggy on Macs, and every new update to the site always seems to cause a Mac-specific problem.


I have never EVER had Facebook crash Safari. And I use Facebook heavily.

Sounds something is wrong with your setup or you just enjoy spreading FUD.

HyperZboy
Nov 12, 2009, 05:04 PM
I have never EVER had Facebook crash Safari. And I use Facebook heavily.

Sounds something is wrong with your setup or you just enjoy spreading FUD.

I have multiple Macs, more than 10, so I'm not spreading FUD.

You must just go on the site and read what people say and don't do anything javascript intensive.

There are many threads of SAFARI complaints on here and on Apple Discussions if you don't believe me.

So far, Safari 4.0.4 seems more stable, but they still need to fix the spinning beachball problem, which also many people have complained about.

I suspect that on Macs FLASH and Javascript would be mostly the causes of these problems, but on the iPhone, there would still be Javascript problems in Mobile Safari since they are based largely on each other.

JonB3Z
Nov 12, 2009, 05:06 PM
Apple is a company that is looking to make money. That's it.

That's what companies do, you know. That's their function. Apple shareholders would riot if Apple made decisions on any basis other than maximizing the value of the company. And when you check your investment portfolio, what do you look for in the companies in which you are invested?

On the basis of making money, I'd have to say Apple's recent decision making has a pretty good track record -- the App Store included. Their decisions aren't always in my best interest, but that's not what they are trying to accomplish, and I'm not selfish enough to think that's what they should be doing.

arkmannj
Nov 12, 2009, 05:13 PM
I hope Facebook will get someone else (or several people) to replace him.
I appreciate his work, and would like to see it continued despite a frustrating process.

pmjoe
Nov 12, 2009, 05:15 PM
In your case though, companies have alternatives to get their product out. The App store is virtually a monopoly. So, a company could spend months developing an app and have it rejected for any reason. Then, they would have no alternative to make the development cost back.

We were affected by the Three20 project rejections also. It cause a delay for us which in turn caused a delay to a client. They weren't too happy about it. That said, we tell all clients that we do not control Apple's process and the risk of delays is there.

It is frustrating and hopefully they make a change soon to alleviate some of these problems.
Yep, this hits it square on the head. I was initially excited about the prospect of developing iPhone apps, but I really can't put my schedule and reputation into Apple's hands. I would certainly not want to be a consultant trying to promise an iPhone solution to a company. Basically, you throw the ball over the 10' wall to Apple and hope it comes back.

Daremo
Nov 12, 2009, 05:17 PM
I can totally understand his frustration. His job is to make his application better. When there is a big bug that sneaks into the application but isn't caught before the release of the app. You discover it after several people complain (and several in FB terms is probably thousands) but you can fix the problem in an hour. But then you need to wait 2-3 weeks for the application to be approved by apple. In the mean time you can't do jack **** because the app store is completely controlled by Apple. Oh and the user has to deal with the bug until Apple approves the update which at the current rate can be anywhere from a week to three weeks (or more as noted below).

His job is made harder because of Apple's BS. Why would you want your job to be harder than it needs to be? Of course you don't want your job to be harder. So why say that his job should be any different than your own.

Nevermind the other developers out there like Cerulean Studio's who haven't heard a single peep from Apple about their Trillian app for the iPhone for over 3 months. THREE MONTHS.

It's pretty clear that while one developer has the capability to be reassigned to better things, not all developers are. As a result he chose to make his life easier. Others can't, but my guess is that if they had the choice they too would switch away from the App Store.

Look at Steven Frank (from Panic) who tried to ditch the iPhone for philosophical reasons as well. He wasn't able to leave. But my guess is his success rate would be higher now with the newer Android devices (Droid and Droid Eris/Hero).

This isn't just one developer having problems. It's a LOT of big developers who are seeing issues. meanwhile more fart apps, flashlight apps and trash are loaded up on the store for no good reason. But those who actually want to make your life easier are getting nothing but grief (or in the case of Cerulean Studios' NOTHING).

Look at the bigger picture is what I'm saying.


I seem to remember though, the initial wait was 2 weeks, but when the app had errors, and resubmitted, Apple jumped on the fixes, and knocked them out pretty quickly, within a day of each submission. I may be wrong here, but I don't think I am.

Darkroom
Nov 12, 2009, 05:21 PM
But that approval process keeps those 30+ million iPhones and iPod Touches humming along without data being corrupted or stolen (Rickrolling jailbroken iPhone worm notwithstanding. Again, once you go outside of this "overbearing" control-freak company, you're vulnerable).

1. iPhone OS applications are strictly sandboxed (jailed phones only).
2. Apple's reviewers have and will continue to miss easter eggs (IE: version 1.0 of C64's ability to execute BASIC, within a sandboxed environment of course)
3. Apple demands that developers reveal easter egg functionality when submitting apps. Otherwise, it is unlikely that a reviewer will notice secret functionality during the 5 minutes they have with the app.

jmpage2
Nov 12, 2009, 05:45 PM
By offering applications both ways you have an advantage. Apps that want to be listed on the App store need to pass all the usual tests and review process.

By offering applications via your own website you get a warning saying the app wasn't reviewed by app, use at your own risk blah blah blah.

Again, I think it's you who doesn't get Apple's logic here. When a 3rd party application crashes the iPhone, uses too much data, etc, it's Apple and the carrier who take the blame, not the idiot developer who developed crap-ware.

Apple would evidently rather spend less time hardening their phone and more time developing the next version of it. The app approval process lets them check things out with an app before it goes out to the greasy unwashed masses.

If that doesn't float your boat there are plenty of alternatives.

1. Get a different device that lets you install whatever you want.

2. Jailbreak your iPhone, just don't call Apple when you flock it up.

The point made about Facebook being a walled garden is a valid one. Your phone is rapidly on the way to being your passport for functioning in society. It will soon be the key fob to start your car, act as a credit card, etc. Do you really want any software out there running on a device that has this much involvement in your life?

batchtaster
Nov 12, 2009, 05:53 PM
Eh. He's replaceable. With any one of a massive raft of iPhone devs who would be more than eager to step in to replace him. Facebook doesn't really have much of a choice about developing for iPhone considering it's (iPhone) the rising star in the smartphone market, that people are clamoring for and waiting sometimes 8 weeks to buy one. If there is no Facebook app for iPhone, owners will go pounding on Facebook's door, not Apple's.

Still he's obviously entitled to do what he wants, career-wise. I just don't think it will be the big dramatic gesture he thinks it is. (What's his name?)

corrado7
Nov 12, 2009, 06:00 PM
I wouldn't know who Joe Hewitt is without the iPhone app. Enjoy this final moment of attention Joe, you are now nearly irrelevant. I wonder how many Twitter followers he's lost in the last 24 hours...

because having a ton of twitter followers is completely relevant to this discussion. That has to be one of the stupidest comments today.

dejo
Nov 12, 2009, 06:06 PM
Ironic that FACEBOOK is one of websites that most OFTEN CRASHED Safari 4.0.3!
How is that ironic (Ms. Morissette)?

techwarrior
Nov 12, 2009, 06:14 PM
Eh. He's replaceable. With any one of a massive raft of iPhone devs who would be more than eager to step in to replace him. Facebook doesn't really have much of a choice about developing for iPhone considering it's (iPhone) the rising star in the smartphone market, that people are clamoring for and waiting sometimes 8 weeks to buy one. If there is no Facebook app for iPhone, owners will go pounding on Facebook's door, not Apple's.

Absolutely spot on taster! There are thousands of talented developers willing to put up with the process. The iPhone is too important to FB, and FB is too important to Apple.

There are clearly improvements that users have been clamoring for that Joe has apparently resisted or doesn't know how to implement with Apple's blessings. These are features others have gotten by the App Store approval police, so this is probably a good thing for those of us who have been hoping for more from this app.

matthewHUB
Nov 12, 2009, 06:17 PM
IRONIC as facebook could clearly benefit themselves on a more strict app approval system. There's so much spam on there these days. People's accounts getting hacked, sending messages with trojan links to everyone.

And the iPhone app itself pretty much sucks anyway so a new developer would be a good thing

nateo200
Nov 12, 2009, 06:20 PM
@OP, this is very sad. I have been with the facebook app forever. Infact I use it more often than my PC! I hope I get push notifications though...it's a shame. The fb app was the first one I got and it's without a doubt my most used app next to safari if you can consider safari an app.

I see this as an excuse for the developer to explore new horizons. Was it not the same "middleman process" when he first submitted the FaceBook app?? I'm sure it was; however maybe the recent changes are slowing final development to fruition & consumption.

Still the web still has a LONG way to go to become so called "best mobile app" because not all data should be sourced in real time or pulled/pushed when needed by the user. Many places where wireless provider data is STILL not truely unlimited & thus restricted (Canadian providers ALL the incumbents STILL charge & cap a specific ceiling of 1-2GB monthly with few % on the offered/pulled 6gb of data; along with tethering restrictions/allowances and so called "fair use" policies).

There are many applications that serve just as well or better with a single burst of data for 1 time & initial requests. Only specific changes in data which wold affect users are required and incremental.

Some applications, like stock data for trading applications, world news events/reports - need and require a continuous stream of data. Issue is web based cloud "apps" (more like interfaces) change not only the data presented to the end user, but many times augmenting the GUI layout which most of the times is not needed; this lacks in efficient data streaming, and more data bucket usuage & costs to the end user.

There is a HUGE reason why WML/WAP1.1 failed, and why WAP2.0 is in a static state of developmental evolution and suits feature phones, and not smartphones.

Yes I'm aware of HTML5 and what GoogleWave presents - but it proves that the GUI layout consistently changes due to new data streams and provides great event notifications - but its NOT suited for a battery packing handheld smartphone/feature phone device. To put it simply developers that code specifically to the web think of Desktops/Laptops (and recently MIDS) First & Foremost; mobile is thought up of only after mass consumption of their work is taken noticed. THAT is the issue.

Smartphones are THE MOST PERSONAL and trusted computing platform and thus heavily guarded by the end user. As such there NEEDS to be some kind of regulation, to what extent can be argued and never resolved for the next 10yrs - but it cannot nor should NOT be left to the end user!

At one point in the future, a smartphones evolution as a mobile device to a lifestyle personal companion should be as easy, as free, and as care free to use as our voices, words and hands (in any language, context & intent) and evolve as such. The only limitations are common sense, experience, and specific laws & moral aptitude for their uses.

Wow, that is thinking different. I think I'm high!!
:apple:
*tears* that was beautiful...

Bevz
Nov 12, 2009, 06:40 PM
Bit of a u-turn considering his last blog post in august stated "No matter how annoyed I get, I will not stop developing for Apple's platforms or using Apple's products as long as they continue to produce the best stuff on the market."!
Also, as I think others have mentioned; the approval process has not changed since he started iPhone development... I understand his frustration at having to wait for approval, but iPhone development has always been this way, and it's the same for all developers it's nothing new... Odd why he's decided to throw his toys out the pram now?
Oh well, it's a shame he's quit since it serves no purpose other than to abandon support to his own users :(

dtich
Nov 12, 2009, 07:03 PM
I do think that Apple needs to work harder on App approval, and I believe the best thing for them to do is have a gold certification level for developers who are trusted. Those developers would be allowed to make as many changes to their applications as they wanted without any interference or approval from apple.

that seems like a very good idea, and i assume/hope/surprised if they're not working on something in that area.

buddhahacker
Nov 12, 2009, 07:19 PM
His approach is not the most mature. My guess is that he has a better job lined up and simply used his departure to get some notoriety. Grow up!

strangelogic
Nov 12, 2009, 07:24 PM
When there is a big bug that sneaks into the application but isn't caught before the release of the app. You discover it after several people complain (and several in FB terms is probably thousands) but you can fix the problem in an hour. But then you need to wait 2-3 weeks for the application to be approved by apple. In the mean time you can't do jack **** because the app store is completely controlled by Apple.

Somehow this logic only makes me think that 'complete control' by Apple is a good thing. Something with as many users as FB warrants thorough testing prior to springing it on unsuspecting users. Just because of open source and 'free testing services' provided by the general public (ala Vista) doesn't really justify a lack of internal QA.

I guess now that Apple helped break down the practices of the carriers totally controlling and locking down crippled phones they suddenly are the bad guy.

Not saying their process is perfect, and I think some 'drama' around it will help it evolve - but - the fact that many developers don't bother to test their apps is one part of why the approval process exists.

ogdogg
Nov 12, 2009, 07:56 PM
because having a ton of twitter followers is completely relevant to this discussion. That has to be one of the stupidest comments today.

I think it is relevant to this discussion. My point is that Joe is using the "fame" that the iPhone app brought him to bash the company that makes it. I think he makes a point and obviously is sticking to his morals by leaving. I applaud him for that, but by throwing mud at Apple he's looking like a kid who's taking his ball and going home. I don't even use Twitter, but can imagine that to someone who is mouthing off for attention the way Joe is, it probably is somewhat important to him. Before someone accuses me of being a fanboy, let me just say that I prefer my PC to a mac. I'm just lending my honest opinion. Who knows, maybe by him leaving the project the facebook app will be improved. If that is the case, thanks Joe.

snowleopard2009
Nov 12, 2009, 08:53 PM
In a way it's rather ironic. When myspace was huge. Some people were defecting to facebook because of all the problems. Myspace allowed you to do and post almost anything. Custom backgrounds, flash, all kinds of HTML. Spam spam spam and more. The result? Slow, clunky pages. Pages that crashed even the toughest browsers and computer with lots of RAM. Phishing SPAM and viruses via messages and pages. Soft core porn and more.

Go to Facebook and you needed to be approved just to join (essentially). You needed a certain email address. Your page can't have graphics and flash. Your name can't be "$h@wn of da d3@d" or whatever. It's similar to an iphone in that way.

lethalOne
Nov 12, 2009, 09:44 PM
Almost all developers live in a world where they code to specs and standards. Their code is then reviewed by other developers, tested repeatedly and then approved for implementation.

Apple's model isn't different from what most companies do internally.

I don't mind Facebook - but the iPhone app is terrible.
It is always crashing and never shows my friends list properly.

Seems to me - he could have used some help and should have focused on defect repair and not on the process of approval.

Supa_Fly
Nov 12, 2009, 09:51 PM
@OP, this is very sad. I have been with the facebook app forever. Infact I use it more often than my PC! I hope I get push notifications though...it's a shame. The fb app was the first one I got and it's without a doubt my most used app next to safari if you can consider safari an app.


*tears* that was beautiful...

Thank you! I'm glad you liked my post. Actually I think it's the best, most structured thought and post on any forum I've ever made. Was studying like crazy for an interview and did very well ~ bumped up to the last final interview today.

I agree that the Facebook app is incredibly well designed between form and function - and I hope more follow through.

Compile 'em all
Nov 12, 2009, 09:59 PM
Almost all developers live in a world where they code to specs and standards. Their code is then reviewed by other developers, tested repeatedly and then approved for implementation.

Apple's model isn't different from what most companies do internally.


Yeah, the point just flew right above your head. Just like 99% of the posters on this thread. This is not about others "reviewing" our apps. It is about the process itself. Do you know that Trillian (yep, the messenger) has been in review for 2 months now without a word from Apple?

Spending time, money, and effort working on an App, submitting it then sitting not knowing what is going to happen or when you are going to hear back from them is ridiculous. Assuming after waiting 3 weeks, they found a bug in your app. You know what happens? Even if you can fix the bug in 1 min? You are sent to the back of the queue for another 3 weeks. That is almost 2 months to get your app to the store. I know some dude who had his app approved after 4 months. A complete joke!

This developer that you are joking about worked on Firefox (yeah, that's right!) and firebug (one of the best FF extensions EVER).


You guys are funny.

Consultant
Nov 12, 2009, 10:08 PM
Let's see, before Apple, there was no useful mobile app market.

Now Apple sells more mobile apps than all the competitors such as Microsoft, Symbian, etc. combined.

Apple must be doing something right.

However, to expedite the process and provide more feedback, Apple probably needs hire more people / change the submission structure (no unlimited submission), probably both.

Keep in mind the whole Apple iTunes mobile app market is fairly new but growing very quickly. Thus that department seems to be facing a classic, but difficult business problem of managing exponential growth.

HyperZboy
Nov 12, 2009, 10:14 PM
IRONIC as facebook could clearly benefit themselves on a more strict app approval system. There's so much spam on there these days. People's accounts getting hacked, sending messages with trojan links to everyone.

And the iPhone app itself pretty much sucks anyway so a new developer would be a good thing

Yes, thank you for pretty much explaining the irony.

Facebook is currently a mess. People on my feed complain about changes every day and several had their accounts hacked into and were sending those viruses out. One day, I could only use Firefox to sign into Facebook. Safari wouldn't work at all. The next day, Facebook fixed it, but still, that's pretty bad.

Therefor, I'm glad Apple is being tough on Facebook.

Who the hell would want all those problems on their iPhone too?

I'm not defending the Apple submission process by the way.
Obviously, it has some issues, but I'm going to take Apple's side on this one considering how many problems Facebook has had recently.

lethalOne
Nov 12, 2009, 10:16 PM
Yeah, the point just flew right above your head. Just like 99% of the posters on this thread. This is not about others "reviewing" our apps. It is about the process itself. Do you know that Trillian (yep, the messenger) has been in review for 2 months now without a word from Apple?

Spending time, money, and effort working on an App, submitting it then sitting not knowing what is going to happen or when you are going to hear back from them is ridiculous. Assuming after waiting 3 weeks, they found a bug in your app. You know what happens? Even if you can fix the bug in 1 min? You are sent to the back of the queue for another 3 weeks. That is almost 2 months to get your app to the store. I know some dude who had his app approved after 4 months. A complete joke!

This developer that you are joking about worked on Firefox (yeah, that's right!) and firebug (one of the best FF extensions EVER).


You guys are funny.

I get the point. Really.

He might be a great developer - but his app crashes consistently for me.

He is philosophically opposed to the process. Tough. QA takes time.
I don't get to write and deploy code - I watch it go through committees and batteries of tests. Reviews are part of life - even within Firefox I'm sure Mozilla reviews code.


He should test it before sending it in. No loops that way.
To me he is a whiner.

hanpa
Nov 13, 2009, 12:14 AM
Will Apple change? I've almost given up...

kalafalas
Nov 13, 2009, 12:22 AM
Why the AppStore works the way it does, and why its perfect, and why poeple shouldn't b*tch.

In the jailbreak community, packages can do whatever they please. there open, so to speak. An example of why this is terrible, is in winterboard, the popular cydia package. (ive installed this and tested everything myself, with load tests, memory tests, performance tests, and many other things, on both the 3G and the 3GS)

A: winterboard relies on a package titled mobilesubstrate, and what that does is lets programs be able to inject there own code instead of the deafult one built in from the spring board (example, when you press the home button in winterboard instead of closing the app it restarts springboard.app to let the changes you made take place)

B: what winterboard does and how it does it. winterboard lets you create a folder in a directory it creates in the system folder called "themes". what you do in there, is create directories that are identical (but in a fashion thats easier and a lot of the major directors for theming is built into winterboard) to apples current ones, but at the end the image or .plist or any file you want to replace, had a different image or code or whatever your replacing. and winterboard forces the phone to load that one, instead of the default one, enabling you to make any changes to the system that you want without harming the original code.

C: Why this is bad. seeing as there are no limits or moderators, anyone can replace anything with whatever they please. Apple spent years optimizing this operating system for the hardware to work flawlessly, to the last detail. and most random hackers just dont have that kind of attention to detail. Example: the main image type used on the iPhone interface is .png. although apple, uses a specific variation. they created there own type of png, with the compression information and color spectrums and tags after the image, instead of before it in the code line. this enables the image to be loaded into the integrated video card, which shares the same processor as the main one, to load the image before it decompresses it. this also helps battery, ebcause it saves lots of processor cycles. seeing as the iPhones main harddrive is a flash drive, that is horribly slow. so this makes the drawing of the images considerably faster, because it can decompress it, without either having to work from the drive, or load it into ram, decompress it, and then delete the image from ram after its done. but every single theme, ever, uses regular formatted pngs, with the data before the code. this is no problem on a computer, with fast harddrives, separate video cars, and much bettr hardware, and that don't have to keep the battery times as long as possible running always on as peoples phones, with limited space so its still portable.

and this slows general performance of the phone to where loading of new images are much slower, and drains battery, just the type of compression used in the png. and not to mention every single time you use the touch screen it has to check to see if you have anything installed to inject code, or permit the original. whicth uses many processor cycles, and drains battery because of this.

now thats only images, think of what people would do with plists, fonts, apps, and everything else.

it just makes the phone, well, crap. and the soul reason this phone is so great, is how optimized the operating system is. if they let it run loose like the palm web OS, people would be getting frustrated at how slow there phone always is, and having to monitor closing apps themselves, and so much more.

apple taking control, is the soul reason for how intuitive, easy use, feature full, glicth-less, and non-jerky the iPhone is, which is all the reasons its successful, and why none of its competitors make it in the same field.

To sum it up: because people are stupid and will fu*k it up if there given the access, and then people will b*tch at apple that they made a crappy, laggy, no battery, crashing-all-the-time product. you have to remember: the main bulk of people using this product, dont know how it works. and for the people that do, we still have jailbreaking if we feel the need to change something silly, or just have a peice of mind that we have the power to (haha i changed it so that when i type my pass code wrong it says "suck is b*tch instead of saying tryagain). and thank you gehot/devteam for making a jailbreak with jsut as much attenion detail as apple has, so the jailbreaking process itself dosn't mess things up :)

mdriftmeyer
Nov 13, 2009, 02:24 AM
Wow. Hewitt is one of the big developers on the iPhone. That's a pretty big loss for the iPhone man. Some seriously big shoes for the new developer to fill.

http://www.joehewitt.com/about.php

Seriously, if you think that's a big developer you live too much in Social Networking sites.

That guy doesn't touch tens of thousands of n-tier professional developers who write call center suites, engineering applications, Wall Street Financial applications, Power Plant applications, etc.

Seriously, he's a kid who got known for Firebug. BFD.

Otaviano
Nov 13, 2009, 03:13 AM
The hardcore Apple fans boys are coming out of the woods today. Criticizing the developer, Facebook, everything but Apple's ridiculous App Store policies.

I just want to know why an established global business like Facebook, can't get permission to push through bug fixes without waiting two weeks for approval? It's freaking ridiculous, and there is an apparent pattern where an app is approved without problems and updates are delayed for weeks on end.

I've been put out by Apple's stupid approval policy on two apps I paid for. Waiting weeks at a time for crucial bug fixes to get pushed into the app store. Knowing the developer has fixed the issue but I'm stuck with an app I paid for that doesn't work properly.

I love Apple's products but they need to put in some work to make the App Store approval process better. Either more training and reviewers, or create some programs where established companies with a proven track record can get updates out there quickly.

str1f3
Nov 13, 2009, 03:51 AM
Let see the fanboys defend this:

Rogue Amoeba has said they will no longer develop iPhone apps and will concentrate on the Mac. It had taken three months for Apple to release a bug fix. Does Rogue Amoeba suck too?

http://bit.ly/2xsMfk

johnnyjibbs
Nov 13, 2009, 05:02 AM
What happens to the Facebook app now? Do they get someone else in or do they just let it rot?

Blue Fox
Nov 13, 2009, 05:06 AM
Here's how I look at it....

Developers are like customers. You have some customers who play by the rules and benefit the company and themselves. Then you have "those" customers who think the world owes them everything. They whine and bitch about anything and everything. They refuse to follow rules or regulations, whine when they don't get their own way, and will purposely try to manipulate and play the system to their advantage.

Eventually, the company notices and places strict guidelines, rules and restrictions to make sure "those" customers can no longer take advantage of the company. Meanwhile, the customers who do play by the rules now have to deal with the hassle of the same restrictions because "those" customers had to ruin it for everyone.

And anyone who has ever worked customer service knows exactly what I'm on about. That's the reason there is a billion lines of fine print for just about everything these days.

So instead of jumping on the whole "lets bash Apple because they're a successful corporation" bandwagon, how about blaming the people who take advantage of the system and break the rules which is what inevitably what got the rules put there in the first place.

wallinbl
Nov 13, 2009, 06:53 AM
Maybe the Facebook app will get better. Perhaps he was frustrated that someone kept pointing out all the problems with the app.

If you're going to vent your "philosophical" issues, you need to make sure that your "real world" issues are all in order first. Otherwise, you look like a sore loser.

kdarling
Nov 13, 2009, 07:04 AM
What happens to the Facebook app now? Do they get someone else in or do they just let it rot?

He stated that support for the Facebook app would be taken over by someone else.

He said he personally was frustrated and going back to web programming.

Let's see, before Apple, there was no useful mobile app market.

Anyone who's had smartphones knows about Handango.

Handango has been around for a decade, with tens of thousands of apps for all kinds of phones. Some carriers even included Handango's specific store app, which existed years before the iPhone came along.

genovelle
Nov 13, 2009, 07:52 AM
I can totally understand his frustration. His job is to make his application better. When there is a big bug that sneaks into the application but isn't caught before the release of the app. You discover it after several people complain (and several in FB terms is probably thousands) but you can fix the problem in an hour. But then you need to wait 2-3 weeks for the application to be approved by apple. In the mean time you can't do jack **** because the app store is completely controlled by Apple. Oh and the user has to deal with the bug until Apple approves the update which at the current rate can be anywhere from a week to three weeks (or more as noted below).

His job is made harder because of Apple's BS. Why would you want your job to be harder than it needs to be? Of course you don't want your job to be harder. So why say that his job should be any different than your own.

Nevermind the other developers out there like Cerulean Studio's who haven't heard a single peep from Apple about their Trillian app for the iPhone for over 3 months. THREE MONTHS.

It's pretty clear that while one developer has the capability to be reassigned to better things, not all developers are. As a result he chose to make his life easier. Others can't, but my guess is that if they had the choice they too would switch away from the App Store.

Look at Steven Frank (from Panic) who tried to ditch the iPhone for philosophical reasons as well. He wasn't able to leave. But my guess is his success rate would be higher now with the newer Android devices (Droid and Droid Eris/Hero).

This isn't just one developer having problems. It's a LOT of big developers who are seeing issues. meanwhile more fart apps, flashlight apps and trash are loaded up on the store for no good reason. But those who actually want to make your life easier are getting nothing but grief (or in the case of Cerulean Studios' NOTHING).

Look at the bigger picture is what I'm saying.

It could have something to do with the fact that Apple actually review the apps to some degree. They review more apps in a week as some of these platforms have available on their phones after a year of trying. Keep in mind that he worked for Facebook and if they are relying on one programmer for this app then thats their failure.

This guy is just trying to draw attention to himself so that whatever he has been working on in his spare time will be noticed more easily. Give it a little time. He will have a start up of his own of some kind and will use this as a soap box to get everyones attention as the guy who Apple made mad because he didn't like the process of writing for an app that wasn't open sourced on a embedded device.

If he was writing for the Wii, Xbox, or even VERIZONS none Andriod phones this process would have been far more restrictive. If Apple allow these cry babies to force them to make there phone less secure the making it a free for all or even changing the policies that clearly make it a superior platform, shame on them. Stick with what works! One developer at one company is not a great loss. There is a price to get to play with the best of anything, if you can't play by the rules you should leave.

iOrlando
Nov 13, 2009, 08:05 AM
Good developers dislike regulation, but in the case of apps, I think its needed. Without regulation, I can just go and make some crap app (that wouldn't work) put a $0.99 price and hope for 20-40 fools a month to accidently buy it. Repeat this step probably 100s of times with clueless "developers" who don't know what they are doing. Regulation at least guarantees the app works, although the functionality and usefulness of the app is up for judgement by the end user.

derondantzler
Nov 13, 2009, 08:29 AM
Palm and Android both allow this if I recall.

Yet still both platforms aren't nearly as good as the iPhone in general terms. As far as their application distribution, not nearly as good either. Just search the web for all the hate that people give Android Market.

ppnkg
Nov 13, 2009, 08:53 AM
at last somebody criticizes apple for the right reasons

w00master
Nov 13, 2009, 10:13 AM
I'm seriously amazed that ANYONE is defending Apple here.

w00master

kingtj
Nov 13, 2009, 10:32 AM
If Apple was rejecting applications because they use private APIs, then that's just the sort of thing Hewitt was complaining about in the first place. He wants a "free and open" programming environment, with nobody saying "Hey, you can't put this on our platform unless you code it THIS way!"

Honestly, I think there needs to be a "middle ground" here. I don't see Apple EVER doing things the way Hewitt wants them done. This isn't the world wide web, where essentially, "anything goes" and your content gets viewed on all manner of devices and browsers. This is a proprietary, commercial device, marketed by a company that places a lot of value on being able to control all aspects of the products they sell (from the "opening the box" experience to the software, to the customer service experience years after the sale).

That said, the *review process* itself needs major revamping! Most iPhone developers aren't screaming about wanting everything totally "free and open". They're simply saying, "Hey Apple! If you're going to reject my app or an update to it, be PROMPT about it, and give me DETAILS on exactly what I can change to make it acceptable to you!" Truthfully, with as many apps as are being submitted these days, Apple will probably need to streamline the process. Stop manually reviewing each and every submission. Instead, do some automated code review to make sure certain "off limits" things aren't in the code, and then default to accepting the app. Provide an easy way for people to "flag" an app in the store though, so live humans can review it as requested for violations, and remove it if needed.


Reading some of the posts about this on Twitter, it may (or may not be) about the Three20 project (Objective C library for developing iPhone apps) that was developed by Hewitt. It apparently was using private APIs and may have been getting other people's apps, who were using the code, rejected. Conceivably, the Facebook app could have been using the same private API calls and was continually getting rejected. Supposedly, Apple has some new way to check out if you're using these APIs. Hewitt may have just got fed up with the situation and decided to quit.

rhett7660
Nov 13, 2009, 11:34 AM
I'm seriously amazed that ANYONE is defending Apple here.

w00master

That is ok, between this post and your previous post, I am surprised you are still here. Because you are offering so much to this conversation by just saying that all of the Apple people are just koolaid drinking fanboys. Really.

Darkroom
Nov 13, 2009, 11:45 AM
I'm seriously amazed that ANYONE is defending Apple here.

w00master

fanboys will be fanboys

andylyon
Nov 13, 2009, 11:49 AM
Incidently a facebook app update has just been released!

techwarrior
Nov 13, 2009, 11:54 AM
Interesting...perhaps this developers whining got somebody's attention at Apple, 3.03 is available on App Store... very short list of enhancements... "Bug Fixes" and "Japanese/Chinese Localization".

sidewinder
Nov 13, 2009, 12:29 PM
I'm seriously amazed that ANYONE is defending Apple here.

w00master

Have you not understood a single post discussing the merits of Apple approving apps? The simple fact is that it is a good idea. Apple's execution is somewhat flawed and could certainly be improved.

S-

DustyLBottoms
Nov 13, 2009, 12:30 PM
Facebook just updated this afternoon. I wonder if Apple rush approved the update because of all this?

NiteWaves77
Nov 13, 2009, 12:40 PM
It's a shame the scenario played out this way. Joe's Facebook app is brilliantly crafted, easily the best (imperfections and all).

But I'm disappointed that he's thrown his arms up and decided to give up. To me, this is akin to the weak willed who threaten to leave the US when a regime philosophically detestable to them come into power. So you'd rather run away with your tail between your legs than stick around and strong arm your commanders into a compromise?

Hewitt, if Facebook had the cojones to support him, could have been the spark in the room of dynamite Cocoa Touch developers needed to convey to Apple that their review process has got to dematerialize. Or, at the very least, turn the austerity knob down from "11". The Facebook app is high profile and an 800lb gorilla. That's leverage to be used.

But Hewitt has his own agenda, and Zuckerburg's too busy picking his toe cheese to care, apparently.

NightStorm
Nov 13, 2009, 12:46 PM
I'm seriously amazed that ANYONE is defending Apple here.

w00master
I'll make this point again... How is what Apple is doing any different than what Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony do with approvals for applications on their devices? If anything, Apple should be commended for giving everyone access to the development environment at a significantly reduced cost. The reason for the approval process is clear: they want to do QA before the product is released because if something bad happens, every news organization will feature headlines about it for a week.

NiteWaves77
Nov 13, 2009, 12:54 PM
http://www.joehewitt.com/about.php

That guy doesn't touch tens of thousands of n-tier professional developers who write call center suites, engineering applications, Wall Street Financial applications, Power Plant applications, etc.

Seriously, he's a kid who got known for Firebug. BFD.

That's an absurd argument. Hewitt has written one of the most popular applications for an emerging consumer platform. You're going to discount his significance in this context because he doesn't write industrial applications for narrow markets? What's your criterion for becoming a relevant developer -- coding packet switching routines for an Avaya KSU? Please.

Furthermore, his age is irrelevant.

Your post smells of jealousy and indignant condescension. I'm sorry that you haven't attained the fame you dreamt of by writing a nuclear power plant management system in ADA. Try to get over yourself.

purd002
Nov 13, 2009, 12:54 PM
ironically facebook 3.03 was just released . . .

str1f3
Nov 13, 2009, 01:11 PM
I'll make this point again... How is what Apple is doing any different than what Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony do with approvals for applications on their devices? If anything, Apple should be commended for giving everyone access to the development environment at a significantly reduced cost. The reason for the approval process is clear: they want to do QA before the product is released because if something bad happens, every news organization will feature headlines about it for a week.

Consoles have never been regulated to this extent. Apple wants you to add a +17 to your app because it can access the web. Rogue Amoeba was told by Apple that they can't even use the likeness of Macs on their Airfoil app. It's hilarious because Apple already allows you to do this on OSX and provides you the ability to do so. Apple initially denied the NIN app because of language yet they sold the song in the store.

This has become so sickening and I hope Apple gets hurt by this. You can't keep running commercial of apps by third party devs and then treat them like garbage.

I no longer want to hear this excuse for bad press. Virtually every other platform now has an app store and have to deal with the same issue, yet they are far more open as a product.

CubusX
Nov 13, 2009, 01:24 PM
Apple has never changed this policy and they never will.

I would have liked to see the promised updates for Facebook. It seems Apple may have fallen down on the job (no pun intended).

diamond.g
Nov 13, 2009, 01:39 PM
I'll make this point again... How is what Apple is doing any different than what Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony do with approvals for applications on their devices? If anything, Apple should be commended for giving everyone access to the development environment at a significantly reduced cost. The reason for the approval process is clear: they want to do QA before the product is released because if something bad happens, every news organization will feature headlines about it for a week.

Microsoft does offer a way for anyone to make apps creators.xna.com (http://creators.xna.com). If I remember correctly your game get peer reviewed, and can be sold on the 360 for a small fee after passing peer review. There is also Kodu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodu_Game_Lab) which allows pretty much anyone to code for Microsoft Platforms with an Alice like language (not saying it is the best thing in the world, but it is a easy start).

icedmocha
Nov 13, 2009, 03:58 PM
I'll make this point again... How is what Apple is doing any different than what Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony do with approvals for applications on their devices? If anything, Apple should be commended for giving everyone access to the development environment at a significantly reduced cost. The reason for the approval process is clear: they want to do QA before the product is released because if something bad happens, every news organization will feature headlines about it for a week.

I don't recall massive outcry from the devs on those other platforms. Why do you think that is?

g3signal
Nov 13, 2009, 05:31 PM
I don't recall massive outcry from the devs on those other platforms. Why do you think that is?

So he thinks he's a rockstar programmer and should act like one. I think it's just ridiculous. So in the end the application was given to someone else to continue and nothing changes. So is this 2 seconds taken from his fame or what?

The Apple Application review process is going to be the topic for turmoil now? So after Apple is beat down, who is next to rise and beat on then. It's all becoming really insane to me. It's nothing more than flavour of the month reporting and debating to be all.

valkraider
Nov 13, 2009, 06:14 PM
an established global business like Facebook

that f_ing breaks their sh_t every other day.

Seriously, facebook is constantly screwing stuff up. I HATE that all my damn friends use it so I am FORCED to use it to communicate with them only because to most of them anymore facebook=internet.

facebook can't even get chronological order right...

surrealestate
Nov 14, 2009, 01:07 AM
I don't recall massive outcry from the devs on those other platforms. Why do you think that is?

Um, the same sort of NDA that Apple had in the beta phase of their developer's program?

surrealestate
Nov 14, 2009, 01:30 AM
Anyone complaining about Apple's app approval process has clearly not developed for other mobile devices for the US Carriers. Even with its faults, the App Store is a walk in the park compared to Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon.

1) All US carriers are very restrictive about what new apps and games they will carry. Even big companies like WB and Disney have had major apps and games turned down. The carrier decks have limited space.

2) The signing/DRM and uploading process for all carriers can be very arcane, with unclear procedures, long delays for hearing back about the status of content, etc.

3) US Carriers require an extensive amount of testing on all builds that they are going to sell. Most of the phones on Verizon, for example, require going through the BREW development process, which entails getting the game build for each handset tested by NSTL, at a cost of $700-1000 per build. Verizon does further testing after that, and neither BREW or Verizon offer a full test bed for network features.

4) European carriers don't do their own testing -- they simply don't guarantee that games and apps will work. As a result, there is a large amount of piracy for apps in the European market, and because devices often aren't tied to a specific carrier/carrier storefront, it's often easier to find the games you want on the pirate sites than it is to buy them.

5)US mobile carriers have very strict content guidelines for most mobile content, including ringtones and graphics. Each carrier has a different content management partner and infrastructure with different procedures.

6)If you plan to submit your game to a US mobile carrier, each carrier will have a list of phones you are required to support, usually about 40 of their better sellers. While this generally includes modern top-of-the-line phones, it also will include some really horrible 4 year old handsets with no features. This has been a big reason for the lack of innovation on the carriers -- it's hard to launch a great new location-aware app if you are required to run it on phones without a GPS, and you can't easily launch a 3D game, since only about 6 or 7 phones will run it, and the other required phones won't.

7)Apple's process puts the onus on the developer to properly test their app, with a minimum of testing on Apple's side. A full test from Apple would cost money, probably hundreds of dollars, and would pretty much eliminate the ability to offer 99 cent apps or free apps. The penalty you pay for insufficient testing is that it may take 3 weeks to get your bug fixes live on the store. Inconvenient, but poetic justice.

8) The Danger Sidekick app store was a real nightmare. Danger prides itself on the fact that nobody submitting an app can get it approved in less than 3 passes. Most of the reasons they turn down apps have to do with how underpowered and buggy the Danger hardware is. Furthermore, in order to sell anything on that store, you have to cut a deal with Danger as well as the carrier offering the device.

So, all said, the reason mobile developers are so excited about iPhone is that for all its faults, the App Store is a breath of fresh air compared to most carrier marketplaces. It's substantially less restrictive than phone carriers or any of the console manufacturers, the cost to get in is minimal, and the process is quite a bit more transparent.

While the process is not perfect, much of the problems people are having are probably attributable to the sheer volume of submissions every week. They are processing thousands of apps during every 40-hour week with a finite staff; the figure I've heard is that the average app gets 6 minutes of review time, which certainly would account for the few flubs they've made.

Considering the hoops Facebook has probably had to jump through for every other phone they support, Hewett just sounds like a whiner. And a web-based Facebook mobile client is even more of a hassle, take it from someone who had to ensure that a major entertainment company's mobile site worked properly on over 500 handsets. If facebook wants to be everywhere, they will pay a price, and the price on the App Store is pretty reasonable.

Rodimus Prime
Nov 14, 2009, 02:52 AM
Anyone complaining about Apple's app approval process has clearly not developed for other mobile devices for the US Carriers. Even with its faults, the App Store is a walk in the park compared to Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon.


Blah blah blah full of miss infomation and comparing Dumb phones to the iPhone

Please compare the iPhone to other smart phones before you go your standard bashing crap and miss information.


I got all those point you made on how to get in to the Carriers apps store. Guess what the US carriers do not block you from downloading 3rd party apps from other location or even installing your own ring tones on the phone. Google offered its apps on multiple phones NOT threw the apps store.

On my old LG CU 400 AT&T labeled and locked I downloaded multiple apps from third parties. Yeah very few worked but that is not the point.

Also all the crap you listed other failing is it it compared iPhone to dumb phones which are VERY different ball parks. In the smart phone world guess what those phones have never had the restrictions you are trying to put on them.

People would not be so up in arms about the crap apple is doing for the apps store if people would install apps from places other than the App store. Then apple can be as hard as they want on what gets in THEIR app store since others can make there own or load them off there own site.

mdriftmeyer
Nov 16, 2009, 06:10 PM
I get the point. Really.

He might be a great developer - but his app crashes consistently for me.

He is philosophically opposed to the process. Tough. QA takes time.
I don't get to write and deploy code - I watch it go through committees and batteries of tests. Reviews are part of life - even within Firefox I'm sure Mozilla reviews code.


He should test it before sending it in. No loops that way.
To me he is a whiner.

He should have strict bounds checking, rich exception handling before he submits his social app--I don't know how we'll survive without it.

Liquorpuki
Nov 16, 2009, 06:21 PM
I don't recall massive outcry from the devs on those other platforms. Why do you think that is?

For Nintendo back in the 80's, there was massive outcry. Not only did they gatekeep but they had a high licensing fee and capped the number of releases per year per developer. So yeah, devs were pissed. Atari even lied to the patent office just so they could reverse engineer the lockout chip (and got sued for it).

So if you don't recall, you probably weren't paying attention

mdriftmeyer
Nov 16, 2009, 06:30 PM
Reading some of the posts about this on Twitter, it may (or may not be) about the Three20 project (Objective C library for developing iPhone apps) that was developed by Hewitt. It apparently was using private APIs and may have been getting other people's apps, who were using the code, rejected. Conceivably, the Facebook app could have been using the same private API calls and was continually getting rejected. Supposedly, Apple has some new way to check out if you're using these APIs. Hewitt may have just got fed up with the situation and decided to quit.

There is a reason you don't use Apple private APIs in Cocoa. They are fluid and will break your application.

Public APIs are meant for mass consumption and have been through several levels of SQA.

You write your own private APIs for the functionality you want that is not current in Public APIs. You submit requests for your functionality to become part of the Public APIs if you feel it would save a lot of time in the future.

Using private APIs by the parent Company violates any basic common knowledge of OOA/OOD.

rhett7660
Nov 16, 2009, 06:40 PM
I don't recall massive outcry from the devs on those other platforms. Why do you think that is?

On reason might be because when was the last time a gaming console had 100K games for it?? I don't think any of them have. Could be wrong thou.

You have far more developers for the iPhone platform then you do for the games thus we hear about it more. I would also speculate that now that we live in an age of instant communication, we don't have to wait it to make the paper or trade magazine we are hearing about it much sooner and more often.

marksonamor
Nov 16, 2009, 11:55 PM
Hi,
According to me,Facebook application is very useful in the making of the i-phone application.It is very quit relevant to the i-phone application.

Compile 'em all
Nov 17, 2009, 01:38 AM
Hi,
According to me,Facebook application is very useful in the making of the i-phone application.It is very quit relevant to the i-phone application.

Wait, what?

nxfxcom
Jan 2, 2010, 08:20 PM
LOL
http://joehewitt.com/post/innocent-until-proven-guilty/

Barbs
Jan 4, 2010, 01:13 PM
LOL
http://joehewitt.com/post/innocent-until-proven-guilty/

That was posted by Joe Hewitt almost 5 months ago. Was it before or after he said he was no longer writing code for the facebook iphone app?

ct2k7
Jan 23, 2010, 06:22 AM
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=255247258033 (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=255247258033)

Now-a-days there are lots of iPhone and iPod Touch game/apps on appstore.Maximum good quality apps are paid.But apple gives developers an opportunity to give promotional code to the gamers.

In this group iPhone apps developer will share their apps/games promo codes for the iPhone game lovers.

And the gamers/user should make a review or atleast give a good rating for the promoted apps/games.

Get the Promo code :apple:,Write a review and enjoy your Freedom!

The Promo Codes are only available to US, thus alienating other users from your comment.

iphonedev11
Feb 15, 2010, 03:07 PM
I can't imagine that apple is too concerned with this. If a developer has problems, they can take their business elsewhere as far as Apple is concerned. They have definitely always been our way or the high way, which can be good and bad.