App Store Submissions Now Being Reviewed for iPhone OS 3.0 Compatibility

[ivladster]

Good Job Apple

Im happy that Apple cares about things like this, other companies just let bunch of junk and errors run their phones and app stores.

Developers shouldn't be whining! You're a developer you should care about your customers too, not just Apple.

 

[benlee]

3.0 will still be released during WWDC, along with preview of final version of Snow Leopard.

I think WWDC this year will focus on two things: First half toward iPhone OS 3.0, and second half toward Snow Leopard (released during Autumn)'

One more Thing: First Blu-Ray Macs, the all new Mac Pro.

I think it is likely to be Snow Leopard then iPhone OS. just a guess.

Didn't a new Mac Pro just recently come out?

 

[fenrus110]

Beginning today, all submissions to the App Store will be reviewed on the latest beta of iPhone OS 3.0. If your app submission is not compatible with iPhone OS 3.0, it will not be approved.

 

[Mitch1984]

This seems a bit demanding to me. What is wrong with the current framework, where apps list system requirements? I would think 3.0 apps could be listed as such without forcing all developers to either ensure 3.0 compatibility or have their app removed.

Let's hope Apple doesn't start requiring all applications for the Mac to be Snow-Leopard compatible once that comes out! (I don't really think they would.)

Because everyone will go mad and blame Apple and the iPhone rather than the developers for not ensuring 3.0 compatibility.

 

[admanimal]

Beginning today, all submissions to the App Store will be reviewed on the latest beta of iPhone OS 3.0. If your app submission is not compatible with iPhone OS 3.0, it will not be approved.

Right, so as of now all submissions must be built using the 2.2.1 (or earlier) SDK but must run acceptably on a device running the 3.0 firmware. This is different from what the OP posted, which is that apps will only be approved if they are built using the 3.0 SDK (...not sure if this is actually what he meant to say). Apple has not yet said that it is OK to submit apps built against the 3.0 SDK (nor would you want to since most people wouldn't be able to use it yet).

EDIT: this was merged from another thread where someone was talking about submitting apps with the 3.0 SDK...so the OP I'm referring to is not the OP of this thread.

 

[dagamer34]

It's not a ridiculous comment. Obviously the situations are not identical, but millions of people using an iPod touch will presumably not get a free upgrade to 3.0. They will have to purchase it and download it.

As I said in my second post (which I posted just before your reply, so you probably didn't see it before you replied), my main objection was for the benefit of smaller developers. One of the reasons that I love the App Store is that a wide variety of developers can reach a broad audience. If it is easy for them to make their apps ready for 3.0, then that eliminates my main objection.

The main problem I have is that testing an app on hardware requires having 3.0 on your iPhone/iPod Touch. Most "little guys" don't have multiple units lying around for testing, since Apple has said not to install the beta firmware on your primary device. This leads me to believe that the firmware needs to come out sooner rather than later, because it puts a developer in limbo if they want to test their apps for 3.0, but want to keep a stable iPhone OS on their phone for typical usage.

 

[AiralynRose]

The main problem I have is that testing an app on hardware requires having 3.0 on your iPhone/iPod Touch. Most "little guys" don't have multiple units lying around for testing, since Apple has said not to install the beta firmware on your primary device. This leads me to believe that the firmware needs to come out sooner rather than later, because it puts a developer in limbo if they want to test their apps for 3.0, but want to keep a stable iPhone OS on their phone for typical usage.

This is exactly my current issue. I only have ONE iPhone. I've only developed ONE app. I don't want to install 3.0 beta, but I guess I am going to have to. When the new iPhone is released i'll be keeping this phone for development/backup only... but until then i only have 1.

 

[Shiner]

3.0 will still be released during WWDC, along with preview of final version of Snow Leopard.

I think WWDC this year will focus on two things: First half toward iPhone OS 3.0, and second half toward Snow Leopard (released during Autumn)'

One more Thing: First Blu-Ray Macs, the all new Mac Pro.

You had me till Blu-Ray Macs and a new Mac Pro. Close.

 

[GenNovE]

i think this is awesome.

I have wanted to use the etrade app to do my day trading but i have been unable due to the app crashing & shutting down on the beta os.

Finally a company that demands a change and makes sure La-z half assed programmers get of their ass.

Kudos apple.

 

[iVoid]

This seems a bit demanding to me. What is wrong with the current framework, where apps list system requirements? I would think 3.0 apps could be listed as such without forcing all developers to either ensure 3.0 compatibility or have their app removed.

Let's hope Apple doesn't start requiring all applications for the Mac to be Snow-Leopard compatible once that comes out! (I don't really think they would.)

Well, with Mac OS X they have no way of enforcing that (fortunately).

With the App Store they have the power to force the devs to keep their apps current or get removed from the store.

Seems a bit draconian to me too.

 

[Lunchbox700]

This kind of sucks for 1st gen ipod touch owners because I wasn't sure if I was gonna get the update since it doesn't offer much for the 1st gen touch but if new apps might not work I might have to.

 

[twoodcc]

alright! great news! means that new iphone is hoping right around the corner! can't wait for wwdc!

 

[alchemistmuffin]

This is exactly my current issue. I only have ONE iPhone. I've only developed ONE app. I don't want to install 3.0 beta, but I guess I am going to have to. When the new iPhone is released i'll be keeping this phone for development/backup only... but until then i only have 1.

You have to update it! It's a huge risk, but there's no other choice.

Another way is to find a used iPod touch on eBay.

 

[alchemistmuffin]

This kind of sucks for 1st gen ipod touch owners because I wasn't sure if I was gonna get the update since it doesn't offer much for the 1st gen touch but if new apps might not work I might have to.

1st gen iPod touch will be able to get 3.0, but that's it. This is the last massive version upgrade for iPod touch 1st gen. After that, for 4.0, you need a new iPod touch. (which is a must, since iPod touch battery won't last for 1 min by the time 4.0 is released)

 

[iPhoneNYC]

Clean up the house, we're expecting company!

 

[AtlasBoy]

This seems a bit demanding to me. What is wrong with the current framework, where apps list system requirements? I would think 3.0 apps could be listed as such without forcing all developers to either ensure 3.0 compatibility or have their app removed.

Let's hope Apple doesn't start requiring all applications for the Mac to be Snow-Leopard compatible once that comes out! (I don't really think they would.)

If I've paid money for an app, and it stops working after 3.0, I'm going to be pissed. It's in the developers best interest too cause they can't sale apps that don't work once everyone moves to 3.0. Apple also wants to be able to advertise that they have xx number of apps in the app store for 3.0 and they can't if they don't know if they work or not. Apple is completely right to make sure developers update their apps (if needed). This is common practice in the software development world. If the platform that your app runs on gets upgraded (hardware or software) you re-certify your app. Thats part of being a developer.

 

[AtlasBoy]

This pisses me off. I've been working on an app for a few months (http://spendly.com). We've tested in OS 3.0, but ignored the bugs, as they're related to the OS and *not* our app. How can we be required to code/launch based on an OS that's too buggy to use full time.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Actually, it's easy to make changes to work with 3.0.

Apple has guidelines on making apps work with 3.0 with just a minor tweaks in code. They have posted the guideline on their website, under read me.

It's actually very easy:

1) Test your app in 3.0
2) Log your bugs
3) report OS bugs to Apple
4) Wait for the 3.0 version that fixes the bugs
5) Retest your app.
6) repeat as needed.

 

[kas23]

That's great news. All those crappy apps out there without somebody taking care of it!
Less app, better quality and more stability.

I agree with this sentiment. It's time Apple took out the trash and this is an excellent way of doing it. There are too many developers out there who basically just dumped thousands of apps on the App Store without any meaningful updates/support. They are just playing the numbers game; the more crap you have in the app store, the more money you will make just by chance alone. This new rule passes more responsibility to the developer - if you truly have a worthwhile app in the App Store, you should take time to make sure it works. But, most importantly, this ensures compatibility for the end-user

 

[kas23]

This is exactly my current issue. I only have ONE iPhone. I've only developed ONE app. I don't want to install 3.0 beta, but I guess I am going to have to. When the new iPhone is released i'll be keeping this phone for development/backup only... but until then i only have 1.

This isn't totally bad news for you. If your one app is removed, then you'll just have to resubmit it in a short while. You can even then re-charge for it (at a discounted price) or offer it for free for a week so existing customers don't get mad. Or, you can find another developer to possibly test it for you. But, like others have said, you probably should pick up a refurbished/used Touch just for testing purposes.

If I may ask, what app is this btw?

 

[jnguyen4]

Release date of 3.0

Does this mean 3.0 will be released as soon as WWDC? Someone told me that it will be released with the new iPhone in July. Does that have any credit?

 

[Lochias]

What's the problem?

So what do you think will happen if developers don't update their apps to work with 3.0 but customers have paid for them? How will they handle refunds of that magnitude?

What magnitude? Have so many customers lost the app?

Even if Apple removes it from the store, I still have it on my Mac and/or on the iPhone. When and if there is an update, it does need to be 3.0 compatible. What's the big deal?

 

[AtlasBoy]

If it's easy to update the code to make apps compatible with 3.0, as people have suggested so far, then I'm less against this than I was originally. I was thinking of "little guy" developers who might not be able to make changes as quickly or as easily as the big names, as well as people who have to pay to update to 3.0 (presumably, iPod Touch owners).

It sounds like the latter (Touch users) would be the most inconvenienced, then. Either they'll have to pay for the update, or stop downloading new apps once 3.0 comes out. This might cause some frustration and confusion among those users, but not among iPhone users then. I would probably be upset if I had an iPod touch, but since I have an iPhone I shouldn't have to worry then.

I understand the point your making, and I would add that the "little guy" developers need to commit to maintaining their app over time. You can't just put it out and forget about it. Maintenance is not as sexy as new development, but it's part of the game. One given is that the platform under your app will change over time - always has, always will. Apps need to be retested and fixed as needed. The good news is Apple has documented what needs to be done to achieve compatibility, and it's not a huge effort.

 

[designgeek]

I hope all the API's work...

 

[AtlasBoy]

What magnitude? Have so many customers lost the app?

Even if Apple removes it from the store, I still have it on my Mac and/or on the iPhone. When and if there is an update, it does need to be 3.0 compatible. What's the big deal?

I think the point was if you have an app on your iPhone, and update to 3.0, and the app stops working, you might request a refund because it does not work anymore. I don't think the post was about the fact the app would be removed from the store.

 

[akac]

This pisses me off. I've been working on an app for a few months (http://spendly.com). We've tested in OS 3.0, but ignored the bugs, as they're related to the OS and *not* our app. How can we be required to code/launch based on an OS that's too buggy to use full time.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I thought the same thing when I started moving to 3.0, only to find out that I was wrong *most* of the time (I still posted 5 bug reports), but the fact is that most of the things we think are OS bugs are really our bugs where we are doing things wrong. I think you'll find if you actually pay attention to the readmes and the Compatibility section of the Release Notes you can get 3.0 compatibility quickly.

I did tonight in about 2 hours.