Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Acquires 'TestFlight' iOS Beta Testing Platform With Burstly Purchase
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How would going to Android help him test his iOS Apps?
His company learned to work around the policies with Testflight. Now they need a new strategy.
The answer to every criticism, constructive or not, isn't "just go to Android".
Yes I do - best way to integrate revision control into an IDE. It's way better than the **** in Visual Studio or Eclipse. So what is your comparison basis that is so superior?
----------
You should never work around policies as that brings you in hot water. It always can be considered as breaking the policies.
But it is really simple - accept the policies or leave the platform. No one is forcing people to develop for platforms where they don't like the policies...
So, there's no third option - continue to lobby for changes to the platform while dealing with the drawbacks?
Also, which features of TestFlight has Apple said they are shutting down? I didn't catch that in the story.
Tower.app. Github.app.
All through the Xcode 4.X versions it kept crashing randomly. In Xcode 5 it still doesn't properly support submodules, branches, etc
Moving on from TestFlight, this new service looks promising: http://www.installrapp.com
The process of registering devices is automated, so testers can have an app installed within a minute or so of receiving an invitation, without manual intervention by the developer. I haven't tried it, but have experience as a customer with TestFlight, and wondered why it took days for an app to be available for installation.
The process of registering devices is automated, so testers can have an app installed within a minute or so of receiving an invitation, without manual intervention by the developer. I haven't tried it, but have experience as a customer with TestFlight, and wondered why it took days for an app to be available for installation.
Actually, it's never that simple when dealing with (or even working for) large corporations.
Strange, I found especially Tower.app really annoying. And both are badly integrate able into Xcode - They stay external tools with all their disadvantages.
We started the day Apple launched the developer program. At that point we had 2 developers and 2 testers. There was 1 iPhone. A 100 device limit made sense then. Now that there are 10+ devices to support, 10+ developers on our team and 10+ million users who paid for our app, a 100 device/developer limit makes no sense.
Me too. At least a good simulator for iOS. I don't do development so I was unfamiliar with TestFlight.
I'm afraid of this too. I very extensively use TF to quickly deliver testable betas. I really am afraid of Apple messing it up or even discontinuing completely. So many GREAT things have been (at least for some time) made inaccessible after Apple's purchase - for example, SnappyCam. (BTW, I've lately published some figures of how SnappyCam compares to the stock Camera app, even on jailbroken devices. My iPhone 4 and 5-specific results are pretty interesting if anyone is into burst / action shooting . They also show removing SnappyCam from the AppStore was a big hit on the iOS platform. My iPhone 4-specific writeup is at https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18795155/ ; the iPhone 5-specific one is linked from the beginning of it.)
----------
I too had major problems with SVN support in Xcode. My solution was just synching with Eclipse. Works wonderfully and has never caused me any problems - even with Xcode (non-Eclipse-native) projects.
SnappyCam - see above. It's sorely missing from the ecosystem and I'm afraid only the iPhone 6 will receive it (again) built into the firmware, not current models.
Yes I have an iPhone 5S, it took a year for them to implement that technology. I'm saying I hope it doesn't take that long before we see updates from TestFlight.
Yes! I'm really happy about this; TestFlight is an amazing product and we make extensive use of FlightPath, too.
I was really disappointed to see FlightPath discontinued without notice the other day, but this could be fantastic.
Apple's developer portal and statistics are woefully inadequate. On the one hand, there is a strong emphasis (rightly) on protecting user privacy, but on the other hand Apple provide no way to accurately track how customers are using your Application or what devices they're using. That means developers are forced to integrate 3rd-party services and trust that they behave themselves and ensure user privacy. Personally, we've always only used TestFlight and FlightPath, because we trust them.
For example, we were recently considering dropping iOS5 support. Sure, there are statistics about what percentage of the market is on iOS7, etc; but there's no way for us to know how many of our existing customers were running iOS5. Maybe we were providing a niche service to those users still trapped on the old version of the OS by maintaining that support - who knows?
Since we integrated FlightPath, we saw hard evidence that allowed us to make the decision to drop iOS5 support (in a coming update). That's the kind of service we need to make informed decisions. It's a shame that we had to integrate a 3rd-party library to do that, though: IMO, that should be a service which Apple themselves provide to developers. As I mentioned, customer privacy is the most important thing and we always feel uneasy about integrating 3rd-party data-gathering libraries in to our applications, no matter how much we trust them.
I really hope they don't neuter the product; as developers we pay 30% of our sales to Apple for the infrastructure they provide. The iTunes store is making record profits, and I haven't seen reports of an explosion in movie or music sales, so I think it's fair to say Apple has financial room to provide more. I think all of us would agree that vital services that TF and FP provided like checkpoints and remote logging would be a good use of those funds. They allow us to gather statistics on how you are using our applications, and what areas we should focus on. It's never used for building a profile for targeting advertising or anything like that - all of the data is always contained within TF, and can only be used to help us make better decisions.
iTunes Connect is a total joke right now. I honestly couldn't believe it the first time I saw it; it's like something from the late 1990s. It provides absolutely no services besides listing your app and viewing sales. If they integrated TF and FP as-is, it would instantly become a fantastic service that would rival the portal you get on the Google Play store.
I was really disappointed to see FlightPath discontinued without notice the other day, but this could be fantastic.
Apple's developer portal and statistics are woefully inadequate. On the one hand, there is a strong emphasis (rightly) on protecting user privacy, but on the other hand Apple provide no way to accurately track how customers are using your Application or what devices they're using. That means developers are forced to integrate 3rd-party services and trust that they behave themselves and ensure user privacy. Personally, we've always only used TestFlight and FlightPath, because we trust them.
For example, we were recently considering dropping iOS5 support. Sure, there are statistics about what percentage of the market is on iOS7, etc; but there's no way for us to know how many of our existing customers were running iOS5. Maybe we were providing a niche service to those users still trapped on the old version of the OS by maintaining that support - who knows?
Since we integrated FlightPath, we saw hard evidence that allowed us to make the decision to drop iOS5 support (in a coming update). That's the kind of service we need to make informed decisions. It's a shame that we had to integrate a 3rd-party library to do that, though: IMO, that should be a service which Apple themselves provide to developers. As I mentioned, customer privacy is the most important thing and we always feel uneasy about integrating 3rd-party data-gathering libraries in to our applications, no matter how much we trust them.
I really hope they don't neuter the product; as developers we pay 30% of our sales to Apple for the infrastructure they provide. The iTunes store is making record profits, and I haven't seen reports of an explosion in movie or music sales, so I think it's fair to say Apple has financial room to provide more. I think all of us would agree that vital services that TF and FP provided like checkpoints and remote logging would be a good use of those funds. They allow us to gather statistics on how you are using our applications, and what areas we should focus on. It's never used for building a profile for targeting advertising or anything like that - all of the data is always contained within TF, and can only be used to help us make better decisions.
iTunes Connect is a total joke right now. I honestly couldn't believe it the first time I saw it; it's like something from the late 1990s. It provides absolutely no services besides listing your app and viewing sales. If they integrated TF and FP as-is, it would instantly become a fantastic service that would rival the portal you get on the Google Play store.
Your anti privacy statement is nonsense. *ASK* your users, not try to rip info from their lives you are not allowed to get...
How would going to Android help him test his iOS Apps?
His company learned to work around the policies with Testflight. Now they need a new strategy.
The answer to every criticism, constructive or not, isn't "just go to Android".
My point is that there are these nasty developer policies that were put in place by evil Apple, forcing them to use things like Testflight, which Apple will likely now shut down 'to screw folks' like him.
So I ask the question, did you know these policies were in place when you signed up. If so and one moves forward rather than going with another software platform, there is little ground to gripe cause you did it to yourself.
----------
My point exactly. Or take another road. Made a valid use case for why the policies should be changed and under what circumstances. I'm sure if someone went to Apple and Tim Cook with a well thought out and non whining proposal for exactly why developers, especially businesses need a way to beta test before running out software, much like how Apple does the same with iOS versions, particularly now that so many offices etc are using iOS based devices, Apple would listen
Perhaps that is part of why they bought this company. Someone made that argument and convinced them. Heck maybe the company made the argument and out themselves up for sale if Apple wanted them. Why invent the wheel when you can buy it
Last edited:
I don't know if you're referring to me, but if you are you misunderstood my point.
Checkpoints are no more invasive than McDonalds keeping a count of which burgers people order, or a hotel keeping a tally of which types of rooms people book (e.g. 80% of customers want a double room), or the road authorities keeping a tally of how many cars drive down a particular road.
A checkpoint could tell a developer, for instance, how often customers go to an advanced settings screen. If a high number of customers go to that screen, you know it's a popular feature and you might want to think about making it easier to accomplish that task.
That's hardly a violation of privacy; it's the kind of data which is collected all the time in the real world. The developers can't possibly use that information to target you specifically; it guides general policy rather than tailoring your experience.
I only wish that these kinds of features could be integrated in to the native SDK; that is, provided by Apple. It's an essential part of application development and leads to better quality apps, so it's in the interests of both parties.
The thing I see many people missing from stating that they are happy that TestFlight was bought by Apple is: TestFlight actually worked.
Seriously, the workflow was totally easy and it even had this application that detected when you created an archive and asked you to upload it to TestFlight. There was only one gap in the whole process: Registering UUIDs in iTunes Connect. TestFlight even uploaded and symbolicated crash reports a thing which iTunes connect still totally fails with.
Apple can only mess this up. There is nothing they can do to make it better. There is a lot of potential to mess this up completely though. I might as well look for an alternative now *sigh*
I can see them discontinuing TestFlight service in two months, then having nothing for about a year and then announcing an inferior product as part of iTunes Connect.
Seriously, the workflow was totally easy and it even had this application that detected when you created an archive and asked you to upload it to TestFlight. There was only one gap in the whole process: Registering UUIDs in iTunes Connect. TestFlight even uploaded and symbolicated crash reports a thing which iTunes connect still totally fails with.
Apple can only mess this up. There is nothing they can do to make it better. There is a lot of potential to mess this up completely though. I might as well look for an alternative now *sigh*
I can see them discontinuing TestFlight service in two months, then having nothing for about a year and then announcing an inferior product as part of iTunes Connect.
That sounds cool testFlight.
Is it true it is possible to see the app logs on the beta tester device as they test it as well as crash reports ?
And also on the fly updates of beta apps ?
I want to have it !
Is it true it is possible to see the app logs on the beta tester device as they test it as well as crash reports ?
And also on the fly updates of beta apps ?
I want to have it !
They are worse. They are like McD putting cams in your home or car to see what you do with the burger, or the hotel putting cams in the rooms to watch how you use the room.
And this is no info you should have without asking for it - everything else is spying on the user.
It actually is. Perhaps not in you opinion but here in Germany it is even a criminal act. You have to ask if you can get this info and have to respect a no.
I don't. Apple supported spying on users is a thing I definitely don't want to see.
No, just no. Not at all. A checkpoint is essentially a button which increments a counter (like McDonald's "customers served" tally). It gets triggered via an internet notification, but it is nothing like what you described. All the developer gets is a count of how many times the checkpoint was passed; no more than that.
You clearly have no experience of using checkpoints.
I am also in Germany and familiar with German law on this subject, and there is absolutely no way it is a criminal act. The Bundesdatenschutzgesetz does not regulate this type of data because it is not personal data and contains absolutely no personal data of any kind (BDSG §3.1):
If it was a true criminal offence, nobody would be able to count anything! Bored children would need to ask the drivers' permission when counting red vs blue cars!
It is spying on my behaviour on my systems and using my data-packages to transmit its results to you.
BDSG is the wrong law. The correct one is http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computersabotage
A 3rd party has no right to do any unauthorised actions on my systems.
Not the counting is the problem - The way you do it is: hidden and by sabotaging the integrity of other it systems.
ROFL! That is a hilarious interpretation of the law.
For one thing, section 303 is part of Chapter 27 - damage of property (sachbeschädigungen). It is quite clearly about hacking (again, clue is in the name - Computersabotage) and nothing else. As the wikipedia article you linked to quite clearly states, it is intended to apply to DDoS attacks and malware (worms, viruses, etc). It does not in any way apply to checkpoints.
Official Translation:
Not a single word of that applies in this case. Data processing is not interfered with, the data in question is of no substantial significance, no data or systems are altered, deleted or destroyed, and there is no intent to damage anybody.
It is not against the law because there really is nothing wrong with it; this kind of data collection has been going on for centuries. Train operators, for example, send people on the trains who tally the number of passengers so they can better plan their schedule. They don't ask for explicit permission from every passenger, because it really is not necessary.
Oh, and not that it's relevant to this discussion, but that law doesn't prevent any 3rd-party from doing anything you don't agree with on your system. It only prevents them from tampering with your data. That particular law doesn't prohibit them from turning your machine in to a Bitcoin-mining slave, for example.