Apple Gives Developers More Time to Update 'Outdated' Apps Before Removal

[tazinlwfl]

Removing it from the App Store doesn’t mean it’s removed from people who have bought/obtained the app. People will almost certainly be able to peruse their previously obtained apps and still get it.

Thank you! It sounds like we're talking about apps that: people have already paid for, have installed, are using, but haven't been updated / downloaded in 3 years...

It seems like everyone who uses those apps ARE using those apps, and they can continue to use them if they decide. But that might mean those users can't update to a new OS and expect those old apps to continue working if they're not updated. And if you choose not to update your OS and keep all the old, outdated apps you want, then so be it. But to want it both ways - expecting outdated apps to not only continue to be stagnant on the store, get no or few downloads, and are not properly supporting the latest devices/OS - is kind of absurd.

Keep your apps, don't remove them from your device, don't update your device... everything you want should work. If you want some new feature of the OS, but don't want that new OS to break your old apps, then petition the developers of your favorite apps for updates, or don't update your device. Apple demands very little here.

 

[ifxf]

This is just so Apple can prune the number of apps on its site instead of improving its primitive search capabilities.

 

[Crowbot]

Thank you! It sounds like we're talking about apps that: people have already paid for, have installed, are using, but haven't been updated / downloaded in 3 years...

It seems like everyone who uses those apps ARE using those apps, and they can continue to use them if they decide. But that might mean those users can't update to a new OS and expect those old apps to continue working if they're not updated. And if you choose not to update your OS and keep all the old, outdated apps you want, then so be it. But to want it both ways - expecting outdated apps to not only continue to be stagnant on the store, get no or few downloads, and are not properly supporting the latest devices/OS - is kind of absurd.

Keep your apps, don't remove them from your device, don't update your device... everything you want should work. If you want some new feature of the OS, but don't want that new OS to break your old apps, then petition the developers of your favorite apps for updates, or don't update your device. Apple demands very little here.

But there's no need for it to be that draconian. If Apple wants to de-list apps that haven't been updated in a while, that's fine. But to make them unavailable to paid users isn't right. Let them move these apps to a special area only available to previous downloaders. That way I can get a new phone but not lose any apps.

 

[dysamoria]

The last 17 apps I tried to download failed. Got a warning each time: “The developer needs to update this app to work on your device”

WTF? The store shouldn’t even let those apps download to your phone.

And this is not what’s happening with the app in question with the developer who I first saw reporting this, yet their app is on the slate for removal.

 

[topdrawer]

This is a very narrow way of looking at it. Like not every app needs update. Why should developers update something which is working fine? Also many of these apps are probably free. If you want the developers to update the app frequently, then they will have to start charging the money. Also what's up what that minimum threshold for downloads? If the app has less download then it dosen't mean it is not useful. It is just that it is not noticed by many people yet.

Or maybe I am missing something about Apple store. Comming from Android, where there are no restrictions like that.

Also many users dont like updating every up all the time. It isnt fun when you go to use an app you havent needed in a year and instead of getting right to it, it wants you to update first.

 

[cupcakes2000]

That's all well and good, but what if the rule or criteria Apple is using to take an app out of the store didn't exist at the time the developer created the app? Is that fair to the developer? For example, here is the criteria Apple is using in their recent "App Store Improvements" page:

Developers of apps that have not been updated within the last three years and fail to meet a minimal download threshold — meaning the app has not been downloaded at all or extremely few times during a rolling 12 month period — receive an email notifying them that their app has been identified for possible removal from the App Store.

Source: https://developer.apple.com/support/app-store-improvements/

Did these rules exist before this new announcement? If not, is it fair for Apple to apply them retroactively?

Funny, using a similar argument in reverse, for example Apples 30% cut and developers anger for it, results in being labelled a fan boy.
These rules existed when the developer started their account, and yet a vocal set of developers then accuse apple of being unfair or applying a 'tax' to them.
Apple are trying to run a business. A dev whom choses to do business with them, must abide by the rules, which are obviously able to be changed. They must also pay for the privilege of partnership. This is exactly the same in any sector of business, with every single other company.
And in this case, the rule is simply 'look after your property or we will no longer allow it to be listed'. Seems legit if you ask me.

This is still dumb. I have several old apps that haven't been updated in years that still work just fine. Not sure if the devs are still even active, some are paid.

Just proves that in this freakin "cloud" world you don't own anything even if you paid for it.

Except, you aren't losing the app, so you do still own it.

 

[Saturn007]

I checked Apple's developer agreement and found this (source):

4. Changes to Program Requirements or Terms Apple may change the Program Requirements or the terms of this Agreement at any time. New or modified Program Requirements will not retroactively apply to Applications already in distribution via the App Store or Custom App Distribution; provided however that You agree that Apple reserves the right to remove Applications from the App Store or Custom App Distribution that are not in compliance with the new or modified Program Requirements at any time.

Excellent find! And, here I thought Apple had good lawyers! How poorly written. It's worse than lawyerly gobbledygook.

It sounds inherently contradictory. New requirements won't apply retroactively to apps, yet Apple can remove the apps at any time… Hmm…

The capitalization of key terms also reminds me of the sloppy, inconsistent spelling and capitalization of the Founders.

On the other hand, read literally, especially considering the word “provided”, it means that Apple can announce Program Requirement changes, which won't affect your current app, but if you want to keep it around, you have to agree that it can be removed if there are any *future* changes in the Program Requirements.

Weird, just plain weird, but it strikes me as a clause that could be used to block Apple's removal of apps for now.

 

[zorinlynx]

What Apple should so is, so long as the developer is still paying their $100 a year fee, to keep all their apps in the store. Devs are paying Apple to host their apps, so Apple should continue hosting them. It's absurd to remove apps because they haven't been updated in a while.

I use an app called "JBL Music" to adjust the EQ on a JBL speaker I have. It hasn't been updated in years because it still does the job perfectly. If it's removed it will leave people with my speaker unable to configure it.

I have another cool app called Pressure Altimeter. You enter the altimeter number for your area and it tells you exactly how high above sea level you are, like an airplane altimeter. It hasn't been updated in two years, because it works perfectly and does the job. There's no need to update it. I just used it this past weekend to see how fast the elevator in One World Trade center is. (2000 feet per minute!!) It's a great app and I don't want it to go away.

There's probably tens of thousands of apps like this. They're feature-complete, mostly bug free and do their job well. Removing them for lack of updates is incredibly irresponsible of Apple; apps should only removed if they have glaring security problems.

 

[jakey rolling]

They need the disk space because storage space is sooooo expensive?

They must be using Apple SSD's in their servers.

 

[jakey rolling]

One more nail in the coffin of using Apple products in an enterprise environment.

I have clients who run warehouse management systems which tie into mobile devices for warehouse workers. Those WMS systems are incredibly expensive to upgrade (think, $200,000+ for a medium-sized business to upgrade their software), so they tend to go anywhere between 5-10 years between major upgrades. The version of the mobile WMS also needs to remain stable for that time, as an update can introduce a bug or incompatibility between the mobile device and the WMS.

Field Servicing and process manufacturing systems are also in this boat.

Apple being the gatekeeper of software on iOS devices has already been flagged as a risk factor for these systems. This just adds one more reason to the list of "why you shouldn't use iOS devices for anything mission critical."

 

[bookofxero]

WTF? The store shouldn’t even let those apps download to your phone.

And this is not what’s happening with the app in question with the developer who I first saw reporting this, yet their app is on the slate for removal.

This is a different issue. I have had it happen when apps did not update to 64-bit.

 

[whoknows2597]

I have one app on my phone that constantly crashes despite me emailing the developer to update the app. The app was last updated 4 years ago. Several reviews in the App Store also make note of the crashes.

My response from the developers team is that my phone might not have storage, is not up to date or it’s a memory issue…. I have an iPhone 11 Pro Max, 256 gigs with 94gigs of space left, and is on 15.4.1.

Yes, the developers make new apps, but they refuse to update old app or comply to the current standards. Hopefully this forces them to address all the bugs and crashes

 

[MastersoftMobile]

I have a Sudoku game that does not appear at all when you use the app store search to search for "Sudoku". Not even 1000 down. Is it any wonder some apps don't get downloads?

"... meaning the app has not been downloaded at all or extremely few times during a rolling 12 month period"

This is another attempt to make more money ... buy Apple Search Ads or they will remove your app.

 

[lfhlaw]

So I wonder if it's just a "touch" your app and maybe update app version to make Apple happy lol.

 

[jakey rolling]

Keep your apps, don't remove them from your device, don't update your device...

...and pray that your device doesn't become lost, stolen, broken, or hacked, or for some other reason needs to be wiped or replaced, necessitating a re-install of those apps.

everything you want should work. If you want some new feature of the OS, but don't want that new OS to break your old apps, then petition the developers of your favorite apps for updates, or don't update your device. Apple demands very little here.

Or, slightly better, remove the ability for Apple to be the gatekeeper of apps on its customers' devices, so that this isn't a problem that consumers have to "just live with."

Luckily, steps are already being taken in that direction. This, of course, being just one more incident that proves why all that "government overreach" is absolutely necessary.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Yes it is, because you don't have a lifetime agreement with Apple when you sign a developer agreement. In fact, you specifically agree that Apple has the right to introduce new policies or change existing ones regarding App Store requirements.

Thats well and good but it’s not legal in EU. And I would be chocked if it’s legal to include a contract clause allowing changes without prior notice, at least with existing US president rulings on the matter.

“We Can Change These Terms at Anytime”: The Detritus of Terms of Service Agreements

The online Terms of Service/Use ecosystem is a difficult one to live in.

medium.com

 

[Abazigal]

Professionals? how about the casuals that do it on their free time but don't have the time at the moment? 90 days is a short notice.

The dev pays $99 yearly so that "partner" already gets money.

Maybe Apple can unlist them from search but still allow download through direct link or something.

Extending the deadline from 1 month to 3 probably just means the developers sit on it for 2 months and 29 days (instead of 29 days) before updating it on the last day and submitting it prior to the deadline.

 

[SFjohn]

I hope Apple isn’t going after iPad Apps like CalculatorPlus, it works perfectly, is free and has Ø tracking. It’s not making Apple any money as an app, but it’s fantastic for what it is.

 

[tkaravou]

Did these rules exist before this new announcement? If not, is it fair for Apple to apply them retroactively?

Their TOS, like every other TOS out there, says that it can change at any time.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Think about it, right now you can download old games and applications from the 90s to fool around with you on your 90s-era retro PC. You can play those old games and enjoy the nostalgia.

Is that legal, though? If a company doesn’t intentionally make an application “public domain” (most won’t because the company doesn’t even exist to take that action), there’s no longer a legal way to acquire it. And, if anyone REALLLY wants to, they can obtain an old jail broken device with the non-public domain .ipa’s of their choice installed and enjoy the nostalgia.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I think it’s a good thing that EU is trying to remove the Apple's monopoly on app store. If there are more stores who charges less commission on sales, it will be beneficial for developers.

The EU needs to remove Apple’s monopoly on the iPhone, too. AND the iPad. AND the Mac. If other companies were free to make those, that would change the equation significantly.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Maybe Apple can unlist them from search but still allow download through direct link or something.

That’s the expectation. The “direct link” would be their personal “Purchased” apps list.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

This is great news for the developers of the Phone app. It's an app I use everyday, but hasn't been updated in years. I really hope the developers take this extra time and develop some amazing new features for all of their users. Fingers crossed that Apple doesn't boot this amazing, albeit outdated app, from the App Store!

I was wondering why one of my old apps only JUST now got the ability to save to the cloud, this action from Apple must have been why. That’s a good developer.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

If it's removed it will leave people with my speaker unable to configure it.

No, people that have your speaker will still be able to configure it, the app will show in your “Purchased” list. If the speaker is still able to be purchased, it behooves them to put at LEAST adorn money into app tweaks while they’re acquiring and building the raw materials into a physical speaker that they then ship around the world. If the speaker is ONLY available used, then the company has stopped supporting it.

It's a great app and I don't want it to go away.

It’ll still be in YOUR “Purchased” list. Folks that don’t have it already won’t be able to find it on the AppStore

 

[Crash0veride]

The number of these devs who claim their app is perfectly fine while not having tested it for any new devices is likely not insignificant either (especially those saying they would need to update hardware to re-build).