Apple's App Review Process Now Takes as Little as Two Days

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
48,743
10,146



Apple's app review process has become significantly faster during the first five months of 2016, according to AppReviewTimes.com, a website that tracks average App Store review times for both the iOS and Mac App Store using data crowdsourced from developers on both platforms.

App Store approval times have dropped to an average of two days, compared to between eight and ten days in May 2015, based on 328 reviews submitted in the last 14 days. The shorter process has been well received by the developer community, which had grown accustomed to weeklong waits.
I'm uncharacteristicly excited about faster review times. Going to be devastated when someone inevitably ruins it.https://t.co/td5QkeUaBb - Paul Haddad (@tapbot_paul) May 5, 2016
Oh, and yet another fast App Store review time of 2 days. Definitely feels like a (welcome) trend of faster review times #iosreviewtimes - John Pollard (@yeltzland) May 4, 2016
Wow, the @AppStore approved my update in 2 days. So much faster. I like the new you App Store. - Aaron Lake (@OrbitalNine) April 4, 2016
"A lot of the way that we build software for iOS is controlled around the fact that you have a one-week release cycle," Button Inc. founder Chris Maddern, whose team has done work for Uber Technologies Inc. and Foursquare Labs Inc., told Bloomberg. "It can now happen within hours of submitting them, which is really awesome because it speeds up the development cycle."

Last December, Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller took over App Store leadership responsibilities from iTunes and services chief Eddy Cue. Schiller now leads nearly all developer-related functions at Apple, and WWDC 2016 next month could serve as a good opportunity for him to announce shorter approval times on stage alongside new versions of iOS, OS X, and other developer updates.

Article Link: Apple's App Review Process Now Takes as Little as Two Days
 

jweinraub

macrumors 6502
Jun 26, 2007
316
159
Sol III
Now, if they would only allow us to have our app star ratings roll over, rather than start all over every time we put out a 0.1 update.
Facebook won't like that, a lot of developers seem to release those point releases to hide their one star reviews... like the useless Facebook Messenger app for example..
 

TrueBlou

macrumors 68040
Sep 16, 2014
3,907
2,678
Scotland
Hmmm, such a sudden and drastic change. Let's hope it's not a case of them firing up an app and, meh, it works approve it.
 

TrueBlou

macrumors 68040
Sep 16, 2014
3,907
2,678
Scotland
Apple should stop accepting apps with no 3D Touch , **** is disrespectful
Or Apple should make something more interesting than 3D Touch for us to support.

Edit*

Ok, I'll admit that might just be me, but 3D Touch just doesn't float my boat enough to classify it as interesting. Ymmv.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vmistery and c0ppo

ovo6

Cancelled
Sep 10, 2015
828
435
Or Apple should make something more interesting than 3D Touch for us to support.

Edit*

Ok, I'll admit that might just be me, but 3D Touch just doesn't float my boat enough to classify it as interesting. Ymmv.
Exactly people don't use it as much cuz no app has it
 
  • Like
Reactions: galrito

TrueBlou

macrumors 68040
Sep 16, 2014
3,907
2,678
Scotland
Exactly people don't use it as much cuz no app has it

Part of the trouble is, from my perspective at least, having the ability to use one less tap to achieve what I want to do just isn't a big deal to me. It's not as far as I'm concerned the best use of the technology. It doesn't excite me.

What the best use may be, well that's another story. It's not something I've written off for inclusion in an app, I just want to find a better use for it than, ooohhh, that took me 1.5 seconds less to achieve the same result. I'll keep experimenting with it but until that breakthrough moment happens it's a novelty.

But again, that's just me, I know there will be those who consider it the best thing since dynamic wallpaper.
 

TrueBlou

macrumors 68040
Sep 16, 2014
3,907
2,678
Scotland
No thanks

That's a double edged sword I suppose. There will be those with great ratings who don't want to lose all that great feedback they've worked so hard to get. And there will be those with, let's say, less fortunate apps who will be glad to see the back of their previous performance reviews. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keijo

ovo6

Cancelled
Sep 10, 2015
828
435
That's a double edged sword I suppose. There will be those with great ratings who don't want to lose all that great feedback they've worked so hard to get. And there will be those with, let's say, less fortunate apps who will be glad to see the back of their previous performance reviews. :D
I know I guys work really hard, but maybe they do it that way cuz u rating that version of the app that is out
 

ethanwa79

macrumors regular
Sep 13, 2014
196
657
You know what would REALLY help developers? Stop taking a 30% cut and drop it down to 10%. As an indie developer myself, every $ counts, and if you want me to choose iOS over Android every single time, this is one way to do it.
 

TrueBlou

macrumors 68040
Sep 16, 2014
3,907
2,678
Scotland
You know what would REALLY help developers? Stop taking a 30% cut and drop it down to 10%. As an indie developer myself, every $ counts, and if you want me to choose iOS over Android every single time, this is one way to do it.

Isn't Google the same though? According to their developer help pages the transaction fees for applications and in-app products is 30% Amazon are the same according to their documentation.

I've never really had an issue with the 30% though to be honest. To get access to over 1 billion potential customers, 30% seems fair.
 

ethanwa79

macrumors regular
Sep 13, 2014
196
657
Isn't Google the same though? According to their developer help pages the transaction fees for applications and in-app products is 30% Amazon are the same according to their documentation.

I've never really had an issue with the 30% though to be honest. To get access to over 1 billion potential customers, 30% seems fair.
I never said it wasn't fair. :) I'm just being a bit greedy, that's all.
 

patrickbarnes

macrumors regular
Sep 24, 2012
247
243
If they stop resetting stars and reviews every update then we're really talking.

Good first step, though.
 

Number-Six

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2013
409
1,127
Isn't Google the same though? According to their developer help pages the transaction fees for applications and in-app products is 30% Amazon are the same according to their documentation.

I've never really had an issue with the 30% though to be honest. To get access to over 1 billion potential customers, 30% seems fair.
It is indeed the same 30% with Google and Amazon
 

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
8,703
4,329
You know what would REALLY help developers? Stop taking a 30% cut and drop it down to 10%. As an indie developer myself, every $ counts, and if you want me to choose iOS over Android every single time, this is one way to do it.
A much bigger issue I have than the 30% cut is the $100 annual fee.

I have apps that I've written that I use daily. Some, not many, would find it a little useful. I'm not willing to charge for it, and I'm not willing to pay $100/year out of pocket to have it distributed, either.

Some people would find their phones slightly more useful if they had the app. But Apple is denying them the ability to have the app at all.

I'm fine with Apple charging the $100 annual fee for developers that are looking to make money, but I feel like there should be a free option for people who want to just distribute free stuff. IDK how you would make sure it doesn't get flooded with junk and keep the cost of operating it low.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AngerDanger

rolsskk

macrumors 6502
Sep 1, 2008
297
297
And at the same time, Apple quietly announced a quicker time to yank an app from the store with no explanation. /s
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.