Apple's App Store Review Guidelines Offer Remarkably Candid View of App Store Philosophy

[anchorsteamer]

Privacy

The main point the critics seem to miss is that Apple is a private corporation whose ecosystem you can choose or choose not to buy into. Their restrictions are not tantamount to the pretty egregious comparisons going on in this forum. If you need to crusade for open source and open content, there are other platforms better suited for your preference.

 

[Prynce]

"If your app is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps."

I don't know, it seems like most times a developer goes to the press about an amazing app that was rejected for no reason, the app ends up being allowed. Apple's policy of retaliation for bad press is kinda ridiculous.

Retaliation is one of the guiding principles of the business in the business world, so if you want to play with the big boys in the business world you better have your ducks in a row if you go on the offensive. Because big boys hit hard, and its not pretty, and small people as one BP exec explained to us who we are, can get trampled quite easily. You ever watch a pissing match in the media between two companies, when they are arguing? Lawsuits and countersuits and accusations are thrown back and forth with great accuracy.

Remember the Iphone 4 Antenna Gate Keynote and the the SALVO of attacks Apple launched after all the other Cellphone Manufacturers who took potshots at its antenna problems, you remember all those videos Apple posted? Those other companies got smart pretty quick and shut up after their damage control press releases, they realized they pushed someone bigger too far who had truth and facts on their side.

So as an App Developer why piss off someone who controls your bread and butter? Thats Just plain stupid, and its a hard lesson to learn for those with no business experience.

 

[Zunjine]

Apple's use of 'Preserve the User experience' gets really, really old! And all the Apple fanboys are buying into it. They use this excuse again and again. Whatever. The only reason Apple is relaxing the rules AND being more transparent with their review process is because Android's competition is forcing them to.

Your views are yours and you're entitled to them but even if you're correct and the only reason Apple has changed its stance is greater competition, what's the problem with that?
If you're wrong then Apple is clearly not the monster that everyone seems to want to make them out to be. If you're right then the market works and capitalism still rules! Either way I'm happy and, to be quite honest, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[notjustjay]

Apple just never sees this as a technical challenge, and is sure they have to set up this human based, manual process to eliminate the next fart app.

Good GRIEF apple, if someone didn't search for a FART APP, why would they see a FART APP.

And if they ARE SEARCHING FOR FART APPS, SHOW THEM ALL YOU GOT.

Maybe the App Store should show apps sorted by user ratings, highest first. And if you get sufficiently low ratings, your app drops off the list.

 

[VenusianSky]

- "We have lots of serious developers who don't want their quality Apps to be surrounded by amateur hour."

These "serious developers" should promote and advertise their app so that it sticks out amongst the others. If they don't, how serious are they?

 

[Prynce]

Except if you're Sports Illustrated, FHM or Playboy.

Problem is the rules aren't even close to being applied equally..

And who said the world was fair and equal......... let alone the business world?

 

[kingtj]

Your opinion, but I don't see why Apple should care?

As a parent myself, I agree completely about "parental controls". Most people DON'T use them, or use them properly. There are plenty of reasons for this, but much of it stems from a traditionally poor implementation of such controls. Especially for those of us who came from a Windows background, we're used to such nonsense as "Create a limited user account for your kid(s) to use, so they can't install new programs without permission." Then you go to the trouble to set it all up and discover 3/4ths. of the kids' games no longer run since the account is too limited for the program to do what it wants to do internally! Or "Buy an Internet site filtering program so your kids can surf the web safely!" ... which usually resulted in an expensive annual subscription fee for a feeble product that kids learned to get around via web proxies or redirector sites, once their classmates tipped them off on how to do it.

Even under OS X where things are noticeably better, I've seen such things as a parent enabling some of the content controls and then not really understanding what they did. Later, when they tried to visit web pages and got blocked -- they panic-ed and assumed they got a virus, and ran to the Apple store for help!

I don't see how we're really collectively "suffering" in this situation? I bought my iPhone and iPad to get real work done, and secondarily, for fun and entertainment. I can do all of that just fine with the rules Apple has in place. The only "suffering" comes from the people who supposedly have a need to see pornography and other "adult material" on these devices, and aren't finding as many options as they'd like to see for it. Well, to them I say: Give me a break! You can't wait until you get home to a regular computer or TV set to view this stuff? You're *really* suffering because you're a bit short on material on your CELLPHONE??

Last I checked, Apple wasn't doing any filtering on content happening on video "Facetime" calls, so heck - you could even have live video phone-sex with an iPhone 4 if you wanted, and that's something Apple just *enabled* you to do that probably wasn't really a workable option on your old phone!

It is good that they posted this, but I find their intro comment about Parental Controls to be maddening. "Hey we have Parental Controls, but no one uses them, so we have to neuter everything in case a kid might download something naughty!!" THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!

Give me a break. Everyone suffers because negligent parents don't use the control tools provided.

It's Apple's decision to be like this, and we can take it or leave it -- I just think it's a crappy decision.

 

[TMay]

Developers who produce garbage apps will stagnate and die out if no one wants them. Don't want the app, don't install it.

What's that oft-repeated expression here from all the zealots? Oh yea, vote with your wallet.

Apple should have a policy of sell or die. Apps in crowded fields would drop out of the store after a reasonable time frame (90 days?) if the apps market share drops below and stays below a minimum threshold. All these apps do is suck up customer dollars that might go to better and more popular app developers in the field.

Sounds unfair, but that is how retail businesses operate.

 

[MrSmith]

These "serious developers" should promote and advertise their app so that it sticks out amongst the others. If they don't, how serious are they?

That's before you even begin to define 'serious'. I'm sure the iFart/wobbly t1ts guys were serious about their products succeeding.

 

[TMay]

This is the type of well reasoned response I was hoping for.

Here's a related question for you:

What happens if Apple decides to take the same approach with their computers?

Strawman.

Totally different paradigms.

More to the point, Apple has been in the computer business for some 34 years and haven't yet done this. Why would they start now?

 

[Zunjine]

This is the type of well reasoned response I was hoping for.

Here's a related question for you:

What happens if Apple decides to take the same approach with their computers?

That's a fair question. I think it's a rather different world mind. The desktop market is very mature and the costs of development and distribution are higher than in the App Store and the mobile market. The iPhone is a success because Apple have created an end to end system that is safe and consumable. Apple knows the desktop market is not the same as the mobile one and is unlikely to approach it in the same manner.

On a related not - I find some the Apple-bashing by mobile app developers verges on the ungrateful. The mobile app market would hardly exist at all had Apple not found a way to make it work. They have built a system that has brought great success to many talented developers and created jobs and opportunities for people who might otherwise have not had a chance but people act as if Apple has done the development world some kind of terrible wrong. It's a little pathetic.

 

[Brometheus]

"If your app is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps."

That's a stupid argument... that board is paid by whom... Apple... therefore, what kind of decisions are they going to take?
I'm sure from time to time they will object to Apple's decisions... but most of the time, they will confirm Apple's decisions as they are paid by Apple and work for Apple.

That board is pretty much like this figure banks have, a bank consumer defender, paid by the bank... ergo... useless to appeal

It is obvious that complaining to press is stupid in many cases, but in some others, making public opinion aware of some tactics which are very wrong and unethical will force a company to change
So the press is still necessary regardless how many review boards there are as long as they are not independent

In my opinion, it is very unreasonable to expect Apple to appoint an independent board to approve apps for the app store. I imagine that there are many people reviewing apps, not just twenty or so. That means that they will not always agree on grey areas, simply because of natural variation in any group of people. Sometimes they will make mistakes due to youth, a lack of political or historical awareness, assorted biases, or because they were in a bad mood. Developers now can calmly make a case to the review board for why their rejected apps should be approved. Presumably the review board consists of more experienced people who can carefully review the developer's argument, while ensuring that Apple's reputation is not damaged. That is a balance that can only be done by Apple's own employees, not an independent board. Now, I feel like I've wasted several minutes writing something that's obvious.

 

[Prynce]

Apple's use of 'Preserve the User experience' gets really, really old! And all the Apple fanboys are buying into it. They use this excuse again and again. Whatever. The only reason Apple is relaxing the rules AND being more transparent with their review process is because Android's competition is forcing them to.

Go buy a droid, Personally I prefer security and quality. Sometimes I think you Apple bashers are just criminals/hackers trying to get your apps on the store to steal our data to use for nefarious reasons and are pushing your agenda to try to force a company to bend to your needs.

 

[kntgsp]

Strawman.

Totally different paradigms.

More to the point, Apple has been in the computer business for some 34 years and haven't yet done this. Why would they start now?

I was not using it to defend my posts. I acknowledged the well thought out response and wanted to pose a separate hypothetical question related to the continuing topic. That is not a strawman fallacy as it was not offered as a rebuttal to his point.

It was simply a "what if this becomes the approach for all their products" as an independent question (and labeled as such).


And to the second part of your post, because the infrastructure for it exists now. Purchasing and downloading a 10GB application would be considered fully acceptable in many areas due to the widespread access to high speed internet. Don't worry, this isn't a "sky is falling" rant. Simply a hypothetical.

 

[BigQid]

I love how they put voice to the guidelines. Usually it's a bunch of boring PR crap that no one reads.

It's still PR crap, just better PR crap. If they are so worried about fart apps, give us mechanisms to point out which apps are crap and which are the best in a category or purpose.
The problem with most corporations view of free market is they focus on being able to put whatever you want in the market and see who buys it. To counter this, the answer isn't less stuff brought to market, it's better feedback and recommendations powered by users.

 

[skeep5]

deleting fart app i just created in 3... 2..

 

[Barbie]

Almost sounds like Steve Jobs wrote these guidelines

 

[ctdonath]

The market speaks. Training wheels are off and amateur hour is over.

Worth repeating.

 

[tigress666]

As a parent myself, I agree completely about "parental controls". Most people DON'T use them, or use them properly.

So everyone else should be limited to what they can get on their computer cause some parents won't learn how to use the controls?

Why should I be forced to only be limited to kid safe apps cause some other person can't figure out a way to use parental controls (or, maybe pay attention to what their kid is using their computer for... the horrors! They might actually have to do work! Gee... maybe they should have used birth control if they weren't prepared for the responsibility).

(and BTW, I honestly don't care myself about not having kid safe apps, it's the principle of the thing that bothers me).

Wouldn't it be a better compromise to maybe, well, work on making parental controls easier to understand or better implemented than just go lazy and say, let's just not allow it cause it's not kid friendly?

 

[VenusianSky]

That's before you even begin to define 'serious'. I'm sure the iFart/wobbly t1ts guys were serious about their products succeeding.

Good point. I think they were probably serious about making money, but that will only last so long. Serious business, not likely with a fart app. Probably would be difficult trying to get respectable ad space and promotions for a fart application. I don't think there is a long-term market for fart applications. Though, with some people, you just don't know.

 

[Stampyhead]

They should have the same policy with the itunes music store.

He he, if the decided to remove all tasteless crap from the iTunes store there wouldn't be much left to chose from!

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

These "serious developers" should promote and advertise their app so that it sticks out amongst the others. If they don't, how serious are they?

Agreed, but that ultimately cannot be the only thing since most consumers do not see "promotions and advertising" for apps. There are great apps that are buried under a mountain of turds. Dedicated developers do have to "prove" their products worth, but once you're in the confines of the store, it's hard to stand out without "something more." Apple's problem is trying to raise awareness to "quality content" in a way that doesn't negate "promising content" while allowing "poor content" to die naturally. Without some guidelines, the app market within Apple's platform and store would devolve into a turdfest and damage their business.

 

[MacFly123]

Almost sounds like Steve Jobs wrote these guidelines.

Haha, I thought the same thing and I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

I love how they put voice to the guidelines. Usually it's a bunch of boring PR crap that no one reads.

I like when documents speak in plain english. It's very refreshing.

Totally agree! What a concept eh?!

Of course you don't want any more fart Apps! The guy running the app store now wrote the original fart app and he doesn't want his profits taking a hit!

Haha, how embarrassing for him and Apple those apps are!

 

[Brometheus]

Maybe the App Store should show apps sorted by user ratings, highest first. And if you get sufficiently low ratings, your app drops off the list.

That would work if people had a clue about how to review apps. The current situation is that low ratings can only be used to eliminate the most horrible, useless pieces of crap in the app store. Overall, though, the problem with ratings is that lots of people have no idea how to review an app. Instead of simply resetting their iPad after downloading a complex, 1.5 gigabyte app, people give very low ratings because the app crashed when they tried to use it. Or they give a low rating because a very useful comic book app does not yet have their favorite comic book available yet. There are numerous examples of why this kind of stupidity makes a mockery of the ratings for certain apps.
Also, where would you make the cut-off for being delisted? How do you prevent a competitor from wiping you out if your app has few ratings overall?

 

[MrSmith]

It's still PR crap, just better PR crap. If they are so worried about fart apps, give us mechanisms to point out which apps are crap and which are the best in a category or purpose.
The problem with most corporations view of free market is they focus on being able to put whatever you want in the market and see who buys it. To counter this, the answer isn't less stuff brought to market, it's better feedback and recommendations powered by users.

Feedback is important but filters are still necessary. As a random example, who would seriously justify the availabililty of a 'Pop-This-Zit' application?