All Articles Tagged rejected apps

Convertbot 1.4 for iPhone Rejected by App Store Because Same “Time” Icon Now Confusable for “Recents”

rejection

Convertbot [$0.99 - iTunes link] has seen their latest update, version 1.4 for iPhone (and iPod touch), rejected by at least 2 of Apple’s 40+ App Store reviewers because the icon they’re using for “Time” (the same icon they’ve been using since 1.0, mind you) is nigh-identical to Apple’s built in “Recent” icon, and that was enough to raise that troublesome “user confusion” flag at iTunes HQ.

They’re going to try and find a different yet equally minimalist icon, and we’re going to start counting down to a letter from either Phil Schiller or the FCC

Sigh.

[Via Daring Fireball]



Apple Responds to FCC Questions (Google and AT&T as Well)

Apple Responds to FCC

Apple has responded to the FCC’s questions, issued following the controversial rejection of Google’s Google Voice application (though, in their response, it looks like Apple is claiming they haven’t rejected Google Voice, but are merely reviewing it (updated: under the dubious “duplicates functionality” rationale, due to independent and different dialing and voice mail interfaces and) to see if it violates Apple’s contract with AT&T not to allow VoIP over AT&T’s data network.)

We are pleased to respond to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau’s inquiry dated July 31, 2009, requesting information regarding Apple’s App Store and its application approval process. In order to give the Bureau some context for our responses, we begin with some background information about the iPhone and the App Store.

The entire document is available via Apple.com.

Google and AT&T responded as well, though not on their own websites yet. Engadget is hosting their letters. AT&T claims they were never contacted about Google Voice, however if their contract with Apple forbids it, like Skype and other VoIP apps, Apple wouldn’t have to contact them, so again — huge round of jeers for AT&T’s non-denial denials.

[Thanks to Doug for the tip)

Apple VP Phil Schiller Emails Steven Frank, No E-Book Rejection Policy, Working to Improve App Store

schiller time

Mac developer and Panic luminary Steven Frank’s public break-up with the iPhone over Apple’s capricious App Store policy was one of the few so grounded in rationale and reason we couldn’t discount it, and neither could Apple’s Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller.

While Schiller previously responded to Daring Fireball’s John Gruber over concerns about the Ninjawords app, Schiller’s response to Steve Frank was different in kind, if similar in sentiment:

I haven’t sought Phil’s explicit permission to republish the letter, so I won’t do so here. But to summarize, he said: “we’re listening to your feedback”. Not all of my suggested solutions were viable, he said, but they were taking it all in as they continue to evolve the app store.

He went on to say that the rumors of widespread e-book app rejection I’d heard were false — that specifically one e-book app had been rejected because it facilitated iPhone-to-iPhone sharing of (potentially copyrighted) books. But that otherwise, there was no sweeping ban on e-book readers.

First, it’s interesting to see such high level and yet fairly intimate intervention by an Apple executive when it comes to the App Store. It’s not an open letter by Steve Jobs — it’s something subtler, and yet seemingly targeted to engender the type of good will that could give Apple the time and good faith they need to fix the App Store approval process if — and it’s a huge if — they truly take the time to fix it. And that’s the fulcrum of actions and results upon which Schiller’s intervention will ultimately succeed or fail.

Second, Steven Frank is now left to wonder whether to continue his boycott of the iPhone given the lack of those observable actions visible results, or to extend his hand back to Apple and give them that same second chance.

It will be interesting to see what happens next…

Is It Time for an Open Letter from Steve Jobs on the App Store?

superjobs

Let’s just ask it: is it time for an open letter from Steve Jobs concerning the state of the iTunes App Store? Apple’s CEO has written several of these over the course of the last few years — rare public statements typically addressing wide-spread perceptions of critical problems or situations facing Apple. He’s taken on DRM in music (but not video) to prevent the EU from forcing Apple to license FairPlay DRM, offered $100 to early iPhone 2G buyers incensed by a rapid post-launch price drop, addressed the lack of native apps on the iPhone amid massive developer dissatisfaction, espoused Apple’s commitment to the environment given Greenpeace’s constant PR pressure, and spoken about the uncertainty surrounding his health prior to Macworld to help assuage investor panic. There was even a “leaked” internal letter regarding the troubled MobileMe launch, one of the worst customer relations situations Apple has faced in recent years.

While the App Store is not yet a large-scale consumer facing problem like the iPhone 2G price cut or MobileMe were (some consumers don’t even use the App Store, many others don’t follow any backstage news about), nor a regulatory issue like DRM-music threatened to be (Apple is hardly a monopoly in the smartphone space) or Jobs’ health might have been to investors, it is and will continue to cause Apple pain in one very important area: tech savvy, power users (and media) who typically influence friends (and readers) and generally presage public perception.

Jason Calacanis, who’s frustration at this point clearly overcame his reason (see Marco Arment’s retort), and Mike Arrington, who might again garner Leo Laporte-esque responses himself, are easy to dismiss given their bombastic personalities, passion, and self-interests. Others aren’t so easily dismissed. Long time Mac developer Steven Frank is one example. Daring Fireball’s John Gruber is another. Dieter’s ranted about it on iPhone Live! and Jeremy and I have even written a word or two. Heck, even Apple’s highly operational COO Tim Cook and perennially affable Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, have mentioned it.

But Steve Jobs hasn’t.

Granted, Jobs is just getting back to work after an extended leave of absence and has been letting his team do their share of heavy lifting, but despite Apple’s highly innovative, world class executive team, Steve Jobs is still the voice of Apple, and there’s likely very little else — aside from carefully watching and tracking tiny improvements over an extended period of time — that will help ease the growing concerns about the App Store and grant Apple a little renewed faith along the way.

An open letter from Steve Jobs in Apple’s news feed, symbolic though it may be, stating a clear “we want a delightful App Store experience for developers” manifesto, reflecting an understanding of the current concerns, offering a “Mobile Me News” olive branch of openness — doing what he did for DRM, the $100 credits, the green initiative, the native apps SDK — would not only address the immediate perception problem, but could start fixing the root cause. Even a “leaked” letter like the one that followed MobileMe’s launch would be a start.

Apple’s often effective, often decried, culture of secrecy is widely thought to emanate from Steve Jobs. He’s shattered it before for Apple’s benefit. Is it time for him to shatter it again?


Daring Fireball: Apple VP Phil Schiller Responds to Ninjawords iPhone App Store Incident

schiller time

Daring Fireball received a response from Apple Senior VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller, regarding the App Store incident involving the Ninjawords iPhone dictionary app.

Gruber quotes “the salient parts” of the email in full, but the gist seems to be that, unlike other dictionaries approved for the App Store, Ninjawords drew from Wiktionary — an open internet source — and thus the App Store suggested they wait until iPhone 3.0 was released with parental controls before re-submitting it. Not knowing the release date of 3.0 and not wanting to wait, the Ninjawords developers went ahead and filtered it themselves, thus ending up with a filtered app that took long enough to approve it timed itself into the 17+ rating anyway.

However, other dictionaries with the same “objectionable content” haven’t been flagged as 17+, so the capricious nature of the App Store — the very thing developers fear most — remains. Check out the above link to Daring Fireball for more on that aspect.

For his part, Schiller closes his response as follows:

Apple’s goals remain aligned with customers and developers — to create an innovative applications platform on the iPhone and iPod touch and to assist many developers in making as much great software as possible for the iPhone App Store. While we may not always be perfect in our execution of that goal, our efforts are always made with the best intentions, and if we err we intend to learn and quickly improve.

On the heels Tim Cook’s comments about improvements needed to the App Store, if observable actions follow the sentiments, perhaps developers and users alike will begin to regain some faith in the approval process. Until then, it remains an unsightly blemish on Apple’s otherwise brilliant mobile platform.

(No word yet on whether Gruber asked him about Google Voice…)

TiPb Presents: iPhone Live! #22 – Objectionable Content!

Join Dieter, Chris, and Rene for iPhone 3.0.1, iProd 1,1 speculation, more App Store craziness, top 5 jailbreak apps, and a dramatic reading! Listen in!

Read the rest of this entry »

App Store Cracks Down on Copyright, Ejects 900+ Aggregator Apps, Rejects E-Books

app_store_church_lady

A couple new and interesting cases of App Store rejection, including the stripping Perfect Acumen and owner, Khalid Shaik, of their developer account, and ejecting their 900+ application already in the store, and the blanket rejection of E-Books — both nebulously tied to copyright infringement or the fear thereof.

Details after the break…

Read the rest of this entry »

App Store Insists Ninjawords iPhone Dictionary Remove “Objectionable” Content, Still Classifies it 17+

app_store_church_lady

Ninjawords [$1.99 - iTunes link], a delightfully crafted dictionary application, was rejected from the iTunes App Store no less than three times of “objectionable content” and still slapped with a 17+ rating before being approved in mutilated form in just the latest of Apple’s stupefying, infuriating, frustrating, and ultimately disappointing blunders that haunt their mobile platform.

Daring Fireball casts a scathing light on the Ninjawords situation, and sums it up brilliantly:

The list of omitted words includes some which have utterly non-objectionable senses: ass, snatch, pussy, cock, and even screw. (Ass and cock appear throughout the King James Bible.)

Every time I think I’ve seen the most outrageous App Store rejection, I’m soon proven wrong. I can’t imagine what it will take to top this one.

Apple requires you to be 17 years or older to purchase a censored dictionary that omits half the words Steve Jobs uses every day.

Yes, you cannot find words for donkeys, cats, roosters, or hardware in this one dictionary on the App Store (though you can, of course, in Apple’s own Mac OS X dictionary). Gruber also rightly points out that App Store reviewers would have had to deliberately search for words like f–k and c–t to find them, given the care taken by the apps developers in filtering results, which mirrors the rejection of e-book reader Eucalyptus when not one but two App Store reviewers deliberately searched for Kama Sutra, apparently just so they could reject an app. (Maybe because they duplicate functionality of Mobile Safari?)

Steve Jobs is back. Could we desperately suggest nothing, not Eric Schmidt, not iTablets, not AT&T should be higher on his priority list than forcing sanity upon the App Store and now? Or does Apple really want the influential, tech-savvy apperati to start considering competing platforms?

AT&T Issues Non-Denial Denial on Denying Google Voice Entry into App Store.

att_iphone_3g_s_hate_you_cant_leave

AT&T has issued an even more strongly worded statement that at first glance shifts blame for denying Google Voice and Google Voice-related iPhone apps entry into the iTunes App Store, while on second glance looks like that’s all it’s really aimed at doing — shifting blame and not actually denying responsibility.

“AT&T does not manage or approve applications for the App Store. We have received the letter and will, of course, respond to it.”

As others have pointed out, AT&T has previously admitted complicity in denying SlingMedia Player usage of the 3G network for their iPhone app, and is widely suspected of having likewise limited the Skype app and having the NetShare tethering app removed from the App Store last year.

Had they rather said something closer akin to “we have no problem with Google Voice or any Google Voice-related app running on our network” it would be quite a bit more believable. (Although who knows what contractual muzzles Apple, AT&T, and perhaps even Google are operating under, though the FCC is sure trying to find out).

If you haven’t yet, get on over to our poll and let us know what you think!


UPDATED: Apple Rejects/Removes all Google Voice Apps for iPhone from iTunes App Store

google_voice_reject

UPDATE: DaringFireball claims a source has confirmed that Apple pulled Google Voice apps at the request of AT&T. GigaOm, by contrast, wonders why AT&T would ban Google Voice (and Skype, and SlingBox) on the iPhone and allow them on BlackBerry, for example. We don’t know of course, but we guess nothing else scares AT&T like the iPhone — it’s the first multi-million selling consumer smartphone success, people actually use its features, and it hits their balsa-wood network like a freight-train. -Rene

ORIGINAL: Apple has systematically removed and/or rejected all Google Voice apps for the iPhone (and iPod touch) from the iTunes App Store, whether by Google themselves or by third party developers.

Rejection is something we’ve all become very familiar with since the inception Apple’s App Store. However, Apple picking off the two Google Voice applications that were already available in the App Store (GV Mobile and Voicecentral) along with flat out rejecting Google’s official application, is something else.

It all started with Sean Kovacs’ GV Mobile client, which originally became available last week (according to Kovacs after being approved by Apple VP Phil Schiller himself), being yanked from the App Store for allegedly duplicating the iPhone’s calling and text messaging features. When Apple contacted Kovacs, no specifics were given on what needs to be changed to get his app back into the store and Kovacs claims Apple refused to send an e-mail to confirm that GV Mobile was yanked. The following is from Kovacs blog:

Richard Chipman from Apple just called – he told me they’re removing GV Mobile from the App Store due to it duplicating features that the iPhone comes with (Dialer, SMS, etc). He didn’t actually specify which features, although I assume the whole app in general. He wouldn’t send a confirmation email either – too scared I would post it. I’ll see what I can do to get it back up there gang…

Voicecentral has since also disappeared from existence within the App Store. They have been less vocal as there is not a single mention of the disappearance on their website.

Is this Apple’s doing or more of a carrier-forced rejection? TiPb thinks the carriers are pulling Apple’s rejection strings on this one as Google Voice has the potential to hit the carriers where it hurts – free SMS messages, cheaper phone calls, etc…

What do you readers think about these rejections?

[Via AppleInsider]

 Page 2 of 4 « 1  2  3  4 »