All Articles Tagged state of the apps

A while back we mentioned that an update to popular Twitter client, Tweetie was rejected by the iTunes App Store because, at that particular day and time, ****itlist showed up as a popular trend on Twitter. Later that same day Apple reversed the decision. But they haven’t, apparently, reversed the capricious lunacy that led to it.

Latest example: the e-book reader Eucalyptus has been rejected because not once, but twice, an App Store reviewer specifically searched for “the kama sutra of vatsyanya translated fr…” (or at least searching for enough of it to be offered that search term, then selecting it).

Developer James Montgomerie blogs about his frustrations, the continued opaqueness of the App Store review policy, and points out the blatant inconsistency of Safari, Google Mobile, and a variety of other built-in and already approved 3rd party apps providing complete internet search access to pretty much any content imaginable. (And some we’d frankly rather not imagine, thanks!)

Needless to say — and regardless of Apple’s statistics saying 98% of all apps are approved within 7 days of submission, 35,000+ apps in the store, and over one billion downloads — that simple, clear, and consistent guidelines, and developer support equal to the customer support Apple touts and prides itself on, are still not available some 10 months since launch, is embarrassing.

The App Store is a phenomenal success, no doubt about it, but doesn’t matter how fine your tuxedo is if you keep walking around with one or more battered, bloody eyes.

Need more absurdity? Forbes profiles the trials and tribulations involved in getting an app approved about US President Obama’s dog in cartoon form…

[via @chokenberry on Twitter, and the Reptile]

A billion apps. Developers getting rich. Apple making a bit of money. Or is it all just a house of cards ready to come tumbling down, with only one sneaky developer and a rule-breaking easter egg to blame?

See, the App Store has rules. You can’t, for example, include porn in an application and expect it to get approved and hosted by Apple in the App Store. But lets say your app looks all sweet and interesting, gets approved by Apple, and then lets slip that with one little gesture or secret code — porn. Or worse, malware or other malicious code.

Sound crazy? Wired (via Ars) tells us it’s already happened, albeit with language in an app called Lyrics.

Seems the app had some language that caused Apple to reject it, so the dev applied a language filter to clean that **** up, but added in a stealthy way to swipe the About screen to re-enable it. Said developer Jelle Prins:

“It’s almost impossible for Apple to see if there’s an Easter egg because they can’t really see the source code. In theory a developer could make a simple Easter egg in their app and provide a user with whatever content they want.”

Until Apple reads that quote, begins scouring apps even more closely, maybe asking developers to submit the actual code base, and making current app approval delays look like the blink of an eye.

Geniuses the lot of you.

We love many things about the iPhone. Most things even. One of the few things we’re not so chuffed about is the weird, wacky restrictions Apple places on App Store apps, and the sometimes haphazard way in which those restrictions are applied.

So, one edge we thought the other platforms might have would be the relative openness of their competing app stores. Turns out maybe not so much. How so? Our buddy Phil Nickinson over on WMExperts spent his weekend scouring through Microsoft’s Windows Marketplace for Mobile restrictions, and at first blush they appear at least as crazy as Apple’s:

• No VOIP apps using a carrier’s data. (Will WiFi be OK?)
• No apps that replace or modify the default dialer, SMS or MMS apps.
• No apps with an OTA download of over 10MB. (Not sure if that’s the app itself, or downloading within the app for, say, a podcatcher or the dreaded torrent downloader.)
• No apps that change the default browser, search client, or media player on the device. (Does that mean no Opera or Skyfire, which let you choose to set them as the default browser? No Kinoma Play, Core Player or the like for multimedia?)

So pr0n’s no problem, but don’t go trying to replace the rendering farce which is IE6? Of course, Microsoft mitigates this by allowing apps from multiple sources, not just their on store, but then again, they’re apparently going to allow the carriers to get their grubby hooks in branded stores to. Sigh.

With great freedom comes great responsibility, people. Never forget your Spider-Man…

Ars Technica reports, with some very nice commentary and screen caps from Equivalence (iTunes link) for iPhone, that:

One of the most requested features from developers, automated crash reports, can now be submitted by users via iTunes 8.2. Developers can access the reports via iTunes Connect.

No code is ever perfect, but anything that helps developers make their apps more solid for more users is certainly appreciated.

According to one of Trent Reznor’s latest tweets, an update to the very popular and crafty Nine Inch Nails application has been rejected by Apple.

Apple rejects the NIN iPhone update because it contains objectionable content. The objectionable content referenced is “The Downward Spiral”

For any of you not familar, The Downward Spiral was Reznor’s 1994 hit album that featured the popular song “Closer“. It’s a pretty good guess that is the song that put a halt to this update hitting the App Store. But wait one second… you can purchase this complete album including that particular song right one iTunes?!

Not much to say about this one but wow… just wow.

Update: Our good friend from WMExperts, @PhilNickinson, just sent over a link from the NIN forums where Trent Reznor has posted a bit more information on the rejection. Turns out The Downward Spiral is not even available to listen to in the updated app yet the objectionable content is The Downward Spiral… We are scratching our heads as well.

[Thanks to Juan for the tip!]

We know our readers are far too savvy to ever fall victim to the “greater internet ****wad theory“, but a couple posts today made us stop and think about App Store reviews, how the system works (or doesn’t), and whether we ever take the time to leave positive reviews for developers of our favorite apps, or just tear off in a fury when we think we’ve been badly done by?

Last things first, is iTunes stacked against developers? Maniacal Rage (via Daring Fireball) has highlighted an issue also raised today on Twitter by Craig Hockenberry, and submitted to Apple via Radar, namely that the iTunes review system, which may work well for music and other media, breaks down when it comes to the back-and-forth requirement of the app ecosystem.

Says Garrett Murray:

But my favorite part of this whole experience is that there’s no way for me to respond to reviews as the app creator. So I can’t go in and say, “Hey, by the way, version 1.3 fixes all this and we’re just waiting on Apple’s ridiculously slow and convoluted approval process!” I just sit by and watch.

Murray’s deeper contention is that, through a one-way review system on iTunes, and a fart-app-driven, race-to-the-bottom rewarded ecosystem, Apple is fostering exactly the kind of that developers don’t want to have as customers. Yep, the dreaded appsholes.

Perhaps developers, many of whom treat their creations as dearly as children, aren’t thick skinned enough to handle the greater pressure — and greater odds of negative pressure — that came with the 20 million iPhone OS (including iPod touch) ecosystem. Maybe users like us forget there are real, living, breathing people on the other end of our “send” buttons. Maybe anger and bad experience are greater motivators than appreciation and great experience. We don’t know.

But here’s what we’re interested in finding out: do you leave positive reviews for the apps you love? Of your top 5 favorite all time iPhone (or iPod touch) apps, how many have you left rave reviews for? And to help grow and support the developers behind those great apps, would you consider doing so now if you haven’t already?

We know SlingPlayer for iPhone was built (we saw it in action at Macworld and shot the video above). We know SlingPlayer for iPhone was submitted to the App Store (SlingMedia disclosed that). But its current status is anyone’s guess. Users got upset they’d need to upgrade to the latest SlingBox. AT&T futzed with their Terms of Service but then backpedaled. BGR reported that it might or might not have been denied at AT&T’s request. SlingMedia responded that they hadn’t heard anything yet. So what’s changed?

Nothing. TUAW checked in with the folks at SlingMedia and the official word is that there’s still no word, and with an app as complex as SlingPlayer for iPhone, there could be no word for quite a while still.

So why post on it? Two reasons. 1) We get asked about it a lot. SlingPlayer is popular with the tech enthusiasts. 2) We hope that the minute blogs start posting that there’s no word, Apple will release it just to make the blogs look silly. Hey, it happens!

Maybe we should start a little informal drop pool. Pick the day you think SlingPlayer will finally be released in the iTunes App Store and post it in the comments. Let’s see if anyone can nail it!

Keeping it short but sweet, Skype’s blog shows once again how crazy-powerful Apple’s iPhone software platform really is:

In less than two days, Skype for iPhone has been downloaded more than one million times – around six downloads every second.

While copypetitors are still announcing or coming online (almost daily, with RIM’s App World! launch on April 1st — we fool you not! — and Microsoft’s Marketplace) this showcases the high ground Apple has already seized with their “on every iPhone” ecosystem, and the uphill battle rival platforms might face.

[Via Daring Fireball]

We’ve talked about this several times before on TiPb, but Jeremy Horwitz over at iLounge takes an interesting journey via the game Peggle, what it’s release looks like for the Nintendo DS at $30, how retail sales prices break down, and what it might mean for iPhone gamers if they’re forced by market conditions to give us a barer-boned $5 version.

We know Apple said “free apps stay free”, so there’s still no model for demos to get people hooked, but the idea of ScaleWare, so a low introductory price can be followed by a few level/feature pack upgrades is something we’re fond of. Horwitz rightly points out that if devs over use this, however, it could make things worse:

just imagine the commercials showing someone actually playing a full Sony or Nintendo handheld game alongside someone clicking on iPod touch dialog boxes to the sound of a cash register.

iLounge likes the idea of regular games (i.e. cheap) with the in-app option to upgrade to deluxe versions (i.e. full price). Sounds good to us. We want great games on the iPhone, and we’re willing to reward developers with fair prices for their work. Are you?

It’s interesting to see how developers try to monetize their work in the iTunes App Store. With the downward pressure towards $0.99 or free apps, many turn to advertising to make up the difference, but users are getting increasingly oblivious to advertising at the same time.

i.TV, as part of their recent update, has tried to make advertising more compelling by making it more interactive. It’s an interesting strategy:

: i.TV introduces the world’s first “shakable” ad. This limited release “Shake-down 2 Get Down” campaign from Dockers features Dufon, from the dance expressionist group “Circle of Fire.” When you see the ad pop up, just shake your device to make Dufon dance!

Even if that loses its appeal after the first few times, it will likely still make a stronger impact than static text or banners. Can developers keep the pace of advertising innovation in line with that of the apps themselves? That remains a question.

The i.TV update also includes a dedicated tab for Comcast subscribers, the world’s first “shakable” advertisement, AT&T U-verse listings and major performance improvements.