4 ms·

App review is effectively a black box since the rules are applied so inconsistently, and working for weeks or months on something only to find out the Apple doe

App review is effectively a black box since the rules are applied so inconsistently, and working for weeks or months on something only to find out the Apple doesn't like it is a constant concern. Unless you're Facebook which has recently been caught abusing silent notifications to start up in the background and continue running permanently by streaming music at zero-volume while draining battery. Apple responds decently when developers have big media presence notice their abusive process and rolls over passively when powerful players like Facebook have them over a barrel. It's a stormy ocean when you're independent. Best to be careful. increasingly disinterested in You mean 'uninterested,' not 'disinterested.'

iampims 11y ago
It was a bug, not intentional from FB: https://www.facebook.com/arig/posts/10105815276466163 https://www.facebook.com/arig/posts/10105815276466163
cft 11y ago
I do not understand why the parent gets downvoted so much. I think FB can do pretty much what they please. If Apple is concerned for any reason, Facebook can simply ask them: "Do you want the Facebook Apps in the App store or not?" I think the answer will be: Yes.
- fpgeek 11y ago
  By that standard, Amazon should be able to do pretty much what they please too, but we know they can't (see: in-app Kindle store / link to web store, etc.).
w4 11y ago
> You mean 'uninterested,' not 'disinterested.' Uninterested may have been better, but disinterested works fine - see the usage notes (desktop only for some reason): http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disinterested http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disinterested
- WildUtah 11y ago
  Popular incorrect use of a word doesn't make it acceptable usage, especially when it occludes an important distinction.
  - mchahn 11y ago
    That depends. The Oxford English Dictionary would agree with you. They are an "authoritative" dictionary that tells the reader what is right and what isn't. However, Webster's wouldn't. They document the common usage. It's a matter of philosophy. In any case, the common usage will always win. People don't consult the OED when talking, or even writing blogs. So language changes. Did you know that even the OED now includes the awful non-literal meaning of "literally"? Oh the horror ...

iampims 11y ago

It was a bug, not intentional from FB: https://www.facebook.com/arig/posts/10105815276466163 https://www.facebook.com/arig/posts/10105815276466163

cft 11y ago

I do not understand why the parent gets downvoted so much. I think FB can do pretty much what they please. If Apple is concerned for any reason, Facebook can simply ask them: "Do you want the Facebook Apps in the App store or not?" I think the answer will be: Yes.

fpgeek 11y ago
By that standard, Amazon should be able to do pretty much what they please too, but we know they can't (see: in-app Kindle store / link to web store, etc.).

w4 11y ago

> You mean 'uninterested,' not 'disinterested.' Uninterested may have been better, but disinterested works fine - see the usage notes (desktop only for some reason): http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disinterested http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disinterested

WildUtah 11y ago
Popular incorrect use of a word doesn't make it acceptable usage, especially when it occludes an important distinction.
- mchahn 11y ago
  That depends. The Oxford English Dictionary would agree with you. They are an "authoritative" dictionary that tells the reader what is right and what isn't. However, Webster's wouldn't. They document the common usage. It's a matter of philosophy. In any case, the common usage will always win. People don't consult the OED when talking, or even writing blogs. So language changes. Did you know that even the OED now includes the awful non-literal meaning of "literally"? Oh the horror ...