7 ms·

They kind of bury the lead here. They can't have their app on the appstore because: " While we still updated our applications in time, Apple did not review the

They kind of bury the lead here. They can't have their app on the appstore because: " While we still updated our applications in time, Apple did not review them for the AppStore, and instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!), and later for requiring UI changes, including showing a Save As panel for each generated file. Now this may not sound like much, this is a serious issue for a document scan application which easily generates hundreds of files in an hour, and thousands of files a day, with file names automatically generated, either thru counters, or advanced auto-id features, such as barcodes." Even if Apple later took back the rejection I bet this was the last straw.

xhruso00 7y ago
I also have my own experience with rejection: You used/included word Contacts in name of the app; this is a trademark of Apple. My app used word Contacts before apple renamed their AddressBook to Contacts.app on macOS. I used appeal with link to their list of trademarks. I am pointing out that humans do many errors and sometimes your app is in review for 2 weeks (2019) for no reason (minor update). Happened to me and the Yoink.app owner as well
- sixstringtheory 7y ago
  Not trying to blame you at all for what happened, but for my benefit as a developer and for anyone else reading, did you ever apply for a trademark or consider it? I'd love to know the details of how that worked out if you did.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    Maybe they thought common sense applies and "Contacts" is not a trademarkable word.
phinnaeus 7y ago
FYI: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/lede https://www.thefreedictionary.com/lede
- Illniyar 7y ago
  FYI: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/bury-the-lede-versus-lead https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/bury-the-lede-... I'll keep using the actual word , thank you.
  - 99052882514569 7y ago
    If you insist on using journalism jargon, why not use it in its intended, original form? I for one am not a language purist, you can change expressions any way you see fit but... I mean... The expression is still bury the lede.
    - wccrawford 7y ago
      The article they posted says that "lead" was the original form, and "lede" was introduced in 2008.
      - 99052882514569 7y ago
        As a standalone word, yes. The expression is, nevertheless, "bury the lede", and always* has been. * since the 1970s when it first surfaced.
        shkkmo 7y ago
        Do you have a reference for this? The linked article seems pretty clear that it is used both ways and "lead" is the original
        reaperducer 7y ago
        "Lead" is correct, and "lede" is journalism jargon. It was adopted in broadcasting circles to keep news readers from saying "lead" (as in the element) instead of "lead" (as in to follow). Source: Journalism degree, communications degree, 20 years in broadcast news.
- 7y ago
Razengan 7y ago
> instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!) As a user, I'm glad Apple did that. As a developer, the one thing that I do dislike about Apple, is the dismal state of their documentation on how to actually take advantage of all their platforms' features. I have to begrudgingly admit that their nemesis Microsoft has always been way ahead in that department.
- Illniyar 7y ago
  I think their point was that the crash was because of the fact that: 1. Catalina had a lot of breaking changes, bugs and crashes that caused the apps to crash - which required special attention just for Catalina 2. They were given only 4 days to fix the mess that Catalina resulted in. At least in this case.
- Someone1234 7y ago
  In context though it is still Apple's issue: > After releasing the Catalina Golden Master build to developers on October the 3rd, we immediately finished fixing any new crash and issue we could find over the weekend. In our opinion, leaving developer just four (4!) days over a weekend with a public release on October the 7th is not very professional. While we still updated our applications in time, Apple did not review them for the AppStore, and instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!), [...]
  - jldugger 7y ago
    Catalina had been available to the public for testing since like WWDC; unless these were late breaks only found in GM, it's a tough pill to swallow that these urgent bugs couldn't have been addressed before GM shipped.
    - semiotagonal 7y ago
      Maybe, but prior to the "Golden Master" release are you really testing your stuff, or Apple's? Leaving such a small window between Apple getting its act together with the GM, and a hard deadline for third parties to get their act together, is rough.
makecheck 7y ago
The last straw for me was that they rejected a minor app update because they claimed my app crashed on a not-yet-released OS update. I literally could not install the OS that had the issue, they would provide me with zero additional information (not even a log), and they would not allow my minor update to get into the store. I deleted it from the store that same afternoon.
netsharc 7y ago
Asking for the "Save As" panel just shows how amateurish the reviewers are. It sounds like the app already worked like that before: batch generation of files through scanning, but now maybe the assigned reviewer noticed this requirement in the guideline (or it's a new guideline) and thought "Oh no, one item missed, and since I'm a simple automaton I'll have to reject this app!'.
burtonator 7y ago
> They kind of bury the lead here. Not calling you out or trying to be rude but it's: "bury the lede" I always thought it was "lead" too until someone corrected me a decade or so ago...

xhruso00 7y ago

I also have my own experience with rejection: You used/included word Contacts in name of the app; this is a trademark of Apple. My app used word Contacts before apple renamed their AddressBook to Contacts.app on macOS. I used appeal with link to their list of trademarks. I am pointing out that humans do many errors and sometimes your app is in review for 2 weeks (2019) for no reason (minor update). Happened to me and the Yoink.app owner as well

sixstringtheory 7y ago
Not trying to blame you at all for what happened, but for my benefit as a developer and for anyone else reading, did you ever apply for a trademark or consider it? I'd love to know the details of how that worked out if you did.
- anoncake 7y ago
  Maybe they thought common sense applies and "Contacts" is not a trademarkable word.

phinnaeus 7y ago

FYI: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/lede https://www.thefreedictionary.com/lede

Illniyar 7y ago
FYI: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/bury-the-lede-versus-lead https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/bury-the-lede-... I'll keep using the actual word , thank you.
- 99052882514569 7y ago
  If you insist on using journalism jargon, why not use it in its intended, original form? I for one am not a language purist, you can change expressions any way you see fit but... I mean... The expression is still bury the lede.
  - wccrawford 7y ago
    The article they posted says that "lead" was the original form, and "lede" was introduced in 2008.
    - 99052882514569 7y ago
      As a standalone word, yes. The expression is, nevertheless, "bury the lede", and always* has been. * since the 1970s when it first surfaced.
      - shkkmo 7y ago
        Do you have a reference for this? The linked article seems pretty clear that it is used both ways and "lead" is the original
        reaperducer 7y ago
        "Lead" is correct, and "lede" is journalism jargon. It was adopted in broadcasting circles to keep news readers from saying "lead" (as in the element) instead of "lead" (as in to follow). Source: Journalism degree, communications degree, 20 years in broadcast news.
7y ago

Razengan 7y ago

> instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!) As a user, I'm glad Apple did that. As a developer, the one thing that I do dislike about Apple, is the dismal state of their documentation on how to actually take advantage of all their platforms' features. I have to begrudgingly admit that their nemesis Microsoft has always been way ahead in that department.

Illniyar 7y ago
I think their point was that the crash was because of the fact that: 1. Catalina had a lot of breaking changes, bugs and crashes that caused the apps to crash - which required special attention just for Catalina 2. They were given only 4 days to fix the mess that Catalina resulted in. At least in this case.
Someone1234 7y ago
In context though it is still Apple's issue: > After releasing the Catalina Golden Master build to developers on October the 3rd, we immediately finished fixing any new crash and issue we could find over the weekend. In our opinion, leaving developer just four (4!) days over a weekend with a public release on October the 7th is not very professional. While we still updated our applications in time, Apple did not review them for the AppStore, and instead rejected them first for a crash (sigh!), [...]
- jldugger 7y ago
  Catalina had been available to the public for testing since like WWDC; unless these were late breaks only found in GM, it's a tough pill to swallow that these urgent bugs couldn't have been addressed before GM shipped.
  - semiotagonal 7y ago
    Maybe, but prior to the "Golden Master" release are you really testing your stuff, or Apple's? Leaving such a small window between Apple getting its act together with the GM, and a hard deadline for third parties to get their act together, is rough.

makecheck 7y ago

The last straw for me was that they rejected a minor app update because they claimed my app crashed on a not-yet-released OS update. I literally could not install the OS that had the issue, they would provide me with zero additional information (not even a log), and they would not allow my minor update to get into the store. I deleted it from the store that same afternoon.

netsharc 7y ago

Asking for the "Save As" panel just shows how amateurish the reviewers are. It sounds like the app already worked like that before: batch generation of files through scanning, but now maybe the assigned reviewer noticed this requirement in the guideline (or it's a new guideline) and thought "Oh no, one item missed, and since I'm a simple automaton I'll have to reject this app!'.

burtonator 7y ago

> They kind of bury the lead here. Not calling you out or trying to be rude but it's: "bury the lede" I always thought it was "lead" too until someone corrected me a decade or so ago...