10 ms·

If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says wha

by chipsa 7y ago

If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.

FussyZeus 7y ago
They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    Apple has tons of goodwill with their users, and that's what matters. That's who pays the bills, and that's who funds the App Store. From the beginning Apple has had a very standoff-ish relationship with their developers. Their rules are clear from the outset: Play by them, or don't publish on our platform. To be honest I think developers occasionally still got entirely too much leeway to break their guidelines and get chances to fix it. Their relationship to us has always been in very simple terms: These are the ways you're allowed to behave while doing business on our platform. Accept that, or do not publish here. If you publish here and break these rules, you will be removed without second chance. Yet again, and again, and again, we get pleas from fellow developers who broke those rules but think Apple's just being mean. No, they're not. They outlined exactly how you should not Do the Thing, and you Did the Thing, and now you're off. This situation is fixed, and you knew the outcomes. You made your bed, sleep in it.
    - pgaddict 7y ago
      Sure the primary concern for Apple is users. But it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it, which largely depends on developers publishing apps. And it's not as if the dev accounts are not subscription-based - it's not expensive and Apple does not make a ton of money on this, but it's not free either. And I don't think anyone suggests Apple should get rid of all the rules and accept anarchy on the platform, that'd be insane. They have the right to set the rules on their platform, and enforce them. And the developers should not be surprised when violations are handled accordingly. The first problem is that a lot of the rules are entirely vague, to the extent that it's hard to make judgments based on the wording. (Essentially what we used to call "rubber law" years ago, a vaguely worded law that can be used to support whatever the state currently wants.). The second problem is that you generally don't get clear explanation what rules you broke. That may seem reasonable, but whoever makes those decisions is bound to make some errors. And if you don't know what rule(s) you supposedly broke and how, you can hardly appeal the decision. Yes, for Apple it's much easier/cheaper to provide as little information as possible, eliminating the issue of appeals (i.e. costs). But it's a bit of a dick move, really. If you set rules for your platform, you really need to plan for proper enforcement, including providing information what rule was broken/how and allowing appeals.
      - pdonis 7y ago
        > it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it We developers would like to believe this is true, but I'm not sure it is. I don't think Apple would care if the third party developer ecosystem went away. They don't depend on it to sell their products.
        rootusrootus 7y ago
        I think it's fair to say that early on, third party developers added a lot of functionality that was lacking in the OS. Apple has steadily incorporated the more popular features so that is probably less true today, but there are still lots of bespoke tools that they are never going to provide. To use a personal example -- if only Android had a Tesla app, it would definitely be a factor in my choice for my next phone. If they ended the ecosystem altogether I'd probably switch. Whether that also applies to regular people is of course debatable.
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation I know we who post here on HN would like to believe this is true, but I have seen no evidence that it actually is.
    - eitland 7y ago
      I started as a huge Google fan. I am not anymore. To be honest though they might have put in the biggest effort themselves when it comes to making sure everyone dislike them.
      - nobleach 7y ago
        The pain with Google is that they go out of their way to ensure there's no way you can talk to a human with any decision making power.
      - pdonis 7y ago
        I'm not a fan of Apple or Google. But I also don't see any reason to think that Apple or Google cares whether I'm a fan or not.
        eitland 7y ago
        They (Google) probably probably care about if people leave their ecosystem, and even more if we go around encouraging other users to leave and investigators to investigate.
  - 205guy 7y ago
    Actually, every time an app dev gets to the front page with a story like this, one of the top commenters has more info that paints them in a much more negative light. Which is exactly what happened in this case (using dev account to access inside information). It happens so often that I am beginning to trust Apple's judgement and reactions, not developers (fair disclosure: I am not an iOS or Android app dev, the shear crowdedness of the app store has discouraged me from getting started). Sure, some explanations from Apple would be ideal, but I think fuzzyZeus makes a good realpolitik argument for why that doesn't happen--and didn't deserve to get downvoted into oblivion for it. And speaking of explanations, why doesn't the OP give us more explanations? The OP details all the delays and non-comm of Apple without even mentioning his own activities--especially if they were as serious as alleged. If he did non-standard or gray-area activities, you'd think he'd explain them and how they should be considered legit. The fact that he does not mention them at all is very detrimental to his case, and will likely cause a Streisand effect. Yes, apps and devs are still critical to the iOS ecosystem, but fuzzyZeus is right that there is too much supply putting the balance of power on Apple's side.
    - chipotle_coyote 7y ago
      With all respect, I don't think FussyZeus makes a convincing realpolitik argument for Apple's approach here. Rambo hasn't, AFAICT, even had it confirmed that his account is suspended at all. The argument isn't that Apple is obligated to spend hours of employee time in back-and-forth arguments with people they kick out of the developer program, merely that they should be clear that that's what they're actually doing and offer at least a sentence or two as to why. The argument that this just can't possibly scale is dubious, given that Amazon meets that standard when they take action against seller accounts. Even Twitter and Facebook, which are dealing with far more bad actors, don't just mysteriously disable your login with no explanation.
      - 205guy 7y ago
        > Rambo hasn't, AFAICT, even had it confirmed that his account is suspended at all. In the original article, Rambo is complaining that his dev account has been limited in some way. Anyway, how is that relevant when no one in this thread is contesting that the OP's account was (or was not) suspended/disabled in some way? > they should be clear that that's what they're actually doing and offer at least a sentence or two as to why I pretty much said the same, but given all the missing information, it might be a case where they can't or don't want to. As other comments have pointed out, Apple has covered themselves legally with their TOS explicitly stating accounts could be terminated without notice for violations. Other comments have also pointed out that Apple might be in a legal situation where they were advised to not communicate (blame the corporate lawyers). > The argument that this just can't possibly scale is dubious Well FussyZeus had a whole explanation for his/her opinion backed by his/her experience and a certain attitude towards the whole situation. Your only argument is that Amazon, Twitter, and FB do manage to give explanations. Yes, but not always, and Google that you don't mention is notorious for not giving explanations and not being able to speak to a human about it. I have the feeling that this is not a minor violation and there is credible speculation the OP seems to have behaved in ways that might merit what happened. So I think it's premature to jump to the conclusion that Apple can and should be more forthcoming in this case.
- ebiester 7y ago
  Because it is in their long term interest - seeing the way Apple and Google treat developers has stopped me, at the very least, from putting time into learning their ecosystems and choosing it for a side project. It may be true that there are plenty of people who will replace me, but the aggregate effect can eventually hurt their marketplaces.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    Your hypothesis comes up against the App Store breaking records each year and making tons of money for those who participate. It's the most profitable mobile store by a huge margin, and it's not as if these policies are new, this has been more or less the environment it's operated in since it opened.
    - logfromblammo 7y ago
      Ethics and economics rarely agree. Slavery was also profitable for slave-owners. Fascism was also profitable for the willing corporate partners of the state. The argumentam ad pecuniam is valid only for the accountants, not for policy-makers.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Really slavery? What next comparing developing for a mobile platform to Nazism?
        logfromblammo 7y ago
        Literally my next sentence after the slavery one. Finding counterexamples to the "profitable == okay" argument is really, really easy.
    - marcus_holmes 7y ago
      Not all those who participate. The vast (overwhelming) majority of app developers don't make a dime from it. A tiny, tiny minority make some side cash from it. A vanishingly small set of maybe a few hundred people maybe earn enough from it to make a living doing it (not developing apps for other people, but developing their own app products).
- IOT_Apprentice 7y ago
  How about not being sociopaths and providing goodwill to their developers who fill their App Store with products customers use? I mean they aren't Google. :)
- eckza 7y ago
  I absolutely see where you’re coming from here. But to me, the answer is, “because that is what is required for a civilized society to function”. It is not as if Apple has given developers this platform to create and sell software out of the goodness of their own hearts; the App Store is wildly profitable for them. What is being asked for here (in the comments, not in the blog post that was linked to) is nothing more than some common courtesy.

by chipsa 7y ago

If someone can manually kill a Dev account, they can include a message why it was killed. Even if it's generic form letter, it can be one that at least says what rule was broken.

FussyZeus 7y ago

They can. But why should they? What's the benefit?

rootusrootus 7y ago
Goodwill. Just because you're the big gorilla and can act as such with impunity doesn't mean you ought to constantly remind people of that. One developer doesn't matter in the grand scheme, but every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation. Collectively that does have value.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  Apple has tons of goodwill with their users, and that's what matters. That's who pays the bills, and that's who funds the App Store. From the beginning Apple has had a very standoff-ish relationship with their developers. Their rules are clear from the outset: Play by them, or don't publish on our platform. To be honest I think developers occasionally still got entirely too much leeway to break their guidelines and get chances to fix it. Their relationship to us has always been in very simple terms: These are the ways you're allowed to behave while doing business on our platform. Accept that, or do not publish here. If you publish here and break these rules, you will be removed without second chance. Yet again, and again, and again, we get pleas from fellow developers who broke those rules but think Apple's just being mean. No, they're not. They outlined exactly how you should not Do the Thing, and you Did the Thing, and now you're off. This situation is fixed, and you knew the outcomes. You made your bed, sleep in it.
  - pgaddict 7y ago
    Sure the primary concern for Apple is users. But it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it, which largely depends on developers publishing apps. And it's not as if the dev accounts are not subscription-based - it's not expensive and Apple does not make a ton of money on this, but it's not free either. And I don't think anyone suggests Apple should get rid of all the rules and accept anarchy on the platform, that'd be insane. They have the right to set the rules on their platform, and enforce them. And the developers should not be surprised when violations are handled accordingly. The first problem is that a lot of the rules are entirely vague, to the extent that it's hard to make judgments based on the wording. (Essentially what we used to call "rubber law" years ago, a vaguely worded law that can be used to support whatever the state currently wants.). The second problem is that you generally don't get clear explanation what rules you broke. That may seem reasonable, but whoever makes those decisions is bound to make some errors. And if you don't know what rule(s) you supposedly broke and how, you can hardly appeal the decision. Yes, for Apple it's much easier/cheaper to provide as little information as possible, eliminating the issue of appeals (i.e. costs). But it's a bit of a dick move, really. If you set rules for your platform, you really need to plan for proper enforcement, including providing information what rule was broken/how and allowing appeals.
    - pdonis 7y ago
      > it's not like the platform could exist without the ecosystem around it We developers would like to believe this is true, but I'm not sure it is. I don't think Apple would care if the third party developer ecosystem went away. They don't depend on it to sell their products.
      - rootusrootus 7y ago
        I think it's fair to say that early on, third party developers added a lot of functionality that was lacking in the OS. Apple has steadily incorporated the more popular features so that is probably less true today, but there are still lots of bespoke tools that they are never going to provide. To use a personal example -- if only Android had a Tesla app, it would definitely be a factor in my choice for my next phone. If they ended the ecosystem altogether I'd probably switch. Whether that also applies to regular people is of course debatable.
- pdonis 7y ago
  > every time they get to the front page of HN with a story like this it chips away at Apple's (or Google's, or whoever's) reputation I know we who post here on HN would like to believe this is true, but I have seen no evidence that it actually is.
  - eitland 7y ago
    I started as a huge Google fan. I am not anymore. To be honest though they might have put in the biggest effort themselves when it comes to making sure everyone dislike them.
    - nobleach 7y ago
      The pain with Google is that they go out of their way to ensure there's no way you can talk to a human with any decision making power.
    - pdonis 7y ago
      I'm not a fan of Apple or Google. But I also don't see any reason to think that Apple or Google cares whether I'm a fan or not.
      - eitland 7y ago
        They (Google) probably probably care about if people leave their ecosystem, and even more if we go around encouraging other users to leave and investigators to investigate.
- 205guy 7y ago
  Actually, every time an app dev gets to the front page with a story like this, one of the top commenters has more info that paints them in a much more negative light. Which is exactly what happened in this case (using dev account to access inside information). It happens so often that I am beginning to trust Apple's judgement and reactions, not developers (fair disclosure: I am not an iOS or Android app dev, the shear crowdedness of the app store has discouraged me from getting started). Sure, some explanations from Apple would be ideal, but I think fuzzyZeus makes a good realpolitik argument for why that doesn't happen--and didn't deserve to get downvoted into oblivion for it. And speaking of explanations, why doesn't the OP give us more explanations? The OP details all the delays and non-comm of Apple without even mentioning his own activities--especially if they were as serious as alleged. If he did non-standard or gray-area activities, you'd think he'd explain them and how they should be considered legit. The fact that he does not mention them at all is very detrimental to his case, and will likely cause a Streisand effect. Yes, apps and devs are still critical to the iOS ecosystem, but fuzzyZeus is right that there is too much supply putting the balance of power on Apple's side.
  - chipotle_coyote 7y ago
    With all respect, I don't think FussyZeus makes a convincing realpolitik argument for Apple's approach here. Rambo hasn't, AFAICT, even had it confirmed that his account is suspended at all. The argument isn't that Apple is obligated to spend hours of employee time in back-and-forth arguments with people they kick out of the developer program, merely that they should be clear that that's what they're actually doing and offer at least a sentence or two as to why. The argument that this just can't possibly scale is dubious, given that Amazon meets that standard when they take action against seller accounts. Even Twitter and Facebook, which are dealing with far more bad actors, don't just mysteriously disable your login with no explanation.
    - 205guy 7y ago
      > Rambo hasn't, AFAICT, even had it confirmed that his account is suspended at all. In the original article, Rambo is complaining that his dev account has been limited in some way. Anyway, how is that relevant when no one in this thread is contesting that the OP's account was (or was not) suspended/disabled in some way? > they should be clear that that's what they're actually doing and offer at least a sentence or two as to why I pretty much said the same, but given all the missing information, it might be a case where they can't or don't want to. As other comments have pointed out, Apple has covered themselves legally with their TOS explicitly stating accounts could be terminated without notice for violations. Other comments have also pointed out that Apple might be in a legal situation where they were advised to not communicate (blame the corporate lawyers). > The argument that this just can't possibly scale is dubious Well FussyZeus had a whole explanation for his/her opinion backed by his/her experience and a certain attitude towards the whole situation. Your only argument is that Amazon, Twitter, and FB do manage to give explanations. Yes, but not always, and Google that you don't mention is notorious for not giving explanations and not being able to speak to a human about it. I have the feeling that this is not a minor violation and there is credible speculation the OP seems to have behaved in ways that might merit what happened. So I think it's premature to jump to the conclusion that Apple can and should be more forthcoming in this case.
ebiester 7y ago
Because it is in their long term interest - seeing the way Apple and Google treat developers has stopped me, at the very least, from putting time into learning their ecosystems and choosing it for a side project. It may be true that there are plenty of people who will replace me, but the aggregate effect can eventually hurt their marketplaces.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  Your hypothesis comes up against the App Store breaking records each year and making tons of money for those who participate. It's the most profitable mobile store by a huge margin, and it's not as if these policies are new, this has been more or less the environment it's operated in since it opened.
  - logfromblammo 7y ago
    Ethics and economics rarely agree. Slavery was also profitable for slave-owners. Fascism was also profitable for the willing corporate partners of the state. The argumentam ad pecuniam is valid only for the accountants, not for policy-makers.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Really slavery? What next comparing developing for a mobile platform to Nazism?
      - logfromblammo 7y ago
        Literally my next sentence after the slavery one. Finding counterexamples to the "profitable == okay" argument is really, really easy.
  - marcus_holmes 7y ago
    Not all those who participate. The vast (overwhelming) majority of app developers don't make a dime from it. A tiny, tiny minority make some side cash from it. A vanishingly small set of maybe a few hundred people maybe earn enough from it to make a living doing it (not developing apps for other people, but developing their own app products).
IOT_Apprentice 7y ago
How about not being sociopaths and providing goodwill to their developers who fill their App Store with products customers use? I mean they aren't Google. :)
eckza 7y ago
I absolutely see where you’re coming from here. But to me, the answer is, “because that is what is required for a civilized society to function”. It is not as if Apple has given developers this platform to create and sell software out of the goodness of their own hearts; the App Store is wildly profitable for them. What is being asked for here (in the comments, not in the blog post that was linked to) is nothing more than some common courtesy.