3 ms·
> Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI? No, it should be the Human Interface Guidelines' role to be the arbiter o
by danudey 6y ago
> Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?
No, it should be the Human Interface Guidelines' role to be the arbiter of what is and is not good UI.
> Should it be the App Review process’s goal today do this?
Yes. Who else is going to do it? Apple doesn't want half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store, so they enforce it at that level. It's unfortunate that such a small detail hung up an update, but a deliberate change was made to the app to remove fundamental functionality that should exist, for no reason that I can tell. Sounds like this is exactly what the process is for, and it sounds like it worked.
- kevingadd 6y agoIs it an HIG requirement now? AFAIK it isn't.
- saagarjha 6y agoIt is a selectively enforced requirement.
- addicted 6y agoThe HIG that Apple has never followed and has published apps and promoted UX that is actively against?
- Gene_Parmesan 6y ago> Apple doesn't want half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store Then why are there so many half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store? I don't think people's primary complaint is the rules (although for some it might be). Most people complain about the arbitrary enforcement. Whenever rules are enforced selectively & without rhyme or reason, people get angry -- especially when it's a situation where someone is trying to make money on your platform, and your arbitrary enforcement determines whether they're allowed to do that or not.