15 ms·
Apple reverses stance on Amphetamine App
- makecheck 6y agoApp Review seriously needs to stop rejecting app updates for things that have nothing to do with that particular update. How many times do we see them suddenly rejecting version #250 because they found a problem with something that had been in place for the entire lifetime of the app (such as its name, or some key feature)?
- barnaclejive 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25617601 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25617601
- swiley 6y agoGlad to hear they backed off on one of the most ridiculous things they've done.
- mschuster91 6y agoSad to hear that "raise a stink on HN" is one of the only ways to catch an actual human's live attention at a mega corp. In a better world, this whole issue would have been averted by the first-level support escalating it to the supervisor who would have used common sense and the liberties of his leadership position.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- JimDabell 6y ago> Sad to hear that "raise a stink on HN" is one of the only ways to catch an actual human's live attention at a mega corp. It’s not. There’s an appeals process staffed by humans. He used it. This is the result. Unless I’ve missed something, there’s no indication raising a stink helped in this case. The original article mentioned that he’d appealed the rejection with Apple which was still pending. This is the result of that appeal. In all likelihood this was a trigger-happy reviewer whose decision was always going to be reversed on appeal. Had the appeal failed, then that would have been newsworthy. Apple has other problems, but it’s not difficult to get human attention from Apple when they reject your application. Use the appeals process; you always get to a human. I think perhaps you’re mixing it up with Google? They are notorious for leaving developers stranded with automated rejections without any route to speaking to a human.
- dj_mc_merlin 6y ago> Unless I’ve missed something, there’s no indication raising a stink helped in this case Of course, there's no way to know. But do you 100% honestly believe reaching the frontpage of HN yesterday had nothing to do with the appeal being accepted today?
- vezycash 6y agoOf course it did. They wouldn't want anything strengthening Epic's anti-trust case.
- sjwright 6y agoWe have no way of knowing. Both scenarios are entirely plausible.
- JimDabell 6y agoLike you say, there’s no way to know for certain. But I 100% honestly believe this was the likely outcome regardless of any media attention. I’ve appealed plenty of dumb Apple decisions in the past and this is the normal outcome when there’s no media attention at all. He filed the appeal, he didn’t wait for the result. The result has now come in. It’s a massive assumption to attribute that result to media attention. Perhaps if your only experience of the Apple review process is hearing about it when it pops up on Hacker News then it’s easy to make the assumption that the media did this, because the media is always involved in those cases. But this is what happens without the media getting involved as well.
- dj_mc_merlin 6y agoAll valid points, and I do agree that the most likely outcome was this. That said, the media storm basically guaranteed it, and there is a very important difference between those two probabilities, even if the expected outcome is the same.
- tailspin2019 6y ago
- mypalmike 6y ago"Raise a stink in public" is a time honored tradition when the normal routes fail to yield results.
- draw_down 6y agoI agree but guys, let’s admit that that train has left the station. This is a well-trodden path at this point, it’s one of the only weapons you have when you’re in their position.
- mam2 6y agoNext challenge: calling your app "Heroin" ><
- dguest 6y agoI had the same thought, but more as an illustration of why the approval process worked exactly as Apple would like here: they likely want to establish a barrier against whimsical provocative marketing but not against serious app development. If you're willing to make a serious case for why your app is called "Heroin" they might approve it. If you're clearly doing it to make a point, they have every incentive to censor it.
- albertgoeswoof 6y agoWhy can’t you call an app heroin? Genuine question. Is it somehow going to cause more drug use? By what mechanism? Why do we accept censorship so easily? Is free speech not worth more?
- dguest 6y agoFor the record I'm not a fan of this sort of censorship either. But I'm guessing their aversion to drug references is more to avoid offending people than to discourage drug use: opiate (and amphetamine) abuse is a pretty serious problem around the world, and a lot of people have lost family or years of their own lives to addiction. Naming an app after something with so much destructive potential---and as a marketing gimmick, no less---might seem a bit insensitive to some of these people. Again, I'm not saying I agree with this logic, but it's a perspective to be mindful of.
- daemoon 6y agoYou're not guaranteed free speech by private corps, they're not a government after all. I don't have a problem with any of those names but it's their policy which developers agree to before publishing apps.
- bitL 6y agoNext, ban synthesizers producing acid sounds. So long, TB-303 emulator: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/pure-acid/id1481283602 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/pure-acid/id1481283602
- liquidify 6y agoI cannot understand why corporations give any credence to the concept of demonizing individual words or concepts. To me, it is just as bad as demonizing technology.
- madeofpalk 6y agoProbably because it’s not corporations, but people.
- Blikkentrekker 6y agoBecause it's good for their profits to do so. You underestimate the amount of capital commanded by the angry mob that so easily becomes morally outraged.
- sjwright 6y agoCorporations reflect the society they are in; expecting them to be an engine of moral progress will always leave you disappointed.
- lb504 6y agoThe human review process in the app store leaves a lot to be desired for consistency. I've worked on multiple apps that were denied during an update renewal for something that wasn't part of the update and was already approved. If a specific app gets approved or denied often has a lot to do with which reviewer picks it up. While it seems like bad press has changed the review outcome it is plausible to me that the stance would be reversed regardless because it's such a grey area in the rules.
- parasubvert 6y agoI’m not sure there any evidence the PR had any effect. This was about apple’s appeal process working as intended. Id much rather have a human involved with some inconsistency and an appeal process, than an automated algorithm or rigid process that is consistently wrong.
- LeoNatan25 6y agoThere has been enough anecdotal evidence by now to show a pattern. The silent appeals often fail, while publicized appeals, accompanied by public outrage, are often successful. Hardly “working as intended”.
- Twisell 6y agoCan you provide some examples of legitimate but failed silent appeal, because on the other hand I think of quite a few publicized illegitimate appeal that failed not matter what. Fortnite being the incontestable leader of this category. You may be right but we should gather some metrics before jumping to claims about correlation between publicity/outcome. Perception bias is inevitable when remembering anecdotal evidences.
- rzzzt 6y agoHow can an appeal be publicized and silent at the same time?
- pkamb 6y ago> "If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps."
- diebeforei485 6y agoDevelopers of certain apps should run to Congressional antitrust committees. Some of them already have.
- null_object 6y ago> Developers of certain apps should run to Congressional antitrust committees. Some of them already have. Questioning the standard HN stance on this topic has led to instant downvotes for me before, but I'd genuinely like clarity on why it's considered a matter of civil liberty to develop whatever you want and force Apple to distribute it on their store? I honestly don't understand it, and I'd really like someone to explain it to me, instead of just downvoting. PS: I develop apps for the Apple store.
- pjmlp 6y agoThat is the rainbows and cheerful music subgroup, that sees Apple as the man.
- _huayra_ 6y agoIt's mainly because Apple (or Google or whatever other monopoly you can think of) has accrued so much power that they can stifle competitors by replicating the competitors' features, entire products (and offer them for free), and engage in anti-competitive practices. All of these companies have hoards of cash and can basically ice out any smaller contender indefinitely. This is basically why the exit strategy of many startups is "get acquired by FAANG and friends". The issue about civil liberty is a byproduct, a stop-gap measure to deal with the monopoly that currently exists. The actual issue is that these companies have accrued for too much power that it prevents competition. Is the product good? Yes or folks wouldn't buy it. That doesn't negate the incentives to behave in an anti-competitive way due to shareholder supremacy. I recall that most publicly-traded organizations could be sued by their shareholders for not pursuing clearly profitable ventures (e.g. replicating a popular product with their vast resources).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Triv888 6y agoReminds me of this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25606123 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25606123 ... I'm glad he fought it.
- packaeB 6y agoPWD:Aa@12345
- packaeB 6y agoID:25619449 PwD:Aa@12345
- AmericanChopper 6y agoThat comment is actually good advice though. Whether Apple was ever going to reverse course was always entirely beyond their control, and the fact that they did doesn’t prove it was a good strategy to rely on them doing so.
- Triv888 6y agoIt does prove that it was worth a try, if anything... He even got some free publicity out of this.
- AmericanChopper 6y agoWell complaining is free, and it certainly was worth trying as much as he did. It would have been a very poor choice of hill to die on though. But as much as I think this is a dumb move by Apple, I think it’s also a dumb name. I personally would have just used it as an opportunity to rebrand with some free marketing thrown in with the anti-Apple furore.
- AsyncAwait 6y ago> complaining is free Is it? I know a lot of HN thinks in terms of stocks, options, VC rounds etc. but time and energy is not 'free' either and is exactly what the author had to spend.
- Blikkentrekker 6y agoAs if moral rules of censorship ever be interpreted consistently. They are typically written down in a manner that suggests rule of law, but morality is always rule of men, and it's always horribly inconsistent.
- pistoriusp 6y agoI honestly didn't think they had a chance in hell when I saw the petition. Colour me suprised.
- polote 6y agodupe https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25617601 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25617601 97 comments
- prtkgpt 6y agoThanks Apple for making this awesome app famous. Good work.
- rendall 6y agoGustafson's tweet: "I am happy we all still have the freedom to express ourselves today." I wonder what that means
- zaptheimpaler 6y agoApple. The company that got its name thanks to Jobs tripping on acid! It's incredibly sad that they ever banned an app over a drugs name in the first place.
- tomxor 6y agoIt is ironic... Even more so considering their 1984 ad. Consider that they are now in a position to ban programs from running on their devices at all. All of these types of issues would evaporate if they were not in that position: banning programs over concern of public image (can't be even tangentially associated with drugs), irreconcilable political differences between countries (can't block criticism of a dictatorship without being undemocratic)... this is why anything resembling an app store should be federated, and the ability to install individual programs at will of the user should never be suppressed. But selling the most expensive and high profit electronics on the planet was not enough.
- ronyfadel 6y ago> In the Steve Jobs biography, Jobs told Walter Isaacson he was “on one of my fruitarian diets” and had just come back from an apple farm, and thought the name sounded “fun, spirited and not intimidating.” I don't think it was drug related?
- blackbrokkoli 6y agoI mean, good for the app, but at this point this really makes my blood boil. Each month, I use several hundred different "apps" (broader meaning)- how many of those are written by a two-person teams in Iraq or Kazakhstan who do not have thousands of monthly Medium readers? How many of your cache cleaners, debuggers, flashlights and mac utility managers are written by some kid in Northern England who never even heard of HN? Every time somebody writes a "my app got finally restored :)" post hundreds or thousands of equally good and legit pieces of software get thrown into the abyss - and why? Because the author speaks no English, has no network, does not tweet enough. What a shitty reason. In the long run, this makes the internet and tech culture as a whole more and more "Silicon Valley" and less and less diverse - and plain worse. Just because FAANG - the guys supposedly at the spearhead of AI innovation and diversity - cannot be bothered to moderate, except when there is a PR thread. I consider that quite the disgrace.
- gonzo41 6y agoDo you own an Iphone and do you fawn over other Mac hardware? Because I think you can only talk to them via the money you spend elsewhere.
- UweSchmidt 6y ago"Voting with the dollar" does not generally work to change corporate behaviour because of oligopols, a multitude of issues and lack of transparency. A user might want to "talk to them" over privacy (buy Apple?) or "talk to them" over App censorship (boycott?).
- subaquamille 6y agoOP is complaining that social inequality impacts expression equality, and you suggest him to vote with his money ? Seems counter productive.
- gonzo41 6y agoI guess I was replying to him, but meant the general point. As long as people still treat Mac products as something that they want to be apart of they give a free pass to the behavior. Sure, speaking out does something, but not buying Apple tech does more to effect change. Or maybe it's too late. Apple is so rich and so big, this is just people being ground up in the gears of bureaucracy.
- ostenning 6y agoMore virtue signalling from a company with little ethics, that uses modern day slavery to increase its cash reserves. Slavery and e-waste are some of the biggest problems humanity faces and Apple is at the top of the culpability list. And here we are squabbling over an “offensive” app name. Its a distraction and it’s the height of hypocrisy.
- scrollaway 6y agoWhatever you are talking about has zero relation to the topic at hand. Apple can do two things. And the worst part is that you're correct, they have few ethics, ewaste is a problem, etc. But that has nothing to do with their app store policies which often are a problem as well.
- ostenning 6y agoWhy is there a difference (or double standard) in how Apple treats those who can afford to buy an iPhone to those who are forced to build them? From the AppStore submission policies: "Apps that encourage consumption of tobacco and vape products, illegal drugs, or excessive amounts of alcohol are not permitted on the App Store ". I don't believe "Apple can do two things" is a valid argument. You cannot promote "protecting" one set of people from drugs whilst exploiting another set of people for financial gain. It is twisted logic and we shouldn't stand for it. Recently Apple lobbied against a Bill in Congress to aimed at protecting Uyghur minorities in China: https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple/ https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple...
- scrollaway 6y agoI don't believe Apple claims, anywhere, that they're "protecting" people from drugs.
- fragmede 6y agoThat is the originally supplied reasoning that Apple gave the developer. > Gustafson says Apple contacted him on December 29th and told him Amphetamine “appears to promote inappropriate use of controlled substances. Specifically, your app name and icon include references to controlled substances, pills.” That sure sounds like Apple is trying to protect people from "inappropriate use of controlled substances", or more colloqually, "protecting people from drugs".
- null_object 6y agoLet's face it, this is a hilarious HN episode: all the pitchforks that came out to protest Apple's 'monopoly' appstore, when the app-developer was actually totally free to distribute the application outside the appstore in any way he wished - but actually wanted to force Apple to distribute it for him, INSIDE the appstore. I guess you have to choose your battles.
- friedman23 6y agoI'm glad you are here to defend apple, you should write up a medium article asking apple to reverse their decision. Clearly apple was wrong to reverse it.
- null_object 6y ago>I'm glad you are here to defend apple, you should write up a medium article asking apple to reverse their decision. Clearly apple was wrong to reverse it. What a strange personal attack. I'm not here to "defend Apple", but there's an undeniable irony in all of the posts decrying Apple's supposed 'monopolistic' rules 'forcing' developers to use the AppStore, when this application could have been freely distributed outside the AppStore - which was precisely what the developer did not want to do.
- gradschool 6y agoFWIW, I'm with you down here at the bottom. The developer wants to distribute non-free software and wants Apple's help. Why should we sympathize with either party?
- ChrisLTD 6y agoLooks free to me: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/amphetamine/id937984704?mt=12 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/amphetamine/id937984704?mt=12 No in-app purchases either.
- superkuh 6y agoYup. Both parties here are in the wrong. Apple for their shitty walled garden model no one should participate in but in which people are coerced to participate due to their profit motive. And the Amphetamine developer for primarily caring about the profits he can achieve from getting into the walled garden and going so far as to demand access to another's (really shitty and lame) property.
- perryizgr8 6y agoPasting my comment from the other thread: Why do you care if it is on the app store or not? Just let users download it from your website. In any case people aren't discovering mac apps from the app store in any significant numbers.
- kjakm 6y agoIt looks to me like this was just a standard rejection and appeal. Some human reviewer noticed the app was technically potentially breading the guidelines and flagged it. The developer appealed and another more senior reviewer reversed the decision. I’m pretty sure this would have been the result regardless of the press the issue has gotten and it’s something Apple OS devs face at least a few times in their career. In a process with human reviewers there will be mistakes and reversals all the time. Creating a fuss before you’ve even attempted to appeal the decision seems disingenuous and a way to create some PR.
- bitL 6y agoMy guess is that some "policy" person/team needs to report they "removed xyz apps violating ToS per week" as their quality bar, so they actively seek any reason for banning an app. It's the same reason why companies dumb down their UI, make weird "unique" choices or remove useful functionality, because some team needs to report work.
- yakubin 6y agoSo many comments written due to assuming that it's about iOS where App Store is the only method of app distribution. Apparently scarcely anybody reads TFA. As far as the actual issue goes, it's their App Store, they have their rules and are free to execute them as they see fit. Given how you can easily distribute your apps outside of App Store, it's a completely different situation from the duopoly on mobile devices, where developers don't have a choice.