4 ms·

Glad to hear they backed off on one of the most ridiculous things they've done.

• mschuster91 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. 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 ago
        Of course it did. They wouldn't want anything strengthening Epic's anti-trust case.
      • sjwright 6y ago
        We have no way of knowing. Both scenarios are entirely plausible.
      • JimDabell 6y ago
        Like 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 ago
          All 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
            > media storm basically guaranteed it Not sure I agree that it guaranteed it but I do agree with you that it very likely had an impact - it would have come up on someone's radar.
      • parasubvert 6y ago
        Apple (and arguably most medium to large tech vendors) don’t make decisions based on HN opinion/fashion, which is about as consistent as their review process.
  • mypalmike 6y ago
    "Raise a stink in public" is a time honored tradition when the normal routes fail to yield results.
  • draw_down 6y ago
    I 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.