5 ms·

This will always be a cat and mouse game, although you would think Apple could have done better here. Perhaps a more effective solution would be for Apple to a

by blunte 6y ago

This will always be a cat and mouse game, although you would think Apple could have done better here. Perhaps a more effective solution would be for Apple to aggressively legally pursue bad actors like the group that churns out these apps. Make them hurt financially as an example to the next people who might entertain similar ideas. If Apple doesn’t start handling this better, eventually there will only be bad/fake apps on the store. Real developers will widely choose not to play the losing game.

elliekelly 6y ago
> Perhaps a more effective solution would be for Apple to aggressively legally pursue bad actors like the group that churns out these apps. Make them hurt financially as an example to the next people who might entertain similar ideas. Maybe a year or so ago Amazon started to aggressively pursue legal action against a few people who were abusing their return process. People who were clearly and egregiously stealing millions of dollars from Amazon via fraudulent returns. I haven’t seen any follow-up reporting but I would love to know the numbers behind the cost/benefit. It doesn’t seem to have had any impact on customer experience and I have to imagine there were others similarly abusing the process who have since stopped. I suspect the approach has largely paid off.
cwyers 6y ago
I'm sure that app review is a hard problem. But it seems like Apple has the worst of both worlds sometimes -- HN frequently puts cases where an existing, very successful app gets suddenly dinged for something, or a new app from a big vendor gets nailed on a point of policy. Meanwhile absolute shovelware like this seems to be able to clear the review process no problem.
- zepto 6y ago
  Those big cases where an existing app gets dinged are often justified, but are also extremely rare. Keeping out shovelware while also allowing rudimentary but useful apps by new developers is a much harder problem. They aren’t really connected in any particular way.
  - ncf04212 6y ago
    > Those big cases where an existing app gets dinged are often justified, but are also extremely rare. There have been many cases ( like Hey ) where Apple justification for removing apps was "We saw you're making money, therefore give us money, even tho we provide zero added value".
    - zepto 6y ago
      "We saw you're making money, therefore give us money, even tho we provide zero added value.” This is just something you made up. Apple’s justification was quite different.

by blunte 6y ago

elliekelly 6y ago

> Perhaps a more effective solution would be for Apple to aggressively legally pursue bad actors like the group that churns out these apps. Make them hurt financially as an example to the next people who might entertain similar ideas. Maybe a year or so ago Amazon started to aggressively pursue legal action against a few people who were abusing their return process. People who were clearly and egregiously stealing millions of dollars from Amazon via fraudulent returns. I haven’t seen any follow-up reporting but I would love to know the numbers behind the cost/benefit. It doesn’t seem to have had any impact on customer experience and I have to imagine there were others similarly abusing the process who have since stopped. I suspect the approach has largely paid off.

cwyers 6y ago

I'm sure that app review is a hard problem. But it seems like Apple has the worst of both worlds sometimes -- HN frequently puts cases where an existing, very successful app gets suddenly dinged for something, or a new app from a big vendor gets nailed on a point of policy. Meanwhile absolute shovelware like this seems to be able to clear the review process no problem.

zepto 6y ago
Those big cases where an existing app gets dinged are often justified, but are also extremely rare. Keeping out shovelware while also allowing rudimentary but useful apps by new developers is a much harder problem. They aren’t really connected in any particular way.
- ncf04212 6y ago
  > Those big cases where an existing app gets dinged are often justified, but are also extremely rare. There have been many cases ( like Hey ) where Apple justification for removing apps was "We saw you're making money, therefore give us money, even tho we provide zero added value".
  - zepto 6y ago
    "We saw you're making money, therefore give us money, even tho we provide zero added value.” This is just something you made up. Apple’s justification was quite different.