5 ms·

The reason that Cydia doesn't have reviews (or even ratings) is that we haven't found a way to make a working review system either, so we don't even try. I don'

by Xuzz 15y ago

The reason that Cydia doesn't have reviews (or even ratings) is that we haven't found a way to make a working review system either, so we don't even try. I don't think that any of us would argue or work against something like that, but I also seriously doubt that Apple will do it. (I'm a contributor to the Cydia open source project, but I don't speak for saurik or Cydia, and that's probably not the official stance.)

saurik 15y ago
So, I /am/ saurik, and I probably /would/ argue with and work around something like that, as I think I should be allowed to review things in the App Store. Really, the "official stance" I have is that developers who believe that having their application fail horribly when the platform is even slightly different is not their fault are deluded: Apple is going to change the platform over time, and when your app fails for Apple they tend to get pissed and just block your app from the store and may even de-prioritize your updates. Seriously: if your app fails because the font is different, there is something epically wrong with your coding methodology; and yes: Apple actually did change the font slightly for the iPhone 4 (on retina screens they switched to Helvetica Neue from Helvetica). Meanwhile, in desktop-land, everyone from large companies to small independent developers deal with this supposedly horrible problem of random fonts, different operating system versions, upgraded libraries, client-side firewalls, or any other number of things that would make developers like kogir freak out, and somehow the world doesn't end, and almost all of the software I download works without issue (with the exception of Chrome on Tablet editions of Windows, and that's squarely Google's fault). (Hell: even almost all of the software on the App Store works under these conditions. What should /really/ happen is that Apple should internally have a different "test version" of iOS that developers are not allowed to see; one that has a newer version of SQLite (which I state in specific as developers make all kinds of incorrect assumptions about the SQLite ABI) and has every core library compiled to the opposite instruction set (Thumb if normally ARM, and vice versa), that has every font replaced with Comic Sans, and uses a different pixel density, on a screen with a slightly different aspect ratio, using a CPU that runs slightly faster than the shipping devices. The reason this needs to be done is that an app that fails to run correctly in that (hidden) configuration is pretty much guaranteed to be an app that is going to stop working when any of the following occur: iOS 6, iPhone Nano, iPad+Retina, or another "game changing" device (such as the iPad when it came out). Rather than let these apps in the store just to fail later, they should be weeded out before they even get in. (And yes: Cydia itself strives not to make any assumptions about any of the things listed, and in fact worked almost entirely correctly when loaded for the first time on an iPad with the flag flipped for "don't show me in a 1x/2x box"; certainly well enough that the reviewer in this scenario would have given it a pass were they testing it in that environment. The one place it tends to get burnt is with what it does to WebKit; and the current implementation, which works fine on everything from 2.0 through 5.0, is likely stable enough to "stand the test of time".) (FWIW: I do believe that people using beta versions of iOS should not be able to review applications. These people are using a version of the firmware that is under NDA... they should not be tempted to be providing feedback that might violate that agreement to applications that fail to operate correctly, possibly due to no fault of the app. I have a good example of this related to Cydia on 5.x, but I can't tell you what it is, for this very reason ;P.)
- shimfish 15y ago
  Um. One of the main reasons beta versions of an OS are made available is to find bugs in the OS. Apps can crash because the OS isn't doing what it's supposed to. Which is why we're up to iOS Beta 5. [edit: didn't see your FWIW - was that an edit?] I'm afraid this reads like a hacker rant who is angry that lesser mortals get to write code too. I'm a bit disappointed this comes from someone as influential as yourself. [edit] It is a great luxury to have a standardised platform to write for and it cuts development costs. Any Android devs want to comment on their experience of writing code for diverse hardware and setups vs iOS? Or indeed Android users wanting to comment on the quality of software being written?
  - saurik 15y ago
    A) Yes, my FWIW was an edit. B) I do not see how anything you have said here responded to any of my arguments. (edit: in specific, I don't even know what your one comment about finding bugs in the OS has anything to do with this conversation) C) My friends who are developers on Android claim that supporting multiple devices is not actually a serious issue. [edit] D) Further, I believe that a response like mine is the only serious response that can be given to someone (kogir) who actually just suggested, "with a straight face", that a full 10% of the people using the App Store should be /banned from leaving reviews/ because he doesn't want to deal with /fonts being changed/. Are you telling me here that you actually agree with him?
    - Troll_Whisperer 15y ago
      "Further, I believe that a response like mine is the only serious response that can be given to someone (kogir) who actually just suggested, "with a straight face", that a full 10% of the people using the App Store should be /banned from leaving reviews/ because he doesn't want to deal with /fonts being changed/. Are you telling me here that you actually agree with him?" Considering that that "full 10%" of the people you speak of have broken their terms of service and are running a non-sanctioned OS, why should Apple be obligated to publish their reviews? I understand the anger at Apple bricking jail-broken phones, but I really don't see how they should be obligated to accommodate them.

by Xuzz 15y ago

saurik 15y ago

So, I /am/ saurik, and I probably /would/ argue with and work around something like that, as I think I should be allowed to review things in the App Store. Really, the "official stance" I have is that developers who believe that having their application fail horribly when the platform is even slightly different is not their fault are deluded: Apple is going to change the platform over time, and when your app fails for Apple they tend to get pissed and just block your app from the store and may even de-prioritize your updates. Seriously: if your app fails because the font is different, there is something epically wrong with your coding methodology; and yes: Apple actually did change the font slightly for the iPhone 4 (on retina screens they switched to Helvetica Neue from Helvetica). Meanwhile, in desktop-land, everyone from large companies to small independent developers deal with this supposedly horrible problem of random fonts, different operating system versions, upgraded libraries, client-side firewalls, or any other number of things that would make developers like kogir freak out, and somehow the world doesn't end, and almost all of the software I download works without issue (with the exception of Chrome on Tablet editions of Windows, and that's squarely Google's fault). (Hell: even almost all of the software on the App Store works under these conditions. What should /really/ happen is that Apple should internally have a different "test version" of iOS that developers are not allowed to see; one that has a newer version of SQLite (which I state in specific as developers make all kinds of incorrect assumptions about the SQLite ABI) and has every core library compiled to the opposite instruction set (Thumb if normally ARM, and vice versa), that has every font replaced with Comic Sans, and uses a different pixel density, on a screen with a slightly different aspect ratio, using a CPU that runs slightly faster than the shipping devices. The reason this needs to be done is that an app that fails to run correctly in that (hidden) configuration is pretty much guaranteed to be an app that is going to stop working when any of the following occur: iOS 6, iPhone Nano, iPad+Retina, or another "game changing" device (such as the iPad when it came out). Rather than let these apps in the store just to fail later, they should be weeded out before they even get in. (And yes: Cydia itself strives not to make any assumptions about any of the things listed, and in fact worked almost entirely correctly when loaded for the first time on an iPad with the flag flipped for "don't show me in a 1x/2x box"; certainly well enough that the reviewer in this scenario would have given it a pass were they testing it in that environment. The one place it tends to get burnt is with what it does to WebKit; and the current implementation, which works fine on everything from 2.0 through 5.0, is likely stable enough to "stand the test of time".) (FWIW: I do believe that people using beta versions of iOS should not be able to review applications. These people are using a version of the firmware that is under NDA... they should not be tempted to be providing feedback that might violate that agreement to applications that fail to operate correctly, possibly due to no fault of the app. I have a good example of this related to Cydia on 5.x, but I can't tell you what it is, for this very reason ;P.)

shimfish 15y ago
Um. One of the main reasons beta versions of an OS are made available is to find bugs in the OS. Apps can crash because the OS isn't doing what it's supposed to. Which is why we're up to iOS Beta 5. [edit: didn't see your FWIW - was that an edit?] I'm afraid this reads like a hacker rant who is angry that lesser mortals get to write code too. I'm a bit disappointed this comes from someone as influential as yourself. [edit] It is a great luxury to have a standardised platform to write for and it cuts development costs. Any Android devs want to comment on their experience of writing code for diverse hardware and setups vs iOS? Or indeed Android users wanting to comment on the quality of software being written?
- saurik 15y ago
  A) Yes, my FWIW was an edit. B) I do not see how anything you have said here responded to any of my arguments. (edit: in specific, I don't even know what your one comment about finding bugs in the OS has anything to do with this conversation) C) My friends who are developers on Android claim that supporting multiple devices is not actually a serious issue. [edit] D) Further, I believe that a response like mine is the only serious response that can be given to someone (kogir) who actually just suggested, "with a straight face", that a full 10% of the people using the App Store should be /banned from leaving reviews/ because he doesn't want to deal with /fonts being changed/. Are you telling me here that you actually agree with him?
  - Troll_Whisperer 15y ago
    "Further, I believe that a response like mine is the only serious response that can be given to someone (kogir) who actually just suggested, "with a straight face", that a full 10% of the people using the App Store should be /banned from leaving reviews/ because he doesn't want to deal with /fonts being changed/. Are you telling me here that you actually agree with him?" Considering that that "full 10%" of the people you speak of have broken their terms of service and are running a non-sanctioned OS, why should Apple be obligated to publish their reviews? I understand the anger at Apple bricking jail-broken phones, but I really don't see how they should be obligated to accommodate them.