9 ms·

The Apple Reaper

288 points by azcoastal 14y ago

pclark 14y ago
just re-submit
- billycoover 14y ago
  re-submitting without the best feature (in my opinion). That's the plan... Although a lot of good ideas have been coming in about how to get around it.
  - xenophanes 14y ago
    Don't remove the feature, just figure out how to resubmit in such a way that it gets reviewed by a different person. Then you have a high chance to be approved.
- khangtoh 14y ago
  I was going to say the same but not resubmit to the same application. Instead create a new application and submit.
  - billycoover 14y ago
    Why would I create a new application?
    - mmackh 14y ago
      If you resubmit through creating a new app, it goes to a different reviewer. Be sure to change the name of your old app before you delete it, so you can still use the app name under the same account. Sometimes the new reviewers are more understanding/ might not see a problem with apps that have been rejected before. E.g. my HN iphone app was rejected 2-3 times for "webviews stuff" or whatever. Once I resubmitted, it had been approved the first time, plus it's been received well by users.
      - awolf 14y ago
        You can't change the name of an app without submitting an update (anymore).
    - khangtoh 14y ago
      I thought it was a brand new app, but since it's an update. You can try to resubmit the same binary and hopefully that will trigger a different reviewer.
      - billycoover 14y ago
        The iPhone version is a brand new app. The iPad versions were updates that they approved. He said they will be taking them down.
  - azcoastal 14y ago
    Another app though? wouldn't you lose brand equity and an upgrade path to the existing users?
michaelvillar 14y ago
What's the feature exactly? :) (Never heard of the multiplatform thing before.. seems like bullshit)
- billycoover 14y ago
  It sounds like bs, but then when you look at Square and PayPal, it makes sense according to this "rule", I guess.
- azcoastal 14y ago
  The feature is that it allows you take payments from anyone by having them enter their CC, and deposit the funds as directed by your Stripe acct. Clearly not in-app purchases. The functionality is similar to Square, without the swipe.
  - michaelvillar 14y ago
    Indeed.
batista 14y ago
"Apple: “If your app is cross-platform, then 11.2 does not apply and this problem goes away" Me: "Really, so if I build an Android version and launch it, I’m good?" Apple: "Yes” Is the above right? Doesn't seem to hold. If it is so, why does the Kindle app still seem to obey the 11.2, despite being cross-platform?
- alexholehouse 14y ago
  Agreed this makes no sense? If this is correct, does this not represent a [significant] financial incentive from Apple to not have an iOS only app?
- mtgx 14y ago
  Hey, I for one am glad Apple is encouraging developers to build apps for Android. Maybe developers will actually start developing for Android first, considering this keeps happening, and worst case scenario, they remain with the Android app, if Apple completely rejects it. If they have just the iOS app, they might just give up for good. The fact that Google has just made a Java 2 Object-C translator tool and that there are now more Android devices in the wild than iOS devices, should be a couple of nice incentives as well to build the Android app first.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - maxd 14y ago
    yeah well except for the fact that you really dont make us any money. we make android apps because we are expected to, not because its a good business decision....
    - vetinari 14y ago
      That's rapidly changing: http://www.swiftkey.net/android-catching-up-with-iphone-on-paid-apps http://www.swiftkey.net/android-catching-up-with-iphone-on-p...
- 14y ago
eridius 14y ago
There's an app review board. I'm not sure of the exact procedure for getting in contact with them, but it's basically the procedure for appealing a rejection like this. I think there's an email address somewhere in the developer portal. Edit: This trend of running straight to social news sites (e.g. HN) whenever something goes wrong is very strange. There are processes in place for dealing with this problem, processes that thousands of people have used in the past. Why would you go complaining publicly before even attempting to resolve it using the normal methods?
- billycoover 14y ago
  "before even attempting to resolve it using the normal methods" - I know I left it wide-open for assumptions like this. I'll update the post with what has transpired since my conversation with him.
- stickfigure 14y ago
  Because this kind of idiocy needs to have light shined on it.
- spaghetti 14y ago
  In my experience the appeal board are just as stupid as the reviewer cited in the post. It was like my app was evaluated by a random different reviewer. Something is strange about the whole app review process. It's been problematic for years. Apple could fix it if they had the incentive. IMO they do have an incentive (more developers, more sales etc) but something else is preventing the process from improving. Lately it seems like the review process is becoming worse. Perhaps it's company politics? The VP of whatever group is ultimately in charge of hiring reviewers, adjusting policies etc may be standing in the way. However given the explosion of the mobile ecosystem it seems unlikely that organizational politics would come first. One side note: for my last app that was reviewed and rejected multiple times (once by the appeal board) it seemed like the reviewers were really trying hard to make the app crash. I log almost everything users do in the app. Since the only people with copies of the app were myself and Apple I could see the reviewer(s) activity. If you've tested iOS apps that use even basic tableViews populated with remote data you know that swiping vigorously, pushing and popping viewControllers quickly etc can wring out some funny corner cases. It seems like the reviewer was trying to find one as a pretense for rejecting the app when the real reason was something they didn't want to say. Apparently they didn't find anything and went with "app is just a re-packaged website without enough native iOS functionality" when the entire app uses native iOS features.
realrocker 14y ago
I up voted just to make him care about it. Is that an evil thing to do?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
hnriot 14y ago
I hope Apple are reading this, possibly some of their trillions of cash dollars would be spent on hiring people that have heard of paypal or square. If they are in a decision making position, they should be equipped with the necessary skills to perform their job. This is inexcusable of a company that is so wrapped up in its mystique and brand image.
robryan 14y ago
I understand stripe and square if you aren't part of the SV echo chamber, but PayPal? Where does Apple find these reviewers?
- calvinlough 14y ago
  He probably exaggerated the responses when he made that transcription. Unless he had an audio recording, it would be an easy thing to do, especially if he was mad.
- biot 14y ago
  There's a big difference between "I haven't heard of the PayPal app" and "I haven't heard of PayPal". I presume that when discussing reviewing apps with an app reviewer, it's not a stretch to assume that the app reviewer thinks in terms of apps.
tisme 14y ago
One observation: The landlord gets to screw with their tenants at his whim, and you don't even have to expect minimum standards (such as basic intelligence) in your interaction with them. This is part and parcel of operating in a walled garden, and should be a conscious part of your decision making process when you work out if you want to work this way (or not).
thechut 14y ago
I don't understand how it is possible that Stripe is not allowed to have this functionality but Square is. Certainly Square does not give 30% to Apple for every swipe. The cross-platform bit is interesting though. This should send a clear message to developers that they should go with ANDROID FIRST.
- asarazan 14y ago
  Square employs a significant number of ex-Apple guys. That might have something to do with it :-)
  - thechut 14y ago
    I'm sure that doesn't hurt...
  - josteink 14y ago
    So working with Apple means walled gardens and corruption? That just makes it sound so much better!
- gsibble 14y ago
  The rule doesn't apply to either. It specifically refers to in app content and features. Accepting a credit card for a good that is not "in app" (ie. a physical good like coffee or a virtual good like consulting) is perfectly acceptable under the rules. The reviewer in this case is just being retarded.
psychotik 14y ago
File an appeal with the App Review Appeal Board (or whatever it's called). It's pretty simple to do from iTunes Connect. Someone smarter than a robot will look into it and get back to you (my IAP appeal took ~14 days, but they did take precedent set by other apps into consideration and understood some nuanced arguments, so they might know what Stripe/Square etc are and how it matters)
wolfgke 14y ago
Then don't do business with a dictator as Apple is. There have been enough cases of "creative interpretations" of Apple's guidelines, against which you have nearly no handle. So you have to blame yourself.
cooldeal 14y ago
Well, I am just glad that Android, Windows Phone and Windows 8 store apps don't have this stupid restriction if you don't use their payment systems. Walled garden and 30% forced cut of app sales is one thing, but a forced 30% cut of every in-app sale is like erecting a toll booth on all apps. Gruber's explanation of "Apple does it because it can, and the people complaining are just jealous that Apple can and they cannot" doesn't really fly. This is one of the reasons that Apple is dragging its feet on making HTML5 web apps work on par with native apps, despite Jobs' anti-Flash memo two and a half years ago. Edit: Sigh, looks like this submission is sinking on the HN front page due to people flagging it for it being anti-Apple. Be classy, HN.
- psychotik 14y ago
  "Well, I am just glad that Android, Windows Phone and Windows 8 store apps don't have this stupid restriction if you don't use their payment systems." The Android Developer TOS says that any other in-app payment system isn't legal, and grounds for your app being removed from the app store. I haven't studied it, but I suspect Microsoft's ToS will say something similar too. Edit: Android's DDA section 3.3 and 4.5 disallow using other payment processors. http://www.android.com/us/developer-distribution-agreement.html http://www.android.com/us/developer-distribution-agreement.h...
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    Doesn't the Kindle Android app allow you to buy ebooks and subscriptions? Also,while Microsoft does support in-app purchases in their store, they don't restrict other payment methods like Apple does. From Microsoft's Store guidelines: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/making-money-with-your-apps-through-the-windows-store.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/maki... Using your own billing system Your app and service may already depend on a particular transaction provider or benefit from ties to other lines of business. Your customers want the trust and efficiency of a familiar, trusted transaction experience. You can use your own transaction provider within your app to provide the experience your customers expect. If you are not using the Windows Store as your transaction provider, you will want to make sure that your app meets all of the certification requirements such as: Identifying the transaction provider to the user during purchase confirmation Prompt the user for authentication before processing the transaction Your payment processor must meet the current PCI Data Security Standard
scheff 14y ago
I would have thought the solution is simple - release an extremely primitive Android app of the same name and splash screen that says "Coming soon", and report back to Apple "Yes, I have an Android version of my app."
- billycoover 14y ago
  Lots fo suggestions for this one :)
spaghetti 14y ago
Honest question: why hasn't Apple fixed this fucking stupid review process? They have the resources to pay cheap reviewers who are probably better than this guy. I'm sure college kids with no job prospects would jump to "work at Apple" even if it's making $10/hour reviewing apps. Why not allow all apps into the store as long as they pass some security checks done by Apple (no downloading executables etc)? The current review process is just encouraging developers to look at alternatives. Android for starters. I'm even spending time learning about Firefox OS. If Apple would stop rejecting totally legit apps for "having limited entertainment value" when my Mixpanel analytics say otherwise I (unfortunately) wouldn't give a shit about Android or any other mobile OS.
- stevewilhelm 14y ago
  Because for Apple and it's customers the app review process is not broken. It's only frustrating for of app developers. Looking over the App store, if anything there is an over abundance of app developers.
  - spaghetti 14y ago
    I agree there's an over abundance of app developers. I wonder if the costs to Apple in terms of hosting all the free apps, paying reviewers, dealing with refunds and dealing with rejection appeals just isn't worth it? However in a way the review process is broken for customers. Say I have a free app with 100 reviews and a 5-star average. The app has been downloaded on average 90 times per day for a year and the monthly average has been slowly growing (except for the initial release spike). Also the analytics show retention and daily usage going up. IMO it's safe to say that users like this app. Therefore users suffer when an update to the app is rejected or the app is pulled for superfluous reasons.
    - stevewilhelm 14y ago
      I would suggest if the example app with 100 reviews and ninety downloads a day was rejected, users would just buy a similar app. Users are happy, ignorate that another app that may have been better was rejected. Apple is happy because revenue is revenue. Only the developer of the rejected app is not.
larrik 14y ago
My guide app was recently rejected for being "simply a book." Seriously. There's actually a "Books" section of the App Store (it's the first one, no less!). My only recourse? Publish it on iBooks, which requires an ISBN. Also, I've never met anyone who's ever even opened the iBooks store.
dlokshin 14y ago
Wait, so if I build something on Android and iPhone, I don't have to use Apple's in app purchase? I can use Stripe directly? Am I understanding this correctly?
- billycoover 14y ago
  That's what he's telling me.
- gsibble 14y ago
  You can use anything you want if you are not selling in app items. Think Fandango. You are buying movie tickets. Do they use Apple's in-app purchase? Heck no. But a game with virtual goods is required to. That's the distinction.
gfodor 14y ago
Its things like this that are going to put Apple on the feds' radar enough to cause them a lot of pain down the road.
jrochkind1 14y ago
The REALLY weird thing is that "cross platform exemption." This guy was NOT doing what that section of the ToS was meant to prohibit. But let's say someone else had an app that really was, that was doing in-app purchases without giving apple their 30% vigorish.... all you have to do is make it for Android too, and Apple will let you? Really? Does this really work?
- fpgeek 14y ago
  Maybe it works if your name isn't Amazon, Google, B&N, Kobo, Sony and so on? (probably not)
cageface 14y ago
I changed the summary text of my apps to say that I disagreed with Apple's patent lawsuits and that I would be removing them from the app store once I'd had a chance to distribute updates to existing users for any issues with iOS 6. The next day my apps disappeared from the store with no notice or explanation. I will never invest in a platform with this kind of arbitrary, totalitarian control again. Goodbye & good riddance Apple & good luck with your silly joke of an IDE.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  Not that I disapprove of the sentiment, but wasn't announcing the reason you were dropping support the equivalent of waving a red flag in front of a bull?
  - cageface 14y ago
    Yes, but I thought they'd be professional enough to at least let me know they were removing them from the store listings. Instead they just yanked them without notice and let me deal with the customer fallout.
    - eridius 14y ago
      I'm pretty sure what you did was a very clear abuse of the description field for your apps. When you very blatantly flaunt the rules and use them to publicly insult your host, what exactly were you expecting to happen?
- mark_l_watson 14y ago
  +1 right on, do what you feel is right.
billycoover 14y ago
Here's what I wrote in my appeal. I tried to speak in the most simple terms as possible. I hope it works: " The rejection states that "if the purchasable content, functionality, or services are intended to be used within the app, they must be purchased through IAP, within the app" - This is absolutely not the case. Pay Pad for Stripe allows USERS to accept payments from their customers with their iPhone & iPad. Nothing that the user is accepting payments for would be used within the app. Pay Pad for Stripe is companion app to the Stripe API (http://www.stripe.com http://www.stripe.com). I am not selling anything inside of the app. There are no subscriptions inside of the app. There is no exchange of a fee or subscription money between myself and a Pay Pad for Stripe user. They cannot buy any content, products, or services from my while inside the app. The most straight-forward way I can describe how someone might use Pay Pad for Stripe is this: My wife has a Stripe account which allows her to accept credit card payments. She downloads Pay Pad for Stripe so that she can manage her Stripe account and accept mobile payments. She takes our daughters to the local grocery store to sell girl-scout cookies. A customer of hers want's to buy a box of thin-mints. She uses Pay Pad for Stripe to take a credit card payment from the customer for those thin-min cookies. That's it. The feature is identical to what you will find in the popular Square and Pay Pal apps. This is not in-app purchasing. This in enabling B2C business transactions. There is no money exchanged between myself and the Pay Pad for Stripe users. "
stevewilhelm 14y ago
Reality check: the iTunes Store sales represent 4% of Apple total revenue. As long as there is a sufficient selection of movies, music, and apps to keep the iPhone compelling, Apple doesn't need to foster a "long tail" app catalogue.
vonwaldek 14y ago
i read your blog post and feel as though your product is worth while to continue spending time and effort on. i applaud efforts towards improvement
- billycoover 14y ago
  Thanks for the feedback. The app has since been approved. Blog post updated with details: http://coovtech.com/posts/the-apple-reaper/ http://coovtech.com/posts/the-apple-reaper/
billycoover 14y ago
Update: Apple reached out to me about this incident. They've approved the app! http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pay-pad-for-stripe-for-iphone/id558387939?ls=1 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pay-pad-for-stripe-for-iphone... I'll update the blog post in the morning with details.
jopt 14y ago
False negative. Has since been fixed.
rizumu 14y ago
"He recites 11.2 to me. I again attempt to explain in detail how the app works, how Stripe works, and how we use Stripe with the various apps and products we have. He stands firm." I once had this argument with a tech over a macbook apple care repair. My screen cable was broken, no display. They opened and found a coffe stain on the case from many months prior. He said I had water damage. I asked what part is damaged by the water. We must have went back and forth 20+ times on this detail. Nothing was damaged by the water, they found an old stain on the case! After shipping it to them twice with no repair, finally I cleaned it out entirely with a qtip and took it to an authorized service center. Fortunately the tech there was able to negotiate the claim for the busted cable. Was it because I already have a few apple care repairs and was near the end of my term? No, the phone operator was trained robotically to repeat the same nonsensical phrase ad infinitum.

The Apple Reaper

288 points by azcoastal 14y ago

pclark 14y ago

just re-submit

billycoover 14y ago
re-submitting without the best feature (in my opinion). That's the plan... Although a lot of good ideas have been coming in about how to get around it.
- xenophanes 14y ago
  Don't remove the feature, just figure out how to resubmit in such a way that it gets reviewed by a different person. Then you have a high chance to be approved.
khangtoh 14y ago
I was going to say the same but not resubmit to the same application. Instead create a new application and submit.
- billycoover 14y ago
  Why would I create a new application?
  - mmackh 14y ago
    If you resubmit through creating a new app, it goes to a different reviewer. Be sure to change the name of your old app before you delete it, so you can still use the app name under the same account. Sometimes the new reviewers are more understanding/ might not see a problem with apps that have been rejected before. E.g. my HN iphone app was rejected 2-3 times for "webviews stuff" or whatever. Once I resubmitted, it had been approved the first time, plus it's been received well by users.
    - awolf 14y ago
      You can't change the name of an app without submitting an update (anymore).
  - khangtoh 14y ago
    I thought it was a brand new app, but since it's an update. You can try to resubmit the same binary and hopefully that will trigger a different reviewer.
    - billycoover 14y ago
      The iPhone version is a brand new app. The iPad versions were updates that they approved. He said they will be taking them down.
- azcoastal 14y ago
  Another app though? wouldn't you lose brand equity and an upgrade path to the existing users?

michaelvillar 14y ago

What's the feature exactly? :) (Never heard of the multiplatform thing before.. seems like bullshit)

billycoover 14y ago
It sounds like bs, but then when you look at Square and PayPal, it makes sense according to this "rule", I guess.
azcoastal 14y ago
The feature is that it allows you take payments from anyone by having them enter their CC, and deposit the funds as directed by your Stripe acct. Clearly not in-app purchases. The functionality is similar to Square, without the swipe.
- michaelvillar 14y ago
  Indeed.

batista 14y ago

"Apple: “If your app is cross-platform, then 11.2 does not apply and this problem goes away" Me: "Really, so if I build an Android version and launch it, I’m good?" Apple: "Yes” Is the above right? Doesn't seem to hold. If it is so, why does the Kindle app still seem to obey the 11.2, despite being cross-platform?

alexholehouse 14y ago
Agreed this makes no sense? If this is correct, does this not represent a [significant] financial incentive from Apple to not have an iOS only app?
mtgx 14y ago
Hey, I for one am glad Apple is encouraging developers to build apps for Android. Maybe developers will actually start developing for Android first, considering this keeps happening, and worst case scenario, they remain with the Android app, if Apple completely rejects it. If they have just the iOS app, they might just give up for good. The fact that Google has just made a Java 2 Object-C translator tool and that there are now more Android devices in the wild than iOS devices, should be a couple of nice incentives as well to build the Android app first.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- maxd 14y ago
  yeah well except for the fact that you really dont make us any money. we make android apps because we are expected to, not because its a good business decision....
  - vetinari 14y ago
    That's rapidly changing: http://www.swiftkey.net/android-catching-up-with-iphone-on-paid-apps http://www.swiftkey.net/android-catching-up-with-iphone-on-p...
14y ago

eridius 14y ago

There's an app review board. I'm not sure of the exact procedure for getting in contact with them, but it's basically the procedure for appealing a rejection like this. I think there's an email address somewhere in the developer portal. Edit: This trend of running straight to social news sites (e.g. HN) whenever something goes wrong is very strange. There are processes in place for dealing with this problem, processes that thousands of people have used in the past. Why would you go complaining publicly before even attempting to resolve it using the normal methods?

billycoover 14y ago
"before even attempting to resolve it using the normal methods" - I know I left it wide-open for assumptions like this. I'll update the post with what has transpired since my conversation with him.
stickfigure 14y ago
Because this kind of idiocy needs to have light shined on it.
spaghetti 14y ago
In my experience the appeal board are just as stupid as the reviewer cited in the post. It was like my app was evaluated by a random different reviewer. Something is strange about the whole app review process. It's been problematic for years. Apple could fix it if they had the incentive. IMO they do have an incentive (more developers, more sales etc) but something else is preventing the process from improving. Lately it seems like the review process is becoming worse. Perhaps it's company politics? The VP of whatever group is ultimately in charge of hiring reviewers, adjusting policies etc may be standing in the way. However given the explosion of the mobile ecosystem it seems unlikely that organizational politics would come first. One side note: for my last app that was reviewed and rejected multiple times (once by the appeal board) it seemed like the reviewers were really trying hard to make the app crash. I log almost everything users do in the app. Since the only people with copies of the app were myself and Apple I could see the reviewer(s) activity. If you've tested iOS apps that use even basic tableViews populated with remote data you know that swiping vigorously, pushing and popping viewControllers quickly etc can wring out some funny corner cases. It seems like the reviewer was trying to find one as a pretense for rejecting the app when the real reason was something they didn't want to say. Apparently they didn't find anything and went with "app is just a re-packaged website without enough native iOS functionality" when the entire app uses native iOS features.

realrocker 14y ago

I up voted just to make him care about it. Is that an evil thing to do?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

hnriot 14y ago

I hope Apple are reading this, possibly some of their trillions of cash dollars would be spent on hiring people that have heard of paypal or square. If they are in a decision making position, they should be equipped with the necessary skills to perform their job. This is inexcusable of a company that is so wrapped up in its mystique and brand image.

robryan 14y ago

I understand stripe and square if you aren't part of the SV echo chamber, but PayPal? Where does Apple find these reviewers?

calvinlough 14y ago
He probably exaggerated the responses when he made that transcription. Unless he had an audio recording, it would be an easy thing to do, especially if he was mad.
biot 14y ago
There's a big difference between "I haven't heard of the PayPal app" and "I haven't heard of PayPal". I presume that when discussing reviewing apps with an app reviewer, it's not a stretch to assume that the app reviewer thinks in terms of apps.

tisme 14y ago

One observation: The landlord gets to screw with their tenants at his whim, and you don't even have to expect minimum standards (such as basic intelligence) in your interaction with them. This is part and parcel of operating in a walled garden, and should be a conscious part of your decision making process when you work out if you want to work this way (or not).

thechut 14y ago

I don't understand how it is possible that Stripe is not allowed to have this functionality but Square is. Certainly Square does not give 30% to Apple for every swipe. The cross-platform bit is interesting though. This should send a clear message to developers that they should go with ANDROID FIRST.

asarazan 14y ago
Square employs a significant number of ex-Apple guys. That might have something to do with it :-)
- thechut 14y ago
  I'm sure that doesn't hurt...
- josteink 14y ago
  So working with Apple means walled gardens and corruption? That just makes it sound so much better!
gsibble 14y ago
The rule doesn't apply to either. It specifically refers to in app content and features. Accepting a credit card for a good that is not "in app" (ie. a physical good like coffee or a virtual good like consulting) is perfectly acceptable under the rules. The reviewer in this case is just being retarded.

psychotik 14y ago

File an appeal with the App Review Appeal Board (or whatever it's called). It's pretty simple to do from iTunes Connect. Someone smarter than a robot will look into it and get back to you (my IAP appeal took ~14 days, but they did take precedent set by other apps into consideration and understood some nuanced arguments, so they might know what Stripe/Square etc are and how it matters)

wolfgke 14y ago

Then don't do business with a dictator as Apple is. There have been enough cases of "creative interpretations" of Apple's guidelines, against which you have nearly no handle. So you have to blame yourself.

cooldeal 14y ago

Well, I am just glad that Android, Windows Phone and Windows 8 store apps don't have this stupid restriction if you don't use their payment systems. Walled garden and 30% forced cut of app sales is one thing, but a forced 30% cut of every in-app sale is like erecting a toll booth on all apps. Gruber's explanation of "Apple does it because it can, and the people complaining are just jealous that Apple can and they cannot" doesn't really fly. This is one of the reasons that Apple is dragging its feet on making HTML5 web apps work on par with native apps, despite Jobs' anti-Flash memo two and a half years ago. Edit: Sigh, looks like this submission is sinking on the HN front page due to people flagging it for it being anti-Apple. Be classy, HN.

psychotik 14y ago
"Well, I am just glad that Android, Windows Phone and Windows 8 store apps don't have this stupid restriction if you don't use their payment systems." The Android Developer TOS says that any other in-app payment system isn't legal, and grounds for your app being removed from the app store. I haven't studied it, but I suspect Microsoft's ToS will say something similar too. Edit: Android's DDA section 3.3 and 4.5 disallow using other payment processors. http://www.android.com/us/developer-distribution-agreement.html http://www.android.com/us/developer-distribution-agreement.h...
- cooldeal 14y ago
  Doesn't the Kindle Android app allow you to buy ebooks and subscriptions? Also,while Microsoft does support in-app purchases in their store, they don't restrict other payment methods like Apple does. From Microsoft's Store guidelines: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/making-money-with-your-apps-through-the-windows-store.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/maki... Using your own billing system Your app and service may already depend on a particular transaction provider or benefit from ties to other lines of business. Your customers want the trust and efficiency of a familiar, trusted transaction experience. You can use your own transaction provider within your app to provide the experience your customers expect. If you are not using the Windows Store as your transaction provider, you will want to make sure that your app meets all of the certification requirements such as: Identifying the transaction provider to the user during purchase confirmation Prompt the user for authentication before processing the transaction Your payment processor must meet the current PCI Data Security Standard

scheff 14y ago

I would have thought the solution is simple - release an extremely primitive Android app of the same name and splash screen that says "Coming soon", and report back to Apple "Yes, I have an Android version of my app."

billycoover 14y ago
Lots fo suggestions for this one :)

spaghetti 14y ago

Honest question: why hasn't Apple fixed this fucking stupid review process? They have the resources to pay cheap reviewers who are probably better than this guy. I'm sure college kids with no job prospects would jump to "work at Apple" even if it's making $10/hour reviewing apps. Why not allow all apps into the store as long as they pass some security checks done by Apple (no downloading executables etc)? The current review process is just encouraging developers to look at alternatives. Android for starters. I'm even spending time learning about Firefox OS. If Apple would stop rejecting totally legit apps for "having limited entertainment value" when my Mixpanel analytics say otherwise I (unfortunately) wouldn't give a shit about Android or any other mobile OS.

stevewilhelm 14y ago
Because for Apple and it's customers the app review process is not broken. It's only frustrating for of app developers. Looking over the App store, if anything there is an over abundance of app developers.
- spaghetti 14y ago
  I agree there's an over abundance of app developers. I wonder if the costs to Apple in terms of hosting all the free apps, paying reviewers, dealing with refunds and dealing with rejection appeals just isn't worth it? However in a way the review process is broken for customers. Say I have a free app with 100 reviews and a 5-star average. The app has been downloaded on average 90 times per day for a year and the monthly average has been slowly growing (except for the initial release spike). Also the analytics show retention and daily usage going up. IMO it's safe to say that users like this app. Therefore users suffer when an update to the app is rejected or the app is pulled for superfluous reasons.
  - stevewilhelm 14y ago
    I would suggest if the example app with 100 reviews and ninety downloads a day was rejected, users would just buy a similar app. Users are happy, ignorate that another app that may have been better was rejected. Apple is happy because revenue is revenue. Only the developer of the rejected app is not.

larrik 14y ago

My guide app was recently rejected for being "simply a book." Seriously. There's actually a "Books" section of the App Store (it's the first one, no less!). My only recourse? Publish it on iBooks, which requires an ISBN. Also, I've never met anyone who's ever even opened the iBooks store.

dlokshin 14y ago

Wait, so if I build something on Android and iPhone, I don't have to use Apple's in app purchase? I can use Stripe directly? Am I understanding this correctly?

billycoover 14y ago
That's what he's telling me.
gsibble 14y ago
You can use anything you want if you are not selling in app items. Think Fandango. You are buying movie tickets. Do they use Apple's in-app purchase? Heck no. But a game with virtual goods is required to. That's the distinction.

gfodor 14y ago

Its things like this that are going to put Apple on the feds' radar enough to cause them a lot of pain down the road.

jrochkind1 14y ago

The REALLY weird thing is that "cross platform exemption." This guy was NOT doing what that section of the ToS was meant to prohibit. But let's say someone else had an app that really was, that was doing in-app purchases without giving apple their 30% vigorish.... all you have to do is make it for Android too, and Apple will let you? Really? Does this really work?

fpgeek 14y ago
Maybe it works if your name isn't Amazon, Google, B&N, Kobo, Sony and so on? (probably not)

cageface 14y ago

I changed the summary text of my apps to say that I disagreed with Apple's patent lawsuits and that I would be removing them from the app store once I'd had a chance to distribute updates to existing users for any issues with iOS 6. The next day my apps disappeared from the store with no notice or explanation. I will never invest in a platform with this kind of arbitrary, totalitarian control again. Goodbye & good riddance Apple & good luck with your silly joke of an IDE.

fpgeek 14y ago
Not that I disapprove of the sentiment, but wasn't announcing the reason you were dropping support the equivalent of waving a red flag in front of a bull?
- cageface 14y ago
  Yes, but I thought they'd be professional enough to at least let me know they were removing them from the store listings. Instead they just yanked them without notice and let me deal with the customer fallout.
  - eridius 14y ago
    I'm pretty sure what you did was a very clear abuse of the description field for your apps. When you very blatantly flaunt the rules and use them to publicly insult your host, what exactly were you expecting to happen?
mark_l_watson 14y ago
+1 right on, do what you feel is right.

billycoover 14y ago

Here's what I wrote in my appeal. I tried to speak in the most simple terms as possible. I hope it works: " The rejection states that "if the purchasable content, functionality, or services are intended to be used within the app, they must be purchased through IAP, within the app" - This is absolutely not the case. Pay Pad for Stripe allows USERS to accept payments from their customers with their iPhone & iPad. Nothing that the user is accepting payments for would be used within the app. Pay Pad for Stripe is companion app to the Stripe API (http://www.stripe.com http://www.stripe.com). I am not selling anything inside of the app. There are no subscriptions inside of the app. There is no exchange of a fee or subscription money between myself and a Pay Pad for Stripe user. They cannot buy any content, products, or services from my while inside the app. The most straight-forward way I can describe how someone might use Pay Pad for Stripe is this: My wife has a Stripe account which allows her to accept credit card payments. She downloads Pay Pad for Stripe so that she can manage her Stripe account and accept mobile payments. She takes our daughters to the local grocery store to sell girl-scout cookies. A customer of hers want's to buy a box of thin-mints. She uses Pay Pad for Stripe to take a credit card payment from the customer for those thin-min cookies. That's it. The feature is identical to what you will find in the popular Square and Pay Pal apps. This is not in-app purchasing. This in enabling B2C business transactions. There is no money exchanged between myself and the Pay Pad for Stripe users. "

stevewilhelm 14y ago

Reality check: the iTunes Store sales represent 4% of Apple total revenue. As long as there is a sufficient selection of movies, music, and apps to keep the iPhone compelling, Apple doesn't need to foster a "long tail" app catalogue.

vonwaldek 14y ago

i read your blog post and feel as though your product is worth while to continue spending time and effort on. i applaud efforts towards improvement

billycoover 14y ago
Thanks for the feedback. The app has since been approved. Blog post updated with details: http://coovtech.com/posts/the-apple-reaper/ http://coovtech.com/posts/the-apple-reaper/

billycoover 14y ago

Update: Apple reached out to me about this incident. They've approved the app! http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pay-pad-for-stripe-for-iphone/id558387939?ls=1 http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pay-pad-for-stripe-for-iphone... I'll update the blog post in the morning with details.

jopt 14y ago

False negative. Has since been fixed.

rizumu 14y ago

"He recites 11.2 to me. I again attempt to explain in detail how the app works, how Stripe works, and how we use Stripe with the various apps and products we have. He stands firm." I once had this argument with a tech over a macbook apple care repair. My screen cable was broken, no display. They opened and found a coffe stain on the case from many months prior. He said I had water damage. I asked what part is damaged by the water. We must have went back and forth 20+ times on this detail. Nothing was damaged by the water, they found an old stain on the case! After shipping it to them twice with no repair, finally I cleaned it out entirely with a qtip and took it to an authorized service center. Fortunately the tech there was able to negotiate the claim for the busted cable. Was it because I already have a few apple care repairs and was near the end of my term? No, the phone operator was trained robotically to repeat the same nonsensical phrase ad infinitum.