Filed under: iPod Family, Bad Apple, iPhone, App Store
iPhone App rejected for "Limited Utility"
When a developer submits a "Pull My Finger" application, you've kind of got to expect it's going to be rejected. iFartz was rejected. Ibrate was rejected -- and that one was even raising money for breast cancer research. Today, over at Mac Rumors, I read about "Pull My Finger"'s rejection for limited utility. Right at the bottom of the rejection letter was the name "Victor Wang".
Mr. Wang has become a near legend for his rejection letters, usually long, delayed (I suspect he's second- or third-tier in the review process) and for aesthetic reasons that leave developers blinking with surprise. While "Pull My Finger" would probably not meet "Koi Pond" levels of user reach (here's our look at Koi Pond), it could have a solid audience. It's a simple, stupid joke app (notice how I'm not pulling punches here) but it's the kind of simple, stupid joke app that a lot of people would download and use because people like simple, stupid joke apps.
I've complained about this before, so apologies to everyone who has heard this point -- the next post is just a wee bit below this one, feel free to scroll -- but until Apple offers developers a firm set of guidelines, developers will continue to be ticked off by seemingly arbitrary rejections like this one. Apple is clearly refusing applications that fail the sniff test -- and yes, I know that's a little more apt a metaphor than this application deserves. "Pull My Finger" is tasteless. Apple should have rejected it for that reason, rather than pulling new reasons out from thin air.
Apple needs to step forward, and do so soon, with a clear set of guidelines that explain to developers exactly what to expect when they press that "submit" button for their new app. Developers shouldn't be wasting Apple's time with unpublishable software. Apple should not be wasting Developers' time with a secretive and arbitrary review process.
Update: The app's author has set up a plea-page
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Isaac said 7:37PM on 9-04-2008
This app is stupid.
If you want to spend 400 bucks to hear farting sounds, come to my house. I fart for free.
Reply
Brian West said 7:44PM on 9-04-2008
Have you not seen some of the crap already on the app store? I mean really do we need 10 apps to calculate a tip? How utterly useless!
jP said 9:43PM on 9-04-2008
If people are spending $400 to hear farting sounds, then why are you doing it for free?
Brian West said 7:43PM on 9-04-2008
But they let some of the other crap on the app store? I don't think its apple's place to decide what someone will or will not like... or if an app will be usable. Look at all the crap thats on the app store already.
Reply
Tony said 7:56PM on 9-04-2008
I'm sure originally apple said they were only going to vet for technical/ui issues not try to make value judgements based on whether they liked an app or not.
If they've changed this what about the hundreds of utterly useless apps already on there? Are they going to be deleted?
Rob said 8:04PM on 9-04-2008
My sentiments....EXACTY!!
Don't EVEN get me started.
I happen to like puerile humor from time to time. ;-) And this is an app I would've downloaded. And as Silly as it is, if they charged .99c for it, and I knew the proceeds were going to a truly worthy cause (cancer research, etc.) I would download it in a heartbeat.
But Apple to actually claim with a straight face that this has "limited utility", while the app store is literally LITTERED with similar "Limited" use apps (remind me, how many cigarette 'Lighter' apps are currently available! OH! I almost forgot...and the several 'CowBell' apps have more than a 'Limited' use!?? give me a FCUKIN break!) vividly illustrates the purely arbitrary nature of the App Store "approval" process.
/rant.
Rubbinz said 8:20PM on 9-04-2008
I remember seeing an app on the store that just a button you hold. If that, and several other crap/waste of time apps are still there now, there is some very clear personal bias in the rejection of Pull My Finger on the part of Mr. "Wang".
If Mr. "Wang" has a personal dislike of fart jokes, he shouldn't be letting it interfere with his work... and maybe change his last name.
Reply
JT said 8:29PM on 9-04-2008
I understand why Apple would want to keep their vetting standards flexible. The minute they release a set of rules, they'll get loopholed to death by apps that technically meet the standards but violate the spirit (yeah it farts on command, but it also a useful alarm clock! An alarm clock that farts!).
If Apple were to be honest they'd just tell developers the truth, if Apple doesn't like it they're not putting it in their store.
Reply
Brian said 8:38PM on 9-04-2008
It irks me that Apple is making moral judgment calls on applications submitted. Not everyone holds the same values. Diversity, tolerance and freedom of expression should be respected... not silenced.
People should be free to do what they want so long as it doesn't harm anyone.
Apple is becoming tyrant and their opinion may not be the right one. If we silence other opinions we'll just never know.
Reply
k8jf6 said 9:07PM on 9-04-2008
Do you really think "immoral" is a reasonable adjective for every decision you you disagree with?
DXJ said 8:54PM on 9-04-2008
My guess is that the utility was not really the problem, even if the rejection letter said so. My guess is that the thing vibrated. I hear they want to reserve vibrations for phone alerts (e.g. incoming calls).
Reply
Rubbinz said 9:06PM on 9-04-2008
That's a load of Bravo Sierra. There's a ton of apps on the store that uses vibrate.
JKT said 11:35PM on 9-04-2008
If that were true, then Apple would not have published a library call to the vibrate function in the iPhone SDK. So basically your claim is utter bunk.
William Hook said 8:52PM on 9-04-2008
They let I Am Rich through, why can't this be let through?
On a more serious note, 90% of the apps are RUBBISH. Apple really need to stop letting all the crap through, and start making the App Store a place for quality apps.
For example, how many tip calculators are there now? Fifty? Why not then go through each one, CAREFULLY, pick the best one, and then allow that?
Reply
Big John said 9:35PM on 9-04-2008
In case you missed it (because you clearly did), it got yanked. It got through, oops, oh well -- can we move on from comparing every iffy application to I Am Rich now, please?
Bob S. said 9:17PM on 9-04-2008
Maybe if the tools writing these dipshit apps (and TUAW posts) stopped writing these dipshit apps, Apple's review process wouldn't take so long, hm?
Reply
iGO said 9:20PM on 9-04-2008
In the End, regardless of everyone's Opinion here, Apple does and will decide what get's on the App Store. That is as fact as the Sun rises everyday. No additional debate or opinion will change that. They do this today and will always do this.
At 200 apps a week, or whatever rate anyone in the know wants to chime in with, the App store may be approaching 10,000 apps a year from now. Ouch.
As a consumer, I EXPECT that Apple will filter the Apps that get on the store by whatever means they deem. If anyone doubts this, go to the Apple Store (retail) and see for yourself. Not every application or every product exists there. Only those that Apple decides to put there, exist. We want this. We need this.
Knowing that Apple is in the business of making profits and growing their customer base through the sound economic practice of turning customers into Highly Satisfied Customers, I expect Apple will use all it's resources to determine what Apps they will make available to Apple's iPhone/iPod Touch customers, in the hopes of making them Highly Satisfied Customers.
As with All companies, they'll make good decisions and bad decisions. As with all successful and profitable companies, they will continue to tweak their product line (Apps on the App Store) and gauge their efforts by profits and highly satisfied customers.
Steve jobs is no dummy.
Reply
Øivind said 12:12PM on 9-06-2008
Well said. Filtering applications is what Apple needs to do, and by that I mean they must let US choose how we want our applications filtered. They shouldn't censor innocent applications just because they have "limited utility", but tag them with "limited utility" and then let users filter out applications tagged with "limited utility". If they start tagging applications properly, they can also add a "List similar applications" button to the AppStore so we can get a proper perspective when buying apps without doing a ton of research.
Big John said 9:33PM on 9-04-2008
I love how everyone bitches about all the useless apps, but when one gets denied those same folks (Erica, I'm looking at you) just complain about it.
What way would you like it? They're not going to get every little niggling thing just because you think they should.
Yes, there are tons of tip apps. Every one has a bit of a different style to it, and most have differing functions. Just because YOU don't have a use for it, doesn't mean someone else doesn't.
Reply
schmidtoh said 9:37PM on 9-04-2008
haha thats pretty cool
if its not to expensive i might buy it
plus come on apple, why do you care if the store has stuff like that! stop picking on the little guys!
Reply