Schiller defends App Store approval process

Developers are quite a naive bunch. Apple should not institute a "trusted developer" program. If I wanted to ruin Apple's clean image, I would submit a dozen clean apps to get on the "trusted" list, then I would write my dirty app. A random audit is unlikely to catch me before it's too late. Apple's "rules" for acceptance would be a evil hacker's dream; a road map for loopholes to exploit (just like the tax code). A test suite for developers would also be great for nefarious hackers. What a great way to write a virus: test it with the suite to make sure that it's undetectable until it's too late. Please think beyond what would be good for you.

In general, developers are being unrealistic about the approval times and the process. Many people take a year or more to write a novel that's not accepted by a publisher. Then they have to decide to write a new novel, risking more rejection when it's submitted, or quit. The acceptance process is vague, and the time frame is usually months not weeks. And the acceptance rate is nowhere 90%. Developers think that writing code, and what code does can be evaluated objectively. But Apple's business is based on the premise that it is not, and that premise has worked quite well for them.

What Apple needs is a full-on test suite for iPhone app submission as part of the SDK. It would be something like what Microsoft has for its WHQL certification for device drivers.

An iPhone dev would run this test suite on their app and it would run a bunch of checks such as checking for any API not on the approved list and whatever other checks can be done by a program as opposed to needing a human to check it. It would allow devs to ensure that they are in compliance with as much as possible before they submit their app.

What Apple also needs is a much clearer list of "things that will get you rejected from the app store". They can continue to have a catch-all for "anything not otherwise on the list that we decide is grounds for rejection" if they need to. But the list itself would cover most of the things.

The problem isn't that there is an approval process. The problem is that no on know what the rules really are. This is yet another example of how Apple's secrecy is doing nothing but hurting itself. They won't tell Devs what the rules actually are; they just give vague guidelines.

Even Apple doesn't seem to know what Apple's rules are. Depending on the reviewer, your app may get denied for a reason, yet that reason may not stop another app just like it. No one really knows what is going on, and the secrecy is leaving devs in the dark. Even MacWorld ha to slug it out with Apple over their app.

All this leads to is bad press for Apple and angry developers who will stop developing for the platform, not because the platform is bad or anoter platform is better, but because, at least on other platforms, they know the rules of the game edited they start playing.

Apple's staunch refusal to communicate with the outside world, it's outmoded Cold War secrecy mentality will be it's achillies heal. It has to wake up eventually. I just hope it is before it's iPhone platform grows too weak.

How screwed up is the Apple app approval process?

Submitt a app with a picture of an iPone and it will be rejected for trademark infringement.

""Schiller says that "if you don't defend your trademarks, in the end you end up not owning them""

But, how did E-Bay Deals get approved with a picture of an iPhone in the app?

Apple has problems sticking to their stated rules on a case by case basis. And that is what has the developers pissed.

It boils down to who you are, what time of day it is, and if it's raining in California.

What I think they should introduce is a trusted developer program.

In essence make every developer jump through the newbie hoops to ensure they understand exactly what is being looked for. Once that developer has released quality code consistently, get them to sign legal documentation stating they won't develop applications that breach the App Store requirements set by Apple, then let them go.

Last thing is to put an audit process in place so that Apple can pick a developer & app at random for auditing - if that app and developer are still compliant they keep their trusted status.

Why punish the majority for the sins of the minority?

Regards,
Shane.

They're not checking for malware or bugs. Or at least not very well. There's already been software that has acted in a less than savory manner that Apple gladly distributed. I don't know how many buggy apps I've downloaded in the last year and a half. If they're looking for anything other than copyright infringement, or duplication of their core functions, I'm not seeing it.

Ya, this story is getting long in the tooth, but it's something that keeps coming up.

Most reasonable people agree it's Apple's store and they can have their own process. The process seems to work pretty well; however, there are growing pains.

Good response on this blog. "Apple Puts iPhone Developers On Hold" http://bit.ly/5ljmqy

I've collaborated with these developers and they've been given zero guidance on why there were rejected.

I've had some rough patches on several projects in this area myself. I think those going wholesale on the Apple side are either non-developers, big developers, or lucky. It's not just about writing "good code" and you're fine.

"Schiller doesn't address at all the idea that Apple might someday allow devs to release apps that haven't been through their approval process"

Schiller didn't address the likelihood of unicorns living on Mars either... an idea that is less far fetched than the supposition that Apple will ever allow devs to release apps without being vetted.

Ummm... Yes they are. Apple needs to stop this approval crap and create an open platform.

If the developers tested their apps prior to submission, and Apple could just certify the apps rather than do a full QA then the backlog wouldn't be so long.

It's all the result of less than talented developers trying to make a quick buck.