Posts Tagged ‘apple review process’

« Older Entries

We cannot post your application because it appears to include features that resemble Chuck Norris

July 3rd, 2010
, , , ,

While I still wait for the tiny bugfix I made to FailClock to be approved, I received a rejection for another app from Apple, and this is the most absurd yet:

…we cannot post your application because it appears to include features that resemble Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris has previously objected to other applications that include features that use his name or likeness, and believes that such features infringe his rights.

Eh? Features that resemble Chuck Norris? Here is Chuck Norris (right) with Dennis Hansen (who?) in 1990 (picture courtesy of Wikipedia):

Chuck Norris - right

What features does my application have that resemble Chuck Norris? Does it have buttons in the shape of silly moustaches? No. Does it magic up a “friend” who has a ridiculous hairdo and get you to pose awkwardly for a Facetime shot when you run it? No. Does it turn you into a has-been who has only been able to make one movie in the last 5 years, a movie that was panned universally? No.

My app uses RSS feeds for dynamic content, so it may include a picture of Chuck Norris, in the same way that an RSS newsreader or twitter application might. Is a picture also a feature? Not where I learnt English. From wordnet:

S: (n) feature, characteristic (a prominent attribute or aspect of something) “the map showed roads and other features”; “generosity is one of his best characteristics”

A random image that just happened to appear is not a feature. It’s not a prominent attribute.

Features that resemble Chuck Norris?! If anyone has had a more ridiculous rejection reason from Apple, please do let me know.

No Comments

Here we go again

June 29th, 2010
, , , , , ,

In FailClock v1.1 for iPhone and iPad, I added Engrish feeds. I’d previously had problems with Apple rejecting an application I made called Engrish Crock so I was wary about including the Engrish feeds, but I consulted with Apple and they agreed to approve the applications. “Success!” I thought.

In FailClock v1.1.1 for iPad, I made some minor update to the display of status messages. Apple approved it.

A week ago I packaged up FailClock v1.2 for iPhone and iPad. The only change made was to fix the 12 hour clock display – previously at midnight and noon it displayed 0:00 am and 0:00 pm instead of 12:00 am and 12:00 pm. Doh! A simple change that would get approved no bother, I thought. But yesterday I received the infamous “We are currently reviewing an app that you submitted for inclusion on the App Store, and want to let you know that the review process will require additional time” mail.

I hope the reason I received this is the same reason I received it for Cat Fun – because I have separate iPhone and iPad apps. Since Apple doesn’t provide any way to unify apps, I have to keep them as separate. That means they’ll approve the apps eventually.

However I fear that the mail is more sinister. After Apple allowing Engrish in FailClock, I fear that they might have forgotten they allowed it and I have to go through the whole vicious approval argument cycle again. I really hope not. I thought I was past all that.

No Comments

Cat Fun for iPad – finally approved

June 4th, 2010
,
Cat Fun for iPad

Cat Fun for iPad

After discussions with Apple, the update to Cat Fun for iPad – now with Dog Fun too! – has finally been approved. Now owners of the app can enjoy loldogs as well as lolcats, at no extra cost.

I have to say that I still don’t understand why the application required additional time to review. The explanation given to me was that I have both iPhone and iPad versions of the application with similar functionality, and that Apple really wants people to create a single universal version of the application rather than have separate iPhone and iPad versions in that case.

That’s all well and good, but both Cat Fun for iPhone and Cat Fun for iPad were both already in the AppStore and had been purchased by people. While I could potentially create a universal binary, there’s no way for me to unify the two versions out there – I have to update both versions to be fair to both sets of purchasers. It’s too late to have just one version now.

As for the “we would like a single universal version of the application if it has similar functionality”… that’s another full topic. Yes, a single version has the advantage that a user can run it on both iPhone and iPad – but I think it’s going to make a lot of developers just price their apps at iPad prices because of the extra development time required for iPad apps, even though iPhone users get less usability.

Cat Fun is also available for Android!

No Comments

Cat Fun situation gets more confusing

June 3rd, 2010
,

I received the infamous “We are currently reviewing an app that you submitted for inclusion on the App Store, and want to let you know that the review process will require additional time” mail for Cat Fun for iPad yesterday. In my experience a rejection message generally follows such a mail a few days later.

Cat Fun for iPad is already approved in App Store. Why the update would require extra time, I can’t understand. It’s even more confusing because today the very same update for Cat Fun for iPhone was approved by Apple.

It’s possible a rejection isn’t pending and there’s another reason that Cat Fun for iPad has been delayed. I hope that’s the case. I hope the iPad department is just busy testing OS4. As yet I can’t get an answer from Apple though.

This kind of inconsistency is incredibly frustrating, and it discourages me from investing time in learning xcode and developing specifically for Apple. As I said a few days ago, I’d love to work with Apple to improve their developer relations – but I know they would never go for it. They certainly need it though.

No Comments

iTunesConnect “In Review”

June 2nd, 2010

A couple of people have written to me telling me their apps are stuck in “In Review” state for a week or more. It’s worth noting that if your app is an iPad app, ”In Review” doesn’t actually seem to mean the app is being reviewed.

When you submit an iPhone / iPod Touch app, it goes to Waiting For Review and stays in that state for several days until it changes to In Review. Reviews are then generally completed in 1-2 days. The app is then approved or you’ll get the infamous “We are currently reviewing an app that you submitted for inclusion on the App Store, and want to let you know that the review process will require additional time” mail.

For iPad, when you submit an app it goes to Waiting For Review. It then usually changes to In Review within the hour. What Apple seems to be doing is automatically changing iPad apps to In Review. I presume that’s because iPad apps are reviewed by a different team, so that’s Apple’s way of separating the queues.

I updated my ipad application “Cat Fun for iPad – lolcats and loldogs” and submitted it on May 25, 2010 06:00. It changed to In Review at 06:03. It still hasn’t been accepted – and this is just a simple update, not even a new app. iPad updates are usually the fastest to get reviewed.

Bottom line: At the moment, reviews are taking AT LEAST a week. The last time reviews became this delayed was just before OS3.2 went live. I presume there is some mad testing going on behind the scenes of OS4 right now and that’s delaying reviews.

Update: Well well well… I’ve just received the “additional time” mail for Cat Fun for iPad. What’s going on here? Cat Fun was previously approved and this update simply adds a dog feed to the cat feed. Is a rejection pending? Or is Apple just severely delayed? I suspect a rejection, but I can’t fathom why. A result of this post, perhaps?

1 Comment

« Older Entries