Apple Rejects the Hey Calendar from Their App Store(world.hey.com) |
Apple Rejects the Hey Calendar from Their App Store(world.hey.com) |
(It often helps.)
The context is that Steve was still involve with Apple's decision. It is similar to a lot of things at Apple. They were there for a reason but it seems a lot of the context were gone once Steve was not there.
> After spending 19 days to review our submission, causing us to miss a long-planned January 2nd launch date
>2025 will see the best of both worlds (we will still easily install apps, easily see permissions shared etc. - But will also get our freedom back, companies won't have 30% revenue taken, etc.). Optimistic, huh.
The hey calendar without the hey email is a something good for nothing. Dream the fight!
Apple rejected our stand-alone free companion app “because it doesn’t do anything”. That is because users are required to login with an existing account to use the functionality.
This is a ridiculous charge. The App Store is filled with high-profile applications that require an existing service account and simply presents a login screen when first launched. Here are just four:
Not sure if there's something else going on beneath that charge. Maybe DHH needs to take a walk with Tim Cook like the Musk man did.
Having had my own app in the store for > 13 years, and shipping hundreds of other updates for various apps (if you follow any major sports, you likely have some of my code on your phone), Apple provides developers with an option to provide reviewers with details about how to use a test account or another way to access services.
Further, you can ship for approval well ahead of release, and schedule when it goes public in the store. You can even update it before that scheduled release and ship the more refined version on the originally scheduled date.
Sending it off to Apple in the week leading up to Christmas is amateur hour. Anyone that’s been in the app industry knows that Apple (corporate, not stores) basically shuts down the entire week leading up to the holiday.
This is pithy complaining by DHH.
If this review time period caused Hey to miss their launch date, this is a major signal that their developers do not have ANY experience with the iOS App Store.
> That is because users are required to login with an existing account to use the functionality.
Again, this is clearly spelled out in the Apple App Store requirements. You MUST provide credential for reviews, and those credentials must work. Additionaly, if you are pushing users to login through an external provider, providing a "Demo Mode" is an easy way around App Store restrictions.
This entire article reaks of inexperience, which is pretty incredible since Hey has gone through similar in the past[0].
My suggestion, hire software engineers with experience releasing to the app store.
I think he should just focus on the discrimination part instead of mentioning about the tax or Apple being a monopoly. I don’t how mentioning those things is going to help him to solve the issue. (Since it is already decided by a judge that Apple doesn’t have a monopoly on the App Store)
For that matter, even supermarkets charge for shelf positioning.
Early adopters tend to explore and self-support more. Late majority need more TLC.
If the government added an additional 50% tax on books that sold over a million copies, it would affect funding for many more authors than the ones with books over the threshold.
What good would that do?
One thing I have found that matters – your app's launch screen had better be as vanilla as possible. If you even hint at conversion, sales, sign-up, etc, you're going to get dinged.
Either way, this has a "smell" to it.
you're planning around the time where most of the people who review these things are going to be taking PTO. as far as I could tell reading the guidelines the only guarantee apple gives you is that they'll get to it as soon as possible
it's also a little funny that DHH is saying that apple exempted them from the rules last time and then a couple paragraphs later is complaining that apple exempts other companies from the rules as well
https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-...
That’s also why I asked if there was a better summary available, preferably from a 3rd party.
As for review turnaround times, it's been quite awhile since multiple weeks without a response has been normal. In a normal app store submission process, with an app this size, an experienced team can plan to make requested changes with that much lead time before a launch date.
I'm surprised though that they didn't ship this calendar app with a simple calendar you can use without paying. That's how they handled the email app deadlock; there's a temporary random email generator feature that anyone can use, which gives the app the requested out-of-the-box functionality. Seems like the same workaround could have been successful here.
I'm extremely skeptical of this claim. I have apps in the app store that behave exactly as you've described and Apple has not rejected any of our submissions. One app uses a third party login, one uses a first party login. One allows for registration within the app, the other requires registration outside of the app.
>it's been quite awhile since multiple weeks without a response has been normal
You are correct that typically reviews are very fast. That said, we recently had a new version of an app take 2 weeks (14 days) to get reviewed and rejected due to a similar, but different, issue. My guiddance is always submit very early (4+ weeks), especially when you have a launch date with marketing or other real-world tie-ins.
There are easy ways to work around Hey Calendar's rejection, but only if you submit early and are prepared to do the work. Similar to your suggestion, providing a "Demo Mode" where a user can see what the app does without login easily solves the rejection issue. I can say this with confidence as I've done it in the past with an app that is still on the app store.
Maybe you don't have all the information because it is not entirely spelled out in the blog post, they have all the engineers they need because they have experience, they already did everything you said but Apple keeps being Apple, and your advice is not needed ?
That does not scream "they have the experience they need".
While they may not listen, they absolutely need to hear the advice to submit earlier.
>Of course we gave them a login. We’ve been publishing apps on the App Store for over a decade. This was not a low-level mistake. It went all the way to the app review board.
In another response he writes that the reviewers did in fact log in.
I agree, the duration of the review is irrelevant to this complaint. I would suggest hiring SWEs/consultants who actually understand the iOS App Review process the next time you want to release an app, since Hey obviously does not understand it.
From Apple's announcement[1]:
> On average, 90% of submissions are reviewed in less than 24 hours. However, reviews may take a bit longer to complete from December 22 to 27.
From Apple's announcement[1]:
> On average, 90% of submissions are reviewed in less than 24 hours. However, reviews may take a bit longer to complete from December 22 to 27.
The author wants clear and fair rules so that exemptions are never even needed. I think the article is pretty clear on this.
Getting their exemption was an absolute nightmare for them - It’s certainly not something they are gloating over.
Additionally, brand new apps, not new versions of existing apps, always take longer.
I constantly recommend to both my project team and other teams asking for advice to have a submission in to the App Store 4 weeks before you want to release. Otherwise you risk exactly what happened here.
We don’t cry over social media, we just do the work.
If you are saying because such apps exist, Hey can't have been rejected for doing the same thing as those apps do...c'mon, you're an experienced iOS developer, right? :)
Why assume that another developer's experiences are not legitimate when they have a long tenure and multiple apps in the store?
And why mock working 19 days ahead when your guidance is only 11 days longer and your worst case was five days shorter? I could see it if you thought that they should submit extra early because they've been targeted by Apple in the past, but you don't believe that they have been.
Also, you can shop for iOS apps in other places, like https://setapp.com/.
In what country/world/universe? I frequently go to a Costco that definitely isn't in my neighborhood. Haven't had any visits from the supermarket police yet.
Also, that's not an alternative store, that's simply a subscription app bundle.
- the average processing time is 24h
- Apple advises you that things slow down between 22-27 Dec
would you say submitting on December 12th, with the goal of being ready by the second of January, is “submitting early”? Seems already extremely conservative.
In my years working with mobile, I never saw any review take longer than three days, ever. Nineteen days is an eternity and probably indicates some internal commotion going on. Who has ever sent their app for review a full month before release?
So no, submitting on the 12th, in the middle of holiday season, is not submitting early. Yes, I know Apple says things only slow down for 22-27, but experience tells me they actually slow down starting the week of Thanksgiving and the slow down lasts until 1/2.
The better option would have been to schedule the release for 1/12 or sometime that is not the day everyone comes back to work. Many mistakes were made in this release planning.
Even still, people might ask Apple for support, but I highly doubt they receive any support beyond a generic message informing them to contact the app developer.
From Apple's announcement[1]:
> On average, 90% of submissions are reviewed in less than 24 hours. However, reviews may take a bit longer to complete from December 22 to 27.
I also disagree that every organization in a capitalist society has to be inherently evil, but that might be more of a fundamental discussion ;)
There was a mobile web before the iPhone?
You have a choice to write and iOS app and publish to the App Store or not. If you choose not to, what bad action is Apple purposely and actively taking against you in retaliation to you not giving in to their demands? Oh wait, they didn’t demand anything from you or threaten anything bad should you not meet those demands. They didn’t approach you with a demand. They didn’t approach you at all. They don’t care about you or anything you have going on.
How is Apple extorting you here? I would like to understand what state of psychosis I must obviously be in for this to be reality
It says on DHH’s blog. We can’t know for sure unless he shares a screenshot of it but more or less that is the reason because I was rejected with this same reason before.
Things have improved vastly with the introduction of web push but Apple is still dragging their feet on making it possible to create a good mobile experience with web-only apps.
Now, I generally don't like conspiracy theories and I seek not to attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity (or even a lack of attention, etc.) However, in this particular case it seems very obvious to me that Apple is doing it in order to force developers to build native apps.
The action you do not want is "rejecting any appeal/blackballing" if you tell people what Apple reviewers did.
You claim "Apple reviewers are within their rights to do that, it's their garden/world you're just living in it."
---
Your professor unjustly gives you a D, but if you complain to anyone, he'll make it an F. It's your fault; you voluntary chose to enroll in that class knowing that the professor could assign you a poor grade. Losers weepers.
>Of course we gave them a login. We’ve been publishing apps on the App Store for over a decade. This was not a low-level mistake. It went all the way to the app review board.
In another response he writes that the reviewers did in fact log in.