Apple rejects iPhone camera app for using volume controls for taking photos | Hacker News Reader

Apple rejects iPhone camera app for using volume controls for taking photos

taptaptap.com

26 pointsjsatok18 comments

It looks like the reviewers pointed to specific Apple requirements that the app violated. That was great. The developers already knew that their app violated the requirement and they are responding to the rejection in a mature manner. This is also great.

Whether or not Apple should review/approve apps is a different question. However, given the current system, it looks like the system worked as well as one would want any review/approval system to work.

They did not reject Camera+ --- Camera+ is one of the most popular apps on the store (it's fantastic, by the way). They rejected a single release of the app which drastically violated Apple's interface guidelines, and specifically explained why.

Um. Well, yes. It's true that their submission did not conform to Apple's interface guidelines. I think it's a little over the top to say they "drastically violated" them as if the poor guidelines were left raped and bleeding on a lonely country road. Sheesh.

When the iPhone 4's separate-button volume controls came out, I thought Apple might use one of them for the shutter. It would have really increased the utility of the phone as a camera. I already use Camera+, this would have been a great new feature.

Seriously! In his keynote, Jobs likened the feel of the iPhone 4 to an old Leica camera. A Leica without a shutter button?

What a funny comparison. Perhaps it's because in both cases you pay more for the name?

That sucks. I've wanted an app that did this forever.

There must be other phone brands that would allow you to do just that.

I think this is a good policy. I hate getting blasted with unexpected loud noises especially with earbuds. It's a very painful experience. The volume buttons should always work as advertised. There's a good argument to be made that the iPhone needs an extra physical button. Either on the top right side or perhaps the ringer on/off switch could become a multi-function button. Toggle + press.

All I can think about is: the time and energy expended sifting through Apple's red tape is time and energy spent not creating new apps and improving existing ones.

It would've been a surprise to most, I think, if this had gotten through.

They should follow [Tapbot's lead](http://tapbots.com/blog/pastebot/pastebot-music-in-backgroun...). Play some music, have the volume buttons adjust the volume of the music (thus following the HIG) while also triggering the shutter.

i.e., play by the letter of the rule, instead of the intent. And risk being shot down in the future, because it's a rather asinine thing to do, and any attentive reviewer would think so as well. HIG is important to Apple. (note that I don't think Pastebot will be a victim of this, just Camera+ if they do it)

The situations are also pretty drastically different: Pastebot is using music-playing to get background operations to work, which will capture clipboard content passively, not via the volume buttons. Meanwhile, Camera+ is trying to use the volume buttons actively to perform a function which is not volume related. Prediction time: if they attempt this, it won't get past the review stage, or will be shot down shortly after.

Stifling innovation? - there's an app for that!™

It's nice they don't react angrily or surprised.

Why would they? The App Store has allowed these developers to create and operate a viable software business, and it's probably made them rich. That wouldn't have been possible if the App Store was not managed correctly.

That wouldn't have been possible if the App Store was not managed correctly.

That's a silly thing to say: obviously some people might profit with an incorrectly managed App Store. For example, many people profit handsomely in very badly managed countries.

If developer profits are your main criteria for a viable app store, you might be doing it wrong. Linux repositories are, on the whole, far better managed than the iPhone app store, and are managed so much better in part by offering no mechanism whatsoever for developers to be directly compensated for their software's use.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com