Hacker News Reader

Comment by msy | Hacker News Reader

$500k Selling Camera+ politely pulled from AppStore with explanation, over deliberate attempt to circumvent ban on functionality that had been explicitly denied. An easter egg is putting a flight simulator in a spreadsheet program, this was just hiding a feature that had previously got the app rejected and then bragging about it.

That they did so after talking about how other apps tried to sneak things past and it was a stupid idea boggles the mind.

When Apple finds out about these incidents, they tend to crack down pretty hard on them, sometimes going so far as completely banning the developers from the App Store. So this is definitely not the smart way to go. - http://taptaptap.com/blog/cameraplus-volumesnap-rejected/

View on HN

I'm getting tired of these publicity stunts. Developers who knowingly try to pull a fast one should have all their apps pulled and their developer license suspended for a year. It's just too easy to leverage the review process to game the media.

I agree with this. The faster Apple kills off their closed dying platform, the better.

There's a reason that Android outsold Apple last quarter, and it wasn't antennagate.

Yeah, it was Verizon pushing Android in exchange for a cop-out on net neutrality.

Do you really think this is helping them more than it is hurting them?

I suspect the buzz they are gaining overlaps highly with people who have already been exposed to to taptaptap. This buzz isn't going to reach Grandma and cause her to buy that "rebellious software from that tappy place". Meanwhile, their app is no longer earning them money and Apple is going to be keeping a watchful eye on all of their subsequent releases.

Not to mention, the decay on this type of buzz probably has a half-life of 12 hours after it reaches its peak in one or two days. In two weeks nobody will think much of this story, and I doubt they'll have released anything to take advantage of the buzz.

Now, their buzz about earning $500k+ on the app, that was pretty helpful. Nothing sells a product more than press about how people can't get enough of it. Just ask Apple about that one.

I completely agree that pulling the app was justified, given Apple's stated rules, and also that it was incredibly stupid on taptaptap's part. They've managed to get their cash cow slaughtered for no reason other than perhaps getting some buzz -- though the people this buzz is reaching most likely overlaps highly with people who've already heard about the product, so I can't imagine it helping too much.

What I don't agree with is Apple's Iron Fist on products, and how they assume all of their users are fairly unintelligent and easily amused. My brother gave me an iPod Touch and I've just started using it. There's no icon to download apps, and to re-sync it (or whatever the hell I need to do) I have to download iTunes + quicktime + The Entire Archived Internet and go through an agonizingly long and painful process of clicking "no" everytime it tries to do me the favor of downloading album art for thousands of albums so that when I browse by album I will be able to see the ALBUM COVERS and it will look SO COOL. It "just works" entails iTunes spending days "determining gapless playback information" yet mysteriously having the "App Store Button" not present on the device and not telling me why. I found the answer on Yahoo Answers by somebody who I suspect was typing with their feet.

Assuming I go through the process of upgrading the Touch, which I probably won't, I'll need to provide my name, address, 3 credit card numbers, tag myself with a GPS transmitter, and fax them scanned fingerprints in order to download free Apps which they can assure me will not ever let my volume buttons be used for any other purpose, no matter how convenient.

Sigh. It's turned into a rant. The decision they made affects users as much as developers, it ultimately says: "You may want this feature, but you can't have it. Trust us, it's for your own good." Long story short, I personally don't care for that type of mentality. I won't deny the market loves it, but I'm not really sold. They're starting to appeal to me as the McDonald's of computers, only it's like the McDonald's in other countries where it costs more because it's a novelty and you're cool as long as you buy into the commercials and sports sponsorships.

Like when Yelp snuck in Monocole in before the iPhone 3.1 release? Except in that case, there was a very different outcome (they weren't removed from the store).

Are we sure they snuck it in?

It's possible they disclosed it appropriately... Apple's policy allows easter eggs if they're disclosed confidentially to the appstore review team.

But the point is that Yelp was using a private (at the time) api to support the monocle.

Edit: According to dieterrams, I am mistaken and stand corrected.

This is apparently untrue, according to the (then) intern who created it.

Yeah, I just put a set of buttons on top of the other camera buttons - no digging into the view hierarchy or anything crazy like that.

stockholm syndrome much?

Maybe because they've already made bank and are sick of dealing with the app store? With those kind of profits, Apple should be accomodating them, not vice versa.

So Apple should abandon their rules and guidelines for popular developers? How is that fair to all the other developers in the app store? That's the exact opposite of what Apple should do.

Imagine if you were competing with Camera+ who, because they sell a lot of apps, were allowed to use the volume button as a shutter trigger. You come along with your camera app and try the same thing, only to be shut down by Apple just because you don't sell as many apps. That is definitively anti-competitive behavior and is the antithesis of what an app store should be.

No, they should abandon their rules and guidelines and trust consumers to make an informed choice.

If they really want to keep up with this nonsense they can make some sort of an "Apple Approved" logo that gives you better search rankings in the market if you get it. This draconian approval process is ridiculous.

Strawman alert. I never made the argument that they shouldn't run an unregulated app store.

Whether or not Apple should regulate app approval is a completely separate argument from the one presented in your original post. You stated that "with those kinds of profits", Apple should accommodate them. That implies favoritism. The only thing worse than a regulated app store is a regulated app store that exhibits favoritism.

It was a general statement. Apple makes profits off of developer sales, Apple should not be making developers' lives unnecessarily difficult.

Though I suppose yes, I would say that regulation based on sales is a much better metric than the capricious whimsy that currently governs the Apple approval process. (And yes, I'd call the HID standards whimsical, and although they specifically are not capricious, I'm again speaking in general.)

They would argue that it's not unnecessary, what they're doing. They're not doing it just to make developers lives difficult.

The process annoys me too, but I can see the reasoning behind it, and I think a lot of it is prudent.

Their profits pale in comparison to Apple's BILLIONS.

Also, you don't throw away your own rules for one successful developer.

Not to mention that the app store represents less than 1% of Apple's total revenue.

And 90% of the value of the latest iOS devices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com