Hacker News Reader

Compare selling on the App Store to selling physical goods in a real store. Can anyone just make a thing at home and take it to their local Walmart and demand they sell it? Of course not. There are quality controls. There are things you have to learn first — that your packaging needs to be in a suitable box, that you need to get a barcode, that it needs legal notices, etc.

If Walmart offered a “seller’s course” where you could go and learn how to do these things nobody would bat an eyelid. They’d probably be praised for it.

Here’s where my analogy falls apart, of course. Walmart still won’t list for sale the crappy useless thing that you made at home. Apple will.

Of course, once you start selling the item and build a business around it, retailers are less likely to randomly yank you with no recourse or real feedback.

It’s almost like physical retail and software are different. Crazy!

It also falls apart in that Walmart allows you to sell your useless thing at other retailers or even flea markets and garage sales. Apple only allows you to sell your useless iOS apps on their App Store.

Sell it on android play

How do you sell an iOS application on an Android-specific app store?

If you're proposing they port the app to Android -- that's a lot of work. And the Android store is packed with even more junkware than the Apple one.

It's kind of disappointing to see you and others in this thread being so hostile towards the developer of FSNotes and assuming the worst.

I guess I'm a bit biased since I use it regularly, and I really like the business model of an open-source application that is available for free, and is purchasable if you wish to support the creator.

It seems like you're ignoring the fact that an actual person (and presumably, fellow developer, I am assuming you are also a dev) who provides a useful tool for free and spends a considerable amount of time and energy on it is going to read your posts that just shit on him and his work with no sympathy.

Also, please keep in mind that $500 is a LOT of money for many developers, both inside and outside of the United States.

It's disappointing seeing a developer claim apple is out to "kill" indie developers.

It follows a pattern of absolutely over the top language around companies like apple.

Apple's approach has resulted in 2 million apps+ in the app store. I'm not sure given their crappy interface I could find or use even a fraction of them.

> The guy complaining here has his "privacy policy" as follows: https://github.com/glushchenko/fsnotes

The iOS version links to that page, but the mac appstore listing [0] links to a different website [1] with an actual privacy policy.

[0] https://apps.apple.com/app/fsnotes/id1277179284

[1] https://fsnot.es/pp.html

> Why it this all apple's fault? I don't think it is unreasonable to ask for a privacy policy.

Apple didn't say this was a privacy policy issue, why do you think it is?

> One fix, developers should be able to pay $500 to [...]

So by default if Apple rejects you and refuses to give a reason, you should have the "opportunity" of paying them $500 so Apple tells you what Apple already knows? What a deal!

I mean, the other way to look at this is the baseline cost for a supported enterprise developer account is $500 (or $5000, or whatever), and it's a discount to $99 if you happen not to need the extra hand-holding.

> extra hand-holding

If "we are going to kick you out and tell you why" is extra hand-holding in whatever bizarre world you live in, sure.

I'm not saying it's acceptable, I'm just saying— the alternative is probably something more like the five-figure game console SDK license fees of the PS2 era. That kind of money pays for you to have a phone number to someone who is accountable for your success deploying product on the platform and helps you work through any issues you come up against. But obviously, it also locks out most smaller devs from participating. So it's arguable whether the current state of affairs is sustainable or a net improvement.

> the alternative is probably something more like [...]

No it's not. If they can send you an email saying your account is suspended they could simply include the reason in there. There is no justification whatsoever for making that information cost further money.

The "bizarre" world is this world.

If you go through the trouble of applying for a job, submitting a resume, doing a phone interview and are rejected - they may kick you to the curb and NEVER tell you why. This is not bizarre world, this is this world.

If you apply to college and they turn you down, even though you have paid fees and spent time on your application, they almost certainly WILL NOT tell you why as they kick you to the curb.

If you are sending spam and the mailer rejects you, it almost certainly will not tell you exactly why - just give a link to general guidance.

Most if not all large / high volume application systems have evolved in this direction.

Apple is dealing with 2 million+ apps. Some of the developers are not reading the guidelines or actively subverting or trying to subvert apples customers.

If you work in this type of space, your time becomes precious and there can be extreme mismatches between what a developer etc thinks is owed to them and what they have paid for.

I'm pointing out that the developer is not following even basic guidelines. It seems possible that either this or another guideline is not being followed?

The problem it lookes like is that apple locked the account because they were reviewing something, but didn't say what, and didn't say why, and didn't provide any more information other than "just sit tight, we'll eventually tell you why your account is locked, and maybe unlock it." They even acknowledge this screws over the end users, but that's life and quit complaining.

And then that's it, for months.

That is DEFINITELY Apple's fault.

No problem, if this crap (really no), why not delete this? Main point in post — 3 month investigation is not normal.

More to the point, part of publishing on the App Store is fulfilling the requirements. If the requirements include you must send a video to them of you standing on your head and blowing a party whistle, that's what you have to do. If you don't want to, you're free to not develop for Apple devices.

That you get away with not doing it for any amount of time is not an excuse. It's Apple's sandbox; play by their rules, or play elsewhere.

People know they're free not to.