What a language! How could "guidelines" ever be "violated"? Rules? Injunctions? Yes. Guidelines? No.
Rules is too harsh certainly, so let's use guidelines instead. But since the underlying meaning does not change, words lose connection to reality.
We think we are creating a softer and kinder world, but the opposite is true. If a guideline is actually an order, what's an order?
"off-nominal"
also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_flight_into_terrain
It means "flying normally, into a path that ends on the side of a mountain". That "flying normally" part is really relevant.
nothing in that statement implies that crashing was not preceded by normal, controlled flight. the term "crash" has no innate implication besides violent impact. though, yes, in actual use it often implies "accidental" and/or "uncontrolled".
Yes, "crashing on the side of a mountain" is also a correct description of the same event. But those two phrases do not have the same meaning.
Not that Android is better, but at least they aren't marketing it.
If Apple tightly controls their store, Apple bad.
If Apple doesn't tightly control their store, Apple bad.
The unavoidable consequence of being really big - a large number of people will be unhappy with your decisions no matter what you do.
If apple doesn't tightly control their store and doesn't claim to protect your privacy or security through their store, then no, they're not bad.
Its about not meeting the expectations they, themselves, set based on their claims.
That's if you have a lot of throwaway money and you don't like charity.
Treating all developers as businesses is part of the problem here I think. There should be more bespoke apps by individuals for small audiences — more of a community feel to things.
You are not entitled to get a open computing platform if the thing resembles an... Actually, they defined this form factor!
They care about market power very deeply so they don't have to care. Where are you going to go? Google? Doing the exact same thing. Neither? Cabin in the woods territory. Oh for the Nokia N900, right?
The Pinephone is on the frontpage at the moment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24329900, and the Librem 5 has been several times recently. Maybe not grandma friendly ATM but I wouldn’t call it “cabin in the woods territory.”
The point is we had it. The N900 was it. 10+ years ago. Maybe pine or librem or open moko or whatever will get us back to where we were more than a decade ago. I really hope so.
+ 2 companies, Pine64 and Purism, making 2 lines of phones
- Pinephones in various community editions, $150 and $200 with and without the convergence package
- Librem 5s for $750 now that the crowdfunding campaign’s over, and a $2000 Made in the US version
+ 2 companies, Pine64 and Purism, making 2 lines of phones
- Pinephones in various community editions, $150 and $200 with and without the convergence package
- Librem 5s for $750 now that the crowdfunding campaign’s over, and a $2000 Made in the US version
- Phosh, based on GNOME and GTK+, developed by Purism as the default shell for the Librem 5
- The KDE equivalent of that, that Purism has wanted as an option for the Librem 5 from early on
- Ubiports’ community maintained Ubuntu Touch
- Sxmo, a bundle of mobile adaptations of dwm, dmenu, etc. with a nice modular (Unixy/KISS/suckless) design eg. a gesture daemon made by the same developer with it but not exclusively for it
A lot of the discussion around this sounds almost exactly like “we need pro-business anti-regulation, it’ll trickle down!”, ie “high taxes on business hurts consumers”. Just like in real life, these arguments would be easier to swallow if they weren’t coming from the businesses themselves who just want a larger slice of the pie.
Too often these discussions on HN center on the power dynamics between Apple and app developers, and occasionally mention in passing something like ("choice is good for the iPhone owner too; if they don't want X then they can just choose to not install X"), but the discussion rarely tackles the nuance of the power dynamics between app developers and smartphone owners.
Ideally rules would be clear and objective. Maybe there are cases where Apple could be better about that, but it's not always possible. For example, one of the rules is to select the appropriate category. I can't imagine how you'd write a rule that perfectly defines proper categorization. Another example is that apps must "use power efficiently", but good luck completely defining what is too wasteful or what is/isn't a worthwhile use of battery power.
"It would be appropriate to {{insert fix here}}" which they think will solve the issue for approval.
Sometimes the thing seems totally inappropriate to do in any other context. But even if it was appropriate, that is still disconnected from the actual reality that it's required in order to be accepted.
but since one of the definitions (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/guideline) of "guideline" is:
> an indication or outline of policy or conduct
imo "guideline violation" isn't too far of a stretch even if it is technically a "policy violation".
It's a commonly used expression, there's nothing wrong or strange about it. An example:
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
This seems like a non sequitur...is Apple claiming this why their use of the word "guideline"? If so, can you show that?
2. A take down of "guideline" breaking comments doesn't impact my income as an app developer.
That's because you pay with your eyeballs (for premium dev/business/startup traffic to YC's posts).
Whether that’s a good or bad thing is a separate question. IMO policing tone is a mostly uninteresting exercise.
Booster?
Go flight!
Retro?
Go flight!
FIDO?
Go flight!
Guidance?
Go flight!
Surgeon?
Go flight!
EECOM?
Go!
GNC?
Go!
TELMU?
Go flight!
Control?
Go flight!
Procedures?
Go!
INCO?
Go flight!
FAO?
Go flight!
Network?
Go flight!
Recovery?
Go flight!
CAPCOM?
Go flight!
Apple App Review Process?
<crickets>
...
...
Launch Control this is Houston...
We are f&#*d...
If you need to be grumpy, well, be grumpy. I've had enough challenges in life to learn that you have to take things seriously but, at the same time, not miss the opportunity to laugh about it a bit when appropriate.