Hacker News Reader

Comment by makecheck | Hacker News Reader

I was once rejected because my one-window app didn’t have a Minimize button...for a game...that primarily runs in Full Screen. Other rejections were at least as pointless, every time leaving a bad taste in my mouth and making me wonder why they wasted as much time as they did.

The breaking point for me was when the reviewer refused to allow my minor update in because it “crashed” in an unreleased minor OS update that I literally could not acquire at the time. I removed my app from the Mac App Store the same day and haven’t been back.

It is a petty, pointless, and infuriating experience, which wouldn’t bother me so much if it wasn’t abundantly clear how much trash still makes it into the store and how inconsistent they are. I recommend that everyone use the “suggestion” box to suggest removing App Review entirely.

View on HN

I think the first reason is a legitimate criteria. Any app that has a window is definitely expected to have a minimise button - it's very strange behaviour if it doesn't, and even games that normally run full screen should have this button when placed in windowed mode.

The second reason certainly sounds infuriating, but it's odd that the reviewer had access to an OS update that you didn't. In general, a crash on the latest OS update is a good reason for rejection because you're going to have to fix it sooner or later anyway. Better to fix it now rather than have to come back to it later.

Well the worst part was, their own Human Interface Guidelines even say:

“These options are usually visible, but can be hidden as a group, such as......, or individually disabled, such as when a full-screen app can't be minimized. ...... A title bar should be visible, but can be hidden in an immersive app like a game.”

Either way, this wouldn’t be in the top 1000 reasons for someone to request a refund for a game on the store so why is Apple even concerning itself?

Yeah, why provide an API to disable the minimize button if they're going to reject your app for using it

Because you might have an occasional transient window where it's legitimate to disable minimization but you shouldn't do this for main app windows.

Because you might use it in an app that you are not going to distribute via the public application stores. It's also possible that the reviewer made a mistake.

I don't buy this - if you add a feature to software you know it's going to get used - if they needed it for internal stuff they could add it in some private library.

And, if it's something people want so bad that you'd allow it for non-published applications then you clearly need to solve it by enabling or offering some sort of replacement for published applications.

The underlying API is a decade or so older than the current version of the human interface guidelines. It's entirely possible that if they were writing the API today, they'd leave that capability out.

Well they should dogfood their own rules and add such a button to Safari. Every time I end up mistakenly tapping Open in New Window (which I NEVER want) instead of New Tab, I have a very frustrating time figuring out how to gesture that new window TF off my screen.

Cmd-M or Cmd-W to close it. Or click that little orange button in the top left corner to minimise it or the red one to close it.

He's referring to the mobile version of Safari, which for some reason labels 'open in new tab' as 'open in background'. If you hit 'open in new window' by mistake you end up with a split screen view that can't be swiped away with a gesture; you have to long-press the tab icon to tell it to merge the tabs in the new window together with the old one.

Safari does have a minimize button. It's the yellow one that sends it down to the dock, and is present on every single window on macOS that I can find. Even the mini-UI palette windows like "Safari User Guide" have a mini version of the same three window controls.

But if you're trying to close a window that you didn't want to open, you probably want the red button not the yellow one.

If what you're trying to do is move a page from its own window to another window, you can drag its tab. But that's not possible if you have "Show tab bar" disabled in the view menu, the tab bar will be hidden for windows with a single tab.

Alternate workaround if you find yourself accidentally opening things in a new window by accident frequently: instead of right clicking and picking from the menu, command-click on the link to open it in a new tab. If you have a 3-button mouse, middle click will do this as well.

How do you reverse the effects of "Cmd+H" without resorting to the mouse or trackpad?

"CMD + Tab" seems to reverse it just fine for me regardless of which app (ie I just tested it in Chrome).

Cmd+Tab and select the program you hid.

Hold cmd and keep hitting tab if you need to cycle through multiple things, but if you've just done it the hidden app should be the first one.

Thabks for the suggestion, but IME cmd+tabbing till the hidden app is selected, then releasing (ie, standard cmd+tab ux) does precisely nothing. Hence the question.

Not sure what to tell you then, since I've never had it not work.

If you tap the command quickly it should happen immediately without even bringing up the app switcher, and if you hold cmd and tab through the app switcher it does the same thing when you let go:

https://streamable.com/pn8rjb

Video recorded on Big Sur beta, but I'm sure this behavior isn't new.

Another thought - if you meant to ask how to restore a window after minimizing it to the dock with cmd-M (rather than hiding the app with cmd-H), there's an even less well known shortcut: Open the command-tab switcher, select the app you want, then hold down option and release command.

Doesn't handle multiple windows gracefully (if the app has another window not minimized it won't do anything, just switch to that window as normal). But if you have an app with a single window and you've minimized it, this will pop it back up.

Alternatively, you can access the whole dock directly with a keyboard shortcut using ctrl-F3 (add Fn if needed depending on your keyboard setup).

"command-tab switcher, select the app you want, then hold down option and release command"

bingo! thanks! :)

Yep that works for macOS. Not iPadOS.

Ah, yes, iPad Safari has the same problem but no option to show the tab bar with a single tab. If you hit the "show tabs" button in the corner you can drag it back from one Safari instance to the other, but it'll open up a new empty tab to replace it. You have to take the other copy of Safari back to full screen (to separate it from the new copy) and then use the app switcher to kill the accidental one.

I don't love this either, it's my biggest complaint about iPad's multitasking system.

The thread you are replying to involves macOS.

I hate “open in new window” on iOS so much, I turned off multiwindowing because every way to close the window felt incredibly awkward.

I still have the “open in new window” item there when I long-press a link. It now does absolutely nothing if I hit it by accident. Which feels inelegant but is a lot better than “oh fuck I just made another goddamn new window when I wanted a new tab”.

> In general, a crash on the latest OS update is a good reason for rejection because you're going to have to fix it sooner or later anyway. Better to fix it now rather than have to come back to it later.

That's true, but how do you fix a bug you can't reproduce with an unreleased patch you can't acquire, which is probably the same for the general public?

There has to be some flexibility here.

Of course, but this situation should not happen. Reviewers should be using the latest OS update that is available to developers. That has always been my experience, but my experience is mostly on iOS not macOS.

In particular because Apple's stated position is "Developers should always be developing against the latest released version of the platform" (being iOS or macOS).

Throwing a rejection because of a bug that can only be reproduced on an unobtainable minor patch release doesn't seem to fit with that guideline.

You will never make any friends making this kind of comments. Nitpicking is bad enough, calling the OP mistaken without evidence is worse. It's just rude.

If it's ever revealed that app reviewers have rejection quotas or some other bullshit internal metric that is driving this I would be the least surprised

Internal metrics, yes. If another reviewer finds an issue in an app that you reviewed, then you get your score docked, so reviewers have an incentive to whine about everything, since there's no penalty for bringing up issues that aren't actually issues and wasting everyone's time.

Is this speculation, or do you have insider knowledge?

> I removed my app from the Mac App Store the same day and haven’t been back.

This is the only winning move.

Along with a charge back for a recent developer subscription.

Which Apple will presumably appeal and and win, because the charge was legitimate.

Even if they don't, say goodbye to being able to purchase anything from Apple ever again.

Doesn't sound like a big problem. It's a big company but quite easy to avoid.

What if Apple's review process turned out not to be as described?

How about a nice game of chess?

If your game supports a windowed mode (which it certainly sounds like it does) then I'd agree that a minimize button would be expected.

Sure it should. I think that’s good UI.

Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

Should it be the App Review process’s goal today do this?

> Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

When it comes to standard OS conventions, like the minimize button, yes. I hope they would also reject a missing “Quit” menu item. Hurts accessibility to not follow standard conventions.

> When it comes to standard OS conventions, like the minimize button, yes. I hope they would also reject a missing “Quit” menu item. Hurts accessibility to not follow standard conventions.

Although Chrome's nonsense with ⌘Q, and Adobe's messing with … everything … indicates that you can misbehave on a fundamental level as long as you're a sufficiently powerful actor.

Chrome is not in the Mac App Store so does not go through review.

Good point. Adobe Acrobat (which is what I had in mind) also doesn't seem to be.

> Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

No, it should be the Human Interface Guidelines' role to be the arbiter of what is and is not good UI.

> Should it be the App Review process’s goal today do this?

Yes. Who else is going to do it? Apple doesn't want half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store, so they enforce it at that level. It's unfortunate that such a small detail hung up an update, but a deliberate change was made to the app to remove fundamental functionality that should exist, for no reason that I can tell. Sounds like this is exactly what the process is for, and it sounds like it worked.

Is it an HIG requirement now? AFAIK it isn't.

It is a selectively enforced requirement.

The HIG that Apple has never followed and has published apps and promoted UX that is actively against?

> Apple doesn't want half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store

Then why are there so many half-assed, misbehaving apps on their store?

I don't think people's primary complaint is the rules (although for some it might be). Most people complain about the arbitrary enforcement. Whenever rules are enforced selectively & without rhyme or reason, people get angry -- especially when it's a situation where someone is trying to make money on your platform, and your arbitrary enforcement determines whether they're allowed to do that or not.

>Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

Yes, obviously it is. If you're asking "should it be?", that's debatable, but I have no problem with that either.

> Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

Apple certainly sees their role as being some sort of QA gate, and this would fall under that to some extent.

>Is it the App Review process’s role to be the arbiter of what is and isn’t good UI?

As their customer, that's part of the reason I prefer to use some of their products, yes.

Not necessarily as an arbiter of good vs. bad UI, but if they have some clear and explicit UI requirements that are generally agreed to be the baseline UI requirements for an app to be accepted into the App Store, I am all for those requirements to be actually enforced.

They aren't asking for some arbitrary and vague things in terms of UI design, like "the flow of the app should be intuitive and cohesive". They are asking for very basic things like "your app should be minimizeable". It is a very explicit and clear requirement with pretty much no room for ambiguity.

> I recommend that everyone use the “suggestion” box to suggest removing App Review entirely.

Probably not worth paying 99 USD/year just to make such a suggestion.

Just for those folks who aren't aware that you actually have to pay Apple every year for the "privilege" of having your app submissions rejected for such random reasons -- even if your app is entirely free and non-commercial.

You could have asked the reviewer for the crash report, looked for access to the OS update, looked for someone with the OS update who could test your app, waited until the OS update was released, or simply submitted your app update again in hopes of getting a more lenient or helpful reviewer.

Why didn't you do those things? I've been in similar situations many times and made poor decisions. In my case, I made those poor choices because of poor mental habits and low emotional awareness.

About 5 years ago, I started spending effort to increase my EQ and mental habits. I consulted a therapist regularly for several years, read Marshall Rosenberg's Non-violent Communication, learned meditation at a free 10-day silent retreat, and talked with people close to me about my emotions and mental habits. I occasionally ask people close to me for feedback on my attitude and behavior. All of this effort as paid off. Compared to 5 years ago, I have more stable relationships, fewer and shorter arguments, fewer days lost to playing unhappy mind-movies, and more work productivity.

I urge you to invest more effort in your EQ skills.

EDIT: s/same situation/similar situations/

If you think my comment doesn't contribute to the discussion, please tell me why.

Probably because the app was tested on a prerelease version of macOS and you're digging into the developer for having poor EQ.

The developer got frustrated and gave up. I did that a lot. After I worked on improving my EQ, I get frustrated/angry and give up less often. Therefore I think getting frustrated/angry and giving up is a sign of poor EQ. This is based on my personal experience.

Important life decisions (like cancelling a project) are better made based on deep personal values, not as reactions to emotions.

> Important life decisions (like cancelling a project) are better made based on deep personal values, not as reactions to emotions.

I haven't read Rosenberg's Nonviolent Communication. However, from the Wikipedia page, I find "Rosenberg says that certain ways of communicating tend to alienate people from the experience of compassion: 1) Moralistic judgments implying wrongness or badness on the part of people who don't act in harmony with our values. Blame, insults, put-downs, labels, criticisms, comparisons, and diagnoses are all said to be forms of judgment." This rings true to me - you're alienating people by making a moralistic judgement that the top comment cancelled his project for a bad reason and diagnosing him with poor EQ. People are reacting to that feeling of alienation by down-voting you.

You're right. I almost deleted my comment when I realized that. My comment would have been much better without the judgmental tone. Reducing my judgmental mental habit is my lifelong struggle. My EQ skills are definitely not good enough yet.

How's this for a non-judgy version?

----

That must have been really frustrating. I struggle with frustration and anger. Sometimes, I make decisions based on those emotions and then miss opportunities, alienate people, and experience negative outcomes. Things work out better for me when I'm more calm and patient.

About 5 years ago, I started spending effort to increase my EQ and mental habits. I consulted a therapist regularly for several years, read Marshall Rosenberg's Non-violent Communication, learned meditation at a free 10-day silent retreat, and talked with people close to me about my emotions and mental habits. I occasionally ask people close to me for feedback on my attitude and behavior. All of this effort has paid off. Compared to 5 years ago, I have more stable relationships, fewer and shorter arguments, fewer days lost to playing unhappy mind-movies, and more work productivity.

Since you and I seem to struggle with similar things, I think you could also benefit from working on EQ skills.

----

You seem to misunderstand the conversation; the OP was not looking for advice about their canceled app. They were relaying their experiences with Apple's bizarre policies. To switch topics from Apple to target the OP specifically is incredibly rude, and shows a significant lack of situational awareness.

I am glad that your journey to raise your EQ seemed to make you feel calmer and more patient, but please take some time to understand why using this discussion to proselytize wouldn't go over well.

Many workarounds undoubtedly exist. The question is, why are any of those things necessary?

It took literally 2 minutes to upload the update for immediate release on Steam (previously set up / approved). [...Oh, except it didn’t, because nowadays Apple makes me wait 15 minutes for their unnecessary Notarization upload to complete. 17 minutes is still faster than App Review though.]

I want to spend my limited free time on things I enjoy, such as actually making software. And at a certain point, it does not matter if there are 5 different workarounds for Apple-imposed problems; what matters is that Apple-imposed problems drain an unreasonable amount of free time and energy for insufficient benefit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com