Hacker News Reader

Comment by singularity2001 | Hacker News Reader

singularity2001

   >>  Apple doesn't have a separate, "VIP" review process for apps

they do. Some years ago my app was in the top 100 and I had nice telephone calls with real human people.

View on HN

It's shocking that this isn't part of the $99/year developer program. 15-minute quarterly check-ins with an Apple developer seem fully within their means.

But then it wouldn't be free money.

It sort of is. You get 2 developer technical support tickets (DTS). These are essentially at the level of having an engineer look at your code and help you figure it out. With these they’ve done things like review my build settings when I was having difficulty with a complex build. I believe App Store consultation is one of the available topics, but if not it would be worth trying anyway. These tickets are clearly worth a lot more than $50 each if used well.

Interesting, I didn't now that. Still though, my recommendation is mostly tongue-in-cheek because even spending 5 hours with an Apple engineer won't fix OP's problem. Nevertheless though, thanks for sharing!

What's OP's problem? Everyone has told them that there are multiple tiers of attention in the review department. Plus you get the support credits for specific issues (i.e. ones that aren't a business problem like the 30% cut.)

I imagine OPs problem is that Apple wants 30% of all the Blockchain transactions. Which is insane.

If that's what he was referring to, then agreed. There is no red telephone access to appeal broadly strategic decision-making, no matter who is the developer, sadly.

A review of the above three exchanges:

"Apple doesn't have dedicated support for established devs"

"They do, I was in it"

"Why don't they support all devs this way? Apple sux."

Added:

"They do, you get 2 free support tickets"

"Oh they do? It still wouldn't fix every problem. Apple still sux."

In this lose-lose environment, I can only expect Apple will simply end up pissing people off no matter what it does.

I realize we all know this but I've never seen it expressed so succinctly in a thread.

The problem isn't Apple's lack of transparency (at least for me) but the fact that they charge $99/year for features that should be a God-given right. They will always piss people off as long as they charge them for a product that should be included with their computer by-default. Until then, I may as well demand Apple include a few rocks from Mars and astronaut ice-cream every year, at least then I'd be getting my $99's worth.

> features that should be a God-given right.

What features are you asking for that apply to this thread?

You do not have a god given right for them to follow your policies.

> They will always piss people off as long as they charge them for a product that should be included with their computer by-default.

The goalposts move with every comment. You don't have the right to determine what parts of their products are free vs. paid.

Being able to develop and build an application I’ll only ever side load for myself should be available on any platform, for free. All the App Store stuff can be a billion dollars for all I care, but it’s a travesty that you need a friggin’ Mac and a hundred bucks to make software for your own damn phone.

You can sideload your own apps through Xcode without a full developer account. They only last for 7 days however, so you'll have to keep sideloading them.

Have you submitted an app to the app store? Have you dealt with their reviewers? The stupidity of these reviewers is maddening. I'm certain I do not want a phone call with them, even though they are extorting $99/year from me.

Everyone has faced this to some degree. You want to get your work or message out there and it gets shut down by the powers that be. The question is how to encourage a level playing field. You could have the government step in, however, that comes with its own issues. I wouldn't want a larger entity who has guns being the decision maker.

Apple has been the vanguard of selling software for years. People don't buy desktop software anymore, and it wasn't all that successful to begin with. They do buy software on phones, though, and Apple enables an ecosystem that might not otherwise exist. It's not clear to me that Google needs paid apps. They were happy with ads before that.

Ask yourself this - if we didn't need to pay to publish apps to the Store (or even less, if we could just publish apps that could be side-loaded), how many of us would voluntarily pay $99 per year for Apple's developer support? You could probably count them on one hand.

If the $99 also gets you Apple's 'verified' stamp of approval that guarantees the app won't mess up your phone or drain your battery like crazy, the number might go up a bit. But I agree that it would be great if we could publish apps without the app review process, for users who don't care about verification.

Even government with unlimited resources will do that

We aren't in the top 100, but I've had conversations with real people about app review issues...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com