Top
Best
New

Posted by _da_ 11 hours ago

App Store Rejection of the Week: Dark Hours(daringfireball.net)
301 points | 176 commentspage 2
martinclayton 7 hours ago|
The words astro-nomy and astro-logy are similar, but this is no "fluke".

There's a Wikipedia article with some history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_astronomy

I imagine astronomers have been sighing resignedly at dinner parties for a couple of millenia:

In the Hellenistic world, the Greek words 'astrologia' and 'astronomia' were often used interchangeably, but they were conceptually not the same.

In his compilatory work Etymologiae [c. 625], Isidore of Seville noted explicitly the difference between the terms astronomy and astrology (Etymologiae, III, xxvii) and the same distinction appeared later in the texts of Arabian writers.

tantalor 10 hours ago||
Is astrology not allowed in app store? That's kind of a weird thing to ban.
gcampos 10 hours ago||
Probably not directly, but indirect by the anti spam criteria: If there are too many similar apps, from whatever category, they will just reject new apps.
Rohansi 9 hours ago|||
I wouldn't say it applies to all categories. I highly doubt they'll ever do it to games no matter how many clones of clones get published
SXX 9 hours ago|||
This doesnt affect casino app spam whatsoever.
ButlerianJihad 6 hours ago||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_Friends_Network

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Cleo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edward#Crossing_Over_with...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi

kbelder 6 hours ago||
One of those things is not like the others...
kyle-rb 9 hours ago||
The arbitrariness of app store review hasn't been the greatest on the Google side, for me lately anyway. I got dinged for having an E-rating for my TV show info app that displays an official promo image for an episode of Landman, where a character has a wound with some blood on his face.

I pointed out that there were a couple other E-rated apps that show the exact same image, and many more T-rated ones that only warn of "In-App Purchases" — no "Violence" label. One of the latter is the official Google TV app [0], so I sent some screenshots of that, and asked if maybe they were "crushing the competition" by avoiding their own review process, to see if that would escalate my case (no such luck).

[0] The image is still the same in the Google TV app, and Google Search surfaces the image in question S1 E10: https://www.google.com/search?q=landman+season+1

par 9 hours ago||
Many years ago, like in 2017, my wife and I designed a dating app that was based on astrological matching. We knew it was tongue in cheek and advertised at as such. At that time we got a clear rejection from the App Store that they were no longer going to allow astrology apps. Fair enough, we pivoted the dating app to something else and it has been in the store doing fine for years now. But what we noticed was sometime around 2020, all of a sudden apple allowed a huge influx of new astrology apps into the store. It made no sense to us and seemed like bullshit, but what can you do?
cdrnsf 9 hours ago||
Building web apps is far more enjoyable if only because you don't have to deal with the capricious nature of Apple's App Store review. It's non-deterministic CI at best.
cageface 5 hours ago|
This is true but if you want to monetize it then there are similar review hurdles you're going to have to clear.
swe_dima 9 hours ago||
It's why I love React Native and over the air updates. So I don't have to deal with this roulette.
vondur 7 hours ago||
The whole thing is stupid. If people want to get an Astrology app, who is Apple to say they won't carry it?
edwinjm 10 hours ago||
I am quite an Apple fan, but this dampens my enthusiasm considerably.

How many great apps are rejected, but build by people without reach?

Grombobulous 8 hours ago||
Just don't be a fan of corporations. Period.

Even the good ones, looking at you Valve.

Am I happy and satisfied customer of some companies? Yes. Not a fan, though.

rpdillon 9 hours ago||
Their business model depends on you not looking too closely here. Apple has a lot of legitimate advantages, but they oversell the safety of the App Store quite a bit, and they also have an infamous review process for apps that deliberately hides both the reasoning and any sort of estimation of false positive / false negative rate. Google should have these sort of stats as well, but obviously neither company would publish them. False negatives should be observable by the public.

I'm a fan of letting users add repos from vendors they trust, so there isn't one centralized gatekeeper.

dinkblam 9 hours ago||
overselling the safety is very euphemistic

many years ago we made a list of malware apps on the Mac App Store:

https://www.corecode.io/_malware_on_the_macappstore.html

(yes, the list was made after being disgruntled because totally legitimate apps were refused for nonsense reasons just like in this story)

Kim_Bruning 9 hours ago||
I wonder how many people are turned off by iOS and have never bothered to learn to write an app for it in the first place?
fylo 9 hours ago|
I guest it wasn't "in the cards" for me
theturtletalks 6 hours ago|
It’s a shame that all these people that are using AI to code are using it to make iOS apps. Even the open-source ones are nice but you can’t install yourself unless you pay $99/year to Apple. Why not just make a great web app that does that job?

I have a terminal in the web app that I use to code on my laptop. I wanted to make a native app for my phone, but using Tailscale and just accessing the website on my phone is way better and I’m not dependent on app stores at all.

More comments...