Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cellphones Handhelds Apple

How Apple's App Review Is Sabotaging the iPhone 509

Posted by kdawson
from the race-to-the-bottom dept.
snydeq writes to recommend Peter Wayner's inside look at the frustration iPhone developers face from Apple when attempting to distribute their apps through the iPhone App Store. Wayner's long piece is an extended analogy comparing Apple to the worst of Soviet-era bureaucracy. "Determined simply to dump an HTML version of his book into UIWebView and offer two versions through the App Store, Wayner endures four months of inexplicable silences, mixed messages, and almost whimsical rejections from Apple — the kind of frustration and uncertainty Wayner believes is fast transforming Apple's regulated marketplace into a hotbed of bottom-feeding mediocrity. 'Developers are afraid to risk serious development time on the platform as long as anonymous gatekeepers are able to delay projects by weeks and months with some seemingly random flick of a finger,' Wayner writes of his experience. 'It's one thing to delay a homebrew project like mine, but it's another thing to shut down a team of developers burning real cash. Apple should be worried when real programmers shrug off the rejections by saying, "It's just a hobby."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How Apple's App Review Is Sabotaging the iPhone

Comments Filter:
  • And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jcr (53032) <jcr@nOspAm.mac.com> on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:31PM (#28763639) Journal

    Apple's managed to get more than fifty thousand apps through the process and onto the store. Nobody's going to write stories about the ones that went smoothly.

    -jcr

    • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by thisnamestoolong (1584383) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:39PM (#28763711)
      Yes, but how many of those apps are good? I don't personally have an iPhone but from what I have seen it seems like most iPhone apps are half-baked juvenile distractions, rather than anything seriously useful. It seems logical to me that the overall quality of iPhone apps could be improved tremendously if devs could actually devote time and resources to apps without fear of arbitrary rejection.
      • Re:And yet... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by lymond01 (314120) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:57PM (#28763905)

        I don't personally have an iPhone but from what I have seen it seems like most iPhone apps are half-baked juvenile distractions, rather than anything seriously useful.

        I have the same problem with using NetJets, that personal jet service Roger Federer uses. I'm sure it's just fraught with late departures and stuck up pilots. One is likely always arriving at their destination late or worse, early, and having to stand around with the populous waiting for the limousine.

        How many iPhone app reviewers are there? How long does it take to fully test an application so you don't get sued for allowing something that:

        1) Bricks the phone
        2) Has child porn shoved inside it
        3) Is free, barely does what the description says it will do, and yet you need to waste your time deciding if it's just not broken enough to put up there

        If there are one hundred app reviewers, there are too few.

        • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by hedwards (940851) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:37PM (#28764257)
          If the iPhone were properly designed it shouldn't be possible to brick via just a software installation. Childporn is a straw man argument, they've been banning things which could be used to access content that doesn't go with Apple's wholesome image whether or not that was the purpose of the app. As for the description being accurate, there are ways that they could handle that without reviewing it formally chances are the reviewers have different standards than what an individual has..
          • Re:And yet... (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Maury Markowitz (452832) on Monday July 20, 2009 @09:36PM (#28764707) Homepage

            > If the iPhone were properly designed it shouldn't be possible to brick via just a software installation

            I'd say the exact opposite is true. Who wants a platform that is so locked down you can't screw it up hacking it? Boooorring! It's precisely because you can brick it that Pwnage tool can exist, and I'd say the platform would be FAR less interesting if that were the case.

            Wow, such an anti-technology skew. So out of place on /.

            Don't get me wrong, the whole approval thing seems like something out of the dark ages to me. But seriously, the machine shouldn't be hackable? Yikes!

            Maury

            • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Interesting)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20, 2009 @11:47PM (#28765683)

              Who wants a platform that is so locked down you can't screw it up hacking it?

              Your point is taken. However, it's a false dichotomy.

              I have an Openmoko Neo Freerunner. It's thoroughly hackable in all respects, except (for legal reasons) the GSM and GPS firmware. Pretty much the opposite of "locked down". Yet it's not possible for me to screw it up completely; there's a backup copy of the bootloader, which cannot be overwritten by any software running on the phone. No matter how badly the OS gets broken, I can always use that backup bootloader to re-flash and start over.

              Even this doesn't qualify as "locking down", however; if I really wanted to, I could buy a "debug board" from OM which would allow me to overwrite everything, including the bootloader. The debug board, naturally, would allow me to brick the phone much more thoroughly, but at the same time it would also enable me to undo any changes I made.

              Even without the debug board, I think the Neo qualifies as both sufficiently hackable and sufficiently unbrickable for most purposes.

              • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                > No matter how badly the OS gets broken, I can always use that backup bootloader to re-flash and start over.

                So in other words, its perfectly possible to brick it with software. You just have a handy backup available to un-brick it when you do. Right?

                Just like the iPhone. What's this you were saying about "proper design"?

                Maury

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by westlake (615356)

              Who wants a platform that is so locked down you can't screw it up hacking it? Boooorring

              The guy who needs to make a phone call. The guy who wants everything to just work. The guy who shops at Apple.

            • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

              by COMON$ (806135) on Tuesday July 21, 2009 @10:08AM (#28769365) Journal
              "Who wants a platform that is so locked down you can't screw it up hacking it"

              This is exactly why OSX is so solid, and why I am a linux/windows admin. Don't mod me troll or flamebait yet, I love OSX because of that, it runs very solidly and I barely ever have to go to my creative department to fix things, but you don't get a mac for its mod ability. But the reason OSX is so great is because it runs in a handful of platforms, so driver and software problems are minimal. I assume they are trying to do the same with the iphone, this will get you a solid device, even though it will be a pain to develop on.

        • Re:And yet... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by iron-kurton (891451) on Tuesday July 21, 2009 @01:44AM (#28766269)
          FTA, the guy's app didn't brick the iPhone and had no offensive material. He didn't indicate directly whether it's a paid app, but he did say he made some money off it. So basically, Apple's rejection does not fit all nice and neat in your three bullet points. More to the point, if the platform was totally open, they really wouldn't have to worry about being sued.
      • Re:And yet... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by BasilBrush (643681) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:58PM (#28763917)

        Well I do have an iPhone, and there are a lot of good apps there. Certainly more good stuff than any other phone platform.

        As to the proportion that is good... if Apple didn't filter out various of the worst UI disasters as they do, the proportion of crap would be higher.

        As to the summary author... he dumped his book into a webview, and then Apple wouldn't publish it. Case in point. They've published plenty of ebooks with good UIs.

        • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Informative)

          by peterwayner (266189) * <p3@wayner. o r g> on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:02PM (#28763945) Homepage

          Actually they did publish it. Then they took 2+ weeks to publish the dozen or so new lines of code that fixed bugs.

          At the same time they rejected a very similar version. The only difference was some extra HTML. The Cocoa code was equivalent.

          So it was fairly random.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by icebike (68054)

            > So it was fairly random.

            Keep screaming. This issue has too get solved. Its entirely out of hand, and completely broken. I can't imagine any other platform where the platform author can get away with this much restriction and control.

            Safari has no age restrictions. Everybody else's app that embeds web does.

            It needs fixing. Apple's feet need to be held to the fire. The only pressure they understand is public embarrassment in the mainstream press.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by dzfoo (772245)

              >> "I can't imagine any other platform where the platform author can get away with this much restriction and control."

              Nintendo (SNES, GameCube, DS, Wii)?
              Electronic Arts (on game publishing)?

              I'm sure there are others.

                      -dZ.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by BasilBrush (643681)

            For everyone's interest, here's the submitter's app:

            http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=310737253&mt=8 [apple.com]

            And here is a list of the reviews it's had around the world so far. Every single review is a one star review. All complaining that the UI is broken.

            http://www.moopf.com/appstorereviews/appstore.php?appid=&urlappid=http%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2FWebObjects%2FMZStore.woa%2Fwa%2FviewSoftware%3Fid%3D310737253%26mt%3D8&submit=Get+Reviews [moopf.com]

            Apple's mistake was this one tim

      • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by wizzat (964250) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:14PM (#28764033)

        How many of them are good? Well, quite honestly alot more are good than if there was no review process at all. If there wasn't a review process, we'd see apps that ignored or borked your settings, leaked memory like a sieve, chewed through your battery life out of ignorance, or hell - maybe we'd simply be looking at a deluge of carbon copy flashlight and porn apps, making the app store effectively useless. Hell, in my opinion (and I do have an iphone) the app store already has *too many* apps, and the quality on the ones there aren't quite high enough for my liking.

        I suppose you could think of it this way: you're looking for a needle (good app that does what you want) and you can either search in the pin cushion full of mostly needles and a bit of straw or you can search through the whole fricking hay stack yourself. I'll take the pin cushion, thank-you-very-much.

        Also, I'm not sure that you're really qualified to say anything about the relative quality of the app store. You don't, afterall, actually have an iphone.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by jcr (53032)

        Yes, but how many of those apps are good?

        What does that have to do with the discussion at hand? Apple doesn't reject apps because they're stupid, they reject them if they fail to comply with the terms stated in the developer program agreement.

        -jcr

    • Re:And yet... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by syousef (465911) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:40PM (#28763721) Journal

      Apple's managed to get more than fifty thousand apps through the process and onto the store. Nobody's going to write stories about the ones that went smoothly.

      Apple is stifling innovation and you think it's fine so long as they've let through 50,000 tetris clones (okay an exaggeration, but it makes my point). Gotta love it. Think different indeed. Think with our marketing blinkers on. To top it off I bet I get modded troll by Apple zealots.

      This is EXACTLY why we need OPEN architectures. No developer should have to go through putting together an application only to have it rejected arbitrarily. The same people who support DRM and copyright supposedly to compensate the creator are happy to deny a developer ANY money for their effort at their whim. Hypocrites!

      Well I won't be buying an iPhone no matter how "cool" they look or what nifty features they have let alone gambling my time and effort developing for one in the hope that some junior Apple cronie rubber stamps it.

      • This is EXACTLY why we need OPEN architectures.

        Sure, but on the other hand, you have to agree that Apple did a good job of keeping viruses and spamware off their platform. There is indeed a real human being(*) who tests all the apps and makes sure that the app does what its description claims...

        If you make a completely open app store, make sure you protect your users against malicious experience. You don't want your end-users to be upset.

        (*) sometimes it does feel like there is indeed one human being doing all the testing :-)

    • by Culture20 (968837)

      Apple's managed to get more than fifty thousand apps through the process and onto the store. Nobody's going to write stories about the ones that went smoothly.

      And everyone one of those apps has had a message from the author in the description saying "Version 2.0 coming ($today-30days). It should solve the connectivity issues". The review process may have gotten them through, but I've not seen fast upgrades for anything other than big companies that can pay to be heard.

    • You missed the point. Its a quality argument, not a quantity argument.

    • by mgblst (80109)

      There are 100s of stories of the successful app, what does it say about you that you haven't read any? I one of the 100,000 iphone developers, and I enjoy reading the good stories much more than the day. Mainly because I already now what the bad stories will say, I have lived through it.

    • by BitZtream (692029)

      Its kind of like using CitySearch.com for restaurent reviews. Pulling random numbers out of my ass, you'll get 5 out of 10 people who write a review about a bad experience to 'stick it to them' and 1 out of 20 people who write a good review just because they read all the bad ones and want to try and balance it out.

      Personally, I think if that is what sabotaging your own device looks like, I need to figure out how to sabotage my own companies products so we get those sort of numbers.

      I'd love to have Apples p

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Pigmeister (1114499)
      I totally agree. There are numerous applications getting poor reviews when the app developer has an update that's been waiting weeks or months to be released by Apple. (People don't read the descriptions.) In many cases I have personally seen app store app comments that existed weeks ago while I await an update for apps I own. In other cases I have been told this via email after writing the author. Exactly what does Apple do to test or qualify updates? AT&T released a GPS navigator app that crashes and
  • Good (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kmac06 (608921) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:38PM (#28763699)
    Apple is not interested in allowing you to control your own hardware. This is just another example among many. I hope this sort of thing makes the iPhone and other Apple crap die a painful death.

    Long live Android!
    • Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)

      by timeOday (582209) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:29PM (#28764181)
      But it isn't dying a painful death in the marketplace at all, is it? In fact it's flourishing.

      You may recall this story [wired.com] about how Apple thrives under Steve Jobs dictatorial and secretive management style.

      You may even recall the infamous slashdot iPod launch coverage [slashdot.org] in which it was deemed "lame" because it was less feature-rich than the competition.

      This is the history of Apple: there is a market for simple, well-managed products that work out of the box, and maintaining tight proprietary control over the Apple universe is how this is accomplished. I don't know what this says for openness, but there you have it. So long as your use cases aren't too far out of the ordinary, I guess it's worth it to have the trains run on time.

  • Nintendo 2 on our hands! You know, from the NES days. Big N Loyalists unite...what were we talking about again?
  • by mgblst (80109) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:52PM (#28763835) Homepage

    I too have found this process annoying. Apples now ruling on UIWebView is ridiculous. I tried to work with them on not allowing any links to work, and they weren't happy enough with that, I still need to give it maximum rating.

    But the most frustrating aspect is having no communication with customers. A customer spots a bug, leaves a review that is it. You can fix it, but there is no way to get in touch with that customer, or leave a reply saying you have fixed it. There is even no message that a customer has left a review, you have to trawl through all your apps for reviews every so often, or you will never find out about this.

    It is a great system, I will keep producing apps because of this, but it certainly could be better.

    • by AndrewNeo (979708) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:19PM (#28764089) Homepage

      Can't you just post a link to a bug tracker in your product description?

    • by mr_zorg (259994) on Monday July 20, 2009 @09:50PM (#28764841)
      Amen to all of the things you said. I'm struggling right now with the capricious nature of the review process. My app is a gesture based music player with larger fonts, designed to make using your iPhone/touch in the car much safer. It was approved at the OS 3.0 launch, but a few bugs cropped up at the last second. I submitted a bug fix three days later, but it *still* hasn't been posted. Last week Apple rejected the update claiming it duplicates the functionality of the iPod app without sufficient differentiation. Really? Then how come you didn't pull the app completely (instead of just blocking the update)? And since when has the iPod music player offered gesture based navigation to change songs, etc? And why'd you approve it in the first place? Give me a break. I love Apple, but this has GOT to change. I keep hoping it's just because they're overloaded, but let's hire more people already!

      Shameless plug:
      FlickTunes (website) [sogeekysoftware.com]
      FlickTunes (iTunes) [sogeekysoftware.com]
  • by girlintraining (1395911) on Monday July 20, 2009 @07:53PM (#28763855)

    Sidekicks -- They have a "marketplace too". Locked down. T-mobile phones. Locked down. AT&T phones. Locked down. Almost every phone in existance has a "market place" equivalent, which has an approval process. Suddenly the iPhone comes along and people were expecting sunshine and kittens?

    • by jpmorgan (517966) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:07PM (#28763989) Homepage

      It's not that other phones have a marketplace with an approval process, it's that the marketplace is the only way to load programs onto your phone. With a Windows Mobile phone, you can download and install a .cab from anywhere you want. If it's not signed you get a brief warning message, and that's it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mjwx (966435)

      Almost every phone in existence has a "market place" equivalent, which has an approval process.

      Android: pay US$25, get published.

      Android Alternative: Dont pay US$25, publish the APK on your web site.

      WinMo: for all its flaws, build app, publish. There is no marketplace.

      You were saying?

  • Author is a dumbass (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Let's count off the ways that the author is a dumbass:

    • in the article, spells 'foreword' as 'forward' at least a half dozen times. For someone that wants others to read their work, this is ridiculous.
    • thinks that writing his own custom scrolling interface in Javascript is a good idea. There is a special place in HELL for idiots that do this (Flash devs, I'm looking at you). Unless I've missed something, the iPhone already scrolls.
    • and finally, the simple principle of "I'll write an app that shows an HTML page'
  • by szyzyg (7313) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:06PM (#28763981)

    I unlocked my phone within minutes of getting it home. I then proceded to take a look at the apps available via the Cydia store, which is unencumbered by the Apple review process.
    Pretty much everything I tried was garbage with the developers doing just enough to get something ported and then abandoning it regardless of what kind of glaring bugs are in the system, yes the reveiw process is harsh but it does help maintain a minimum level of quality that is bettter than 99% of the apps in the cydia store.
    (still, being able to get low level access to my phone still makes the jailbreak worthwhile)

    • by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:28PM (#28764169) Homepage

      What percent of the 20+ million devices running iPhone OS do you think are jail broken? It's just not a reliable answer for most people.

      Some people see things how they are.

    • by foom (29095) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:29PM (#28764189) Homepage

      I'm sure part of the problem with the "unofficial" app store is that it's quite likely that one of these days, Apple will get serious, and make a bootloader without glaring security holes in it. (I mean come ON, Apple, the bootloader isn't that big!...)

      When that happens, it may be impossible to "permanently" unlock an iPhone without hardware mods, which will seriously limit the Jailbreak community -- probably into irrelevance.

      That's a rather big risk for anyone to take on in their development...

      Heck, I'm not even bothering to learn to write for the iPhone as a *hobby*, because it'd be a waste of my time. Pretty much everything I want to write isn't allowed by Apple's rules, and while my phone is Jailbroken, Apple is trying (so far, completely incompetently...) to prevent me from being able to buy a new jailbreakable iPhone ever again. So it seems to me that the iPhone is basically a dead-end platform.

  • Wasted time (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Djupblue (780563) on Monday July 20, 2009 @08:12PM (#28764011)
    Why would I as a developer put time and hard effort into developing software if I believed there was a good chance it would never even get the chance to be installed?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Manfre (631065)

      That plus the fact you have to pay to become a developer and can only develop the apps on a mac (with mac hardware), so that is another financial hurdle. I seriously considered developing iphone apps, but probably of it being a waste of time and money was too high.

  • ... available for the iPhone nvolve some sort of fee/subscription/paid srvice from a third party? In other words, other than services/fees involving Apple/AT&T?

  • This has been how Apple has done business for years. How much more money could they make if they allowed OS X to be installed on any x86 PC? They do not because they like being in control. You do not purchase a Mac, or an Iphone, you purchase the experience, as regulated by Apple. Right or wrong, this business model is along the path they chose long ago so I doubt that they will change much now. If, as a developer, you do not want to play by their rules, then you can take your software elsewhere. Just
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Was the html in his "Application" as bad as what was on that site? Why did I keep seeing the line "<!-- pagebreak -->"? If I was apple, I'd reject an App that was just a piece of bad html too.
  • Anyone saying "it's just a hobby" either doesn't understand what a hobby is or what "just" means. If people actually have a hobby it's going to be very very important to them. Anyhow, I wonder how many people would accept / defend a Microsoft app store that was there to ensure no kiddy porn or trojan could be loaded on your Windows PC.
  • by CopaceticOpus (965603) on Monday July 20, 2009 @09:11PM (#28764557)

    Apple's customers are not the app developers. Apple's customers are the iPhone users. So long as there are users waiting in line with money to spend, there will be app developers competing for that money, no matter how arduous the review process may be.

    This will only change when a competitor such as Android offers better apps or better selection than what the Apple store carries. This could happen, but it will take quite some time due to Apple's head start.

  • is your APP pure HTML, or does it contain JavaScript code like the PhoneGap [phonegap.com] project uses?

    If it contains JavaScript code, maybe Apple didn't like the way it was designed as it was similar to the old PhoneGap code they rejected, did you update your JavaScript code to the new PhoneGap codebase that was approved, or did you remove the old PhoneGap code with different JavaScript code?

    If your APP is HTML with JavaScript, Apple might have an issue with that. Sometimes JavaScript code can do nonstandard things that locks up a web browser or causes incompatibility issues. When I programmed in JavaScript I had to keep changing my code to changing Web browser standards, as soon as a new web browser was released, the way JavaScript worked would change and I had to change my code to accommodate it.

    If it is pure HTML, there might be tags you are using that Apple finds non-standard and thinks they might run exploited code.

    Here is a story on why Apple rejected the PhoneGap framework in the first place [readwriteweb.com].

    Yeah I know, Apple wants to protect their users and set quality control standards high, and they include such rules as not using third party or open source frameworks, and Apple does not want the APP modified on the iPhone after being bought, Apple does not want the APP to run on a competitor's phone (HTML and JavaScript applications can easily be ported to another format), and PhoneGap type applications may not work on future iPhones, it is all a matter of risk management. Apple does not want to risk anything so it sets strict guidelines on what an iPhone APP can and cannot do.

    Yeah ironically Apple has exchanged freedom for security, and in doing so shut out developers like yourself. Even something as simple as HTML code and/or JavaScript has to be reviewed and has a possibility of being rejected. It goes against the open source philosophy, I don't know what else to say. Even Microsoft is not that strict on what can and cannot be done on their smart phones or Windows OS. Except to say that Microsoft's products are more prone to exploits and viruses and other malware, and maybe Apple is doing this kind of thing to prevent exploits in their iPhone?

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by peterwayner (266189) *

      It's not worth speculating on why Apple rejected my application because I don't know. The notes were short and pretty much inscrutable. Eventually they accepted one version while rejecting one that was pretty much the same thing. So maybe it was some Javascript, but that doesn't sound like it should be against the rules. They only insist that code be "interpreted and run by Apple's Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s)." Well, it sure sounds like Safari and Javascript fit that definition to me.

  • The Other Problem (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew@g m a il.com> on Monday July 20, 2009 @10:14PM (#28765013) Homepage Journal

    The rich get richer. Browsing the App Store, you see the most popular apps at the top. There is no power search for apps with the highest user ratings. I really can't find what I'm looking for.

    New app developers start at the bottom and have to compete against popular apps already ingrained at the top.

    I'm writing for an App Review site right now that hopes to help alleviate that.

  • by erroneus (253617) on Monday July 20, 2009 @10:27PM (#28765129) Homepage

    There are generally two polarized camps:

    1. Apple is too restrictive
    2. It's Apple's game, it's a damned good game, and if you don't want to play it, then go home!

    Both camps have some valid points and the biggest problem is that the second camp effectively refuses to see the validity of the first camp. The first camp's complaints have nothing to do with the [defensive] position of the second camp. In fact, you can both love and admire the iPhone and still think that Apple is a bunch of jerks with Nazi policies.

    But it is such a repetitive and pointless cycle. Neither side will convince anyone of the other side to see it their way.

    Personally, I am in the first camp. I won't voluntarily buy an iPhone until someone sets up a jail-broken app store from which to distribute the apps Apple doesn't approve of. And frankly, there are many phones that are LOTS better than the iPhone so it's a moot point really. Still -- let people complain and maybe one day Apple will listen... I have no reason to believe they will. Apple is more stubborn than Apple's fans are.

  • by Jay L (74152) * <jay+slash&jay,fm> on Monday July 20, 2009 @10:50PM (#28765277) Homepage

    That's a suspicious number... Clearly Apple must be rejecting so many iPhone apps because the App Store database can only hold 65,536 apps!

  • Advice to Peter (Score:4, Insightful)

    by magamiako1 (1026318) on Monday July 20, 2009 @11:13PM (#28765443)
    It's a fucking Ebook. Why the hell do you need javascript?

    From what others have been pointing out you've been trying to do something naughty or odd and you're getting called out on it. You just won't admit that you're at fault and would rather just take the shot at Apple.

    I certainly rather enjoy that you make note to call out Apple for their vague reasons for denying your application, but yet you have not been very open exactly as to what has been rejected. You could very well post the source code to your application if you were this desperate to call Apple out, but you won't, because chances are someone, somewhere, will call bullshit on you. The fact is, that Apple is vague because they might not have all of the source available--but you do. And you are the only one that can change what you're doing, not them.
  • by lennier (44736) on Tuesday July 21, 2009 @12:54AM (#28766045) Homepage

    Wouldn't that be more like a 'lukewarmbed'?

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.

Working...