I hope this is true and agree with apple on this. an update is to improve an app, not get noticed. This hopefully helps out on the long lines for approvals for people who truly have updates for their current customers.
My attitude is if you don't like it go program for android. I am doing both and i see it as money i did not have before so anything is better then nothing. What sucks is people who believe they are entitled to it. Which is a joke.
As most of you know by now, updates are no longer placed in the "New Release" category (for your genre).
You were all worried about developers updating their apps constantly and cluttering the store and review board. Some claim that this will help the store, I think it will destroy the store...or at least minimize its impact on the market.
I believe with these new rules, indie developers will backlash on Apple and make i.e. 50 copies of their existing apps, rename, re-skin, colors, text, etc...same app, just slightly different in the look. This will be terrible for all of us.
You hit the nail on the head!
__________________
--
Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit... Then why am I a programmer?
How do we know that Apple won't reject something that's 99% similar to an existing app the developer has? If they can change the system as they've done, they can change the reviewing strategy as well, even if it just brings up a page of the devs apps currently in store. It'd only take 2 minutes to check, and then bingo, rejection based on being near identical to current app.
We don't know it won't be like this. But it probably wont be! lol
If, as predicted, each fly-by-night dev has 5 near-identical copies of one app in the store, it's going to confuse consumers IMO and dilute the devs presence. Which would you rather have, 10 rotten apples or one juicy one?
How do we know that Apple won't reject something that's 99% similar to an existing app the developer has? If they can change the system as they've done, they can change the reviewing strategy as well, even if it just brings up a page of the devs apps currently in store. It'd only take 2 minutes to check, and then bingo, rejection based on being near identical to current app.
We don't know it won't be like this. But it probably wont be! lol
If, as predicted, each fly-by-night dev has 5 near-identical copies of one app in the store, it's going to confuse consumers IMO and dilute the devs presence. Which would you rather have, 10 rotten apples or one juicy one?
there will be a way to sneak by.... just look at the 20,000 book apps. same app, different book.
__________________
--
Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit... Then why am I a programmer?
Under the Word category, Norsk Hangman is showing release date of Nov 8th, 2009 for me. That's 2 days in the future!
in the utilities "A Free Level (sep 2008)" along with others showed up in frunt of the newly released apps. And no apps with updates including mine showed at all in release date. I hope the this is just a bug witch i think it is.
AppRankings app dev responded in a support email that they have changed the way they are reporting app's. So the problem is system wide.
How do we know that Apple won't reject something that's 99% similar to an existing app the developer has? If they can change the system as they've done, they can change the reviewing strategy as well, even if it just brings up a page of the devs apps currently in store. It'd only take 2 minutes to check, and then bingo, rejection based on being near identical to current app.
We don't know it won't be like this. But it probably wont be! lol
If, as predicted, each fly-by-night dev has 5 near-identical copies of one app in the store, it's going to confuse consumers IMO and dilute the devs presence. Which would you rather have, 10 rotten apples or one juicy one?
Even on the same day that all this went into effect, I had a brand-new app buried on the third page by an avalanche of nearly-identical, also brand-new soundboard apps, all by the same dev.
As for myself, I have enough components in the library that I can cut-and-paste new apps pretty easily. They won't appear to be identical, or even similar, on the surface. And I'm not distracted by those pesky updates.
I would rather continue incrementally improving a set of existing apps, but I gotta feed the kids.
I would rather continue incrementally improving a set of existing apps, but I gotta feed the kids.
I hope it doesn't come to this but you're totally right. There's going to be 1,000,000 app' in no time. Think about it currently 100,000 app's x laid over new skins a couple of time and bang 1,000,000 apps. Great idea apple!
My reference is towards the Dice section (cuz its the only one I got).
I am already seeing copies...anybody else for other sections?
The BIG question is...how did these developers know that the change was coming, so they could get their app reviewed Just-In-Time? Or is it just coincidence?
How did the Blocked dev know to submit a 1.0? (Release date 6th Nov 2009, 2680 Ratings). Where did they get their information from that there was going to be a new system/bug?
Lets say it had taken 10 days to get approved, this all started happening say 4th Nov? So they wouldve had to submit around 25th Oct? It doesnt make sense.
You cant change the version number like you can change dates so something is wrong. Do a certain group of devs have contacts within Apple? Breach of NDA?
Should we be looking at these guys as cheating the system not just gaming it?
How did the Blocked dev know to submit a 1.0? (Release date 6th Nov 2009, 2680 Ratings). Where did they get their information from that there was going to be a new system/bug?
Lets say it had taken 10 days to get approved, this all started happening say 4th Nov? So they wouldve had to submit around 25th Oct? It doesnt make sense.
You cant change the version number like you can change dates so something is wrong. Do a certain group of devs have contacts within Apple? Breach of NDA?
Should we be looking at these guys as cheating the system not just gaming it?
As I said in another thread - It is pretty obvious that this is a glitch in the system, not something created by the developer.
Apple are making changes, history shows us everything gets fkd-up when they do... This will sort itself out once things are starting to fall into place again, alternativly it won't - but it will still be an error in the AppStore.
No dev in their right mind would create this situation for themselves since it would only result in being banned from the store and Apple taking back their money since it then would be fraud and a pretty obvious one if you ask me...
I think it's pretty clear looking at the AppStore that something is broken at the moment...
I dug into this a bit more. I think there is just a bug in the App Store.
Look at finance-> new releases on your iPhone. Auto Fuel Economics shows up with 9 reviews and one written review back on Nov 2, 2008. The post date is showing up as Sept 8, 2008 and the version is 1.0, yet somehow it is in the new releases.
Now look at iTunes on your computer. It shows up as being released Nov 6, 2009 as 1.0 again with 9 reviews and one written review back on Nov 2, 2008.
It looks to me the version number isn't updating at the moment, and is showing up as 1.0 regardless of the true version number.
As I said in another thread - It is pretty obvious that this is a glitch in the system, not something created by the developer.
Apple are making changes, history shows us everything gets fkd-up when they do... This will sort itself out once things are starting to fall into place again, alternativly it won't - but it will still be an error in the AppStore.
No dev in their right mind would create this situation for themselves since it would only result in being banned from the store and Apple taking back their money since it then would be fraud and a pretty obvious one if you ask me...
I think it's pretty clear looking at the AppStore that something is broken at the moment...
Agreed - there was a great gnashing of teeth when subcats were "removed" around the iTunes 9 launch, and two days later when all the pages were rebuilt everything was fine. It's clear that a new system is coming, but we do *not* know what the new system is yet.
I went on Apple's dev forums. It looks like an App with a version 1.0 got an updated release date of Nov 6, 2009 even if it has never been updated since it's initial release... What a surprise for people who submitted an App and then gave up on it a year ago.
If this were completely true, my 1.0 app would also have an updated release date (it was ACTUALLY released on Oct 30/09 and still displays as that). Maybe it is apps that are still in the old format that have no keywords?
If this were completely true, my 1.0 app would also have an updated release date (it was ACTUALLY released on Oct 30/09 and still displays as that). Maybe it is apps that are still in the old format that have no keywords?
That could be it. In any case there are strange things a foot at the circle K.
I believe with these new rules, indie developers will backlash on Apple and make i.e. 50 copies of their existing apps, rename, re-skin, colors, text, etc...same app, just slightly different in the look. This will be terrible for all of us.
What rock have you been living under? People have been doing that since the app store was created! For example, all those bullshit auto dialers "Call Mom", "Call Dad", etc.
These idiots are no worse than the morons who were coming out with new releases (claiming bug fixes, yeah right) every day just to scam the system so that they show up in new releases.
This change is good and it will only hurt assholes who abused the system.
The next change I want to see from Apple is limit the # of releases in some way. Such as 1 per week, if you submit more than 1, they are put at the END of the queue each time they approve 1 of your apps. That will utterly destroy these abusers.
Oh, and if they start charging for each "new release", say $50, that would help too. Bug fix updates free, new releases $50 each. That will stop these kids and scammers in their tracks.
Maybe they will do something like that - they obviously take something on board from the forums (keywords, more updates on status to name two things we've all been asking for), and I doubt they're finished with their tinkering just yet!
Agreed - there was a great gnashing of teeth when subcats were "removed" around the iTunes 9 launch, and two days later when all the pages were rebuilt everything was fine. It's clear that a new system is coming, but we do *not* know what the new system is yet.
I agree with you, Crabfish and others that there is a bug in the system and it will eventually work itself out. And it is not affecting my app at all for the moment.
What I am annoyed about is the lack of feedback from Apple about this and all their other changes. When you go to iTunes Connect, there should be a statement that there is a bug in the apps store and "we are working on it" or some such comment.
Moreover, It's frustrating to not know what the rules are. Must we add keywords? - apparently not yet, even though Apple was very insistent about it quite a long time ago.
Also, if there is some kind of change going on where updates may not show in the new releases, we should know about it before the new system goes into effect. We shouldn't have to speculate here about what the rules are. Apple should treat us as partners in this endeavor and tell us what the rules really are.
It was bad enough when people had to discover here or the hard way that they had to change the release date or their apps would not appear in the new releases.
Just looking at Utils new releases theres an app there that was released 15th November 2009.
Initially my thoughts were that perhaps are only making major versions new releases i.e. 1.0 , 2.0 etc and minor versions 1.0.1 as updates but there seems to be no logic.
I.E. a free level released 8th Nov 2009 has 3067 reviews going back to 2008.
Do you know when the Mongols ruled China?
Linear Mode
