Angry iPhone developers get new site

 

Highlights level of frustration with approvals process.

Angry iPhone developers finally have their own web site on which to vent their frustration with Apple's iPhone apps approvals process.

Apple Rejected Me, untold tales of rejected iPhone apps is a new web site for developers to post their stories, and judging by the number of posts and the responses they have already generated, there are a great deal of them about.

Typical posts include: "I patched an app with a bunch of bug fixes and new features. Apple rejected me."

As the posters to the site remain anonymous, it has attracted mainly hoax posts, although the very fact that the site exists is proof that the iPhone application review and approval process has serious defects.

The site was created by iPhone developer Mark Gurman, who built the $99 You Are Rich iPhone application.

"Mark and several developers from the community agree that app review policies need to be updated significantly," says a message on the site.

"AppleRejectedMe.com is the perfect place for developers to share their stories, people to post funny app ideas, and for people to be creative and make up app rejection reasons."

A couple of weeks ago we wrote how the developer of the popular iPhone Facebook app turned his back on the project, while Rogue Amoeba, the firm that makes the popular Airfoil software for the iPhone, walked away after revealing it took nearly four months for Apple to approve a security update.

Copyright ©v3.co.uk


Angry iPhone developers get new site
 
 
 
Top Stories
NSW to build its own myGov
Service NSW digital profiles available by September.
 
Android bug leaves a billion phones open to attack
Hackers only need phone number to target devices.
 
Australia's leaders agree to end GST-free online goods
Gerry Harvey may finally get his way.
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest Comments
Polls
Should law enforcement be able to buy and use exploits?



   |   View results
Yes
  13%
 
No
  51%
 
Only in special circumstances
  17%
 
Yes, but with more transparency
  19%
TOTAL VOTES: 715

Vote