Mastodon Client Rejections
As I’m preparing version 1.0.2 of Re: Toot it feels even more bitter that version 1.0.1 for macOS has been rejected.
The reviewer said that my metadata cannot refer to Mastodon because doing so can be harmful and misleading to users. Oh, and also I’m apparently a copycat.
Meanwhile any third-party Mastodon client on the App Store refers to Mastodon. Same for bird site apps.
And the same version of the iOS version with the same metadata was approved.
One thing is the unfairness about Mastodon.
What really gets me riled up is that app review has a standard reply threatening to terminate the developer account. What are their assumptions about 3rd party developers when this is their process?
The sketchy ChatGPT app could have used this sort of scrutiny—and the developer was a repeat offender.
Remember when they said they won’t reject patch version updates and instead issue a notice for us to fix in the next update? Total BS
A Halide bug-fix was just rejected because the App Store reviewer didn’t understand that you’re supposed to swipe or tap on the first screen to continue.
The app has behaved this way in every single version, going back to its launch in 2017.
Hey Apple, I’m so tired of this fucking bullshit submitting a damn app to the App Store where I put a ton of efforts into it. Could you put a little effort into understanding what the app is about? I can’t believe this.
They said that his Mastodon client “only includes links, images, or content aggregated from the Internet with limited or no native iOS functionality. Although this content may be curated from the web specifically for your users, since it does not sufficiently differ from a mobile web browsing experience, it is not appropriate forthe App Store.”
Via Peter Steinberger:
Next thing I make, if I ever code again, has to be runnable without a gatekeeper. If it has to be web tech, so be it.
Previously:
- Ivory
- Wired Finds App Review Unchanged
- Developer Account In Limbo Due to Popularity
- Allowing Bug Fixes and Challenging the Guidelines
Update (2023-01-12): Rui Carmo (Mastodon):
I follow quite a few Apple developers, and can reach back as far as 2010 for similar idiocy (some of it with apps from places I worked in), so it saddens me that in 2023 Apple still has uneven, arbitrary process to approve iOS apps[…]
Update (2023-01-13): Thomas Ricouard (via Matt Thomas):
And if you’re wondering why @icecubesapp is still not on the App Store, it’s because according to Apple it’s useless. I’m on strike 🇫🇷, I’ve stopped working on it until Apple say it’s useful.
Update (2023-01-19): John Gruber (Mastodon):
Today, Mastodon’s explosive growth in the face of Twitter’s collapse has made it a new UI playground, especially so on iOS. […] There are no limits to what developers can choose to do with the Mastodon APIs. There are, however, limits to what iOS developers can deliver to users: App Store review.
[…]
But in what can only be described as both Kafkaesque and, alas, all-too-familiar — the Ice Cubes 1.0 submission to the App Store has been held up in limbo for an entire week. The hamfisted faceless reviewer(s) looking at Ice Cubes are repeatedly rejecting it for utterly nonsensical reasons, primarily violating guideline 4.2.2, “Minimum Functionality”[…]
[…]
It is now six days — a week! — after that initial rejection and Ricouard is still banging his head against Apple’s orifice. Seven rejections in six days. It’s enough to make one start pricing Pixel phones.