Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 16th Jun 2009 13:25 UTC
Apple During last week's Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple introduced a new iPhone model, the iPhone 3GS, which comes, among other things, with a faster processor and more RAM. Since this is a developers' conference, there were also numerous sessions on iPhone development, and the last session was about publishing on the App Store. Since every session at every WWDC is always followed by an open Q&A session, you'd figure this'd be the perfect opportunity for iPhone developers to ask about Apple's App Store policies. Well, no.
Permalink for comment 368864
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
If there is one consistent thing...
by mrhasbean on Tue 16th Jun 2009 22:35 UTC
Member since:
2006-04-03 is that Thom's articles always have a dig at Apple, be it subtle or blatant as in this case.

I don't think anyone would disagree that there are issues with the current situation with iPhone development, but I ask you this question, if they don't have any answers to give at the moment that are going to make everyone any happier why would they spend the time and effort trying?

They may already be working to fix these things and they may not - I know that response times have certainly improved over the past 12 months to what they were. The consistency in approvals and rejections is also something that needs to be addressed, and who knows maybe they are, maybe they aren't. They may not give a shit about any of it because as has already been pointed out, it seems to be working from the customer's perspective. But if they ran a Q&A session and didn't provide the answers the devs (or more importantly in this case, Thom) wanted to hear the articles would have been even more negative than this one, so in this situation it was probably easier just to say nothing. And frankly they will never please everyone so there will always be some turkey out there getting a quick headline out of them to try to support their own meaningless agenda.

But of course it requires some logical reasoning to see that...

Reply Score: 3