I heard that Apple was scolded again a few days ago... It seems that this time it is because the software application update of the app store is controversial again** According to foreign media reports, apple sent an email to all application developers. The general meaning is: "next, we will start with the software of the app store. Those apps that haven't been updated for too long will be gone if we don't think of a way."
As soon as this email, which is nominally a notice but has a "warning" component, some developers are not only angry, but also a little worried about whether they will suffer a reckless disaster.
They think Apple It's too arrogant. It belongs to disrespect for their labor achievements.
Moreover, many previously developed software have entered a stable and easy-to-use cycle... In this case, it is normal not to make additional updates. Unexpectedly, they were taken off the shelves by apple.
Moreover, they think that even some software that hasn't been updated for several years is just because they don't have time to maintain it.
If you say anything to me, it's the apple that's doing it wrong.
After taking a look at Apple's official website, I did find a description of "App Store improvement" *.
Let me briefly summarize the key points:
1. In order to ensure that the apps provided by apple are the latest and normal functions
2. Those that do not meet the requirements shall be rectified within 30 days
3. What has not been rectified is just off the shelf, and the information is retained in the developer's account
4. Users who have downloaded the app can still use it normally
It seems that in addition to the urgent time requirements for rectification, other aspects are not unreasonable.
So why are those developers so dissatisfied with apple? Let's talk together ~
To be honest, I feel that the biggest controversy in this statement is about Apple's so-called "continuous process of evaluating app"**
As we all know, Apple's management on the app store has always been strong. According to them, the app should first work in the expected way of the software, and at the same time meet the user's own needs
Normally, the software can be used normally without bugs, and we think it is useful even if it meets the two standards they say.
It seems to have nothing to do with the "renewal cycle".
In Apple's app store, there are a lot of independent stand-alone games and tool applications that seem to be ignored, small and easy to use.
For example, the "Fieldrunners" game with a score of 4.8 in the app store, the history of the previous version also reads: added a pair of iPhone X's full support**
But the latest five-star review is less than half a year away from now
And the more outrageous "XCOM" ®: Enemy within ": as a mobile game in 2012, its last update mainly solved the bug of program crash on iPhone 8.
People are still playing.
Although these games look outrageous, it's good that they haven't been taken off the shelf for the time being. In contrast, some wronged tool software is really wronged.
An overseas developer mentioned that an app designed for the visually impaired was taken off the shelves by apple because it had not been updated for more than two years.
Big brother, people are a mature tool app. What do you want developers to update? Add fancy voice packs for the visually impaired**
When I used to work, I also dealt with technicians.
One of the most common words they tell me is not to imagine functions that will not be used at all, and not to extend the user's operation path.
In their view, if all the functions that should be done are in place, inexplicable updates are icing on the cake. In fact, there are far less innovative functions of that are really useful and innovative than expected**
An easy-to-use software application doesn't need too many modifications from developers
That is, there are bugs that lead to unstable apps, or too many things you want to do, so you can't do anything well, and then all kinds of tossing and jumping repeatedly.
From this point of view, there are many niche and easy-to-use software with single function, which may be accidentally injured by apple. This is really unfair to developers.
In other words, Apple's new policy doesn't say he did wrong.
Because judging from common sense, apps that haven't been updated for a long time must be the ones with inferior quality greater than the ones with high quality**
Users choose applications, then generate revenue through applications, then maintain and update, and then feed back and expand the number of users. This is a very simple circular chain.
After the waves of the market, there is a problem in one of the links. In fact, it can be concluded that the developer's app product itself has defects.
Or there are better products to replace, or even not practical at all
Of course, there is another possibility, that is, the studio or company is closing down, and there is no way to study how to make the app better.
It's really not interesting to keep this kind of app.
Therefore, I think what Apple should do next is to formulate more reasonable evaluation criteria, rather than studying according to the version history or update interval.
Do not engage in "one size fits all" that apps before 20XX should be eliminated without updating. Do you know how many people will be hurt by this?!
I also read some discussions of relevant people on the Internet. Some developers think apple is "too harsh".
Originally, if an application wants to be put on the app store, it needs to join "Apple Developer Program" , that is, become a member of the developer program.
This is an extra charge for . It costs 688 yuan a year in domestic currency** After paying this money, your software can be downloaded and used by users in the app store. If you don't renew it after one year, it will be taken off the shelf
Originally, developers complained about "getting off the shelf without giving money". Even some independent developers or free software turned to other platforms.
But after paying the money, it's not easy to make an app. You still have to face the risk of being taken off the shelf. I think we can understand the grievances under the double buff.
"Not only have to pay, but also force me to pay unnecessary costs.".
But when you think about it carefully, it's the same as when we upload videos. Whether things are good or not and whether they can meet the requirements are actually two different things.
Let me say that developers do not have opinions on Apple's update policy, but may take this to express their dissatisfaction with fee based development**
Of course, some programmers are more "flexible", and it is said that someone has been thinking about how to avoid Apple's policy.
For example, take the initiative to get off the shelf and then get on the shelf again? Or make a "fine adjustment" to the app and adapt it according to the version update of IOS? Change the color? Add a small button?
According to the official website, the basic code information of the software is still retained in the developer's account. If only doing "adaptation" is also an update, it will not necessarily bring great work pressure and cost to developers.
Especially those developers who have done more than one software application can also get some adaptation experience according to the app currently being updated. It's not that all your software hasn't been updated for a long time
What I fear most is that this adaptation cannot be recognized by Apple as you are "updating and maintaining"
On the other hand, it's not the first time for app store to perform similar operations.
A few years ago, they were already cleaning up some applications that did not meet the requirements, or asked developers to update the app.
This action is to tighten the gold hoop on the developers' heads again, and check and fill in the gaps in their original policies.
According to Apple's style of always boasting user experience, this idea makes sense in order to enable users to enjoy the "latest, best and most cutting-edge" application software.
After all, no matter how powerful the program and design at this moment, it will one day not keep up with the times**
I guess Apple thinks so:
If you are not willing to devote yourself to the innovation and promotion of app, then I have to supervise and urge all of you here.
And now the application platform that "squeezes" developers like apple is not without, but it is really very strict in terms of urgency.
For developers, they either choose to accept it or change a platform... But in contrast, the cost of adapting to another ecosystem seems to be more.
As the only software window in Apple's ecosystem, the app store is still strong.