One or two kunt reviewers

chemistry · August 2012

Do you guys reckon a few reviewers are just pure kunts?

iekei · August 2012

I reckon that the reviewers think that of the majority of app developers. There was an article published last month that claimed that the reviewers are swamped with reviewing so many garbage apps every day, many of them with depictions of male genitalia in them, that you'd expect there to be a few mistakes made.

Trybius · August 2012

Actually, I think the perverse thing is, we actually like the reviewers who are bad at their jobs.

In almost all the cases where a reviewer has come back and rejected an app (both in the cases that have happened to me, and those that other's have reported) have been fair. The only difference is they did their job more thoroughly than the reviewer before them, who just let it slide.

And I can only manage the despair of having to look at so many terrible apps on a day in day out basis and not eventually cracking as iekei says.

chemistry · August 2012

From what i see now, I think alot of reviewers are just afraid. Afraid that they approved some non-compliant app and this results in reviewers starting to reject apps for the sake of it.

But I totally understand their situation cos in many cases, doing nothing is better than breaking something.

krashed · August 2012

Can I share my experience here? I'm doing it anyway...

Recently had 3 apps submitted, they are the same app, but of different localization (I was requested to made them into separate apps). The app basically reads from the users' device photo library and albums and turns the photos into a puzzle. The english got approved after 2 weeks, the japanese version got approved after 1+ weeks and the chinese version.... took 3 weeks before going into review, AND GOT REJECTED.

The two reasons given were
1. The app requested for Location Services permission despite not needing it
2. Contains excessively vulgar/explicit contents

For anyone who had worked with similar apps, Location Service permission is required if the app were to automatically access the device's photo albums due to the geo data that's embedded in each photos. The biggest joke was the 2nd reason, they even attached an image for me as evidence, It showed a completed puzzle, featuring image of a sexily dressed lady. Did they not realize that that image came from their device and not my app?

Obviously I appealed and it got approved within hours.

chemistry · August 2012

krashed said:
The biggest joke was the 2nd reason, they even attached an image for me as evidence, It showed a completed puzzle, featuring image of a sexily dressed lady. Did they not realize that that image came from their device and not my app?

Obviously I appealed and it got approved within hours.

You serious?!

Btw, I do realize that apps that have a default language that isn't English takes a lot longer waiting for review and in review.

HemiMG · August 2012

krashed said:
The biggest joke was the 2nd reason, they even attached an image for me as evidence, It showed a completed puzzle, featuring image of a sexily dressed lady. Did they not realize that that image came from their device and not my app?

Now we know why apps take so long to review, they are busy looking at scantily clad women! tsk tsk. Haha. But seriously, I doubt reviewers use their own personal device. The sexy pic might have came from one of the many "sexy women photos" apps that people submit. If reviewers don't use the same device everyday, I suppose it's possible it came from one of those and they legitimately didn't know about it being on there. That's really still no excuse for them not knowing that whatever photos came up on your app were supposed to be from their device and checking for it before the rejection.

rocotilos · August 2012

krashed said:
The biggest joke was the 2nd reason, they even attached an image for me as evidence, It showed a completed puzzle, featuring image of a sexily dressed lady. Did they not realize that that image came from their device and not my app?

Obviously I appealed and it got approved within hours.

LOL!!! Reviewers are clueless. Thanks for sharing, it made my day

skrew88 · August 2012

krashed said:
The biggest joke was the 2nd reason, they even attached an image for me as evidence, It showed a completed puzzle, featuring image of a sexily dressed lady. Did they not realize that that image came from their device and not my app?

Obviously I appealed and it got approved within hours.

Lol ! Like it! :)

Just another fresh history (1 hour ago). I have 2 applications who have same functionality (1 for iPhone, 1 for iPad)

Exactly same name, except iPad version have "HD" in the name.
And same synchronisation between iPhone / iPad app.

1) iPhone version validated (even without any launch, i have a tail -f on the server log, nothing !)
2) iPad version, 5 minutes after, got rejected for
- "incorrect name between name displayed on springboard and name in iTunes" (and telling me to not put keywords in title !)
- "The reviewer want a demo account for the synchronisation thing"

Note i use long name for 1 year and the sync stuff are in for 1.5 years... First time i got rejected for this reason...

Excuse for my poor english :)

Howdy, Stranger!

Forums

One or two kunt reviewers

Replies