Marco Arment, on the state of Apple software :

I fear that Apple’s leadership doesn’t realize quite how badly and deeply their software flaws have damaged their reputation, because if they realized it, they’d make serious changes that don’t appear to be happening. Instead, the opposite appears to be happening: the pace of rapid updates on multiple product lines seems to be expanding and accelerating.

New features in a highly competitive industry like computer or smartphone marketing, are fundamental to keep your company relevant from your competitors. If Apple was selling the iPhone 6 with iOS 6 installed, I doubt that it would led to “the biggest iPhone launch ever”.

But the biggest priority that you should have when you’re making something, is that it should work as expected. What’s the point of having a Swiss-Army knife if the blade is so bad that you couldn’t cut anything?

Edit : Fixed the awful mistakes. Sorry about them.

Following yesterday piece, Cromulent Labs published a blog article explaining why the had to remove their app from the App Store recently.

Here’s some bits that I’ve selected:

During one of my conversations with someone at App Review last month, I asked if they could tell me if some of these new apps being accepted slipped through or if their use of widgets was deemed acceptable. I heard what had come to be a popular refrain from them. They couldn’t discuss other apps with me, they would look into those apps, and if I submitted a new app with that specific functionality they would be happy to review it and let me know if it was acceptable or not by either rejecting or accepting my new app. They steadfastly refused to tell me if a certain use of a widget was acceptable or not ahead of time.

Apple : “- Yeah, you have to spend dozens of hours to implement this idea to see if it doesn’t violate our -so ambiguous policies that even us understand them after the fourth revision of your implementation-”.

The Apple representative responded by saying that they prefer that the rules remain vague because that allows developers to come up with innovative ideas […]

Yeah, because uncertainty and vague policies is the best way to make your business work!

[…] and also allows Apple to be flexible in case they change their minds later.

This is the real reason why Apple is ambiguous.

When pressed on the issue of their policies leading to wasted developer time, I was told, “If you are afraid something you are working on will be rejected, then don’t work on it.”

So basically, they are telling you to not try to make your app better. Best way to “come up with innovative ideas”!

But this is the best piece :

During this same conversion, I also asked specifically why Launcher was removed from the App Store after 9 days when other similar apps are still available weeks later. The answer to this question was the most interesting and informative response I had ever heard from them. They basically said that Launcher was a trailblazer in uncharted territories and that they felt that they needed to make an example of it in order to get the word out to developers that its functionality is not acceptable without them having to publish new specific guidelines. And they said that the fact that they aren’t seeing hundreds of similar apps submitted every day is proof to them that taking down Launcher was successful in this regard. This was a pretty big revelation to me. After Launcher was rejected and the press picked up on it and started writing articles which painted Apple in a bad light, I was afraid that Apple might be mad at me. But it turns out that was actually the outcome they were looking for all along. They acted swiftly and made me the sacrificial lamb. And after that, removing other apps with similar functionality became a low priority for them.

No comment.

To finish, Joe Cieplinski summarize well the situation (check his article, it’s very short). I think it’s time for someone to vest his (or her) stock options. It’s not like Tim Cook hasn’t done this before.

Thanks Marco Arment.

Panic’s update notes for Transmit :

Also, at Apple’s request, we had to remove the ability to “Send” files to other services, including iCloud Drive. In short, we’re told that while Transmit iOS can download content from iCloud Drive, we cannot upload content to iCloud Drive unless the content was created in the app itself. Apple says this use would violate 2.23 — “Apps must follow the iOS Data Storage Guidelines or they will be rejected” — but oddly that page says nothing about iCloud Drive or appropriate uses for iCloud Drive.

Since the release of iOS 8 and the Notification Center controversy, App Store’s App reviews keeps surprising people with non-sense decisions, like asking PCalc developer to delete it’s implementation of his Calculator in the Notification Center (which is clever), or for inserting buttons in your widget like in Drafts or Evernote.

But the worst thing, taken apart the absurdity of the rejections (see John Gruber’s thoughts on this case), are the a posteriori intervention of the reviewers : all the apps and the controversial implementations were endorsed by the review team, who got sometimes a full week between the submission and the release, and were updated many times before being rejected. This is a irresponsible behavior, and something that could be very costly for the developers who put time and effort in those features. And in this case, this is one of the critical feature of the app, who was sold as being able to transfer files to iCloud Drive or Dropbox/Box and now can’t.

By being this schizophrenic, Apple put in danger business (see the opinion of famous developers like Marco Arment) on which it relies heavily on to sell its products (an iPhone without the App Store is a very expensive piece of junk), and its relationship with its customers.

Maybe it’s time that Apple grab its shit together and do the right call : being friendly with third party developers (WWDC 14 was a good start) and being consistent.

Kyle Orland, for Ars Technica:

After a very brief announcement and teaser at E3 this year, Nintendo used the inaugural Game Awards webstream and live presentation in Las Vegas tonight to show off a more substantial trailer highlighting new gameplay features in the next Legend of Zelda game, planned to hit the Wii U some time in 2015. In the trailer, Zelda creator Shigeru Miyamoto and project producer Eiji Aounuma discuss the game’s “massive world” designed with “a number of high places with great views” to view far-off goals (“It would take a very long time for Link to walk” across the map, Aounuma says). Distant landmarks can be highlighted through a first-person view, controlled by tilting the GamePad, then show up as markers on an interactive, zoomable map on the touchscreen.

Nintendo finally understood that their biggest strength wasn’t their Hardware (at least, for this generation of consoles), but their portfolio of games. I never considered buying a Wii U (and I have the original Wii) until today.

Now, the question is : Will I get a Wii U before the PS4? The release date of No Man’s Sky might be the answer.