[athirnuaimi]

As someone who has built and published apps on both major platforms, this issue of not being able to speak to someone is a problem on the Apple platform as well (as on Googles). As mentioned in the article, it’s heart wrenching to receive an email saying there is a problem with your app and know that the app or the release you worked so hard on might not get published. Having a release rejected can also be as bad as a termination if that release has a major new feature. The platforms price their developer accounts very low to attract developers but those of us who make a living of it would gladly pay a bigger price to get a higher quality of support. There are many developers who make their living off apps and struggle with the black hole that is app approval and the associated dispute process

[yholio]

The final decision to terminate is usually taken by a human, not an algorithm. However, that human is not allowed to speak to you because anything they say is a potential liability in court or in PR terms.

Companies exist to produce profits for their owners. Without public regulation, you should not expect fair and faithful service. If you no longer represent a revenue opportunity - since they clearly decided just that - then you no longer exist.

The solution is often to try to align the incentives of the company with your own, with public shaming campaigns like this one.

[PavlovsCat]

I'd say companies exist to provide value to society, and profits are an incentive provided by said societies, which allows them to operate in the first place.

> The solution is often to try to align the incentives of the company with your own, with public shaming campaigns like this one.

Which is probably why it got flagged off the front page by people who won't say why they did that. They forget that the internet's ability to "route around problems" is really just a shadow of the ability of people and life in general to do that, and that trying to suppress local solutions just widens the area to be routed around.

[tokyodude]

I'd believe I'd rather just have a secure platform that's open to any apps, no gatekeepers. Kind of like the web. Almost anyone can make an website and no gatekeeper gets in the way. We mostly trust the browsers are secure (or at least I trust Chrome to be secure, maybe Firefox too soon).

I feel like iOS in particular could already do this. They could just let users install apps from anywhere and then do their best to keep their platform secure.

I'm sure others disagree though but I feel like if you want a gatekeeper you should opt in. You're free to only install apps certified by "somecompanywhoauditsapps.com" or "apple.com" but if you want to you're also free to just install them from anywhere.

I suppose you'd still end up with the same problem that if you choose to go through "apple.com" they might not approve your app but hopefully with alternatives there would be more incentive to provide better support. I can certainly imagine Epic Games would jump at chance to offer their own iOS store. Valve might as well.

[yulaow]

I believe it is _STRONGLY_ against apple/google interests to allow apps to be installed from anywhere especially considering they have an economic interest on their own marketplaces... actually I think they are soon gonna even discourage the use of webapps in subtle (eg on purpose performance hits on browser experiences) or not subtle ways.

[bitwize]

Get used to gatekeepers and censors. If you say or do the wrong thing too loudly, MasterCard will step in and yank your ability to accept payment out from under you.

[southerndrift]

On Android, you already have this since you can install apps directly. There is no dedicated open store, but nobody is preventing developers from publishing their Android apps on their homepage.

[Semaphor]

> There is no dedicated open store

For FOSS at least, there is F-Droid.

[acct1771]

Which even allows addition of custom repositories, if, say, Epic Games wanted to make use of such.

[teilo]

>I feel like iOS in particular could already do this.

And give publishers like Amazon, Netflix, Spotify, and similar the ability to offer in-app purchases that bypass Apple’s 30% cut? Never gonna happen.

[glow8]

> (or at least I trust Chrome to be secure, maybe Firefox too soon)

What's wrong with Firefox? Are you talking about yourself or some security update coming soon?

[soonoutoftime]

I've worked on apps on both platforms, and with others who have.

IIRC you can actually organise a call with somebody at Apple to discuss issues, but not with Google. Can anyone else confirm this? The app dev who shared this info with me was making millions for both Google and Apple.

The same app dev had their app taken down from Google Play but then reinstated within 24 hrs after some furious emailing. I know of another dev who received no response to their desperate emails, who was told to never try to create another account, just like OP. This dev hadn't made Google any money.

[ForHackernews]

Wait, am I understanding correctly that Apple and Google actually charge developers money to produce the content that Apple and Google monetize on their app stores?

[athirnuaimi]

They charge to have access to the dev tools and the right to publish apps. There are real costs to doing this right and I believe most developers are happy to pay.

[chillydawg]

Other than the 30% fee they charge and ad revenue generated via the apps? Please. That fee is 100% an anti spam mechanism.

[simonh]

IIRC it’s about $100 or so per year. Basically hobby money just to make sure anyone submitting apps for review means it.

[glow8]

The Play Store only charges you $25 when you register, $100 a year is for Apple

[lern_too_spel]

That $100 per year is required just to keep apps installed on your own iDevices, let alone submitting them for review.

[simonh]

That hasn’t been true since XCode 7. You can side load apps onto your own devices from XCode with a free developer account, you only have to pay the fee to submit apps to the App Store.

[lern_too_spel]

You cannot "keep apps installed on your own iDevices" because without paying that fee, you have to re-sign and reinstall your apps every week.