With all their patent trolling and absurd tyrannical control over the app store, I have no idea why so many tech-saavy people still love Apple.
So how's the Android version doing? Please tell me there is one. Because complaining about the walled garden and then ignoring the larger and more open platform, that's rather silly.
It's a common enough rejection; I've gotten it before and know other people who have too. You can respond to them and clarify why this set of functionality is right, that it's a new app and will have features added in the future, etc. Worked for me, anyway.
When my son was 2, I found a free iPad app called "My Colours". It was a grid of 12 colors. When a color block was touched, a synthesized female voice read out the name of the color.
For my son, at least, it worked very well, much better than fancier (and often garish) apps, and he was even able to identify "turquoise" because of the app. When I had to reinstall my iPad, I found it was missing from the App Store. Fortunately, I found a backup copy.
I strongly suspect that the colors app was pulled for having been "too simple". If that was the case, it would seem that Apple seems to prefer bells and whistles to functionality.
Looks like you need to add a duck. Just keep adding features till they accept it. Example: simple form that lets you take a picture of yourself, type a note about your mood, and share it on Twitter or Facebook, as well as link to the graph.
This seems like one of those moments when Tim Bray's 2002 sharecropper post applies:
"What it comes down to is this: if you want to develop software, you can build for the Web and/or Unix and/or OSS platforms; or alternatively, you can be a sharecropper."
https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePl...
I'm going to go in the opposite direction of everybody here and tell you your app sucks (based on what you say about it) and Apple was right. Look at it this way - A developer creates an app that ask a daily question (maybe with a reminder) and then plots the answers on a graph. That developer then release 1,000 versions of that app to the app store by simply changing the question. That app should have been a general purpose app that lets you define your own questions/frequency/etc. All you've got right now is a question, that when asked daily creates some interesting data. You need to built an app around that. You have some actual features outlined in your roadmap, why not implement at least some of those and resubmit? Oh, and I went looking for feature listings, videos, philosophy, etc, or anything about your app on your website and I got nothing. The entire website about your app is a landing page and one page that is complaining about your rejection. If your app is currently so simple that it didn't even need a single webpage maybe Apple was right....
Unrelated to the article itself, but a friendly tip for the Hueman guys: the lack of margins on this page made it very hard to read. Not everyone browses full-screen on their 27" iMac. On any window under 1100px, the content runs into the margin on the left, which could easily be avoided with some padding: http://cl.ly/image/2V0A021M1t0S
I honestly don't what is the big deal. It sounds like this is not a full blown rejection, it is more like a "Oh, nice idea! We could use that. Why don't you revise it a bit and resubmit": > We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate additional content and features to provide a more robust user experience.
And it also sounds like you were already aware of what is missing: > The next couple planned releases on our roadmap will heavily rely on native iOS functions and code to include things like tagging, additional graph views and scrubbing, ability to add media.
It think it will be a great app. I hope you get over the "rejection" notice and keep working on it. All the best for your resubmission.
Why appeal to us? Appeal to Apple, through this channel: https://developer.apple.com/appstore/contact/?topic=appeal
"If it's just using webviews, why does this need to be an app?"
exactly...
there is no actual reason this couldn't be a cross platform 'web app'. it would be better that way. why do you want the app on the appstore exactly?
the list of reasons given are of debateable merit the last one is probably the best, and suggests a fix. develop the app a bit further so you can justify it not being a web page...
also, why are you storing data on the user's phone? will you be using icloud or some web service to preserve it across devices? is it just cache?
I would suggest to add a function so you can add a personal note to each day, and sell it as a mood tracker / diary. First, it would be useful to keep track of why you were feeling bad or good on a given day by maybe a making a small not on what happen. Plus, then apple would not be able to reject it, as it would be a diary app with a graph. There are a ton of diary apps on iOS, and this one would even have a graph. Let them argue that's not novel and feature reach :)
So far few people have addressed Apple's argument. Does this app provide valuable utility? Does it enable people to do something they couldn't do before or in a way they couldn't do it before?
There are already many mood trackers, just search the app store. This is certainly not anything new. The one thing that makes this one different from the others is that it seems to have no extra features. But that can't be their design vision, because they plan to add a social aspect and more views and editing functions. So what's special about this app in the way it stands right now?
You even state that
> The next couple planned releases on our roadmap will heavily rely on native iOS functions and code to include things like tagging, additional graph views and scrubbing, ability to add media. etc... And by eventually letting people combine their data, you will be able to see how their relative happiness aligns to other users, a neighborhood and even the world.
It sounds like you think it needs more features too. I understand wanting to release as soon as possible but this might be a good chance to add the other features YOU want.
Given the app consists of two web views and a bit of background code I'm not surprised. Perhaps if they'd utilised the GUI elements Apple provides to give a native experience it would actually warrant being an app.
tbh this seems like it would be better implemented as a HTML5 mobile site that utilises the new local storage APIs. You can still promote web apps through App Store, and it seems like a more obvious route to me.
Should have gone with Android.
I really want this app, and now they are having to spend time getting it accepted by apple, it's just going to delay an Android version.
The whole concept needs work. You compare each day to the previous one, but the app doesn't know by how much. Which leads to ludicrous results when applied to real life situations. For example you got fired, or your girlfriend left you, or your friend/relative died. What a terrible day! But then over the course of several days you slowly get over it, so your mood rises up until you reach the original level. But what does the graph show? That you're feeling much better after the traumatic event! What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, eh? The model is just plain wrong.
In all fairness, I'm confused about what the app does. What do the colors represent? What is the y axis? etc.. Could insert a legend and some labels to make it more clear. But I could be wrong and the screenshots don't accurately depict the app. Also the Hueman ID is a bit clinical/sterile and I would say doesn't represent a good user experience, because it doesn't provide me with anything useful only a question mark. But again, this is from just seeing the screenshots. Look forward to downloading the app! Neat idea!
A walled garden can be used to guard against bugs, viruses, spam. But when its used to curate according to somebody's idea of taste or usefulness, that's arrogance. Let the market decide.
Absolute power corrupts.
I wonder - when an app rejection with a good idea happens based on it being "too simple" (and many great ideas are simple to implement), what if competition picks up the idea, adds more bloat, gets approved and steals the original's thunder, shouldn't Apple be held responsible and pay for damages?
There's probably no chance of that happening, because it's their app store, they can do whatever they want and so on. But this kind of deal is exactly why some companies feel like protecting their "intellectual property" with patents. Because the distribution networks are not open, except for the web and even if your execution is perfect, there's no guarantee you'll be the first to market, because shit like this happens. And then we've got people praising app stores, because their grandma can now feel safe, though to me optimizing for grandmas doesn't make much sense.
I view the app store model as a regression. It is useful, but only when it's optional. Android is still allowing installs from third-party sources, even though you have to click a checkbox to enable the capability, but due to current trends and seeing Android's evolution, I don't have many hopes for this feature surviving in the long run. In the end, the web is still the most open distribution platform and these big companies are trying to fix that.
Yeah, well, reject Apple yourself and put it into the Play Store.
I use a Macbook Air and multiple idevices. I don't develop mobile (yet). I'm sorry, but I find all these 'daddy Apple rejected my app' posts a bit tiring.
It doesn't sound like you've tried appealing the ruling. This sounds like the sort of thing that would get through on appeal once you've explained why it can't have more features.
"we consider simplicity to be uncomplicated - not limited in features and functionality"
I cannot believe this is an official position for a company like Apple (or any company for that matter).
My advice would be to move away from native and towards the web, as opposed to baking in useless features or planning new features that rely on native capabilities.
I worked for a mobile apps platform that cobbled together webkitviews and formed it into a mobile app. Quite often it was rejected because it's really just various RSS feeds.
Apple didn't reject you because they thought it was simple. They rejected you because you built it too simply.
At least toss in some Origami flips and folds.
It's really your typical regulatory committee keeping up appearance and hitting their quota:
Regardless of quality or compliance with the rules, Apple's App Store review staff needs to reject a given number of admission a week. Otherwise, they're out of a job.
Think about end-of-the-day traffic tickets or city's planning and zoning... Here's a classic explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apdi885ZdBA Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Food_and_Drug...
Fuck Apple. I mean really.
I've been there, had an app I used daily in my job. I valued it for how fast it got me the information I needed (aviation weather) without features that I didn't need getting in the way. A few friends thought it looked useful so I put it on the store and got the same rejection. I added a couple of features that nobody uses (saving weather for later viewing) and got it through. I always suspected it was that I wanted to charge Tier 3 for it and they didn't think that was justified.
That's a shame. Mood trackers are a useful tool to help tackle some mental health problems. Tacking on a bunch of stuff to get it into the app store feels sub-optimal. My current mood tracker has some features that I really don't like. https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/moodometer/id404137652?mt=8
When did "do one thing and do it well" become something to avoid?
Assuming you haven't already, just respond to them with a well-reasoned argument why they should let it through as-is. It occasionally works.
I've done it before when they tried to reject my company's app because we were using a webview in one section and they felt it should be native. We were doing a bunch of other stuff behind the scenes though and I told them it would be cost-prohibitive to redo that whole section right then. They let it through.
Not everything can be as deep as Flappy Bird.
By Apple's logic the app Everyday should not have been accepted: http://everyday-app.com/
I realise many are in the mood to dump all over apple but... really, if apple or anyone treats their app store as a store-front, it's not hard to understand how the store manager might find this application to be just adding noise.
if you think all apps should be allowed no matter what, then you are right to be bothered by their rejection of this app. if you think any store manager has some reason to filter apps, then you cant really complain.
I wonder if it was partially rejected due to the use of 'webviews'.
Your mistake was making an iOS app. Experiments must be done on a platform that allows users to install apps themselves, like Android.
This is why Apple is inferior to Android. You spend resources to develop something, and it's a crapshoot whether or not it gets accepted or stays accepted.
I can understand ordinary customers being wow'ed by Apple marketing, but why don't developers jump ship en masse at the way Apple treats them? It's not like there isn't an alternative.
Add a flashlight or fart button to it. "Needs more flashlight" should be the "needs more cowbell" of our age.
I like the idea of this. Not only is the historic data interesting, I suspect just taking time to reflect on your days would likely improve happiness in an of itself (e.g. if you know anyone who is doing one of those 100 happy days challenge).
However, the arguments against the web are a bit flimsy IMO. Data on the web is ephemeral only if you put it in an ephemeral store. Put it in localStorage! It's highly unlikely you'd exceed some quota (usually 10mb) with the kind of data you're storing, plus user's are offered chance to expand quota usually.
Or if you want something that goes above and beyond that (or what you have with a "native app") you could integrate with Dropbox's datastore API [0] and have data available on any machines I choose to use.
So they had a submission screen and a probably blank graph. It's pretty easy to go back and add a tutorial with colorful graphics and an example graph, a few help pages describing the idea and concept, etc.. Honestly they should have just added some more filler pages rather than writing this blog entry, both are about as tough.
Just wondering if you appealed and what was the response ?
Considering how much crapware is on the Appstore, it's hard to believe Apple even reviews stuff anymore. You see rejections like this, and you wonder why those same rules weren't applied to basically everything that comes up in a search.
This seems to be a great idea. I really like everything about it, I would love to use it (even though I don't own smartphone). Too bad Apple did reject it. One sentence that made me quite happy in this article is:
"Hueman is free and anonymous, and to create that seamless experience, it needs to store data on your phone. If it was a web page on mobile safari, that data is more ephemeral."
If the Hueman developers read this: have you considered something like unhosted [0] for your application? It should be easy enough to implement.
A similar app was recently in the top chart in "productivity" section.
It's called feeltracker, and it has historical graphs: https://www.feeltracker.com
At least they could plot their feelings of rejection on the app Apple rejected.
The times when I'm unhappy, I often have no idea of the cause.
Why not add some optional questions that would drive more useful reporting if answered:
# Are you in a relationship? For how long?
# Do you have a job? Rate your performance 1-10
# Are you exercising? How often?
# Are you happy with your weight? What is your weight?
# Rate the healthiness of your diet.
# How well are you sleeping? How many hours?
There are so many more useful data points you could collect. If they're optional, and maybe hidden unless you enable them, it won't do much to over-complicate the app.
It would then be super useful for those who suffer from depression or other psychiatric illnesses, and problem solved re app store.
Does it cost anything to submit an app (apart from the initial dev account)? Otherwise you could just submit it again, and hope that it gets a different reviewer. Reviews seem to be a bit arbitrary sometimes.
Apple is curating a ten billion dollar marketplace [1].
Apple will error on the side of maintaining the overall quality of the entire Application selection, even if it means many very worthwhile applications are rejected.
I sympathize with huemanapp's developers, but they must realize they are competing for "virtual shelf space." I say to them; keep plugging away and good luck.
[1] https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/01/07App-Store-Sales-T...
The ironic thing is that Apple is asking you to do something very Un-Apple. I imagine if you loaded the app up with "Share this with your friends!" kind of junk, they'd accept it.
So... could this by any chance mean an Android port? Pretty please? :)
A bit off-topic but is there a name for the tone of the copy on this? It reads like the current tranche of MS/Apple advertising speak. Would cult-like be going too far?
"Apple sucks" and "use Android" aren't really productive responses to an article like this. Consider taking your quips to a site like Reddit.
An app like Flappy Birds will pass, but this won't? sigh
Reason makes me feel like they don't want you competing with an area they're going to go into.
I appreciate people sharing their stories about Apple's rejection motivations. This helps other developers to avoid doing the same "mistakes". But, isn't it against the TOS we agree on when joining the Apple Dev Program, to talk about rejection reasons and even cite the feedback mails? I was under this impression, can't say that I would be sad if I'm wrong.
Maybe not related, but is it possible that Apple does not want this app to exist because parts of it could be considered prior art for it's patent application?: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/126980-apple-seeks-to-scan-y...
That's odd, I reject Apple for the same reason.
I joke of course, but Apple builds monopolies they have tight control over, sue for anything and basically tell everyone who doesn't like it to screw off (and they can because they have the monopoly). As much as I like their design and hardware, as far as corporate entities go, they're kind of a jerk.
The article was interesting, but it's more interesting seeing that Apple is Hacker News favourite whipping boy now.
When I was younger and struggling with issues, I did exactly this - plot my happiness on a graph. It was one of the few things that helped me get through a day, seeing that there are ebbs and flows, and for every low point there's likely a high point coming up.
This app needs to be published.
Best thing that could have happened to you, given all the attention you're getting now? :-)
I've published apps that were simpler than "Hello World" for iOS, if this is any indication:
Make it live on the web. Better yet, make it live on a device. Two buttons, button presses are valid only once a day, LED confirmation, USB read-out. Make the case beautiful, done. Standard AAA Battery will live for years, data can be written to flash.
I put down a sketch pad and collection view for memo taking app. It didn't get rejected.
> We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate additional content and features to provide a more robust user experience.
Easy - just add the ability to issue fart sounds, which has always been enough quality for Apple users.
My DogeCoin price app was too simple too.
http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/1wmmk9/my_dogecoin...
Seems like the cheapest way to get noticed in the App Store is for your app to get rejected.
I had an idea like this once: http://lifemetric.com/
I always wanted to make an app for it, but it looks like yours is pretty nice. Just add some more features and Apple will probably accept it.
Skimmed the article and the comments, thought the app seemed like a cool idea. It was when the App Store couldn't find any results for 'Hueman' that it struck me; the whole point of the article! Ha. Damn it.
This pleadings with Apple make me wanna throw up. I can't make myself even read how great you are and it is not fair. The only thing not fair is you submitting it to Apple.
50 hues of gray is what this is.
Just release it on android
There's actually a UK citizen science project running along very similar lines: http://www.mappiness.org.uk/
It also reminds me of that episode of King of the Hill where Hank and his family join another church and they keep getting calls asking how satisfied they are on a scale of 1-10 XD
How is a once a day mood tracker app not useful? Look at the apps currently in the App Store... how is this any less useful than a flashlight or any other single function application?
Fuck Apple.
Been there, had that response. I got the same rejection last year and basically stopped fine tuning my app as I refused to add stuff that it didn't need.
I am absolutely fascinated with this tool. I only with I had the ability to write something like it myself. I'm really satisfied others have the same thoughts.
Thank you!
Anyways it is not wise to pour frustration on rejection publicly. Especially in this case, as there seems to have been no conversation or further appeal.
You should get it working on Android -- but only so I can use it. In all seriousness, it looks like a great app, I'd keep appealing it.
Don't know whether I should spoil the secret or keep it to myself, but why don't you submit again? and again. until it gets in.
This just in - grass has rejected itself for being too green. This is the core feature of Apple products - their simplicity.
Just put it on Android. It looks great though!
Send it to the bloggers that be as "The app Apple doesn't want you to see" and use it to your advantage.
Forget Apple, make an Android app.
Add something that uses the new M7 motion tracking chip and they'll approve it. :)
Waiting for the Android version.
this app is perfect the way it is. i'm disappointed that the pioneers of design in software are requiring you to make things less simple for some arbitrary reason.
"make things as simple as possible, but no simpler" --Einstein
This is great. I hope it eventually makes the app store. I would 100% use this.
I really like the idea behind the app but we also need to follow quality criteria set by Apple team to stop non productive app being listed in appstore.
As suggested by Crazygringo, they can improve the app by including some functionality. I am eagerly waiting for this app to get approved !
Is there some technical limitation to making this a web app?
Apple keeps chipping away at that good will.
you can port it over to android then
Tap to flap.
iWatch territory.
I fought the same fucking battle. Just keep appealing and cross your fingers you find a reviewer who isn't a dipshit.
Its called android
I'm not surprised since this is pretty similar to what all communication hubs are trying to do (for obvious marketing reasons). You are serious competition and they have the power to sweep you under a rug.
My heavens. This is in danger of turning all the rhetoric around depression on its ear! Everyone knows happiness or the lack of it is determined by brain chemistry, not life events. A well-adjusted person feels the same whether you run them over with a car or give them a hand job.
Apple keeps chipping away at that good will.
...and yet, somehow, Flappy Bird, with all its absurd simplicity, passed review.
Let me be the first to reject this website for being "too shitty".
First of all, that sounds like a really cool idea for an app. I want it.
But secondly, of all the app rejection stories I've ever heard... this one is the easiest to fix. Just add some more features, who cares, and resubmit it.
Ideas: annotate/categorize the things that are making you happy/unhappy. Maybe have categories/icons for them. (Friends, party, loneliness, exercise, ate well, ate bad, had sex, no sex, fought, made up, my team won, etc. -- there really aren't that many fundamental things.) Then also produce charts showing how your happiness correlates with those items.
Heck, you might even be able to produce an amazing academic paper or two with the dataset you produce. Or at least some really cool and fascinating blog entries from the data.
(Personally, I'd rather rate my happiness on a 1-10 scale rather than compare with yesterday, and also maybe be asked 3-4 times a day. Maybe features let you pick those.)