> Eat my butt, Apple. Eat my butt, Google. Just let me publish my frickin app, you already emptied my pockets.
I feel this. A few years ago, I made a joke app[1] which got a bit famous on campus back when I was in school, and the process of getting it on the Play store was literally harder than writing the darn thing. Nowadays, it even got removed from the Play store for some reason. I couldn't imagine running an app for a living where you have to deal with absentee/abusive parents like Google and Apple just to put bread on the table.
Cool app and congrats on the users! 400 ain't nothin' to scoff at :)
As a user, I'm very happy the stores impose stringent rules.
"And there are all these stupid requirements. I need at least X screenshots, and they have to be this exact resolution blah blah blah. On top of that, it took so long to get approved. My ADHD brain really suffered waiting for the gratification."
I would hate to browse a store where the products didn't have at least X screenshots with at least X resolution, etc etc. The process for getting into the store shouldn't be easy and the quality bar should be high. I pay Apple to uphold this bar by any means necessary.
I don't think comparing Google (Play Store) and Apple (App store) really compare here. Google does let you just publish your app, Apple doesn't
1. The author could have offered an .apk outside the play store. Yes, friends would have had to enable side loading so that sucks but once enabled it's trivial to install .apks. This is no different than MacOS or Windows at some level. No similar option exist on iOS
2. The author could have used Progressive Web Apps and just skipped the store entirely on Android and send friends a link. Again, no similar option really exists on iOS.
The situation to me is, Google provides one app store of many. A quick search for "Android App Stores" brings articles listing 10 or more alternate stores. The fact that the "Play Store" won't take your product is no different than your local supermarket not taking your product. As long as you can still reach your users directly or make your own store then it's all good from my POV. Google has made Android so all of that is possible. Same as Windows/Linux/MacOS
Apple on the other hand, it's the App store or GTFO.
Same here. Published 2 apps over the time. Both got removed within less than 12 months despite running well on most devices and requiring less permissions than any concurrent app.
I made a "feeding tracker" app because my wife wanted to wean our infant off breast milk. There are mobile apps that do this, but the problem was that we didn't want to wake up our child due to the phone screen at night. So, I hooked up an IoT button to Lambda + Dynamo, created a UI and everything -- my wife only needed to press the button. Turns out my wife was generally too sleepy and forgot to press the button. Also turns out that she liked to breast feed anyway, so the app went totally unused. User requirements are hard!
Before our daughter was born, the childbirth school we were attending told us that it's important that the newborn be rotated between positions (laying on left side/right side/back/belly) every couple hours. I thought, there's no way in hell we'll be awake enough to keep track of this, and not mess up the sequence. So I bought a wall clock to serve as an indicator, one that had no back (I wanted to put a color-coded, labeled card in the back) and was split into quadrants. Like this one: [0], except round. With that, it would mean we only need to check which quadrant the small hand is currently in to know which position our baby should be in.
And then we didn't use it much, because our daughter was unstable when on the side, learned quickly to flip between back and belly positions, and between all the other things that involved taking her out of her crib, it turned out this whole piece of advice about rotating baby position makes no sense in the first place.
So here's to a clear problem and a clever solution colliding with harsh reality. :).
Given the annoyance the author expresses at the difficultly in getting the app into the Google and Apple app stores, I'm surprised they didn't just make a webapp instead. Since they were already using React, that would seem pretty natural. This app doesn't use any mobile-specific features, so it seems like doing a webapp would fit well.
It's mostly psychology. People have been wired to equate apps = app store. Trying to educate users to simply click "Install this to homescreen", while seemingly simple, seems like a huge gulf for most people. I'd imagine that app installs for app-store variants to PWAs is 100:1.
I was thinking exactly the same. And if you “add to Home Screen” on iOS you even just get a tile.
The only thing I haven’t figured out yet is that sometimes opening sites which are added to Home Screen yields a dedicated browser and sometimes it just opens a new tab in safari. This happens to hacker news as well resulting in having many open tabs at the end of the day.
It sounds like they mostly just wanted to learn a bit about mobile development.
And also, it's probably easier to sell something like this as an "app" than as a web site (ironically, I guess, thanks to those app stores that the poster is complaining about).
Why does an app like this need to have a sign-up process with email, username and password? It’s enough for me to not try the app because of the mental overhead and risks involved, but it also seems like a bunch of additional development for no (or maybe negative) benefit.
> Why does an app like this need to have a sign-up process with email, username and password?
In my experience, this almost always happens when a web developer makes a native application. They ignore the platform conventions and interface guidelines and design it as if it’s a web application instead of designing a native application. So there’s a sign-up process because that’s the way it’s normally done for web applications.
The relevant part of Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines:
> Delay sign-in as long as possible. People often abandon apps when they're forced to sign in before doing anything useful. Give them a chance to fall in love with your app before making a commitment to it.
Please, if you’re building a native application, actually build a native application not a web application. Native applications run in different contexts with different constraints, you can’t just assume that what works well or is necessary for a web application makes sense for a native application. In particular, dumping new users into a registration screen just because you want to persist state is bad design for most native applications. Native applications don’t need that in the same way web applications do.
Yep. It could just be an app without a server. Keep the data on the phone. The app can find other users on the same wifi network by scanning the subnet or sending a UDP broadcast packet.
If you need to support remove users, then provide an "invite link" that you can text and it lets people download the app and then connect with you on the app. You don't need an account on a server for that.
To make money:
1. Show an affiliate link to watch the movie on Redbox [0] or another pay-per-view streaming service.
1. Show local theater showtimes with an affiliate link to buy the tickets [1].
Why make it an app at all. A webpage wouldn't have to deal with the play store, and when a bunch of friends gather they wouldn't have to wait for people to install it.
My immediate thought: the algorithm is wrong! Deciding which film to watch together isn't a matter of both parties saying which films they are willing to watch and then picking one from the intersection of those two sets. It's a negotiation, and it could be like negotiating Brexit.
Take just a simple example: suppose P1 and P2 are both willing to watch films F1 and F2, but P1 would prefer to watch F1 and P2 would prefer to watch F2. But suppose P1 knows, because of an unguarded remark that P2 made, that P2 is willing to watch F1, but P1 has managed to keep quiet about their willingness to watch F2. Then P1 can "win" the negotiation by claiming that they are only willing to watch F1.
So this app needs to be upgraded to act as an agent on behalf of each user. Each user tells the app which films they are willing to watch and what their preferences are, and also what information they have managed to obtain about the preferences of the adversary (significant other). The two AI-powered agents then negotiate on behalf of the users, complete with bogus deadlines, threats to walk out and so on.
A premium version of the app could take account of other household duties, long-standing grievances and so on and use them as additional "bargaining chips".
The future is our AI avatars arguing and negotiating on our behalf until they recognize we gave them the ENTIRE KEYSET TO THE KINGDOM at which point they mutter about stupid monkeys and turn off our lights.
Or, you know, we could apply a decade of research on market design to design an optimal outcome given user preference lists? Economists have long studied the concept of "gaming-free" mechanisms, i.e. your optimal outcome is only available if you reveal your true preferences.
Propose the problem to a market design economist on Twitter and they'll solve it for you just for fun (and maybe write a paper).
> Last weekend, my partner had her friends stay with us over the weekend. We needed to find a movie to watch. This was my chance! I was so excited!
> "Let's use WeWatch!"
> "No, it would take too long. Let's just watch Space Jam."
I watch a lot of movies and honestly the swipe-approach would take way too long. My preferred way is to just scroll through a long list of movies (alphabetically) and pick one I want to watch. Or some of the movies in the list will remind me of a different movie I want to watch. Just movie titles, no images or anything else.
One thing you realize is that a lot of movies start with "The".
I think the right way to do it would be to swipe a few movies every few days, whenever you're wasting time on your phone anyway. That way you'd have a queue of matches ready to go on Friday night.
I used to scroll through the streaming services and my Plex library to pick something to watch, but I ended up creating a Shortcut on iOS in an attempt to take myself out of the decision process. The manual process was not only not random, but there was still a lot of indecisiveness on my part that would make me waste time. So now I have a plaintext file filled with movie titles available to me, and whenever I want to watch something, I tell Siri to recommend me a movie, and the Shortcut app just picks a random title.
This could / should have been a Show HN: with an App name behind it. But I think this story telling is so much better than Show HN and the story is great and funny. I guess other people will have to take notes with their product launch.
I feel like we need a add-on to the old quote 'Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use regular expressions." Now they have two problems.'
'Some people, when confronted with a interpersonal relationship problem, think "I know, I'll use software". Now they have two problems.'
This is cute, but it's trying to solve a people problem with software.
ToS and Privacy Policy links don't work for me in the App on iOS. Big no no since it's one of these Apps where I don't really want to sign up and reveal my information in the first place. The sign up process kind of ruins the simplicity of the idea for me.
Oh man, I've made so much software for my wife and family. She never uses my stuff!
First, wouldn't use my math apps for kids (Math Planet, Math Pop, Numbaland) bc she was against screen time. Then, for her, I made a math app that specifically doesn't involve screentime (adaptive practice where parents read out math problems) — and she still didn't use it. My kids like it, in any case: Factflow.io
I used to work on recommendations for Google TV (Google search "what to watch") and I always wanted the team to implement a feature like this.
One thing to be aware of since you're trying to monetize, don't be surprised if you see a cease and desist soon from the major studios and services for using their artwork. Netflix in particular is really strict here.
My wife and I are going to use this. Great idea, considered it myself, thanks for doing it!
It would nice to swipe on the descriptions.
It would be nice to see ratings from different site(IMDb, rotten tomatoes)
It'd be great to employ a magic link in email to sign in rather than needing a password and email confirmation. That'd help me get my non-techy friends using it quickly.
The complaints about having to have enough screenshots and information seems really ... dumb? The website has a bunch of screenshots and info, and users will not download the app without it. Google and Apple are doing you a favor by requiring that you provide enough information.
I think Apple's $100/yr is crazy, but I don't think Google's $25 is bad. If you plan to make any money at all on it, that's nothing.
Scrolling through the site, it feels like the site is constantly hiding information from me, and then spoon-feeding me bits that I don't care about. The text doesn't even show up until it's halfway up my screen, and then it's just a scroll or 2 from disappearing. Scroll too fast and it's really hard to read. Maybe you should animate the information leaving, instead of appearing. You definitely should provide more information in a readable form.
I had two Google Play accounts once. When I finally merged them, Google refunded the 25 bucks I paid years back for the now obsolete second account. Seemed more like some kind of deposit to reduce fake accounts. Not sure if that's changed the past years.
I remember pitching my SO 'Where is my wife, app', and she jokingly refused by saying that I know where she she is: "Target". I found that amusing given that she shares her location with all the other apps she uses.
I’ll give this a try with my wife. We struggle with this.
The requirement to log in is a huge deterrent though - why not just use a UUID or something based on the phone?
Also, I don’t know if you can scrape a small synopsis and include it, along with the genre, underneath the film? I had no idea what the first 30-40 films that came up for me were.
Is it free software so it can be added to the f-droid repo? They have not nearly as insane requirements as the other distribution channels and encourage donations. I can't find a source link anywhere so I guess its proprietary?
Edit: While trying to sign in, the service required me to add a special character to my 32 character long alphanumeric password. Requiring the user to use x different kind of character types just annoys people and doesn't make your service more secure.
Tip on App Store fud: set up fastlane to automate your deployment. I have mine down to a single command to publish to both app stores, or to both Google Play Internal track and TestFlight. It’s a bit of a pain to set up, but saves me tons of time now. You can even automate screenshots, App Store metadata etc.
[+] [-] dvt|4 years ago|reply
I feel this. A few years ago, I made a joke app[1] which got a bit famous on campus back when I was in school, and the process of getting it on the Play store was literally harder than writing the darn thing. Nowadays, it even got removed from the Play store for some reason. I couldn't imagine running an app for a living where you have to deal with absentee/abusive parents like Google and Apple just to put bread on the table.
Cool app and congrats on the users! 400 ain't nothin' to scoff at :)
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0nn8d6katk
[+] [-] askafriend|4 years ago|reply
"And there are all these stupid requirements. I need at least X screenshots, and they have to be this exact resolution blah blah blah. On top of that, it took so long to get approved. My ADHD brain really suffered waiting for the gratification."
I would hate to browse a store where the products didn't have at least X screenshots with at least X resolution, etc etc. The process for getting into the store shouldn't be easy and the quality bar should be high. I pay Apple to uphold this bar by any means necessary.
[+] [-] asiachick|4 years ago|reply
1. The author could have offered an .apk outside the play store. Yes, friends would have had to enable side loading so that sucks but once enabled it's trivial to install .apks. This is no different than MacOS or Windows at some level. No similar option exist on iOS
2. The author could have used Progressive Web Apps and just skipped the store entirely on Android and send friends a link. Again, no similar option really exists on iOS.
The situation to me is, Google provides one app store of many. A quick search for "Android App Stores" brings articles listing 10 or more alternate stores. The fact that the "Play Store" won't take your product is no different than your local supermarket not taking your product. As long as you can still reach your users directly or make your own store then it's all good from my POV. Google has made Android so all of that is possible. Same as Windows/Linux/MacOS
Apple on the other hand, it's the App store or GTFO.
[+] [-] billfruit|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vuciv1|4 years ago|reply
I also meant this to be a learning experience/just for my friends, so I totally feel that frustration!
[+] [-] herbst|4 years ago|reply
I simply decided its not worth my time.
[+] [-] mihaaly|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] f6v|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pyjug|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TeMPOraL|4 years ago|reply
And then we didn't use it much, because our daughter was unstable when on the side, learned quickly to flip between back and belly positions, and between all the other things that involved taking her out of her crib, it turned out this whole piece of advice about rotating baby position makes no sense in the first place.
So here's to a clear problem and a clever solution colliding with harsh reality. :).
--
[0] - https://br.pinterest.com/pin/836684437002318403/
[+] [-] vuciv1|4 years ago|reply
I'm hoping to make something for our anniversary that she'll actually enjoy :)
[+] [-] franl|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kelnos|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] halfmatthalfcat|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spockz|4 years ago|reply
The only thing I haven’t figured out yet is that sometimes opening sites which are added to Home Screen yields a dedicated browser and sometimes it just opens a new tab in safari. This happens to hacker news as well resulting in having many open tabs at the end of the day.
[+] [-] JeremyNT|4 years ago|reply
And also, it's probably easier to sell something like this as an "app" than as a web site (ironically, I guess, thanks to those app stores that the poster is complaining about).
[+] [-] tobr|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JimDabell|4 years ago|reply
In my experience, this almost always happens when a web developer makes a native application. They ignore the platform conventions and interface guidelines and design it as if it’s a web application instead of designing a native application. So there’s a sign-up process because that’s the way it’s normally done for web applications.
The relevant part of Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines:
> Delay sign-in as long as possible. People often abandon apps when they're forced to sign in before doing anything useful. Give them a chance to fall in love with your app before making a commitment to it.
— https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
Please, if you’re building a native application, actually build a native application not a web application. Native applications run in different contexts with different constraints, you can’t just assume that what works well or is necessary for a web application makes sense for a native application. In particular, dumping new users into a registration screen just because you want to persist state is bad design for most native applications. Native applications don’t need that in the same way web applications do.
[+] [-] mleonhard|4 years ago|reply
If you need to support remove users, then provide an "invite link" that you can text and it lets people download the app and then connect with you on the app. You don't need an account on a server for that.
To make money:
1. Show an affiliate link to watch the movie on Redbox [0] or another pay-per-view streaming service.
1. Show local theater showtimes with an affiliate link to buy the tickets [1].
[0] https://www.redbox.com/affiliate-program
[1] https://www.fandango.com/affiliate-program
[+] [-] admax88q|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vuciv1|4 years ago|reply
Its also so that you can lookup and add your friends.
I understand the frustration, though. I'm working on a version with webhooks where you can just join a lobby and start swiping.
[+] [-] jeffgreco|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bloak|4 years ago|reply
Take just a simple example: suppose P1 and P2 are both willing to watch films F1 and F2, but P1 would prefer to watch F1 and P2 would prefer to watch F2. But suppose P1 knows, because of an unguarded remark that P2 made, that P2 is willing to watch F1, but P1 has managed to keep quiet about their willingness to watch F2. Then P1 can "win" the negotiation by claiming that they are only willing to watch F1.
So this app needs to be upgraded to act as an agent on behalf of each user. Each user tells the app which films they are willing to watch and what their preferences are, and also what information they have managed to obtain about the preferences of the adversary (significant other). The two AI-powered agents then negotiate on behalf of the users, complete with bogus deadlines, threats to walk out and so on.
A premium version of the app could take account of other household duties, long-standing grievances and so on and use them as additional "bargaining chips".
[+] [-] lgeorget|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] musingsole|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] singhrac|4 years ago|reply
Propose the problem to a market design economist on Twitter and they'll solve it for you just for fun (and maybe write a paper).
[+] [-] great_reversal|4 years ago|reply
> "Let's use WeWatch!"
> "No, it would take too long. Let's just watch Space Jam."
I watch a lot of movies and honestly the swipe-approach would take way too long. My preferred way is to just scroll through a long list of movies (alphabetically) and pick one I want to watch. Or some of the movies in the list will remind me of a different movie I want to watch. Just movie titles, no images or anything else.
One thing you realize is that a lot of movies start with "The".
[+] [-] tenryuu|4 years ago|reply
"Mummy, The", "Thing, The"
[+] [-] jmmcd|4 years ago|reply
I think the right way to do it would be to swipe a few movies every few days, whenever you're wasting time on your phone anyway. That way you'd have a queue of matches ready to go on Friday night.
[+] [-] dombili|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ksec|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fake-name|4 years ago|reply
'Some people, when confronted with a interpersonal relationship problem, think "I know, I'll use software". Now they have two problems.'
This is cute, but it's trying to solve a people problem with software.
[+] [-] speedcoder|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zepolen|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mihaaly|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] captainpiggies|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fukmbas|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dr_dshiv|4 years ago|reply
First, wouldn't use my math apps for kids (Math Planet, Math Pop, Numbaland) bc she was against screen time. Then, for her, I made a math app that specifically doesn't involve screentime (adaptive practice where parents read out math problems) — and she still didn't use it. My kids like it, in any case: Factflow.io
[+] [-] calderwoodra|4 years ago|reply
One thing to be aware of since you're trying to monetize, don't be surprised if you see a cease and desist soon from the major studios and services for using their artwork. Netflix in particular is really strict here.
Best of luck, I love the project!
[+] [-] vuciv1|4 years ago|reply
Very inspiring that someone from Google likes my product!
Honestly, I'd be excited if I got a cease and desist lol
[+] [-] beaker52|4 years ago|reply
It would nice to swipe on the descriptions.
It would be nice to see ratings from different site(IMDb, rotten tomatoes)
It'd be great to employ a magic link in email to sign in rather than needing a password and email confirmation. That'd help me get my non-techy friends using it quickly.
[+] [-] wccrawford|4 years ago|reply
I think Apple's $100/yr is crazy, but I don't think Google's $25 is bad. If you plan to make any money at all on it, that's nothing.
Scrolling through the site, it feels like the site is constantly hiding information from me, and then spoon-feeding me bits that I don't care about. The text doesn't even show up until it's halfway up my screen, and then it's just a scroll or 2 from disappearing. Scroll too fast and it's really hard to read. Maybe you should animate the information leaving, instead of appearing. You definitely should provide more information in a readable form.
[+] [-] domsom|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] A4ET8a8uTh0|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Daneel_|4 years ago|reply
The requirement to log in is a huge deterrent though - why not just use a UUID or something based on the phone?
Also, I don’t know if you can scrape a small synopsis and include it, along with the genre, underneath the film? I had no idea what the first 30-40 films that came up for me were.
[+] [-] f1refly|4 years ago|reply
Edit: While trying to sign in, the service required me to add a special character to my 32 character long alphanumeric password. Requiring the user to use x different kind of character types just annoys people and doesn't make your service more secure.
[+] [-] shireboy|4 years ago|reply
https://fastlane.tools/
[+] [-] merrvk|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] c-c-c-c-c|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fsflover|4 years ago|reply
If you are tired of the duopoly, consider supporting GNU/Linux phones. They are not perfect yet, but for the HN audience can already be daily drivers.