05-24-2013 01:49 PM - edited 05-24-2013 01:55 PM
My app - Taghvim has been rejected twice for BFB for the following reason (both times)
The addition of features beyond a single, simple function. The eligibility guidelines state: Apps that perform a simple, single function, such as play a noise or display a graphic, are not eligible for the program.
However, I don't know what else to do to qualify
My app (in my opion) does what the guidelines are asking for:
1) Uses various BB10 gestures (flow, peek, etc)
2) Displays real-time calender for both Persian and Arabic calendars
3) Displays real-time local time of Tehran or Mecca
4) Uses active frames
5) Ability to send BBM invites
6) Uses Hub notification to notify users of all Persian and Arabic major events
7) Uses help, setting, info menu items + action bars
8) Uses tab to swith to another tab to convert between various calendars types
I don't understant why they keep saying it's a "simple" and "single" function app, where in fact, it does more than 1 function and it is really NOT simple (converting between the three calendar systems is really not that easy!).
Am I missing something here? What else could I add to make it approved?
I have 1 more try before appealing the decision and I want to include updates to the app that will get it approved.
Suggestions/comments is greatly appreciated.
05-28-2013 01:24 PM
06-17-2013 10:51 PM
Jtegen, what do you think of this app which was accepted as BFB : http://appworld.blackberry.com/webstore/content/83
My guess is that this app will most likely not be accepeted into BFB unless you make it much more complicated. That is what the want. They want big, complicated , many tabs, many screens.
06-18-2013 08:49 AM
StevenKader, they do not actually want "big, complicated, many tabs", although initially it did appear that the reviewers had been trained to look for such things.
My two BFB-approved are possibly good examples of where I thought the bar was, at one point. Fuel Traqker isn't trivial, but it's not "big, complicated" either, and has only a few screens (four or so, counting Settings and Help). My White Noise app has also now been approved, and visually it's even simpler (although under the covers there's more to it and it's probably on par with Fuel Traqker in complexity, currently). Both of them are Cascades apps, with the BB10 look and feel, and system integration etc, meeting the stated objective requirements. White Noise was initially rejected under the generic "simple, single function" clause but the automatic re-review of those apps has now accepted it.
That LinkShrink app, however, shows that they are no longer mandating almost any minimum degree of complexity with this program. And there's even a survey they've sent out to some devs asking whether we think they should allow AppGenerator apps to be considered Built For BlackBerry.
06-18-2013 09:53 AM
06-18-2013 09:58 AM
06-18-2013 10:53 AM
To me complexity and "depth of App" are meaningless and should have nothing to do with the quality level of the app is. LinkShrink is a simple and not very good app, which you can see by the 7 reviews and 3 stars that it has. What about a free app that was rejected that is actually more complicated, meets all the tech requirements of BFB, very usefull, and has over 2000 5 star reviews, proving that it is a great app by the actual users of it. How do we explain it getting rejected? I assume it is because each app is looked at in a vacuum and that the reviewers are being very subjective using a confusing set of criteria. Lack of consitency is creating the negative posts you see on this forum, which is a shame. Program has good intentions but needs to quickly clean it up and get back on the right track to turn it into a positive experience for the dev community, or in the end it would have been better not to have it.
06-20-2013 05:12 PM
Putting the genie back in the bottle now would be very difficult and upset a lot of developers.
You can see BlackBerry's thinking here, better to broaden the entry requirements and soften the purpose of the program than try and get back to the original purpose and create bad blood.
It's a shame as it's devalued the program as a differentiator but it's better to have something than nothing at all.