Back to all discussions

  •   almost 13 years ago

Conflicting information on app deliverable and review

If one were to submit a finished application into the iOS App Store today, it's unlikely that it would be approved before the challenge deadline. Further, it makes the app public for anybody to download and begin using. For a variety of reasons, that's probably not a good thing: it stops feedback loops, skips QA to fix any bugs, etc. A challenge submission is rarely a strong production release candidate for the general public. Android apps on the Google Play marketplace are published virtually immediately, but are still released to the public.

My suggestion would be to allow apps to be demonstrated and judged using a mobile website, web-based prototype, TestFlight, device simulator/emulator, etc. The only way for the judges to get a mobile application onto an iPhone without using the App Store, for example, is TestFlight. This requires a rather lengthy process that involves each judge signing up for an account, downloading TestFlight, getting added as authorized users, accepting security certificates, entering in tons of information, etc.

If the judges vow to only review apps available to be "downloaded to a mobile device" as of the challenge deadline, the challenge will be closing itself off to ALL quality submissions and will only serve as a challenge to see who can get App Store approval and/or get the app in a publishable state first (which is different from feature-complete), which effectively means the deadline has already passed.

I understand the rules as published in the Federal Register include:

"Entrants will be expected to demonstrate in real time the functional features of their apps to assist the judging panel's evaluations according to the selection criteria. Demonstrations must be accomplished remotely during this designated time during the judging period."

Could you detail how this process will take place?

I'd strongly encourage the challenge administrator(s) to review applications based on the totality of the submission: a slide deck that analyzes the problem and proposed solution, detailed wireframes and/or visual design comps, and a working application prototype with the challenge entrant providing very specific and actionable steps to take to get the app into a publishable state.

Could you please kindly outline the testing environment and processes being used by the judges?

Thank you for your time!

  • 2 comments

  •   •   almost 13 years ago

    FYI I posted this question (how to submit a native app) in another thread (http://suicidepreventionapp.challenge.gov/forum_topics/2351) so you may want to also subscribe to that.

    A couple days ago the moderator clarified that they want a functional app, so I wonder if the wireframes or comps would be redundant. How about a demo *video* of the app running on the iphone/android simulator or the developer's personal phone? A tour through each screen and button press? Tony I would wonder what you think about that.

    And maybe there should be extra consideration in the eval criteria for whoever is able to get a bug-free, new app into the public app store in time. I agree that it shouldn't be a strict requirement because (in the case of iOS) Apple could always reject on a technicality and without leaving time to resubmit.

    Damien

  •   •   almost 13 years ago

    I also need clarification if the only way the judges will judge an iOS app is if they receive it through the App Store (vs file to run in a simulator or through device ID). Thank you!
    Ginger

Comments are closed.