This is standard fear-mongering from Apple fanboys. The truth is that consumers gravitate to lean, high-quality apps regardless of a review process - the market is the ultimate review.
I personally would not use any app that did what you described, and I don't see why anyone else would willingly use them.
It doesn't take an anal probe by Apple to push high quality apps to the top of consumer mindshare.
Also, let's for a moment assume Apple does give a flying f* for end-users. If they did, they wouldn't charge a $99 annual, per developer fee, and ban competitors (Steam, alternate payment methods, non Safari browser engines,...), retroactively revise app store policies, whimsically reject app submissions, purposefully cripple Safari's W3C compliance and force developers on to the app store, ....
Apple's review process is 95% rooted in monopolistic control, & 5% in what their PR/spin claims it to be
I personally would not use any app that did what you described, and I don't see why anyone else would willingly use them.
It doesn't take an anal probe by Apple to push high quality apps to the top of consumer mindshare.
Also, let's for a moment assume Apple does give a flying f* for end-users. If they did, they wouldn't charge a $99 annual, per developer fee, and ban competitors (Steam, alternate payment methods, non Safari browser engines,...), retroactively revise app store policies, whimsically reject app submissions, purposefully cripple Safari's W3C compliance and force developers on to the app store, ....
Apple's review process is 95% rooted in monopolistic control, & 5% in what their PR/spin claims it to be