15 ms·

Apple rolls out a new App Store developer site

88 points by sharp11 10y ago

acrooks 10y ago
Their guidelines page (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/) has some pretty curt language. Interesting how terse and forward they are here as compared to other Apple docs. Reads as if a jaded reviewer wrote it :)
- glhaynes 10y ago
  I always thought the original version of that page (it looks like it hasn't changed much) sounded very Jobsian. "If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps" in particular sounds like him.
  - aljones 10y ago
    Yeah. https://youtu.be/TVJ4VnN6YPY?t=3422 https://youtu.be/TVJ4VnN6YPY?t=3422
- ikawe 10y ago
  >Apps or metadata that mentions the name of any other mobile platform will be rejected So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? >Apps cannot use Push Notifications to send advertising, promotions, or direct marketing of any kind Ahem Lyft.
  - jasonjei 10y ago
    > 10.3 Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and icons, correctly and as described in the Apple iOS Human Interface Guidelines may be rejected Edit: Alright, I'm taking a slaughtering on karma. Point taken. You can implement your own widgets on iOS. Please accept my apologies to all for my original comment that I thought Google wasn't in compliance and for my misguided interpretation.
    - TillE 10y ago
      "Apps that do not use system provided items...correctly...may be rejected"
      - jasonjei 10y ago
        [deleted] - I apologize for my misguided interpretation of 10.3, you may implement your own controls. I have taken your point via moderation. To all whom I have offended, I apologize.
        tsieling 10y ago
        The small studio I work at has shipped numerous apps with non-standard UI and we've had no problems. I think they reserve the option to reject something they find unusable or otherwise objectionable.
        josephpmay 10y ago
        I believe, if I'm reading it right, that you can implement your own, but if you use theirs you can't use them incorrectly.
        masklinn 10y ago
        Not even that, such a use may lead to rejection, but won't necessarily do so. Most other rules state that breach will lead to rejection unconditionally. This one is conditional because it's contextual, so that developers correctly use standard controls[0] for regular applications, but can still implement their own controls in e.g. games. There's also a fair bit of leeway for developers with their own "style" e.g. I don't think tapbots uses a single system-standard widget. [0] and their accessibility support, and "skin" changes with the system's evolution
        k-mcgrady 10y ago
        99.9% sure your reading is not correct. I'm not sure how you read it that way actually, it seems pretty clear. If you choose to use system provided UI objects they must be used the way Apple intends them to be used. For example a user tapping a UIButton expects a certain action to take place. Using buttons to display text (not perform in actions) in place of the correct object (UILabel) would lead to rejection.
  - MicroBerto 10y ago
    > Apps cannot use Push Notifications to send advertising, promotions, or direct marketing of any kind What if that is the whole point of the app? ie we run a deals engine, users who install would be installing exclusively for such content!
    - masklinn 10y ago
      Then Apple does not want you in their store?
      - MicroBerto 10y ago
        I figured not... which is why we've never made an app anyway. Fair is fair
    - rbritton 10y ago
      That particular rule is pretty universally ignored. Even Apple breaks it [0]. [0]: https://marco.org/2014/12/01/app-store-rule-5-6 https://marco.org/2014/12/01/app-store-rule-5-6
  - fredley 10y ago
    > So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? Really[1]. 1: http://www.cultofmac.com/320141/apple-rejecting-ios-pebble-apps/ http://www.cultofmac.com/320141/apple-rejecting-ios-pebble-a...
  - masklinn 10y ago
    > So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? You can't say it in the application or its metadata (e.g. appstore listing), no. > Ahem Lyft. Report them?
    - thisisdave 10y ago
      How? With a bad review, or some other method? I didn't see anything on the App Store page, but I might have been looking in the wrong places.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - duaneb 10y ago
      > Report them? Why? It's a clear win for everyone but Apple to mention cross-platform capabilities when you have them. The iOS store is full of apps that refuse to acknowledge the existence of any non-apple products you might use or want to sync/integrate with. If anything, you should push back against Apple directly. Good luck.... Edit: disregard, I cannot read.
      - FireBeyond 10y ago
        He means report Lyft for spamming you with promos and ads via notifications.
  - pareci 10y ago
    I'm trying to understand ego. I think, as part of it, "ikawe" would not mention an app that "ikawe" wrote that uses push notifications to send advertising. Ego classifies things as "bad" or "good", and notices "bad" in others and "good" in self.
  - st3v3r 10y ago
    This is old news.
- elcapitan 10y ago
  I wish their iTunes EULAs etc. were that clear.
  - duskwuff 10y ago
    EULAs are legal documents. This inherently makes them wordy, because they have to be valid, completely unambiguous, and satisfy all sorts of legal requirements in hundreds of different jurisdictions. The App Store submission guidelines, by contrast, aren't a legal document. They're essentially just documentation, and as such can be written however Apple sees fit.
    - elcapitan 10y ago
      I know that. There is the possibility though to have a human readable EULA side by side with the lawyer readable one. That would actually be fair towards the users. Here's a good example: https://about.500px.com/terms/ https://about.500px.com/terms/
      - masklinn 10y ago
        > I know that. There is the possibility though to have a human readable EULA side by side with the lawyer readable one. That would actually be fair towards the users. I'm guessing the lawyers would reject that for fear of what'd happen in case of conflicts between the "lawyer" version and reasonable interpretations of the "human-readable" version.
        elcapitan 10y ago
        They use 60 unreadable pages abandoning all my rights on anything i do with the software, they can spend another line declaring that the human version is not binding.
        masklinn 10y ago
        They're corporate lawyers, do you expect them to have compassion or something? What next, HR putting employees first?
- kfinley 10y ago
  > 2.7 Apps that download code in any way or form will be rejected Is this an indication that things like CodePush[0] may be rejected in the future? 0: http://microsoft.github.io/code-push http://microsoft.github.io/code-push
  - jasonjei 10y ago
    Or even GitMongo or Downloads or iOctocat or Dropbox, albeit in uncompiled or text or binary forms ;) some of these apps even let you download HTML that run JavaScript...
  - masklinn 10y ago
    This page is a "quick guidelines" version of the actual Developer Program Agreements[0]. As per the DPA's rule 3.3.2 code downloaded and executed via the built-in webview is exempt from this limitation: > 3.3.2 An Application may not download or install executable code. Interpreted code may only be used in an Application if all scripts, code and interpreters are packaged in the Application and not downloaded. The only exception to the foregoing is scripts and code downloaded and run by Apple's built-in WebKit framework or JavascriptCore, provided that such scripts and code do not change the primary purpose of the Application by providing features or functionality that are inconsistent with the intended and advertised purpose of the Application as submitted to the App Store. (emphasis mine) which is why e.g. you can build a browser around the system webview or build code-push, but you can't publish your own browser with its rendering and JS engines. [0] https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Program_Information_4_3_15.pdf https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Pro...
  - 0x0 10y ago
    Very risky, at least. Apple seems dead set on apps not changing behavior without going through the review process again.
- masklinn 10y ago
  Note that this is a guidelines listing, the point is to be a curt/easy read version of the iOS Developer Program Requirements for reviewers[0] and developers (which it actually refers to in 27.1). The complete actual rules are in the DPR. [0] IIRC it was originally an internal document, which got leaked way back
  - duskwuff 10y ago
    These guidelines are the rules. The Developer Program License Agreement referenced in 27.1 is something else.
    - masklinn 10y ago
      > These guidelines are the rules. They're not rules they're guidelines. That's in the name. Which is why they don't mention the webview exemption to guideline 2.7 for instance. > The Developer Program License Agreement referenced in 27.1 is something else. No, the agreement the actual thing developers sign on and must follow.
      - galistoca 10y ago
        The detail semantics don't matter. When you get a rejection letter, they always explicitly mention items on that guideline. What else would you call a "rule"?
- copperx 10y ago
  I had to do a double take after the first paragraphs. Am I at Apple's site? From the website: > If you want to criticize a religion, write a book. If you want to describe sex, write a book or a song, or create a medical App.
apocalyptic0n3 10y ago
Looks like only certain parts have been updated. The Certificates/Provisioning section seems to be the same, login page remains the same, iTunes Connect remains the same (which admittedly received a facelift last year).
johansch 10y ago
I'd say that so far, Apple has gotten a lot of good apps in spite of their App developer/app submission infrastructure, rather than because of it. It's basically been an obstacle rather than a help. Is this a sign that their Jobsian approach to third-party developers is changing?
- joemi 10y ago
  I'm not going to argue that there aren't crap apps on Apple's app store, since there definitely are, but if it were easier to let apps onto the appstore, wouldn't there be even more crap apps? I doubt a loosening of restrictions would mean a massive surge of quality apps. Sure, it might mean some good apps that had been rejected or had avoided the appstore because of restrictions could get on, but the number of those quality apps would be minuscule compared to the crap app surge.
  - johansch 10y ago
    There's already insane amounts of crap apps in the Apple app store. What Apple should build is robust quality app discovery, filtering out the crap. What I'm seeing at the moment (seven years after the launch of the app store ) is a software architecture that appears to rely on the app store submission process being a guarantee of quality. What a joke...
  - st3v3r 10y ago
    "but if it were easier to let apps onto the appstore, wouldn't there be even more crap apps?" Yes. Look at Android and Windows Phone.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  Why would it be a sign that things are changing? None of the stuff there is new. It's all the same stuff, they've just now got a nicer website for it.
unfamiliar 10y ago
> Apps larger than 100MB in size will not download over cellular networks (this is automatically prohibited by the App Store) I have a 10GB data plan, why is this still a thing?! At least give me an option to turn it off buried deep in the settings somewhere. I wish we had something like `defaults` on iOS.
- mschuster91 10y ago
  > I have a 10GB data plan, why is this still a thing?! Where are you living and holy fuck how much are you paying? Not everyone lives in Finland, unfortunately. It's a small number of countries where 100MB won't eat up like half your monthly data allowance and it's good that Apple prevents morons with unneccessarily huge apps (FACEBOOK!!!) to screw their customers.
  - gmac 10y ago
    I also have a 10GB/month data plan, on Vodafone UK. It costs GBP £46 (USD $65) per month over 24 months, including a 20% discount [1]. It came with a 'free' 128GB iPhone 6, 2 years of Spotify and 6 months of Netflix. [1] https://advantage.vodafone.co.uk/ https://advantage.vodafone.co.uk/
  - philippoi 10y ago
    I have 50GB from Telia in Denmark and pay roughly $50, but that includes Spotify and HBO Nordic subscriptions in the bundle. Most everything else in Denmark is pretty expensive though.
  - iagooar 10y ago
    In Switzerland, you get unlimited LTE 150mbit/s with no limit & no speed reduction for CHF59 (~ USD60) per month. Just to put it in context, 60 francs in Switzerland is the price of a dinner in a good (but not excellent) restaurant for one single person.
  - mikestew 10y ago
    Not everyone lives in Finland, unfortunately. Finland? T-Mo in the U. S. (you know, the country that is sooo much worse than Europe when it comes to mobile?), two lines with combined 14Gb data, $120/month. Not quite 10Gb per phone, but close enough for our use. We had the unlimited data, but we didn't use enough to justify the extra $30/month.
sandstrom 10y ago
Perhaps the URL should be updated to https://developer.apple.com/app-store/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/ (instead of techcrunch)
mschuster91 10y ago
Also, they have recently overhauled the Developer Member Center, which instantly breaks all of the tutorials on the internet on how to set up that certificate crap for push notifications, dev deploy and prod deploy. Android is "obtain a key from GCM, then ionic build android (and distribute the apk to whomever you want, as long as the target device has Play Services)"... iOS is "okay, generate a CSR here, (insert 20 steps), still not finished", and to make stuff worse it's a true PITA to debug push notifications. Apple's developer workflows suck, not to mention the ridiculous 100-test-devices-per-account policy (huge company and all agencies are invited to their account => huge chaos).
- rimantas 10y ago
  There is fastlane and testflight which makes life easier.
- M4v3R 10y ago
  Actually, when you go to 'Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles' section it is unchanged, so the tutorials should still be usable :). On a side note, I usually didn't need to go there very often. These days XCode takes care of most of the certificate/provisioning profiles crap. Still, for a newcomer this can be overwhelming and they should really try to simplify it.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  >> "iOS is "okay, generate a CSR here, (insert 20 steps), still not finished"" A few years ago maybe. Now Xcode handles most of this stuff for you automatically. There are still some situations when the member centre is queried but for the most part Xcode seems generate everything you need when you try to build & run for the first time.
  - tl 10y ago
    Xcode handles the simple case automatically and screws up everything else making the "Fix Issues" button a bit of a gamble, honestly.
  - ratfacemcgee 10y ago
gondo 10y ago
no pictures of an apple fruit "3. Variations, Takeoffs or Abbreviations: You may not use an image of a real apple or other variation of the Apple logo for any purpose. Third parties cannot use a variation," (http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelinesf...)
sandstrom 10y ago
They seem to have increased restrictions on purchases outside Apple's control (section on 'Purchasing and currencies'). Subscriptions Outside of an App Subscribers to magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video and cloud storage services who were acquired outside of your app can read or play content through the app. However, you may not provide external links in your app that allow users to purchase subscriptions outside of the app. Sure, they've created the OS, but this is starting to feel a bit like a troll guarding a bridge, forcing every one to pay up to walk across.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- ProAm 10y ago
  > this is starting to feel a bit like a troll guarding a bridge, forcing every one to pay up to walk across. Starting? This has been the way Apple does business for over a decade now. For years they charged people just for the privilege to develop software on their own device.
- nicolas_t 10y ago
  We got caught with this when developing an app... It was really annoying going back and forth with the reviewers until they accepted the app (even links to the website without linking to the pages where people can purchase the app was forbidden).
- fbuilesv 10y ago
  I could be wrong here but I think this has been in place for a while now (starting around the same time the whole Amazon debate started).
- jeff_tyrrill 10y ago
  This is not new. This was put in place in 2011. This is why the Kindle app (for example) does not allow you to buy books in the app, and the Amazon app can order physical goods but not downloads. http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/09/apple-reverses-course-on-in-app-subscriptions/ http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/09/apple-reverses-course-on...
educar 10y ago
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ OK, this is not going to be a popular opinion but this is terrible, harsh and condescending language. Only apple can get away with this. Phrases like 'think about the children', 'amateur hour', 'run to the press' simply don't help. I know how to take care of my kids, thank you. And the lesson I am giving them is not to get into walled gardens where someone else controls what my children can see and do. Calling things amateur is sad - who are they to decide? Let the market decide, don't decide for the market. Did these guys see the airbnb video the other day where Brian said everyone said the idea was totally stupid. 'Lasting entertainment', yeah right. I don't know about you guys but this is as close to big brother speak as I have seen. (I don't own any apple product and never will because I cannot imagine buying a device where I cannot install my own software without purchasing Apple laptops. Seriously? This is progress?)
- masklinn 10y ago
  > Calling things amateur is sad - who are they to decide? The owners of the platform? > Let the market decide, don't decide for the market. That's completely nonsensical, every content owner or provider makes decision about the content they want to publish, at best "the market" "decides" whether it likes their content or not. > Seriously? This is progress? This is old news, mostly. These are a curt form of the developer agreement (with a short form of the reasoning behind them), the original version was leaked back in 2010 or something, back when it was still an internal guidelines document for appstore reviewers.
  - educar 10y ago
    I don't get your line of thinking. You are condoning their actions because they own the platform? It's their garden, they can do whatever, so we just stop talking about it? Can we then do the same for, I don't know Korea, Middle east and the like? It's their land, they can do whatever with human rights. Why talk about it?
    - masklinn 10y ago
cloudjacker 10y ago
> If your App is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps. Except it does, until the US and EU Antitrust commissions make you guys stop this shit.
- 6stringmerc 10y ago
  Hey now, you're assuming Apple learned anything from being legally held liable for collusion with respect to the publishing industry, which if you read the statement from their lawyer following the verdict, they apparently did not.
- coldtea 10y ago
  What "(anti)trust"? This is a single company.
  - cloudjacker 10y ago
    Their actions are anticompetitive towards developers and app publishers. These are individuals and companies, both valid entities in an antitrust complaint.
    - rimantas 10y ago
      You have a lot of learning to do. Figuring out why antitrust does not apply would be a good first step.
    - DerekL 10y ago
      Starting with the Nintendo Entertainment System, most video game consoles have included lock-out technology to prevent the console from running unlicensed software. Has any console manufacturer been stopped from doing this by antitrust law? How is this different from the iPhone?
      - cloudjacker 10y ago
        In a lot of ways, but thats the thing with legal analogies, they fail for reasons you didn't even consider. Its not "the lock-out technology" we are even debating.
capote 10y ago
Their whole thing about sex in the second paragraph—anyone have any idea, given this, why if I type "sex" in to the app store search I get a good amount of apps blatantly about sex? First one is Sex Positions 3D.
- bobwaycott 10y ago
  Guess they're wanting to either halt future apps of that kind, or have a reason for removing them in the future.
  - megablast 10y ago
    They have had big clean outs before, where they removed lots of apps from the store, when they were trying to clean up the image of the store.
bobwaycott 10y ago
Pay to be promoted in search? Ugh. How about offer a portion of credits out of the 30% cut to go toward search/category promotions. Or lower the cut taken. Or offer a choice between the two, plus an additional means for buying ads. But digging further into the 70% devs are pocketing before taxes? Lame. And paid promotion seems like it's already going to make the App Store even more awful for users and smaller developers.
- dijit 10y ago
  30% sounds a lot, especially before tax. but if we take a lesson from the games industry, we know that 30% is what valve takes.. and what Sony/Microsoft takes. Not to mention the up front cost of the verification (which is a significant amount of money honestly, Apple's is minuscule by comparison). But for that money Sony/Microsoft/Valve will not promote your product, they will simply be available for the platform. I'm not sure how the Play store works of course, but my point is that marketing budget and release "tax" are separate.
norswap 10y ago
Shouldn't they improve the terrible mess that the app store is, instead of "educating" developers?
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  I think a vague awareness has seeped through the walls of Cupertino now that the App Store has turned into the software equivalent of grey goo. I wouldn't be surprised to see an announcement of a big clear out at WWDC - if not this year, then certainly next.
beeswax 10y ago
Apple recently rejected a tvOS app of mine due to the 2.12 no long lasting value item. I sort of anticipated that and while for some users the amount of content and long lastingness is sufficient in that build I think the features I had initially planned for the first update will really make a better 1.0 with appeal to more users. When I first browsed the Apple TV app store I was really disappointed by the vast amount of crap, so from a consumer's perspective I'm glad they started taking their guidelines serious now.

88 points by sharp11 10y ago

Their guidelines page (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/) has some pretty curt language. Interesting how terse and forward they are here as compared to other Apple docs. Reads as if a jaded reviewer wrote it :)

glhaynes 10y ago
I always thought the original version of that page (it looks like it hasn't changed much) sounded very Jobsian. "If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps" in particular sounds like him.
- aljones 10y ago
  Yeah. https://youtu.be/TVJ4VnN6YPY?t=3422 https://youtu.be/TVJ4VnN6YPY?t=3422
ikawe 10y ago
>Apps or metadata that mentions the name of any other mobile platform will be rejected So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? >Apps cannot use Push Notifications to send advertising, promotions, or direct marketing of any kind Ahem Lyft.
- jasonjei 10y ago
  > 10.3 Apps that do not use system provided items, such as buttons and icons, correctly and as described in the Apple iOS Human Interface Guidelines may be rejected Edit: Alright, I'm taking a slaughtering on karma. Point taken. You can implement your own widgets on iOS. Please accept my apologies to all for my original comment that I thought Google wasn't in compliance and for my misguided interpretation.
  - TillE 10y ago
    "Apps that do not use system provided items...correctly...may be rejected"
    - jasonjei 10y ago
      [deleted] - I apologize for my misguided interpretation of 10.3, you may implement your own controls. I have taken your point via moderation. To all whom I have offended, I apologize.
      - tsieling 10y ago
        The small studio I work at has shipped numerous apps with non-standard UI and we've had no problems. I think they reserve the option to reject something they find unusable or otherwise objectionable.
      - josephpmay 10y ago
        I believe, if I'm reading it right, that you can implement your own, but if you use theirs you can't use them incorrectly.
        masklinn 10y ago
        Not even that, such a use may lead to rejection, but won't necessarily do so. Most other rules state that breach will lead to rejection unconditionally. This one is conditional because it's contextual, so that developers correctly use standard controls[0] for regular applications, but can still implement their own controls in e.g. games. There's also a fair bit of leeway for developers with their own "style" e.g. I don't think tapbots uses a single system-standard widget. [0] and their accessibility support, and "skin" changes with the system's evolution
      - k-mcgrady 10y ago
        99.9% sure your reading is not correct. I'm not sure how you read it that way actually, it seems pretty clear. If you choose to use system provided UI objects they must be used the way Apple intends them to be used. For example a user tapping a UIButton expects a certain action to take place. Using buttons to display text (not perform in actions) in place of the correct object (UILabel) would lead to rejection.
- MicroBerto 10y ago
  > Apps cannot use Push Notifications to send advertising, promotions, or direct marketing of any kind What if that is the whole point of the app? ie we run a deals engine, users who install would be installing exclusively for such content!
  - masklinn 10y ago
    Then Apple does not want you in their store?
    - MicroBerto 10y ago
      I figured not... which is why we've never made an app anyway. Fair is fair
  - rbritton 10y ago
    That particular rule is pretty universally ignored. Even Apple breaks it [0]. [0]: https://marco.org/2014/12/01/app-store-rule-5-6 https://marco.org/2014/12/01/app-store-rule-5-6
- fredley 10y ago
  > So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? Really[1]. 1: http://www.cultofmac.com/320141/apple-rejecting-ios-pebble-apps/ http://www.cultofmac.com/320141/apple-rejecting-ios-pebble-a...
- masklinn 10y ago
  > So if I have a cross platform messaging app, I can't say, "syncs with android and Windows phone devices". Really? You can't say it in the application or its metadata (e.g. appstore listing), no. > Ahem Lyft. Report them?
  - thisisdave 10y ago
    How? With a bad review, or some other method? I didn't see anything on the App Store page, but I might have been looking in the wrong places.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - duaneb 10y ago
    > Report them? Why? It's a clear win for everyone but Apple to mention cross-platform capabilities when you have them. The iOS store is full of apps that refuse to acknowledge the existence of any non-apple products you might use or want to sync/integrate with. If anything, you should push back against Apple directly. Good luck.... Edit: disregard, I cannot read.
    - FireBeyond 10y ago
      He means report Lyft for spamming you with promos and ads via notifications.
- pareci 10y ago
  I'm trying to understand ego. I think, as part of it, "ikawe" would not mention an app that "ikawe" wrote that uses push notifications to send advertising. Ego classifies things as "bad" or "good", and notices "bad" in others and "good" in self.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  This is old news.
elcapitan 10y ago
I wish their iTunes EULAs etc. were that clear.
- duskwuff 10y ago
  EULAs are legal documents. This inherently makes them wordy, because they have to be valid, completely unambiguous, and satisfy all sorts of legal requirements in hundreds of different jurisdictions. The App Store submission guidelines, by contrast, aren't a legal document. They're essentially just documentation, and as such can be written however Apple sees fit.
  - elcapitan 10y ago
    I know that. There is the possibility though to have a human readable EULA side by side with the lawyer readable one. That would actually be fair towards the users. Here's a good example: https://about.500px.com/terms/ https://about.500px.com/terms/
    - masklinn 10y ago
      > I know that. There is the possibility though to have a human readable EULA side by side with the lawyer readable one. That would actually be fair towards the users. I'm guessing the lawyers would reject that for fear of what'd happen in case of conflicts between the "lawyer" version and reasonable interpretations of the "human-readable" version.
      - elcapitan 10y ago
        They use 60 unreadable pages abandoning all my rights on anything i do with the software, they can spend another line declaring that the human version is not binding.
        masklinn 10y ago
        They're corporate lawyers, do you expect them to have compassion or something? What next, HR putting employees first?
kfinley 10y ago
> 2.7 Apps that download code in any way or form will be rejected Is this an indication that things like CodePush[0] may be rejected in the future? 0: http://microsoft.github.io/code-push http://microsoft.github.io/code-push
- jasonjei 10y ago
  Or even GitMongo or Downloads or iOctocat or Dropbox, albeit in uncompiled or text or binary forms ;) some of these apps even let you download HTML that run JavaScript...
- masklinn 10y ago
  This page is a "quick guidelines" version of the actual Developer Program Agreements[0]. As per the DPA's rule 3.3.2 code downloaded and executed via the built-in webview is exempt from this limitation: > 3.3.2 An Application may not download or install executable code. Interpreted code may only be used in an Application if all scripts, code and interpreters are packaged in the Application and not downloaded. The only exception to the foregoing is scripts and code downloaded and run by Apple's built-in WebKit framework or JavascriptCore, provided that such scripts and code do not change the primary purpose of the Application by providing features or functionality that are inconsistent with the intended and advertised purpose of the Application as submitted to the App Store. (emphasis mine) which is why e.g. you can build a browser around the system webview or build code-push, but you can't publish your own browser with its rendering and JS engines. [0] https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Program_Information_4_3_15.pdf https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Pro...
- 0x0 10y ago
  Very risky, at least. Apple seems dead set on apps not changing behavior without going through the review process again.
masklinn 10y ago
Note that this is a guidelines listing, the point is to be a curt/easy read version of the iOS Developer Program Requirements for reviewers[0] and developers (which it actually refers to in 27.1). The complete actual rules are in the DPR. [0] IIRC it was originally an internal document, which got leaked way back
- duskwuff 10y ago
  These guidelines are the rules. The Developer Program License Agreement referenced in 27.1 is something else.
  - masklinn 10y ago
    > These guidelines are the rules. They're not rules they're guidelines. That's in the name. Which is why they don't mention the webview exemption to guideline 2.7 for instance. > The Developer Program License Agreement referenced in 27.1 is something else. No, the agreement the actual thing developers sign on and must follow.
    - galistoca 10y ago
      The detail semantics don't matter. When you get a rejection letter, they always explicitly mention items on that guideline. What else would you call a "rule"?
copperx 10y ago
I had to do a double take after the first paragraphs. Am I at Apple's site? From the website: > If you want to criticize a religion, write a book. If you want to describe sex, write a book or a song, or create a medical App.

apocalyptic0n3 10y ago

Looks like only certain parts have been updated. The Certificates/Provisioning section seems to be the same, login page remains the same, iTunes Connect remains the same (which admittedly received a facelift last year).

johansch 10y ago

I'd say that so far, Apple has gotten a lot of good apps in spite of their App developer/app submission infrastructure, rather than because of it. It's basically been an obstacle rather than a help. Is this a sign that their Jobsian approach to third-party developers is changing?

joemi 10y ago
I'm not going to argue that there aren't crap apps on Apple's app store, since there definitely are, but if it were easier to let apps onto the appstore, wouldn't there be even more crap apps? I doubt a loosening of restrictions would mean a massive surge of quality apps. Sure, it might mean some good apps that had been rejected or had avoided the appstore because of restrictions could get on, but the number of those quality apps would be minuscule compared to the crap app surge.
- johansch 10y ago
  There's already insane amounts of crap apps in the Apple app store. What Apple should build is robust quality app discovery, filtering out the crap. What I'm seeing at the moment (seven years after the launch of the app store ) is a software architecture that appears to rely on the app store submission process being a guarantee of quality. What a joke...
- st3v3r 10y ago
  "but if it were easier to let apps onto the appstore, wouldn't there be even more crap apps?" Yes. Look at Android and Windows Phone.
st3v3r 10y ago
Why would it be a sign that things are changing? None of the stuff there is new. It's all the same stuff, they've just now got a nicer website for it.

unfamiliar 10y ago

> Apps larger than 100MB in size will not download over cellular networks (this is automatically prohibited by the App Store) I have a 10GB data plan, why is this still a thing?! At least give me an option to turn it off buried deep in the settings somewhere. I wish we had something like `defaults` on iOS.

mschuster91 10y ago
> I have a 10GB data plan, why is this still a thing?! Where are you living and holy fuck how much are you paying? Not everyone lives in Finland, unfortunately. It's a small number of countries where 100MB won't eat up like half your monthly data allowance and it's good that Apple prevents morons with unneccessarily huge apps (FACEBOOK!!!) to screw their customers.
- gmac 10y ago
  I also have a 10GB/month data plan, on Vodafone UK. It costs GBP £46 (USD $65) per month over 24 months, including a 20% discount [1]. It came with a 'free' 128GB iPhone 6, 2 years of Spotify and 6 months of Netflix. [1] https://advantage.vodafone.co.uk/ https://advantage.vodafone.co.uk/
- philippoi 10y ago
  I have 50GB from Telia in Denmark and pay roughly $50, but that includes Spotify and HBO Nordic subscriptions in the bundle. Most everything else in Denmark is pretty expensive though.
- iagooar 10y ago
  In Switzerland, you get unlimited LTE 150mbit/s with no limit & no speed reduction for CHF59 (~ USD60) per month. Just to put it in context, 60 francs in Switzerland is the price of a dinner in a good (but not excellent) restaurant for one single person.
- mikestew 10y ago
  Not everyone lives in Finland, unfortunately. Finland? T-Mo in the U. S. (you know, the country that is sooo much worse than Europe when it comes to mobile?), two lines with combined 14Gb data, $120/month. Not quite 10Gb per phone, but close enough for our use. We had the unlimited data, but we didn't use enough to justify the extra $30/month.

sandstrom 10y ago

Perhaps the URL should be updated to https://developer.apple.com/app-store/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/ (instead of techcrunch)

mschuster91 10y ago

Also, they have recently overhauled the Developer Member Center, which instantly breaks all of the tutorials on the internet on how to set up that certificate crap for push notifications, dev deploy and prod deploy. Android is "obtain a key from GCM, then ionic build android (and distribute the apk to whomever you want, as long as the target device has Play Services)"... iOS is "okay, generate a CSR here, (insert 20 steps), still not finished", and to make stuff worse it's a true PITA to debug push notifications. Apple's developer workflows suck, not to mention the ridiculous 100-test-devices-per-account policy (huge company and all agencies are invited to their account => huge chaos).

rimantas 10y ago
There is fastlane and testflight which makes life easier.
M4v3R 10y ago
Actually, when you go to 'Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles' section it is unchanged, so the tutorials should still be usable :). On a side note, I usually didn't need to go there very often. These days XCode takes care of most of the certificate/provisioning profiles crap. Still, for a newcomer this can be overwhelming and they should really try to simplify it.
k-mcgrady 10y ago
>> "iOS is "okay, generate a CSR here, (insert 20 steps), still not finished"" A few years ago maybe. Now Xcode handles most of this stuff for you automatically. There are still some situations when the member centre is queried but for the most part Xcode seems generate everything you need when you try to build & run for the first time.
- tl 10y ago
  Xcode handles the simple case automatically and screws up everything else making the "Fix Issues" button a bit of a gamble, honestly.
- ratfacemcgee 10y ago

gondo 10y ago

no pictures of an apple fruit "3. Variations, Takeoffs or Abbreviations: You may not use an image of a real apple or other variation of the Apple logo for any purpose. Third parties cannot use a variation," (http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelinesfor3rdparties.html http://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/guidelinesf...)

sandstrom 10y ago

They seem to have increased restrictions on purchases outside Apple's control (section on 'Purchasing and currencies'). Subscriptions Outside of an App Subscribers to magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video and cloud storage services who were acquired outside of your app can read or play content through the app. However, you may not provide external links in your app that allow users to purchase subscriptions outside of the app. Sure, they've created the OS, but this is starting to feel a bit like a troll guarding a bridge, forcing every one to pay up to walk across.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ProAm 10y ago
> this is starting to feel a bit like a troll guarding a bridge, forcing every one to pay up to walk across. Starting? This has been the way Apple does business for over a decade now. For years they charged people just for the privilege to develop software on their own device.
nicolas_t 10y ago
We got caught with this when developing an app... It was really annoying going back and forth with the reviewers until they accepted the app (even links to the website without linking to the pages where people can purchase the app was forbidden).
fbuilesv 10y ago
I could be wrong here but I think this has been in place for a while now (starting around the same time the whole Amazon debate started).
jeff_tyrrill 10y ago
This is not new. This was put in place in 2011. This is why the Kindle app (for example) does not allow you to buy books in the app, and the Amazon app can order physical goods but not downloads. http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/09/apple-reverses-course-on-in-app-subscriptions/ http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/09/apple-reverses-course-on...

educar 10y ago

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ OK, this is not going to be a popular opinion but this is terrible, harsh and condescending language. Only apple can get away with this. Phrases like 'think about the children', 'amateur hour', 'run to the press' simply don't help. I know how to take care of my kids, thank you. And the lesson I am giving them is not to get into walled gardens where someone else controls what my children can see and do. Calling things amateur is sad - who are they to decide? Let the market decide, don't decide for the market. Did these guys see the airbnb video the other day where Brian said everyone said the idea was totally stupid. 'Lasting entertainment', yeah right. I don't know about you guys but this is as close to big brother speak as I have seen. (I don't own any apple product and never will because I cannot imagine buying a device where I cannot install my own software without purchasing Apple laptops. Seriously? This is progress?)

masklinn 10y ago
> Calling things amateur is sad - who are they to decide? The owners of the platform? > Let the market decide, don't decide for the market. That's completely nonsensical, every content owner or provider makes decision about the content they want to publish, at best "the market" "decides" whether it likes their content or not. > Seriously? This is progress? This is old news, mostly. These are a curt form of the developer agreement (with a short form of the reasoning behind them), the original version was leaked back in 2010 or something, back when it was still an internal guidelines document for appstore reviewers.
- educar 10y ago
  I don't get your line of thinking. You are condoning their actions because they own the platform? It's their garden, they can do whatever, so we just stop talking about it? Can we then do the same for, I don't know Korea, Middle east and the like? It's their land, they can do whatever with human rights. Why talk about it?
  - masklinn 10y ago

cloudjacker 10y ago

> If your App is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps. Except it does, until the US and EU Antitrust commissions make you guys stop this shit.

6stringmerc 10y ago
Hey now, you're assuming Apple learned anything from being legally held liable for collusion with respect to the publishing industry, which if you read the statement from their lawyer following the verdict, they apparently did not.
coldtea 10y ago
What "(anti)trust"? This is a single company.
- cloudjacker 10y ago
  Their actions are anticompetitive towards developers and app publishers. These are individuals and companies, both valid entities in an antitrust complaint.
  - rimantas 10y ago
    You have a lot of learning to do. Figuring out why antitrust does not apply would be a good first step.
  - DerekL 10y ago
    Starting with the Nintendo Entertainment System, most video game consoles have included lock-out technology to prevent the console from running unlicensed software. Has any console manufacturer been stopped from doing this by antitrust law? How is this different from the iPhone?
    - cloudjacker 10y ago
      In a lot of ways, but thats the thing with legal analogies, they fail for reasons you didn't even consider. Its not "the lock-out technology" we are even debating.

capote 10y ago

Their whole thing about sex in the second paragraph—anyone have any idea, given this, why if I type "sex" in to the app store search I get a good amount of apps blatantly about sex? First one is Sex Positions 3D.

bobwaycott 10y ago
Guess they're wanting to either halt future apps of that kind, or have a reason for removing them in the future.
- megablast 10y ago
  They have had big clean outs before, where they removed lots of apps from the store, when they were trying to clean up the image of the store.

bobwaycott 10y ago

Pay to be promoted in search? Ugh. How about offer a portion of credits out of the 30% cut to go toward search/category promotions. Or lower the cut taken. Or offer a choice between the two, plus an additional means for buying ads. But digging further into the 70% devs are pocketing before taxes? Lame. And paid promotion seems like it's already going to make the App Store even more awful for users and smaller developers.

dijit 10y ago
30% sounds a lot, especially before tax. but if we take a lesson from the games industry, we know that 30% is what valve takes.. and what Sony/Microsoft takes. Not to mention the up front cost of the verification (which is a significant amount of money honestly, Apple's is minuscule by comparison). But for that money Sony/Microsoft/Valve will not promote your product, they will simply be available for the platform. I'm not sure how the Play store works of course, but my point is that marketing budget and release "tax" are separate.

norswap 10y ago

Shouldn't they improve the terrible mess that the app store is, instead of "educating" developers?

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
I think a vague awareness has seeped through the walls of Cupertino now that the App Store has turned into the software equivalent of grey goo. I wouldn't be surprised to see an announcement of a big clear out at WWDC - if not this year, then certainly next.

beeswax 10y ago

Apple recently rejected a tvOS app of mine due to the 2.12 no long lasting value item. I sort of anticipated that and while for some users the amount of content and long lastingness is sufficient in that build I think the features I had initially planned for the first update will really make a better 1.0 with appeal to more users. When I first browsed the Apple TV app store I was really disappointed by the vast amount of crap, so from a consumer's perspective I'm glad they started taking their guidelines serious now.