5 ms·

This means that you can push updates, features, and bug fixes instantly to your users, bypassing the labor of bundling, submitting, and having your app accepted

This means that you can push updates, features, and bug fixes instantly to your users, bypassing the labor of bundling, submitting, and having your app accepted to the App and Google play store This is the real killer feature to me but it also seems like the sort of thing Apple will quickly shut down if it gets popular. Even though allowing remote JavaScript to be downloaded and run is explicitly allowed right now I feel like they were thinking about web pages and not native js code. Are there apps right now that push out new features with JavaScript bypassing the App Store? Is Apple ok with this?

blizkreeg 10y ago
By shutting it down, Apple would make a huge mistake and literally walk back into the past. I can't imagine that happening. As it is, it's becoming difficult for app developers to get noticed and grow and as chat-based interfaces become more powerful, I in fact don't see a bright future for "downloaded" apps - the way installed software was upended by the web for most use cases.
- sidlls 10y ago
  From my point of view web versions of applications generally offer a worse experience compared to the native desktop versions that have to be installed. I suppose the closer the browser gets to just being an operating system running in a pseudo-virtual-machine the less crappy the non-desktop-experience will become. On the other hand we're already approaching absurd levels of JS required as a download for some web sites. I could easily envision, in some dystopian future, a scenario where hundreds of MB (compressed) of JavaScript or more are required for an especially loathesome resource eating web "app". Is it really better to have to download 10s or 100s of MB of JS every time (yes, yes, caching helps) you want to use an application instead of a one-time install of a couple of GB? Edit for clarity: I'm responding to the part of your comment about web apps "eating" the install-based model of desktop apps, specifically, not to the broader topic of mobile apps (as clearly there's a difference in the model, packaging of applications, etc. there).
  - Bahamut 10y ago
    Except it's not a one time download - every damn update has you downloading the whole mobile app again, which is a devastating multiplier. JS isn't nearly as offensive as those exaggerated numbers by comparison
    - qzervaas 10y ago
      Not a fair comparison. Those updates can happen in the background (when in another app, when you're asleep, etc.), and most apps will continue to operate without being updated. Nothing more irritating then being forced to update / download content when you need to go and quickly do something in an app.
      - mgkimsal 10y ago
        the few apps I care about (banking, for example), always force a full update, and generally right when I need to use the app. Old version doesn't work anymore, and I have to reinstall a new one. And... I've never seen mobile apps update in the background or while I'm asleep. I have to explicitly authorize (generally with the clunky password input box) the new update. Every. Single. Time.
        sidlls 10y ago
        I don't seem to have this trouble. My apps update maybe once a week on average. The notifications always seem to pop up over night while I sleep. When I wake up I simply accept the updates and make my breakfast or shower while the updates occur. I haven't spent time waiting on an update when I needed the app right then in so long I can't remember the last time it was.
    - flukus 10y ago
      With JS they have to download a new version too (now that we're compiling javascript), and not in the background but when they want to run the app.
  - GuiA 10y ago
flukus 10y ago
> This is the real killer feature to me but it also seems like the sort of thing Apple will quickly shut down if it gets popular. It also means they can add, change and remove features whenever they want, that isn't consumer friendly.
matwood 10y ago
It is popular, and has been used by many apps for years at this point (Ionic supports it as part of the framework). The key thing is not to change the app radically with an update that bypasses the App store. Of course Apple will never say anything since they like to leave their ToS vague enough where they can do whatever they like.
jheriko 10y ago
They already shut it down ... afaik this has always been forbidden by App Store guidelines
- dabit3 10y ago
  I have a good relationship with the Microsoft team behind Code Push. After speaking with them about this exact topic multiple times, they are sure that not only are JavaScript updates allowed, but they will continue to be allowed, as it is stated in the Apple Developer Agreement [1]. There is also a growing ecosystem of open source projects and companies offering services that offer and facilitate over the air updates. [1] https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Program_Information_4_3_15.pdf https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Pro...
  - statictype 10y ago
    Thanks for clarifying. I'm guessing Microsoft has directly talked to Apple about this before spending time building their infrastructure. I'm thinking many people at Apple are happy to encourage OTA updates and even side loading apps. The original guidelines were dictated by you-know-who and so that's what they rolled with, but are willing to look the other way now (even though this type of code push directly violates the spirit of the App Store as a closed and controlled environment)
- reggieband 10y ago
  When I investigated last year, the TOS had a pretty clear paragraph that only allowed JS that was run by the Safari Browser to be downloaded. It specifically disallowed web views. However, about 2 months ago, the mobile team at my current workplace announced a new product built with several React Native components. They specifically mentioned that they had gotten clearance from Apple on downloading JS bundle updates outside of full app releases. I haven't personally reviewed the TOS to see if there is a change to the language, YMMV, IANAL, etc.
- htormey 10y ago
  In theory so is A/B testing yet pretty much every major app (Facebook/Pinterest/Airbnb/Google) has been doing it for years. It's very unlikely you would get in trouble unless you abuse it terribly. Also the app store changed its rules recently to allow over the air updating with JS.

blizkreeg 10y ago

By shutting it down, Apple would make a huge mistake and literally walk back into the past. I can't imagine that happening. As it is, it's becoming difficult for app developers to get noticed and grow and as chat-based interfaces become more powerful, I in fact don't see a bright future for "downloaded" apps - the way installed software was upended by the web for most use cases.

sidlls 10y ago
From my point of view web versions of applications generally offer a worse experience compared to the native desktop versions that have to be installed. I suppose the closer the browser gets to just being an operating system running in a pseudo-virtual-machine the less crappy the non-desktop-experience will become. On the other hand we're already approaching absurd levels of JS required as a download for some web sites. I could easily envision, in some dystopian future, a scenario where hundreds of MB (compressed) of JavaScript or more are required for an especially loathesome resource eating web "app". Is it really better to have to download 10s or 100s of MB of JS every time (yes, yes, caching helps) you want to use an application instead of a one-time install of a couple of GB? Edit for clarity: I'm responding to the part of your comment about web apps "eating" the install-based model of desktop apps, specifically, not to the broader topic of mobile apps (as clearly there's a difference in the model, packaging of applications, etc. there).
- Bahamut 10y ago
  Except it's not a one time download - every damn update has you downloading the whole mobile app again, which is a devastating multiplier. JS isn't nearly as offensive as those exaggerated numbers by comparison
  - qzervaas 10y ago
    Not a fair comparison. Those updates can happen in the background (when in another app, when you're asleep, etc.), and most apps will continue to operate without being updated. Nothing more irritating then being forced to update / download content when you need to go and quickly do something in an app.
    - mgkimsal 10y ago
      the few apps I care about (banking, for example), always force a full update, and generally right when I need to use the app. Old version doesn't work anymore, and I have to reinstall a new one. And... I've never seen mobile apps update in the background or while I'm asleep. I have to explicitly authorize (generally with the clunky password input box) the new update. Every. Single. Time.
      - sidlls 10y ago
        I don't seem to have this trouble. My apps update maybe once a week on average. The notifications always seem to pop up over night while I sleep. When I wake up I simply accept the updates and make my breakfast or shower while the updates occur. I haven't spent time waiting on an update when I needed the app right then in so long I can't remember the last time it was.
  - flukus 10y ago
    With JS they have to download a new version too (now that we're compiling javascript), and not in the background but when they want to run the app.
- GuiA 10y ago

flukus 10y ago

> This is the real killer feature to me but it also seems like the sort of thing Apple will quickly shut down if it gets popular. It also means they can add, change and remove features whenever they want, that isn't consumer friendly.

matwood 10y ago

It is popular, and has been used by many apps for years at this point (Ionic supports it as part of the framework). The key thing is not to change the app radically with an update that bypasses the App store. Of course Apple will never say anything since they like to leave their ToS vague enough where they can do whatever they like.

jheriko 10y ago

They already shut it down ... afaik this has always been forbidden by App Store guidelines

dabit3 10y ago
I have a good relationship with the Microsoft team behind Code Push. After speaking with them about this exact topic multiple times, they are sure that not only are JavaScript updates allowed, but they will continue to be allowed, as it is stated in the Apple Developer Agreement [1]. There is also a growing ecosystem of open source projects and companies offering services that offer and facilitate over the air updates. [1] https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Program_Information_4_3_15.pdf https://developer.apple.com/programs/ios/information/iOS_Pro...
- statictype 10y ago
  Thanks for clarifying. I'm guessing Microsoft has directly talked to Apple about this before spending time building their infrastructure. I'm thinking many people at Apple are happy to encourage OTA updates and even side loading apps. The original guidelines were dictated by you-know-who and so that's what they rolled with, but are willing to look the other way now (even though this type of code push directly violates the spirit of the App Store as a closed and controlled environment)
reggieband 10y ago
When I investigated last year, the TOS had a pretty clear paragraph that only allowed JS that was run by the Safari Browser to be downloaded. It specifically disallowed web views. However, about 2 months ago, the mobile team at my current workplace announced a new product built with several React Native components. They specifically mentioned that they had gotten clearance from Apple on downloading JS bundle updates outside of full app releases. I haven't personally reviewed the TOS to see if there is a change to the language, YMMV, IANAL, etc.
htormey 10y ago
In theory so is A/B testing yet pretty much every major app (Facebook/Pinterest/Airbnb/Google) has been doing it for years. It's very unlikely you would get in trouble unless you abuse it terribly. Also the app store changed its rules recently to allow over the air updating with JS.