3 ms·

They did not reject the app for using an API they have provided.

• yoz-y 5y ago
  They rejected it for (allegedly) requiring it. Apple’s obsession with “all apps must work for everybody” is losing them potentially original or deep apps. The same goes for example for the rule than any iOS game must be playable without a controller. I get the idea that you don’t want people to download programs they can’t use, but I think a better solution would be to update the App Store to better communicate the requirements and make the refunds easier.
  • user-the-name 5y ago
    > They rejected it for (allegedly) requiring it. Yes. You are allowed to use this API, but it is a very risky API, and people will not feel comfortable allowing it. Apple wants people to feel comfortable and safe using their device, and if apps can randomly force you to turn on unsafe APIs, that is ruined. Therefore, you are not allowed to require accesses to protected services to function. It is a very good rule for users.
    • yoz-y 5y ago
      We’ll disagree here. I’m all for warnings and keeping the user knowledgable about what is going to happen if you enable this or that api. However forcing developers to make crippled modes of their apps even though nobody will actually use them in this way is a waste of everybody’s time.