6 ms·

Yes, I understand why Apple doesn't pull FB/IG/WA/Uber/etc but as a smaller developer it's incredibly frustrating to have the full rules applied to me but not t

Yes, I understand why Apple doesn't pull FB/IG/WA/Uber/etc but as a smaller developer it's incredibly frustrating to have the full rules applied to me but not the big players. A week or two ago I had to fight with app review over some functionality that was behind a login screen (they thought it should be public, I disagreed) and for my pre-permission-request screens (you know, the screen almost every app shows before firing the system prompt). Turns out you can have that screen but you can't ask a question on that screen or offer a way to dismiss and not get the system dialog. That was news to me since I had seen countless "Do you want to enable push notifications (yes|no)?" screens in top apps but that rule has changed and no longer allows you to pre-ask. I complied but the very next day I opened an app from a billion dollar company and I got a pre-ask that I was able to dismiss without popping the system dialog. wtf... Why am I expected to bend over backwards for app review when these serial abusers get a free pass (no ban AND they can do things smaller apps get slapped down for)? I know the answer is "money" but I fucking hate it.

galleywest200 4y ago
Removing text seems like an incredibly minor change request.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > Removing text seems like an incredibly minor change request. Can you expand on this? I'm not exactly sure what you mean. To clarify, I had 2 issues: * App review thought part of my app should not be being a login screen, the data on this screen was fetched via our API was was authenticated (not a super easy change to expose that and we don't expose it to unauthed clients on purpose. * Our app asked the user if they wanted to allow location access to see nearby stores on our map page (only asked when they went to the map page). We didn't pop the system dialog unless they agreed first to our own permission prompt (since you can only pop the system dialog once). This is against the rules now, which is fine, my frustration stems from continuing to see this practice everywhere.
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    > This is against the rules now, which is fine, my frustration stems from continuing to see this practice everywhere. This kind of sounds like being mad that the cop pulled you over for speeding, despite everyone else also speeding. I know it sucks and it feels like you're being singled out, but generally "everyone else is breaking the rule, too" has never been convincing to rule enforcers. I worked at a company that always tried to walk the line right up to the edge of Apple's rules, and unsurprisingly kept running into trouble with app reviews. The company kept wanting to dig in and fight because "our_competitor does the same thing". My advice was always that it's pointless, and we'd be better off just concentrating on our app and fixing it. At this point in my career, I almost feel like I could make money simply being an "AppStore Rules Consultant" who flies into a company, says "Just Do What Apple Said In Their Message!" and take home my fee.
    - joshstrange 4y ago
      > This kind of sounds like being mad that the cop pulled you over for speeding, despite everyone else also speeding. It's a little closer to being pulled over in a Honda Accord with 200K+ miles on it going 71 in a 70 zone while Tesla's and BMW's fly by at 90+. Also those Tesla/BMW owners have had hundreds of tickets but somehow keep their licenses. Yes, I know this is actually probably completely/near accurate to the real world, money runs everything, but it doesn't mean I have to be ok with it. I'm not advocating I should be allowed to "speed", just that it's frustrating to be the only one getting pulled over with (ok, I've stretched this metaphor as far as I can stand) a tiny dev team while billion/trillion dollar companies, for which my entire team is less than a rounding error, get away with murder.
    - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
      The problem is that the rules are enforced differently based on the reviewer you get, and how s/he feels that day. This is blatantly obvious after time dealt with reviewers for more than 3 submissions. So that cop who pulled you over? Did he have a bad day with his wife that morning? You’re getting a ticket. Tomorrow? Possibly not.
    - mod 4y ago
- jasonlotito 4y ago
  It might be if your only language is English. If not, it requires going back and getting translations done again. And it's not necessarily as easy as just removing the offending text. Text is very contextual, and the removal of some text might necessitate changing other text. I'd not want to suggest that something is "minor" in a system I'm not familiar with.
secretsatan 4y ago
FB did once have their developer certificate once by Apple : https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-offered-gift-cards-for-root-level-access-to-ios-users-data/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-...
- joshstrange 4y ago
  Right but that was just their enterprise cert and didn't affect their big apps, only internal apps and their gross VPN apps (which they were distributing via enterprise cert to get around app review).
tonmoy 4y ago
For what it’s worth, I know FB/IG spies on me and avoid installing their apps, whereas I’d feel much safer with a small app like yours.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  Same here. I only use Facebook and IG websites on mobile.
- justapassenger 4y ago
  Counter argument - small apps _usually_ have much more trackers, coming from many different sources. As a result, your data is syphoned to many dozens of entities, and each of the faces less scrutiny than FB/IG.
  - arrosenberg 4y ago
    Small apps should face less scrutiny than billion dollar companies. It's much easier to regulate Segment, Google and Facebook than doing it to every small business in America.
    - justapassenger 4y ago
      From regulations point of view - sure. Which is also the reason why big tech is general better with privacy, as weird as it may sound. If you care about privacy, small apps are much more dangerous (on average of course). Have you seen data practices from smaller data brokers vs big tech? Big tech uses your data, but they try to protect it (with various levels of success), as it’s more valuable to them. Small data brokers literally sell everything (and not like big tech, where they sell you services that utilize it, but raw data) they can, directly, to anyone.
      - arrosenberg 4y ago
        That sounds like what Google's PR department would say, right before their lobbying arm turns around and promotes a data privacy law that absolutely obliterates citizen rights. The smaller data broker can't afford the privacy-compromising lobbyist department, so I would still rate them less dangerous for privacy overall. I'm not even sure the big companies do a better job, it's certainly more damaging when it goes badly (e.g. Equifax)
cageface 4y ago
My life has improved immeasurably since I gave up iOS dev and went back to the web. My baseline frustration level is so much lower.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  That might be a viable path if not for push notifications and the fact that companies want an app more than anything. I've used cross platform frameworks in the past and had the web version up and all I hear is "when app?", even though it's the same codebase, same look, sometimes without even leveraging anything like push notifications or other app-only features. They literally will not even look at the web version. I've proven this over 10+ different companies. I deliver the web version, then I get started on app store hell and only after the app (iOS is all they often care about, at least at the start) is out do they start giving feedback. It's frustrating since they normally have had access to the identical web version for weeks but they just don't care. I love the web, but users and companies just want apps, and I want to get paid.
  - cageface 4y ago
    I've switched to working on other kinds of apps, more rich desktop kinds of apps. I enjoy this a lot more too since most mobile apps are pretty dumb and gimmicky. Of course if you're doing client work you have to build what your clients are asking for and yeah the web is not a substitute for native in all cases.
    - SoftTalker 4y ago
      Or find different clients.
  - LeifCarrotson 4y ago
    Why do companies want an app? Is it just for telemetry? Just for push notifications? Just because their competitor/idol has an app and they want one too?
    - 4y ago
blint_carton 4y ago
Agreed. I supported a relatively large retail app (about a million users) with a team of 5-8. Apple review process was always a risk. I've had times as well where my submission was denied, but in the appeal process would point to a larger app that did the same thing and it would rarely help.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  The reply I got when I pointed at other apps was "Please file a report via the App Store, other apps not following the rules doesn't give you a free pass". :rolleyes: I also once got told (on the phone with a reviewer) that I couldn't say Allow "My App" to use your location? In the title of the permission dialog because I was "leading" the user to allow. Never mind that the title of that dialog is system-generated and you can only edit the description that shows underneath. I went 3-4 rounds with the reviewer saying I didn't control that while they insisted I did/could. I finally gave up, made 1 other change they requested, then resubmitted and it went through. Reviewer roulette sucks.
eloisius 4y ago
> or offer a way to dismiss and not get the system dialog. I wish it was applied fairly, but I am thankful for that rule, because it reduces the amount of “soft requests” where the app will continue to pester me relentlessly about enabling access to my contacts or something
- joshstrange 4y ago
  I see both sides here. It'd be different if I didn't hear from clients/users about how they can't get push/location/etc feature to work only to find out they dismissed/denied the initial request. I have code I move from project to project to handle the soft-request and to handle the "you denied the system request, let me guide you to where you need to go in settings to fix this". Turns out my soft-request code goes against the rules (ok, that's fine, I just with it was constant) so I'll remove that but getting only 1 try to request is rough (though I agree it would be worse if apps could request that an unlimited number of times). I don't know what the good middle ground is here, maybe 1 request is the middle ground.
- delecti 4y ago
  It might not work on iOS, but at least on Android one trick is to accept the "soft" request, and then reject the OS dialog.
hedora 4y ago
This sounds like classic anticompetitive collusion between monopolies to me. If this behavior really is common, I suggest complaining to the relevant authorities.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  I know you are trying to be helpful but I can't stop laughing. There are no "relevant authorities", it's Apple/Google's way or the highway. Even if there were "relevant authorities" I don't have the funds/time to buy the justice I want.
  - hedora 4y ago
    There are multiple antitrust cases underway against both those companies. I'm sure the parts of the EU trying to block Facebook spying and outlaw app stores would be extremely interested, for example.
toast0 4y ago
> but that rule has changed and no longer allows you to pre-ask. I complied but the very next day I opened an app from a billion dollar company and I got a pre-ask that I was able to dismiss without popping the system dialog. wtf... Apple enforcement on rule changes has several different options: a) only applied to new apps b) only applied on next app submission c) app will be removed on date unless it's fixed This sort of change seems likely to be in category A, and then over time will be in category B and eventually the billion dollar apps will get an update denied until they fix it. They may drag their feet a little or a lot first. Some of the subjective review things will get flagged only sometimes, so you might get through if you resubmit with no changes, or if you only address some of the requests. Inconsistent enforcement is frustrating, of course.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  I know this is the case for certain changes such as allowing users to delete their accounts. I remember the new apps/updates being bifurcated with updates being allowed for a few months after it went into effect for new apps but for this system dialog change I'm not aware of anything being said publicly about this, I think the rules just changed internally. My google-fu might be failing me but I can't even find articles about this change. It was news to me (it's in the HIG, not in the guidelines) when we got hit with it and normally I keep abreast of any new requirements/rule-changes and when they go into effect. I completely understand and agree with the different options you outline but I don't think that was done in this case, at least publically. Please, if I'm wrong and someone has a link to an article about this I'd love to see it/know about it.
isodev 4y ago
Imaging myself getting the same treatment as Facebook - as an indie dev, I prefer my app to get rejected rather than deal with a lawsuit of that magnitude. Complying with App Review guidelines is a small effort, after all.
s1k3 4y ago
I actually specifically decided not to start any app companies because of the risk inherent with being on the App Store. Apple wield their power to heavy handidly. I’ve been affected by it at my last couple of jobs where apple just stonewalls or otherwise makes a complete mess of trying to get something in the App Store. It’s too much platform risk. They’re starting to push innovators away.
JimDabell 4y ago
> Turns out you can have that screen but you can't ask a question on that screen or offer a way to dismiss and not get the system dialog. That was news to me since I had seen countless "Do you want to enable push notifications (yes|no)?" screens in top apps but that rule has changed and no longer allows you to pre-ask. We regularly (multiple times per month) launch new applications in new Apple developer accounts where we present a screen explaining what notifications we send and two buttons, one of which says “Notify me” that triggers the system permissions prompt, and one of which says “Not now” and continues without triggering the system permissions prompt. I’m not sure of the precise difference Apple sees between what you are doing and what we are doing, but this is not a roadblock for us, so perhaps copy that approach more closely and Apple will relax a bit?
- joshstrange 4y ago
  I'm in the exact same boat as you. It's a whitelabel app that we have launched many times in the past on new Apple Developer accounts but we just randomly got hit with this. Our screen also said "Enable Location" or "Not now" but that wasn't satisfactory. If you look at the "Pre-alert screens" section of this HIG document [0] you will see even your way of doing it isn't allowed but with all things app review, it's a game of roulette if the reviewer notices/cares. I've run into this before where I set up 2 apps within days of each other, different accounts, same core base base, and one gets dinged in review and the other doesn't. I've shipped new apps that didn't have the ability to delete user data well after Apple's deadline and some sneak through ("sneak" but I wasn't trying to sneak, I just forgot to add it to one of my apps, I quickly added it in the next update so I didn't run into a brick wall later if they noticed) and some are caught. [0] https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/patterns/accessing-private-data#pre-alert-screens https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
  - JimDabell 4y ago
    Apple are definitely inconsistent in how they apply their rules but we’ve never had to tweak this screen as far as I know, across several hundred applications. Maybe it was a one-off? In my experience, Apple don’t really reject things based on the HIG any more. Last time they did for me was back in 2008. If they rejected things based on the HIG, they’d reject almost everything – look at how many applications abuse launch images to show a splash screen, for instance.
isk517 4y ago
I just got back from a trip were I was visiting a lot of older relatives and everyone of them now has a iPad that about 40-70% of their usage is FaceBook. In a battle between Apple and Meta I honestly wonder who would blink first but my money would be on Meta. Apple has already made their money and the primary FaceBook audience isn't rushing out to buy a new iPad every year, where as losing complete access to the Apple market would immediately have a huge impact on Meta's bottom line.

galleywest200 4y ago

Removing text seems like an incredibly minor change request.

joshstrange 4y ago
> Removing text seems like an incredibly minor change request. Can you expand on this? I'm not exactly sure what you mean. To clarify, I had 2 issues: * App review thought part of my app should not be being a login screen, the data on this screen was fetched via our API was was authenticated (not a super easy change to expose that and we don't expose it to unauthed clients on purpose. * Our app asked the user if they wanted to allow location access to see nearby stores on our map page (only asked when they went to the map page). We didn't pop the system dialog unless they agreed first to our own permission prompt (since you can only pop the system dialog once). This is against the rules now, which is fine, my frustration stems from continuing to see this practice everywhere.
- ryandrake 4y ago
  > This is against the rules now, which is fine, my frustration stems from continuing to see this practice everywhere. This kind of sounds like being mad that the cop pulled you over for speeding, despite everyone else also speeding. I know it sucks and it feels like you're being singled out, but generally "everyone else is breaking the rule, too" has never been convincing to rule enforcers. I worked at a company that always tried to walk the line right up to the edge of Apple's rules, and unsurprisingly kept running into trouble with app reviews. The company kept wanting to dig in and fight because "our_competitor does the same thing". My advice was always that it's pointless, and we'd be better off just concentrating on our app and fixing it. At this point in my career, I almost feel like I could make money simply being an "AppStore Rules Consultant" who flies into a company, says "Just Do What Apple Said In Their Message!" and take home my fee.
  - joshstrange 4y ago
    > This kind of sounds like being mad that the cop pulled you over for speeding, despite everyone else also speeding. It's a little closer to being pulled over in a Honda Accord with 200K+ miles on it going 71 in a 70 zone while Tesla's and BMW's fly by at 90+. Also those Tesla/BMW owners have had hundreds of tickets but somehow keep their licenses. Yes, I know this is actually probably completely/near accurate to the real world, money runs everything, but it doesn't mean I have to be ok with it. I'm not advocating I should be allowed to "speed", just that it's frustrating to be the only one getting pulled over with (ok, I've stretched this metaphor as far as I can stand) a tiny dev team while billion/trillion dollar companies, for which my entire team is less than a rounding error, get away with murder.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    The problem is that the rules are enforced differently based on the reviewer you get, and how s/he feels that day. This is blatantly obvious after time dealt with reviewers for more than 3 submissions. So that cop who pulled you over? Did he have a bad day with his wife that morning? You’re getting a ticket. Tomorrow? Possibly not.
  - mod 4y ago
jasonlotito 4y ago
It might be if your only language is English. If not, it requires going back and getting translations done again. And it's not necessarily as easy as just removing the offending text. Text is very contextual, and the removal of some text might necessitate changing other text. I'd not want to suggest that something is "minor" in a system I'm not familiar with.

secretsatan 4y ago

FB did once have their developer certificate once by Apple : https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-offered-gift-cards-for-root-level-access-to-ios-users-data/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/01/facebook-and-google-...

joshstrange 4y ago
Right but that was just their enterprise cert and didn't affect their big apps, only internal apps and their gross VPN apps (which they were distributing via enterprise cert to get around app review).

tonmoy 4y ago

For what it’s worth, I know FB/IG spies on me and avoid installing their apps, whereas I’d feel much safer with a small app like yours.

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
Same here. I only use Facebook and IG websites on mobile.
justapassenger 4y ago
Counter argument - small apps _usually_ have much more trackers, coming from many different sources. As a result, your data is syphoned to many dozens of entities, and each of the faces less scrutiny than FB/IG.
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  Small apps should face less scrutiny than billion dollar companies. It's much easier to regulate Segment, Google and Facebook than doing it to every small business in America.
  - justapassenger 4y ago
    From regulations point of view - sure. Which is also the reason why big tech is general better with privacy, as weird as it may sound. If you care about privacy, small apps are much more dangerous (on average of course). Have you seen data practices from smaller data brokers vs big tech? Big tech uses your data, but they try to protect it (with various levels of success), as it’s more valuable to them. Small data brokers literally sell everything (and not like big tech, where they sell you services that utilize it, but raw data) they can, directly, to anyone.
    - arrosenberg 4y ago
      That sounds like what Google's PR department would say, right before their lobbying arm turns around and promotes a data privacy law that absolutely obliterates citizen rights. The smaller data broker can't afford the privacy-compromising lobbyist department, so I would still rate them less dangerous for privacy overall. I'm not even sure the big companies do a better job, it's certainly more damaging when it goes badly (e.g. Equifax)

cageface 4y ago

My life has improved immeasurably since I gave up iOS dev and went back to the web. My baseline frustration level is so much lower.

joshstrange 4y ago
That might be a viable path if not for push notifications and the fact that companies want an app more than anything. I've used cross platform frameworks in the past and had the web version up and all I hear is "when app?", even though it's the same codebase, same look, sometimes without even leveraging anything like push notifications or other app-only features. They literally will not even look at the web version. I've proven this over 10+ different companies. I deliver the web version, then I get started on app store hell and only after the app (iOS is all they often care about, at least at the start) is out do they start giving feedback. It's frustrating since they normally have had access to the identical web version for weeks but they just don't care. I love the web, but users and companies just want apps, and I want to get paid.
- cageface 4y ago
  I've switched to working on other kinds of apps, more rich desktop kinds of apps. I enjoy this a lot more too since most mobile apps are pretty dumb and gimmicky. Of course if you're doing client work you have to build what your clients are asking for and yeah the web is not a substitute for native in all cases.
  - SoftTalker 4y ago
    Or find different clients.
- LeifCarrotson 4y ago
  Why do companies want an app? Is it just for telemetry? Just for push notifications? Just because their competitor/idol has an app and they want one too?
  - 4y ago

blint_carton 4y ago

Agreed. I supported a relatively large retail app (about a million users) with a team of 5-8. Apple review process was always a risk. I've had times as well where my submission was denied, but in the appeal process would point to a larger app that did the same thing and it would rarely help.

joshstrange 4y ago
The reply I got when I pointed at other apps was "Please file a report via the App Store, other apps not following the rules doesn't give you a free pass". :rolleyes: I also once got told (on the phone with a reviewer) that I couldn't say Allow "My App" to use your location? In the title of the permission dialog because I was "leading" the user to allow. Never mind that the title of that dialog is system-generated and you can only edit the description that shows underneath. I went 3-4 rounds with the reviewer saying I didn't control that while they insisted I did/could. I finally gave up, made 1 other change they requested, then resubmitted and it went through. Reviewer roulette sucks.

eloisius 4y ago

> or offer a way to dismiss and not get the system dialog. I wish it was applied fairly, but I am thankful for that rule, because it reduces the amount of “soft requests” where the app will continue to pester me relentlessly about enabling access to my contacts or something

joshstrange 4y ago
I see both sides here. It'd be different if I didn't hear from clients/users about how they can't get push/location/etc feature to work only to find out they dismissed/denied the initial request. I have code I move from project to project to handle the soft-request and to handle the "you denied the system request, let me guide you to where you need to go in settings to fix this". Turns out my soft-request code goes against the rules (ok, that's fine, I just with it was constant) so I'll remove that but getting only 1 try to request is rough (though I agree it would be worse if apps could request that an unlimited number of times). I don't know what the good middle ground is here, maybe 1 request is the middle ground.
delecti 4y ago
It might not work on iOS, but at least on Android one trick is to accept the "soft" request, and then reject the OS dialog.

hedora 4y ago

This sounds like classic anticompetitive collusion between monopolies to me. If this behavior really is common, I suggest complaining to the relevant authorities.

joshstrange 4y ago
I know you are trying to be helpful but I can't stop laughing. There are no "relevant authorities", it's Apple/Google's way or the highway. Even if there were "relevant authorities" I don't have the funds/time to buy the justice I want.
- hedora 4y ago
  There are multiple antitrust cases underway against both those companies. I'm sure the parts of the EU trying to block Facebook spying and outlaw app stores would be extremely interested, for example.

toast0 4y ago

> but that rule has changed and no longer allows you to pre-ask. I complied but the very next day I opened an app from a billion dollar company and I got a pre-ask that I was able to dismiss without popping the system dialog. wtf... Apple enforcement on rule changes has several different options: a) only applied to new apps b) only applied on next app submission c) app will be removed on date unless it's fixed This sort of change seems likely to be in category A, and then over time will be in category B and eventually the billion dollar apps will get an update denied until they fix it. They may drag their feet a little or a lot first. Some of the subjective review things will get flagged only sometimes, so you might get through if you resubmit with no changes, or if you only address some of the requests. Inconsistent enforcement is frustrating, of course.

joshstrange 4y ago
I know this is the case for certain changes such as allowing users to delete their accounts. I remember the new apps/updates being bifurcated with updates being allowed for a few months after it went into effect for new apps but for this system dialog change I'm not aware of anything being said publicly about this, I think the rules just changed internally. My google-fu might be failing me but I can't even find articles about this change. It was news to me (it's in the HIG, not in the guidelines) when we got hit with it and normally I keep abreast of any new requirements/rule-changes and when they go into effect. I completely understand and agree with the different options you outline but I don't think that was done in this case, at least publically. Please, if I'm wrong and someone has a link to an article about this I'd love to see it/know about it.

isodev 4y ago

Imaging myself getting the same treatment as Facebook - as an indie dev, I prefer my app to get rejected rather than deal with a lawsuit of that magnitude. Complying with App Review guidelines is a small effort, after all.

s1k3 4y ago

I actually specifically decided not to start any app companies because of the risk inherent with being on the App Store. Apple wield their power to heavy handidly. I’ve been affected by it at my last couple of jobs where apple just stonewalls or otherwise makes a complete mess of trying to get something in the App Store. It’s too much platform risk. They’re starting to push innovators away.

JimDabell 4y ago

> Turns out you can have that screen but you can't ask a question on that screen or offer a way to dismiss and not get the system dialog. That was news to me since I had seen countless "Do you want to enable push notifications (yes|no)?" screens in top apps but that rule has changed and no longer allows you to pre-ask. We regularly (multiple times per month) launch new applications in new Apple developer accounts where we present a screen explaining what notifications we send and two buttons, one of which says “Notify me” that triggers the system permissions prompt, and one of which says “Not now” and continues without triggering the system permissions prompt. I’m not sure of the precise difference Apple sees between what you are doing and what we are doing, but this is not a roadblock for us, so perhaps copy that approach more closely and Apple will relax a bit?

joshstrange 4y ago
I'm in the exact same boat as you. It's a whitelabel app that we have launched many times in the past on new Apple Developer accounts but we just randomly got hit with this. Our screen also said "Enable Location" or "Not now" but that wasn't satisfactory. If you look at the "Pre-alert screens" section of this HIG document [0] you will see even your way of doing it isn't allowed but with all things app review, it's a game of roulette if the reviewer notices/cares. I've run into this before where I set up 2 apps within days of each other, different accounts, same core base base, and one gets dinged in review and the other doesn't. I've shipped new apps that didn't have the ability to delete user data well after Apple's deadline and some sneak through ("sneak" but I wasn't trying to sneak, I just forgot to add it to one of my apps, I quickly added it in the next update so I didn't run into a brick wall later if they noticed) and some are caught. [0] https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/patterns/accessing-private-data#pre-alert-screens https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
- JimDabell 4y ago
  Apple are definitely inconsistent in how they apply their rules but we’ve never had to tweak this screen as far as I know, across several hundred applications. Maybe it was a one-off? In my experience, Apple don’t really reject things based on the HIG any more. Last time they did for me was back in 2008. If they rejected things based on the HIG, they’d reject almost everything – look at how many applications abuse launch images to show a splash screen, for instance.

isk517 4y ago

I just got back from a trip were I was visiting a lot of older relatives and everyone of them now has a iPad that about 40-70% of their usage is FaceBook. In a battle between Apple and Meta I honestly wonder who would blink first but my money would be on Meta. Apple has already made their money and the primary FaceBook audience isn't rushing out to buy a new iPad every year, where as losing complete access to the Apple market would immediately have a huge impact on Meta's bottom line.