4 ms·

Total BS title. They are rejecting apps that mention other products in the metadata. If you submit an app that says 'also available on Android' the same thing w

Total BS title. They are rejecting apps that mention other products in the metadata. If you submit an app that says 'also available on Android' the same thing will happen and it has been enforced for years. The rejection was very clear.

Touche 12y ago
It's worse discussing though because mentioning Pebble has not been enforced for years, it only started to be enforced when Apple created a competitive product.
- ptaipale 12y ago
  Which looks like evidence about the anti-competitive nature of Apple's actions.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  Sure it can be discussed but the rule is quite clear and my problem is with the title of the article which is completely untrue.
hurricaneSlider 12y ago
That is a very different situation. The app in question has pebble integration. It is not simply saying that SeaNav also has a pebble app, it is saying that one of SeaNav's features is that it can communicate with an Apple Phone.
- s73v3r 12y ago
  It's not a different situation at all.
BinaryIdiot 12y ago
This is incorrect. They are rejecting apps that mention other mobile platforms. Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform. Them reclassifying it seems awfully timely. This makes the user experience of pebble watch owners worse as they won't be able to search for applications that support Pebble anymore; they'll have to find them elsewhere. Not being able to discover applications in an app store is just stupid.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  >> "Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform." Aren't smart watches a type of mobile platform?
  - BinaryIdiot 12y ago
    If we want to be pedantic...I don't think so. Mobile implies a device that is connected to the world, standalone and is small / handheld; smart watches are only accessories for mobile devices that can't stand on their own. I would argue they're different but the word mobile can be interpreted various ways. It would be nice for Apple to be more explicit in their terms.

Touche 12y ago

It's worse discussing though because mentioning Pebble has not been enforced for years, it only started to be enforced when Apple created a competitive product.

ptaipale 12y ago
Which looks like evidence about the anti-competitive nature of Apple's actions.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
Sure it can be discussed but the rule is quite clear and my problem is with the title of the article which is completely untrue.

hurricaneSlider 12y ago

That is a very different situation. The app in question has pebble integration. It is not simply saying that SeaNav also has a pebble app, it is saying that one of SeaNav's features is that it can communicate with an Apple Phone.

s73v3r 12y ago
It's not a different situation at all.

BinaryIdiot 12y ago

This is incorrect. They are rejecting apps that mention other mobile platforms. Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform. Them reclassifying it seems awfully timely. This makes the user experience of pebble watch owners worse as they won't be able to search for applications that support Pebble anymore; they'll have to find them elsewhere. Not being able to discover applications in an app store is just stupid.

k-mcgrady 12y ago
>> "Pebble is not a mobile platform, it's a smart watch platform." Aren't smart watches a type of mobile platform?
- BinaryIdiot 12y ago
  If we want to be pedantic...I don't think so. Mobile implies a device that is connected to the world, standalone and is small / handheld; smart watches are only accessories for mobile devices that can't stand on their own. I would argue they're different but the word mobile can be interpreted various ways. It would be nice for Apple to be more explicit in their terms.