Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

forums.getpebble.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 414 posts

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#301

Post by s73v3r »

Oletros wrote: post #299
s73v3r wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy.

> Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy Can you point where it is stated or the related point in the policy? Thanks

Look for any story where someone said they had their app taken down because they had copyrighted material in the promo pictures or used a trademarked name in the title or copy.

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#302

Post by CHY872 »

bzbarsky wrote: post #283
CHY872 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not super concerned about that. In particular, no such browser exists, so it's largely a semantic argument. Furthermore, there are inherent security risks; so it's easier to just lock it down until there is actually a problem. The bigger problem is that you can't implement a JIT on iOS, because you can't take a writeable page and make it executable. This is a clear security positive for iOS, but does preclude wri…

> In particular, no such browser exists Such a rendering engine does exist (Servo), and one can build a browser around it (and that will in fact happen). Just not on iDevices. > The bigger problem is that you can't implement a JIT on iOS You're not allowed to implement an interpreter either, if the code that you're interpreting is downloaded from the internet.

Not quite. I did consider Servo, but it's hardly ready for use in the wild. It'd fall foul of many iOS guidelines, not just the 'no browser' one. It'd also fall foul of the 'only C, C++, Objective-C, Swift' guideline, for example.

I didn't know the second point, but it's clearly there for the same reason; it's an easy way to stop apps from including new functionality and bypassing the review process.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#303

Post by krschultz »

AlexandrB wrote: post #69
fmsf wrote: post #47

My guess is that in Europe they could get an anti trust lawsuit. Comparing it with internet explorer on windows anti trust lawsuit from EU, Microsoft was forced to acknowledge and provide choice of competitor platforms that where compatible with the system (Firefox, Chrome, Opera,...). Under the same logic, pebble is just an laternative platform compatible with the system (IOS + SeaNav). But either way that is a beha…

Antitrust requires a monopoly position, which Apple doesn't have (but Microsoft did have). Apple are being dicks and should be smacked down for it in the market, but I doubt antitrust would stick.

That's not accurate. Apple themselves have already lost a suit about anti-competitive behavior in a market in which they do not have a monopoly. [1]

I don't know about you, but I've bought hundreds of ebooks from the largest ebook retailer on Earth - and it's not Apple.

There is way more nuance to it all than "do they have a monopoly or not" and there are a range of anti-competitive practices. There are also different laws in different jurisdictions of the US and abroad. The EU has a much stricter definition.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation#eBook_pr...

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#304

Post by Oletros »

moskie wrote: post #276
Oletros wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Doing an anti competitive practice is legal if you don't have a monopoly?

That is my understanding. For example, Microsoft got in trouble for pre-installing IE on Windows because they had monopoly in the OS market. If they didn't have that monopoly, they would not have been penalized.

Pre installing a browser is not an anti competitive practice.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#305

Post by s73v3r »

joenathan wrote: post #226
s73v3r wrote: post #215

Title is misleading. They're not rejecting apps that code in support for Pebble. They're rejecting apps that say they support it in the App Store copy. This is nothing new; you've never been able to mention other platforms in your App Store copy.

Title isn't misleading. So you can support the Pebble Smartwatch, you just can't tell anyone about it?

Title is completely misleading, as it makes it sound like they're searching inside the binary's symbols for Pebble's SDK. They're not doing that.

You simply cannot use Apple's platform to advertise alternate products. Just like you can't mention Android or Chromecast in your App Store copy. Put it in the app or on your website.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#306

Post by jahewson »

brianpgordon wrote: post #293
moskie wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is my understanding. For example, Microsoft got in trouble for pre-installing IE on Windows because they had monopoly in the OS market. If they didn't have that monopoly, they would not have been penalized.

Having a monopoly might put you under the microscope, but you certainly can't get away with anticompetitive practices like price fixing or wage fixing even if you don't have a monopoly.

Yes but those are just about the only things which you can't get away with. The US has very weak consumer protection laws in general.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#307

Post by krschultz »

epaga wrote: post #26

Flagged since this is complete non-news. Apple Watch is now an Apple product so it's now against the rules to mention Pebble in your app store description, a rule which has been around for a LONG time. EDIT: OK, OK. Unflagged since you apparently all really want to talk about this. :)

I interpret the flag to mean "spam" or "offensive", not "This story doesn't interest me". That's why you are getting down votes. If you don't like the story, don't up vote it.

Flagging things that are not spam or offensive either wastes mods time or raises the bar on what it takes to flag actually offensive things off the site.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#308

Post by Someone1234 »

kbenson wrote: post #285
Someone1234 wrote: post #15

This forum appears to have an invalid certificate: Domain: forums.getpebble.com CN = *.vanillaforums.com If you use HTTPS Everywhere, you'll want to uncheck this specific site, remove the HTTPS part of the URL and reload. PS - I love HTTPS Everywhere but it always surprises me just how many sites have broken HTTPS implementations.

Just because the same IP address also listens on port 443 doesn't mean that delivers the same website, and assuming it does is not a failure on their part, it's a failure of assumptions you or some software you utilize (knowingly or not) has made along the way.

Indeed it doesn't. So why are they returning status code 200?

> not a failure on their part, it's a failure of assumptions you or some software you utilize

No, it is a failure on their part. They're returning the wrong status code. The software I utilize checks that, they got it wrong. Return 404 instead.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#309

Post by tapoxi »

tdkl wrote: post #246
d0m wrote: post #76

It's a bit tricky. I agree with most comments here that Apple is in the right to control what appear in the description and metadata. Not just from a competitive standpoint but in a way to make the it better for the user experience. That being said, in the Pebble case, I think it makes the user experience worst for the user. I.e. if I have a pebble watch and am looking for an iphone app that play well with it, I'd wa…

> I don't like that approach of forcing everything into the Apple ecosystem. I got tired of that 2 years ago and switched to android So you rather switched to a system where there's a Google Services component that sends your location every 60 seconds (unless device is set to "GPS only") and gets updated without your control ? That's bold.

Apple devices also record your location history and send it to Apple. It's to build a wifi location database.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#310

Post by bzbarsky »

CHY872 wrote: post #302
bzbarsky wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In particular, no such browser exists Such a rendering engine does exist (Servo), and one can build a browser around it (and that will in fact happen). Just not on iDevices. > The bigger problem is that you can't implement a JIT on iOS You're not allowed to implement an interpreter either, if the code that you're interpreting is downloaded from the internet.

Not quite. I did consider Servo, but it's hardly ready for use in the wild. It'd fall foul of many iOS guidelines, not just the 'no browser' one. It'd also fall foul of the 'only C, C++, Objective-C, Swift' guideline, for example. I didn't know the second point, but it's clearly there for the same reason; it's an easy way to stop apps from including new functionality and bypassing the review process.

Sure, I understand why they have the interpreter rule in place. It just blocks legitimate apps and reduces competition with Apple's products, which is what blumkvist is asking for an example of.

And I wasn't talking specifically about their "no browser" or "no interpreter" guideline, just the sum total of requirements they have for iOS apps. The actual details of which exact requirement block useful things are not that important for purposes of addressing blumkvist's original question, which was how Apple's policies are more restrictive than those of Microsoft 20 years ago in ways that block objectively useful things.

Post reply on HN