Live data from Hacker News

Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

forums.getpebble.com

411–414 of 414 posts

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, Apple isn't PULLING apps now that the Apple Watch is released. The Pebble app is still there, and you can still use it. This whole uproar is about a single developer who had his app denied by a specific reviewer at Apple for a basic breach of their terms and conditions for putting Apps on the App Store. The general consensus seems to be that a simple rewording (maybe not even having to remove the word '…

> First of all, Apple isn't PULLING apps now that the Apple Watch is released. The Pebble app is still there, and you can still use it. For now. A better analogy would be if Amazon suddenly refused to stock new Apple TVs and Rokus and Chromecasts in its warehouses and only stocked Fire TV devices, if we want to get all semantic about it. > This whole uproar is about a single developer who had his app denied There are…

> Yes they do, per U.S. and European (at the very least; probably others are included) antitrust laws. Using one's market position to conspire to monopolize runs afoul of them.

I'm sorry, but I have to *sigh at that one. They don't have a monopoly on anything but THEIR OWN marketplace.

Anyway, have fun with your opinions man. I'm sure you're a bit hit at parties.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#412
post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor wording for my part, it must say "it is not an anti competitive practice per se"

Right, the fact it is not illegally anticompetitive per se shows that it is an answer to your original question. > Doing an anti competitive practice is legal if you don't have a monopoly? A practice being anti-competitive (in a legal sense) depends on the act being done by a company that is a monopoly, or part of an oligopoly. For example, a company giving their product away for free is not illegal per se . Say, as…

Microsoft was not found guilty for giving away IE

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#413

Until this happens again I would suspect this is just a mistake by whoever reviewed the app for Apple.

This is the only sensible reply on this thread. From the response that Apple provided: > We noticed that your app or its metadata contains irrelevant platform information in the app. Providing future platform compatibility plans, or other platform references, is not appropriate for the App Store. > Specifically, your app and app description declare support for the Pebble Smartwatch. It is pretty clear that the review…

The forum OP posted this:

UPDATE 24th April:- Good news. Apple rang me directly late last night UK time at Pocket Mariner , apologised for rejecting our app in error and immediately approved our SeaNav app for sale.

Re: Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support

#414
post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but when you don't think you're actually breaking the rules, "you never did anything about that guy" is good support. This is not a case of somebody breaking the rules and trying to say that the rules do not apply. This is a case of the rules suddenly being reinterpreted to mean something completely different from what they used to mean. Imagine if you stepped on a worm and then got arrested for murder. Would i…

"Yeah, but when you don't think you're actually breaking the rules, "you never did anything about that guy" is good support." No, it isn't. The other guy is irrelevant; the fact of the matter is, YOU broke the rules.

Every app literally breaks the rules. I do not know of one that doesn't.
Post reply on HN