Submitted First App

[RagingGoat]

I just want to say thanks to everyone on here who helped me when I had some problems with my code. I submitted my first app to Apple this morning.

Thanks Everyone!

[ArtOfWarfare]

What's the wait time right now for iOS app approvals? I haven't checked, but I'd suspect your app won't be approved until next year. (Just a heads up so you're not disappointed if that's the case.)

[RagingGoat]

It's sitting at around a week or two right now.

[jnoxx]

That's really long! Average waiting time atm is 7-10 days.. At least till 21 December, so what Art is saying, i'm kind of doubting that.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare

...but I'd suspect your app won't be approved until next year.

Next year? What leads you to believe that?

[phr0ze]

Congrats!

[RagingGoat]

Originally Posted by phr0ze

Congrats!

Thanks!

[Ides]

What kind of app is it? Just curious.

[RagingGoat]

Originally Posted by Ides

What kind of app is it? Just curious.

It's an app I did for work. It pulls articles from a few different RSS feeds, shows member benefits, shows our monthly video, links to our social network pages, and shows a photo gallery. That's the majority of it. I've got quite a few things I want to add to it which I'll start on soon.

[RagingGoat]

How long does an app typically stay "In Review"?

[Reason077]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

How long does an app typically stay "In Review"?

Not long in my experience. Sometimes a few hours. Sometimes less than 5 minutes.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

How long does an app typically stay "In Review"?

For what I've seen, normally only a few hours at most. If it's longer, that typically indicates the App Review Team is "thinking about it", which usually means you should expect to get a rejection at some point. Then the real fun begins!

[RagingGoat]

They ended up rejecting the app after being In Review for 48 hours. They said that only provides a limited set of features. I've appealed the decision so we will see what happens with it.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

They said that only provides a limited set of features.

Does your app provide some functionality beyond what a simple web-app might have?

[RagingGoat]

I did the app for work and have looked at other organizations that have done apps that are very similar or offer less functionality than ours does so I'm wondering how they got approved but we didn't. Ours gets articles from several different RSS feeds, provides easy access to our social network pages, gives access to benefit info for members of the organization, has an embedded YouTube video that gets updated automatically on a monthly basis. There are some other things that I'm planning on adding as updates. Worst case scenario is that they still reject it after the appeal process and I have to go ahead and add the functionality I was planning on adding later.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

...and have looked at other organizations that have done apps that are very similar or offer less functionality than ours does so I'm wondering how they got approved but we didn't.

Ah, the inconsistency of the App Store review process rears its ugly head. Sometimes, it's just a matter of who is doing the review. Good luck with the appeal! Hopefully they can provide some more specific direction on what they expect to see.

[RagingGoat]

It looks like my appeal worked. They said the original rejection was wrong but that they found another problem that needed to be addressed. It was because I mimicked an iOS feature. I asked them to clarify and they said it was because of my pull to refresh functionality looking the way it does in Apple apps. They said to either remove it or revide it so I just took it out. It is now waiting for review again and it looks like it should be approved this time.

[PhoneyDeveloper]

FYI,

Average App Store Review Times:

http://reviewtimes.shinydevelopment.com

[dejo]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

I asked them to clarify and they said it was because of my pull to refresh functionality looking the way it does in Apple apps.

Did you use UIRefreshControl? If so, I wonder why Apple would reject an app for using a control that they've provided to us.

[RagingGoat]

Here is what I used:

- (void)viewDidLoad
{
    self.title = @"Public Affairs";
    UIRefreshControl *refresh = [[UIRefreshControl alloc] init];
    refresh.attributedTitle = [[NSAttributedString alloc] initWithString:@"Pull to Refresh"];
    [refresh addTarget:self action:@selector(refreshView:)forControlEvents:UIControlEventValueChanged];
    self.refreshControl = refresh;
}

-(void)refreshView:(UIRefreshControl *)refresh
{
    refresh.attributedTitle = [[NSAttributedString alloc] initWithString:@"Refreshing data..."];
    
    // custom refresh logic would be placed here...
    
    NSDateFormatter *formatter = [[NSDateFormatter alloc] init];
    [formatter setDateFormat:@"MMM d, h:mm a"];
    NSString *lastUpdated = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"Last updated on %@",[formatter stringFromDate:[NSDate date]]];
    refresh.attributedTitle = [[NSAttributedString alloc] initWithString:lastUpdated];
    [refresh endRefreshing];
}

----------

They rejected it because the pull to refresh looks like it does in Apple's apps. If you look at third party apps that use it such as Facebook and Twitter, it looks different. It really doesn't bother me because I was questioning whether or not I really needed it in there anyway. I'm not getting too worked up about it. I removed it and submitted it again. It was exactly a difficult fix.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

They rejected it because the pull to refresh looks like it does in Apple's apps.

So, you are using UIRefreshControl! Of course, it's gonna look like Apple's apps then. Isn't that why they provided it? For consistency's sake? That seems like saying they rejected your app because you used a rounded-rect UIButton that looks like it does in Apple's apps or they rejected your app cause your navBar looks too much like theirs. Seems strange.

Unless of course you weren't using to refresh a table-view, which the docs clearly state is what it is intended for. Could that be the case with you?

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

If you look at third party apps that use it such as Facebook and Twitter, it looks different.

Yeah, that's probably because they aren't using UIRefreshControl.

[RagingGoat]

Originally Posted by dejo

Unless of course you weren't using to refresh a table-view, which the docs clearly state is what it is intended for. Could that be the case with you?

It was refreshing a table view that contained articles from a RSS feed.

Here is what they said:

During the review of your application, we found the pull to refresh feature, shown in the screenshot, mimics an iOS interface and behavior.

It would be appropriate to remove or revise this feature. Thank you, and we look forward to reviewing your revised application.

[Saladinos]

Originally Posted by RagingGoat

Here is what they said:

During the review of your application, we found the pull to refresh feature, shown in the screenshot, mimics an iOS interface and behavior.

It would be appropriate to remove or revise this feature. Thank you, and we look forward to reviewing your revised application.

Reply that you're using UIRefreshControl, part of the iOS 6 SDK.

You're not mimicking anything; you're using the same provided control.

[ntrigue]

Originally Posted by Saladinos

Reply that you're using UIRefreshControl, part of the iOS 6 SDK.

You're not mimicking anything; you're using the same provided control.

And please let us know the response as I am using UIRefreshControl whenever possible.

[RagingGoat]

I've asked them to clarify why it was cause for rejection. I will let everyone here know what they tell me.