Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iOS Required Device Capabilities

X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
Thanks.
I disqualified iPads by requiring the camera flash, and that got approved.
I'll be more obvious next time and look at what you're suggesting.
Both times there is a good reason, it's protecting iPads from damage.

This time, I don't want an iPad taken hiking using GPS in an environment I know to be rough.
 
ArtOfWarfare

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
9,561
6,059
xArtx said:
This time, I don't want an iPad taken hiking using GPS in an environment I know to be rough.
Click to expand...

I would say, if anything, to just have a warning to the user that what they're doing is a bad idea. You don't know if they have an iPad case built to protect it from anything.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
The iPad version's layout is completely different,
and I'm also lazy with boring things :)

I guess you never know if something will be rejected,
but I don't think that will be a reason this time.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
I wonder if Apple allows you to cheat for a device requirement. For instance indicating that the phone app is required even though your app does not need it. That would limit an app to an iPhone, for now.
Click to expand...
We will both find out ;)

It wants both the phone app, a camera flash, and GPS to keep it on
GPS equipped iPhones. It's more than just protecting the iPads now.

I was given permission to use data from four Government maps that sell commercially.
That means I convinced someone to make a choice that has no potential
to increase the sale of their paper based maps, for a goodwill project.

They did show some concern about the maps being printable,
and that's ok, but I fear the bigger the screen is, the easier it would
become to assemble a printable map from a sequence of screenshots!
 
thewitt

thewitt

macrumors 68020
Sep 13, 2011
2,102
1,523
xArtx said:
Thanks.
I disqualified iPads by requiring the camera flash, and that got approved.
I'll be more obvious next time and look at what you're suggesting.
Both times there is a good reason, it's protecting iPads from damage.

This time, I don't want an iPad taken hiking using GPS in an environment I know to be rough.
Click to expand...

Why do you care where I use my iPad?
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
I thought I made that clear in a message that you didn't quote.
The more important reason now is to protect the
agreement I made with the copyright owner of the maps.
On an iPad, it would be easier to reproduce a map with a sequence of screenshots... for something that is silly to use as a hiking GPS.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
xStep said:
I wonder if Apple allows you to cheat for a device requirement. For instance indicating that the phone app is required even though your app does not need it. That would limit an app to an iPhone, for now.
Click to expand...

Looks like the answer is yes.

Disqualified iPad and older iPhones by requiring camera flash,
Disqualified iPads (again) by requiring the stock phone App,
where the App has no requirement for either the camera or phone app.

I did explain the reason in the review notes when submitting my App,
and acknowledged that the requirements are there for the sole purpose
of preventing iPads running the App.

I did support 4 inch retina, and also included an iPad screenshot to show
it was a deliberate choice, and wasn't just being lazy about supporting the iPad screen size.

Funny, the iPad screenshot had text printed over it stating that the image should never be seen! :D

One more thing... has anyone got
Code: 
exit(0);
approved?
I did an option that will cause the App to auto bail if the battery falls below 30%.
That's the one I thought might have caused trouble.
 
Last edited:
X

xStep

macrumors 68020
Jan 28, 2003
2,031
143
Less lost in L.A.
xArtx said:
Looks like the answer is yes.

...

One more thing... has anyone got
Code: 
exit(0);
approved?
I did an option that will cause the App to auto bail if the battery falls below 30%.
That's the one I thought might have caused trouble.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the update. Good knowledge to keep in the back of ones mind for future reference.

As for the 30% bail out. I don't think you should be making that arbitrary decision for the user. That is a lot of remaining power and the status bar should be displayed and informing them of it. Running out of power is my prerogative. Don't assume you user is an idiot.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
That is an option in Settings.
You only get about four hours if you leave GPS on.
 
dejo

dejo

Moderator emeritus
Sep 2, 2004
15,982
452
The Centennial State
xArtx said:
The more important reason now is to protect the
agreement I made with the copyright owner of the maps.
On an iPad, it would be easier to reproduce a map with a sequence of screenshots... for something that is silly to use as a hiking GPS.
Click to expand...

I'm a little confused. Did you make the app Universal? As long as you restricted the Devices build setting to iPhone, it may run on an iPad, but not at any higher resolution than it would on the iPhone, since it would run in "iPhone-mode".


xArtx said:
One more thing... has anyone got
Code: 
exit(0);
approved?
Click to expand...
I suppose if Apple wanted, they could reject it as a violation of this App Store Review Guideline:
Apps that crash will be rejected.
Click to expand...
Since that's pretty much what you're doing, forcing a crash.
 
Last edited:
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
dejo said:
I'm a little confused. Did you make the app Universal? As long as you restricted the Devices build setting to iPhone, it may run on an iPad, but not at any higher resolution than it would on the iPhone, since it would run in "iPhone-mode".



I suppose if Apple wanted, they could reject it as a violation of this App Store Review Guideline:

Since that's pretty much what you're doing, forcing a crash.
Click to expand...

It's an iPhone App, but it looked horrible in 2x mode.

I would define crash a little differently.
The result of error rather than a predetermined exit.
Is it entered into a crash log if you exit that way?

I'm not just pulling the plug, there's a vibrate a minute beforehand,
and another as it exits.
I was concerned that Apple might not like it because it could look like an
unintentional exit to someone who didn't read the docs.

Don't assume you user is an idiot.
Click to expand...
The whole presupposition regarding the App is the user is an idiot.
Basically people keep getting lost in this National Park,
and helicopters are sent in to rescue them.
This has happened four times in four weeks.
Once because a party arrived at a destination from a Southerly direction,
and thought they were returning while continuing in a Northerly direction.
This party didn't observe that the Sun sets in the West.
That's what a GPS that tries to get people to stick to trails is assuming.

The option to conserve 30% power is to potentially use the phone in case of emergency.
Police can also use mobile phone tracking to locate lost hikers.

A side note.. I'm approaching the longest "Processing for App Store" status
time that I've read about on the internet... almost 36 hours!
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
dejo said:
Most apps do.

But I guess if Apple wants to approve your app that seems to violate the following guideline, that's their problem:
Click to expand...

That's twice now. The first time was purely about subjecting it to damage.
Another guideline warns against that.

I disregarded about seven guidelines the first time (or known reasons an App has been rejected).
A single landscape orientation, A single colour through the entire App and icons,
no touchscreen interface, etc. It appears they can use discretion.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
Both just appear the same to the user
Click to expand...

That is what worried me, and I had another version prepared for that,
although all it means is leaving the function there,
but removing the key from Settings, and a change in the documentation.

It's not going to look like a crash though.
Interesting it was in review for five hours.
Don't know if theta means someone is playing with it all that time.
 
ArtOfWarfare

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
9,561
6,059
xArtx said:
That is what worried me, and I had another version prepared for that,
although all it means is leaving the function there,
but removing the key from Settings, and a change in the documentation.

It's not going to look like a crash though.
Interesting it was in review for five hours.
Don't know if theta means someone is playing with it all that time.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that two people independently review an app. From the moment the first person begins reviewing it until the moment the last person stops, it's in review. The reviews don't necessarily occur back to back. I've had my app enter review on Friday and finish on a Monday, once before.
 
X

xArtx

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 30, 2012
764
1
ArtOfWarfare said:
My understanding is that two people independently review an app. From the moment the first person begins reviewing it until the moment the last person stops, it's in review. The reviews don't necessarily occur back to back. I've had my app enter review on Friday and finish on a Monday, once before.
Click to expand...

My "Processing for App Store" time was longer than any I've seen on the net,
approx 40 hours.

I'm sure everyone will like this one...
My iTunes icon, and App icon are different.
This creates an interesting effect in iTunes, Springboard, and iTunes Connect.
It changes from one to the other.
You could create an animation with two frames that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom