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

Apple Rejects iOS App for Citing Pebble Support in App Store Description [Updated]

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,555
37,933



Boating and navigation app SeaNav US [Direct Link] reported this morning that Apple is no longer welcoming the app on the App Store due to the mention of Pebble support, or "any other mobile platform", within the app's description.

0e5e13c7a1265d4a01b63e6b27dfe453_large.png
SeaNav notes that its iOS app has been previously approved by Apple with no fuss, and have only faced roadblocks after receiving the rejection email this morning. The app supported Pebble for "nearly 2 years" before today, and the company says the app's most recent update has "no changes to our support for the Pebble", hinting that the impending launch of the Apple Watch could be the main culprit of the crackdown on SeaNav.
We have just had the latest version of our SeaNav US iOS app rejected by Apple because we support the Pebble Smartwatch and say so in the app description and meta-data (we also state in the review notes that "This application was approved for use with the Pebble MFI Accessory in the Product Plan xxxxxx-yyyy (Pebble Smartwatch)". See copy of rejection reason below.

SeaNav US has previously been approved by Apple with no problem, we have had Pebble support in SeaNav for nearly 2 years and there are no changes to our support for the Pebble in this version. What are Apple doing? Have they gone Apple Watch crazy? What can we do?
Click to expand...
App Store review guideline 3.1 has covered the prohibition on mentioning competing platforms for some time, but until now developers have generally not had issues with Apple rejecting apps for mentioning Pebble support. With the Apple Watch ready to launch, however, Pebble may now be considered a competing platform.

Apple has been known to deal swiftly with apps it deems questionable on the App Store in the past, but today's news is definitely interesting given the reason for rejection and the launch of the Apple Watch tomorrow. SeaNav US should be able to resubmit the app after removing all mentions of the Pebble smartwatch from its marketing materials and App Store page, but it certainly leaves an interesting question for the future of Pebble-supported iOS apps, especially Pebble's dedicated iOS app, presuming SeaNav's rejection was not the result of a reviewer misunderstanding Apple's intended application of the guidelines.

Update 9:32 AM: The developer of Home Remote notes in the Pebble discussion thread that he had an update approved just last night. Pebble is mentioned in his app's description, so it remains unclear whether SeaNav's rejection is part of a specific shift in policy for Apple.

Article Link: Apple Rejects iOS App for Citing Pebble Support in App Store Description [Updated]
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/23/apple-rejects-app-citing-pebble/
My guess is that the app will be accepted with absolutely no issues whatsoever, so long as you just remove mention of the pebble from the App Store description.

Having settings inside the app to link it up with the pebble, and mentioning the pebble on your company homepage should be fine.
 
My girlfriend is android, I am iOS. I want to know about cross platform compatibility when purchasing apps. If Apple wants to force me to go a developers website to determine compatibility, so be it.
 
Can you really blame them for keeping people from advertising other devices that competes with one they make? That would be like walking in to a video game store and advertising your own store down the street, saying "We have almost the same stuff but cheaper!"
 
The funniest part of this Pebble/Apple feud is that many thought that they'd get their :apple:Watch way before Pebble's new watch came out. :rolleyes:
 
I'll be watching for the FTC investigation. If Apple starts to block me from using competing devices I will make the switch to Android or Windows Phone.
 
thekeyring said:
Makes me wonder what will happen when/if Google launches an app making Android Wear compatible with iPhone.
Click to expand...

Considering the main (only?) point of the app would be to allow compatibility with Android Wear devices, it will be interesting to see them describe it without mentioning Android Wear, lol
 
I thought they allowed this. I swear my password keeper app is marketed this way. This seems monopolistic, but I suppose as long as they don't require exclusivity--just refraining from mentioning competitoes it's OK.
 
imoxja said:
Can you really blame them for keeping people from advertising other devices that competes with one they make? That would be like walking in to a video game store and advertising your own store down the street, saying "We have almost the same stuff but cheaper!"
Click to expand...

well there are apps that are literally called "remote app for FIRE TV STICK" "xy app for SAMSUNG TV" and they dont mind it there. wonder why :rolleyes:

i for one would like to know if an app supports multiple platforms
 
imoxja said:
Can you really blame them for keeping people from advertising other devices that competes with one they make? That would be like walking in to a video game store and advertising your own store down the street, saying "We have almost the same stuff but cheaper!"
Click to expand...

Eh, it gets a little hairier than that. This is too much like what Microsoft got excoriated for in the 90's, in fact I think it's worse. iOS is a platform, and while I appreciate the strict control Apple has on it in order to stay secure (in theory), doing this for peripherals? If this is true (and this is a BIG if, we never get Apple's side of the story in these instances), it's very bad news.

It's bad enough that Amazon's app has to redirect me to their website to avoid paying the Apple Tax if I want to buy a Kindle book. To restrict mention of accessories because they (sorta) compete with you? No, no, no.

I've always said that if the the Mac had won the computing war over Microsoft in the 80's into the 90's, Apple would have been a far more anticompetitive company than Microsoft was. I still think that's true, except this time they ARE winning the war (on some fronts). I love their products (err, see below) but this kind of thing shouldn't be tolerated.

Again. If.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kdarling
The way it seems to work to me is that if there is a product launch, like the Watch right now - then they're gonna keep mention of competitors out of the App Store. If it's an older product that has been around for a while, they're gonna let people mention other alternatives because they already have proven it as a product.
 
John6Plus said:
.... doing this for peripherals? ....
Click to expand...

And apparently an MFI accessory according to the article quote of the app's description.

I do wonder if there's an of* body in the UK that would investigate this. Or a similar part of the EU.
 
Are they going to kick out Run Keeper next for working with other heart rate monitors? The Apple Watch is a heart rate monitor too.

They really shouldn't be kicking out apps just because they offer support for other products. Not everything in the world has to be made by Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kdarling
imoxja said:
Can you really blame them for keeping people from advertising other devices that competes with one they make? That would be like walking in to a video game store and advertising your own store down the street, saying "We have almost the same stuff but cheaper!"
Click to expand...

Your analogy isn't correct because apps are like patrons walking into a store. It would be more like a video game store and a popular video game mentioning a competing store in the description of the video game printed on the back of the box.

That happens all the time by the way, in actual video game stores. I have seen plenty of used games at Gamestop that have old Best Buy price stickers on them, clearly with the Best Buy brand shown.
 
Andy-V said:
Apple TV is a competitor to the fire stick.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I can get Netflix, Hulu, and HBO on my Apple TV, all have content that compete with iTunes' content. Yet there is no Amazon ATV app, it's the one service I need to use something else for to get online content on my TV. Given Amazon's attitude about these things (e.g. putting the Kindle app on EVERYTHING), I doubt this was Amazon's decision. It's random and frustrating.
 
What an awful move. Will Apple be removing apps that link to console games such as the GTA, Steam, Xbox, or Playstation companion apps? The official Pokemon apps encourage people to play the games on 3DS. Chromecast app better watch out too... and the Amazon app for selling music and books.

Shame on Apple.
 
imoxja said:
Apple doesn't make a "remote for Fire Stick" or "remote for Samsung TV," but they do make a Watch...
Click to expand...

The remote for the Samsung TV doesn't make a compelling argument. Not sure what the OP was trying to say with that one.:eek::D

But they do make an ATV which competes with the Fire Stick, the Roku, and the Chromecast. All of those have apps. It's not only apps. Apple sells items that compete with their products in the store as well.

Look, I don't blame Apple for making the choice since they want the :apple:watch to be as successful as possible. It's business. I also think it's just par for the course with this watch release. Almost everything about this event has been handled in a hamfisted manner. It's like they're just shooting from the hip and missing horribly.

I do think it's an overreaction regarding the app rejection, but that's just my personal opinion. Apple can't seriously think Pebble being mentioned in an app has any consequence for the :apple:watch. That's pretty stupid. I think it's more likely that some over zealous app reviewer thought they were doing the right thing.
 
Last edited:
imoxja said:
Can you really blame them for keeping people from advertising other devices that competes with one they make? That would be like walking in to a video game store and advertising your own store down the street, saying "We have almost the same stuff but cheaper!"
Click to expand...


Good example. But more correctly it would "We have almost the same stuff but more expensive!"

;)
 
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
Back