Comments on: Static Analysis Rejection? http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/ Freshly Squeezed Software Sun, 31 Jan 2010 02:56:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Apple is Rejecting Its Own Advice | Juicy Bits http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Apple is Rejecting Its Own Advice | Juicy Bits Tue, 01 Dec 2009 04:42:36 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-32 [...] not sure where to begin, so we’ll pick up the story from our last post: Static Analysis Rejection? That post has been referenced in a number of other articles about App Store rejections by [...] [...] not sure where to begin, so we’ll pick up the story from our last post: Static Analysis Rejection? That post has been referenced in a number of other articles about App Store rejections by [...]

]]> By: developer http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-31 developer Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:05:08 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-31 We basically did the same thing as you, calling the new api's only for 3.1 and using older compatibility stuff for 3.0. Even after talking to apple over the phone about what we were doing they still made us only support 3.1 and pull all of our older code out before approval. Of course it doesn't make a lot of sense since the old 3.0 builds will always work since apple doesn't modify 3.0 builds anymore. So it really only hurts the users that don't want to upgrade. It is nice that users can leave scathing reviews because it won't work with 3.0 anymore even though it is not our choice to stop supporting those users but apple's. But I guess that's what we must deal with to sell in the app store. I wish apple would use there own public api for developing all of their apps on the phone. It would basically solve all the problems we encounter. The public api has a lot of bugs that wouldn't exist if apple used it to develop their own apps. We basically did the same thing as you, calling the new api’s only for 3.1 and using older compatibility stuff for 3.0. Even after talking to apple over the phone about what we were doing they still made us only support 3.1 and pull all of our older code out before approval. Of course it doesn’t make a lot of sense since the old 3.0 builds will always work since apple doesn’t modify 3.0 builds anymore. So it really only hurts the users that don’t want to upgrade. It is nice that users can leave scathing reviews because it won’t work with 3.0 anymore even though it is not our choice to stop supporting those users but apple’s. But I guess that’s what we must deal with to sell in the app store.

I wish apple would use there own public api for developing all of their apps on the phone. It would basically solve all the problems we encounter. The public api has a lot of bugs that wouldn’t exist if apple used it to develop their own apps.

]]> By: App Store Submissions Now Subject to Private API Use Checks | World of Apple http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-30 App Store Submissions Now Subject to Private API Use Checks | World of Apple Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:34:56 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-30 [...] automated process is already creating stories of apps being rejected for use of private APIs which developers are [...] [...] automated process is already creating stories of apps being rejected for use of private APIs which developers are [...]

]]> By: App Rejections » Blog Archive » REJECTED: 3D camera – for following Apple’s instructions http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-29 App Rejections » Blog Archive » REJECTED: 3D camera – for following Apple’s instructions Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:11:18 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-29 [...] key thing about Juicy Bits experience is that both apps eventually got accepted, which strongly supports their interpretation of why they were REALLY [...] [...] key thing about Juicy Bits experience is that both apps eventually got accepted, which strongly supports their interpretation of why they were REALLY [...]

]]> By: admin http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-28 admin Sun, 08 Nov 2009 04:48:47 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-28 Thanks for the tip, Brent. When we re-submitted our latest app, we added an explanation to the "Demo Account" field. Glad to hear it works for you. There's hope! Thanks for the tip, Brent. When we re-submitted our latest app, we added an explanation to the “Demo Account” field. Glad to hear it works for you. There’s hope!

]]> By: Brent Royal-Gordon http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/2009/11/07/static-analysis-rejection/comment-page-1/#comment-27 Brent Royal-Gordon Sun, 08 Nov 2009 04:41:43 +0000 http://www.juicybitssoftware.com/?p=491#comment-27 You may be able to use that "Demo Account" field on iTunes Connect for this kind of thing. If your app keeps running into the same issues, you may find that describing how you address them in that field will get you through the gauntlet. For example, one of my apps has been rejected for using encryption without having gone through export controls, but pointing out that I'm using the pre-approved ones in libSystem gets me through. You may be able to use that “Demo Account” field on iTunes Connect for this kind of thing. If your app keeps running into the same issues, you may find that describing how you address them in that field will get you through the gauntlet. For example, one of my apps has been rejected for using encryption without having gone through export controls, but pointing out that I’m using the pre-approved ones in libSystem gets me through.

]]>