Hacker News Reader

Comment by yoda_sl | Hacker News Reader

Not sure what really is the big deal here... Apple had I think such requirements for not mentioning any other products or even mentioning pricing in your product description aka "On sale today only for $0.99" will get the same rejection... It is ok to put a %

So this is nothing new and just one Apple employee/reviewers that follow the rules from the guidelines... If the folks that were submitting the app try to resubmit and remove references of Pebble, most likely their app will be approved without problems.

Since their issue is with the app description, it is simply a metadata rejection of the app, and the developer do not even need to submit a new binary: just edit the app description and problem solved...

It shouldn't even made it in the top HN stories IMHO

View on HN

You seem to be suggesting that this isn't wrong just because a rule exists. That position is predicated on the assumption that the rules themselves cannot be wrong. It is essentially circular logic to try and avoid discussing the topic at all, and the fact you are arguing that "It shouldn't even made it in the top HN stories IMHO" is quite evident of that belief.

An explanation of the rule doesn't really justify Apple's actions in this case, or how this rule has been applied before and after Apple had a competitive product in this specific space. Overall I think Apple's actions are very anticompetitive (maybe not illegally so, but we can still judge/criticise them).

All in all Apple wants to make it harder to find a competitor's product on their store. So they're actually willing to hurt their customer's usability if it means also hurting a competitor's market share. Really shows what their priorities are.

PS - I'd criticise Google or Microsoft for exactly the same thing.

> I'd criticise Google or Microsoft for exactly the same thing.

Microsoft was litigated for less. Imagine the uproar arising from "you can't install a browser on Windows if it mentions another OS."

I think it would be fair if they could require that you mention Apple's products alongside competing products ("Supports Pebble and iWatch"). That way I could browse the store for apps supporting my device, without Apple losing business to their own store. I think that's far too much to expect from this anti-competitive behemoth.

> You seem to be suggesting that this isn't wrong just because a rule exists.

This thinking is called "legal positivism". While famously used by soldiers after war crimes, it does not even apply in that case. Just because your laws or orders say so does not mean, that they are right, morally justified or that you will not get punished afterwards.

Apple had I think such requirements for not mentioning any other products...

They have a line about not mentioning other mobile platforms. The latest version of SeaNav is 3.2.6, so it's been there for a while, with Apple happily accepting it and its description. What appears to have changed is Apple have decided that Pebble is a "mobile platform" only since the launch of the Apple Watch.

That is arguably change to their rules to unfairly misuse their position as gatekeepers of the Apple ecosystem - they're abusing their market to negatively impact Pebble.

The OP title is " Apple now rejecting apps with Pebble Smartwatch support" Sorry but no Apple is not rejecting such apps... It just doesn't want other product name mentioned. And yes Apple is the gatekeeper of the Apple ecosystem... It is just the way it is. I am not saying that what Apple is doing is right, but the OP statement is wrong

It's not just they're the gatekeeper, it's that as gatekeeper they're acting against users' interest in this case.

But there are apps in the App Store that their only purpose is as a companion for a Pebble app, not to mention the main Pebble app itself. It will be impossible for such apps to change their metadata to avoid mentioning Pebble. Therefore it appears that in the future Apple will be de-facto rejecting such apps.

>> "...unfairly misuse their position as gatekeepers of the Apple ecosystem..."

The point of building the Apple ecosystem was to exploit their position as its gatekeeper. This is the expected result. I would never expect anything else from a walled garden.

Exploiting your position as gatekeeper by selling lots of apps inside that ecosystem is one thing, unfairly misusing that position to imply the support for a rival product in a different market is lacking by rejecting apps in your ecosystem because they mention the rival product so you can take a share of that different market is entirely another rather more illegal thing.

If the whole purpose of an app is to be used with the Pebble, it's a bit strange if it cannot mention "Pebble" in the description don't you think?

I do have myself a Pebble and honestly I find my Pebble apps in the Pebble store... Not looking in the Apple App Store

Not mentioning pricing is a completely reasonable rule. It's there because Apple has stores in a lot of different countries priced in local currencies. "On sale for $0.99" will be nonsensical or potentially wrong (for places that use $ for the local currency but have different prices) in many of those places.

Requiring them to remove mention of Pebble support is almost the exact opposite. Rather than enforcing accuracy, they're requiring inaccuracy by forcing them not to mention a feature the app has.

Then how did Pebble get this in the store? https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pebble-smartwatch/id59201272...

That's what I don't understand. Let's all agree here, rules have been there, but they are used at Apple's discretion (read 'whim'). The only rule so far seems to be "I don't like it".

I think the problem is that they are (again) inconsistent with applying their own rules and the bad timing, since Apple just released their own watch.

Oh yes totally agreeing on that... I am not sure how many reviewers they have and some are more lenient whereas others are not... Trying to fight Apple here on simple words is a lost battle, and if they really care about getting their app to their users, the solution is a no brainer: edit the app description, save! Wait for approval, then done. It is only a metadata rejection and those are the one that are usually the easiest to fix

And what should they write?

"We support also a device made by another company that you can wear on your wrist. Our maps will be displayed there."

> "On sale today only for $0.99" will get the same rejection... It is ok to put a %

This is because not everybody uses USD as a currency, and also because not everybody understands "$" as USD.

This is a clear violation of Anti-trust laws.

I don't think you understand anti-trust laws.

I don't understand them. please enlighten.

They are abusing their position in the smart phone market to squash competition in the watch market, which has been a lightning rod for bringing down anti-trust action before. They will be quivering before the FTC before too long (I say as very much a non-lawyer). They have a history of overreaching before backtracking, like when they wanted Objective-C only on the appstore to lock out Flash and cross-platform toolkits.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com