Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.

Apple Rejects Watch App for Description Saying 'Pebble Compatible'

posted by takyon on Friday May 01 2015, @06:36AM   Printer-friendly
from the walled-bonsai-garden dept.

scruffybeard writes:

Apple is paying close attention to the app offerings for its new watch. If your iOS app advertises support for any watch, other than the Apple Watch, prepare for trouble. Apple recently rejected an update to an established iPhone and iPad app because it mentioned support for a non-Apple Smartwatch:

We noticed that your app or its metadata contains irrelevant platform information in the app. Providing future platform compatibility plans, or other platform references, is not appropriate for the App Store. Specifically, your app and app description declare support for the Pebble Smartwatch.

Additionally, Apple has established criteria for Apple Watch developers that reject applications where the primary function is to tell the time.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Apple Rejects Watch App for Description Saying 'Pebble Compatible' | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 57 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Nollij on Friday May 01 2015, @11:55AM

    by Nollij (4559) on Friday May 01 2015, @11:55AM (#177427)

    See: Razors and blades, printers and inks/toners,

    It's funny you mention that. The courts ruled against Lexmark trying to do the same thing [wikipedia.org]

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Informative=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   5  

  • (Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday May 01 2015, @04:08PM

    by BasilBrush (3994) on Friday May 01 2015, @04:08PM (#177493)

    You didn't read that link did you. They did no such thing.

    It says
    1) That circumventing Lexmark's mechanism from typing printer and ink together isn't a violation of DMCA. Well no one is saying Jailbreaking is either.
    2) That Lexmark's particular advertising, for which there is no Apple parallel, was false advertising. So irrelevant.

    There's nothing to say Lexmark, let alone Apple, aren't perfectly entitled to continue technical measures to tie product with accessories/consumables. Nothing whatsoever.

    --
    Hurrah! Quoting works now!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01 2015, @05:33PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01 2015, @05:33PM (#177525)

      I say so, so yes, there is something to say.