Apps rejected

[Dan]

Hi,

I had two apps rejected today. Both had been in review forever. One
was a month in and the other was over two months.

They were both rejected due to the PhoneGap API.

They say that they have contacted the PhoneGap dev's and asked for
changes to be made. Is this happening?

Here is the email I received:

Hello Dan,

Upon review of your application, ******* cannot be posted to the App
Store due to the usage of the 3rd-party PhoneGap API set. Usage of
such non-public API, as outlined in the the iPhone Developer Program
License Agreement section 3.3.2 is prohibited:

"An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code
by any means, including without limitation through use of a plug-in
architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No
interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except
for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Documented APIs and
built-in interpreter(s)."

The version of the PhoneGap API in your application is in violation of
section 3.3.2. Apple has contacted the PhoneGap developer and he has
committed to update his framework to come into compliance with our
guidelines. Please contact the PhoneGap development team with any
questions regarding updates to their framework.

Regards,

iPhone Developer Program
****************************

[JacKlink]

I got the EXACT same thing today!

Has phonegap really been contacted?

What do we have to do?

What is in violation? (nothing!)

I have waited a month for this!

[Brian LeRoux]

Yeah, we talked to Mike (nachoman) today and they have a couple of
standard points:

- anything named phonegap is going to raise a flag (phonegap.js,
anything in settings.plist, etc)
- bundling your app with ALL the features without

Solutions:

- use the nachoman branch Makefile or unphonegap.py (we are working on
an official solution for building soon)
- remove unused references

Mike! Can you chime in?

[ade]

has anyone encountered this on "updates" as i'm about to submit an update

--
ade
...........................................................................................
www.ibizaA-Z.com
www.iphoneibiza.com
www.podcast-ibiza.com
www.ishopibiza.com
www.ibiza-blog.com
www.ibizawinter.com
www.ibizaa-z.com/webcam
http://twitter.com/blogibiza
Ibiza NOW - The Islands Magazine

[Dan]

Where can we find "the nachoman branch Makefile or unphonegap.py" ?

[Macarse]

I guess he is rerefering to this:
http://github.com/NachoMan/phonegap/commit/600a7be02fa3484726be132ed57763e2672c757f

[Dan]

Can anyone elaborate on this? Has anyone gone through the process of
using one of these solutions and can you explain exactly how to do it
if you have?

Thank you,

> I guess he is rerefering to this:http://github.com/NachoMan/phonegap/commit/600a7be02fa3484726be132ed5...

[JacKlink]

yes. my app was an update and was rejected.

On Jul 7, 5:47 pm, ade <adeib...@gmail.com> wrote:
> has anyone encountered this on "updates" as i'm about to submit an update
>
>
>
> Brian LeRoux wrote:
> > Yeah, we talked to Mike (nachoman) today and they have a couple of
> > standard points:
>
> > - anything named phonegap is going to raise a flag (phonegap.js,
> > anything in settings.plist, etc)
> > - bundling your app with ALL the features without
>
> > Solutions:
>
> > - use the nachoman branch Makefile or unphonegap.py (we are working on
> > an official solution for building soon)
> > - remove unused references
>
> > Mike! Can you chime in?
>

> www.ibizaA-Z.comwww.iphoneibiza.comwww.podcast-ibiza.comwww.ishopibiza.comwww.ibiza-blog.comwww.ibizawinter.comwww.ibizaa-z.com/webcamhttp://twitter.com/blogibiza

[cmalexander]

Well the one good thing to hear is that Apple is in contact with the
developers and are speaking with them about how they can make things
work!

> >www.ibizaA-Z.comwww.iphoneibiza.comwww.podcast-ibiza.comwww.ishopibiz...

[Alberto]

Hi, I'm really disappointed. Today after 3 weeks of revision, Apple
has rejected my update Taxi Madrid 1.1

"The version of the PhoneGap API in your application is in violation
of section 3.3.2. Apple has contacted the PhoneGap developer and he
has committed to update his framework to come into compliance with our
guidelines. Please contact the PhoneGap development team with any
questions regarding updates to their framework."

I don't know what to do right now... Please Phonegap team, have you
plan some resolution on this?

Thanks

[Rina]

Yeah I got the same rejection too, for 2 applications - 1 of which has
been there for almost 3 months.

Is there something we can do to help the PhoneGap developers to
accelerate this "compliance" issue?

Rina

[rudygfl]

I've been following this issue a bit before I put my eggs in the
Phonegap basket (although a very good framework). In case anyone wants
to read Mike's saga with Apple... some enlightening stuff...

http://nachbaur.com/blog/updates-on-apple-phonegap#more-124

Rudy

[Vivian Aranha]

Hi

I had this problem 2 months back when apple started rejecting PhoneGap Apps. 

Then I created my own framework coz of this problem and they started rejecting that too. So its not phonegap that is being rejected by apple but its the way you write your applications.

They have 60,000 apps in store adn they dotn wnat anyone using HTML JS just Objective C.

I just started lookign at OVI applications - they have a pretty startup small store adn even the simplest twitter app is 10$. Give it a try explore something new.... if you are not good with obj C.

Also look at Palm Pre apps - The SDK is leaked and its all HTML JS apps there

Best of luck

Vivian Aranha

--
Vivian Aranha

[Giraldo Rosales]

Has anyone taken a look at other alternatives such as Ansca (http://www.anscamobile.com)? Writing code which is converted into Obj-C. Suppose to be as easy as JS or AS3. Want to look around some more before testing this one.

-G

[delasare]

We had our app approved and we used PhoneGap. It was rejected once,
then resubmitted with a few changes. It sat in the queue for about 3
weeks and was approved on July 4th. We removed all references to
PhoneGap prior to the first submission. We were kind of sweating it
after reading horror stories in here. I really don't see the
difference in writing an Objective C app that uses a UI Web View to
display content and using PhoneGap. PG just helps you get to market
faster.

[Giraldo Rosales]

Reading about it a bit further, the name of their SDK is Corona and it looks like these developers are former Adobe mobile software developers. The only bad thing is that for now, after you build an app, you have to send it to Ansca to compile, then they send it back to you. Looks as though this is probably temporary until they out of beta. After that it looks like they are going to charge for the SDK.

-G

[Vivian Aranha]

i downloaded the sdk and played with it.... looks liek u have to learn another language called  LUO.... I rather learn OBJ C and do more stuff... also they dont have any networking stuff yet so we cant access internet or web services.... so its no use

Viv

--
Vivian Aranha

[Giraldo Rosales]

True true.

-G

[Paul Prescod]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Giraldo Rosales<nit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone taken a look at other alternatives such as Ansca
> (http://www.anscamobile.com)? Writing code which is converted into Obj-C.

What makes you think that it is compiled into Objective-C and not just
wrapped exactly as PhoneGap does it? Lua is typically
embedded/wrapped, not compiled.

Paul Prescod

[Vivian Aranha]

i dotn knwo i just saw this dude say it....

below check so i thought they did that.... I guess phonegap is stll better....

Has anyone taken a look at other alternatives such as Ansca (http://www.anscamobile.com)? Writing code which is converted into Obj-C. Suppose to be as easy as JS or AS3. Want to look around some more before testing this one.

-G

--
Vivian Aranha

[kjeldahl]

On Jul 9, 7:34 pm, Vivian Aranha <vivianara...@gmail.com> wrote:
> They have 60,000 apps in store adn they dotn wnat anyone using HTML JS just
> Objective C.

Question: wouldn't it be possible to supply an encryption key,
compiling all the javascript stuff, possibly even as embedded
encrypted string in the final compiled executable? Stand alone
encrypted javascript files should also carry another file extension of
course, like "dat"? This is assuming that there is an interface in the
SDK to shove arbitrary string data to the browser directly without
referring to it in the filesystem (which would complicate the
encryption of course)?

I realize this seems like a lot of work, but then again Apple trying
to force development language on developers for no obvious reason
(other than their own proprietary lockin) is not exactly being
forthcoming towards developers. I'm just trying to figure out if Apple
will eventually be successful in forcing obj-c down people throats or
not. If encryption/code hiding like I suggested is possible (sending
string data directly to the browser that will get parsed and
executed), this is obviously a battle that Apple will lose eventually.

Marius K.

[Giraldo Rosales]

Just like I said, took a quick run through of it. Saw something about compiling into native code but since they do not give you the actual SDK to compile yourself, I have no idea what the end result looks like. Can't say which is better. Just know that for the time being, JS is a lot easier.

What I am curious is to whether it uses the WebView or native components. The WebView seems to be slow and clunky.

-G

[Carl Youngblood]

Why not add one of the great selection of existing obfuscators/minimizers to combine all the js into a single obfuscated file as part of the final build process?

I've heard that 37signals' Sprockets project is great for this:

http://www.rubyinside.com/sprockets-a-ruby-powered-javascript-dependency-library-from-37signals-1520.html

Sent from my iPhone

[Paul Prescod]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 2:38 PM, kjeldahl<marius....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 7:34 pm, Vivian Aranha <vivianara...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> They have 60,000 apps in store adn they dotn wnat anyone using HTML JS just
>> Objective C.
>
> Question: wouldn't it be possible to supply an encryption key,
> compiling all the javascript stuff, possibly even as embedded
> encrypted string in the final compiled executable? Stand alone
> encrypted javascript files should also carry another file extension of
> course, like "dat"?

Are you confident that this would make it easier for PhoneGap-based
apps to get into the app store? I don't think anyone knows what
technique exactly they are using to distinguish between PhoneGap-based
apps and other ones. If they are just looking for PhoneGap class
libraries then your strategy doesn't help.

Paul Prescod

[Jake Sankey]

I'm with the rest of ya'll now. 2 apps rejected with the exact same
email nastygram from Apple. "PhoneGap API violation" ..... I went
through the entire app and changed absolutely everything that contains
so much as 'gap', removed unused classes, etc.. Resubmitted one, so
we'll see.. For the other, I am going to try the same thing plus I am
going to completely remove the phonegap api (since all that app uses
it for is sound) and then see what happens with that one. Would love
to know if Apple and the phonegap guys are really in communication
about this stuff.

On Jul 9, 5:41 pm, Paul Prescod <pres...@gmail.com> wrote:

[kjeldahl]

On Jul 10, 12:41 am, Paul Prescod <pres...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you confident that this would make it easier for PhoneGap-based
> apps to get into the app store? I don't think anyone knows what
> technique exactly they are using to distinguish between PhoneGap-based
> apps and other ones. If they are just looking for PhoneGap class
> libraries then your strategy doesn't help.

I responded to the possibility that Apple is targeting javascript apps
in general, not specifically phonegap. The "best" solution would be to
adhere to specific issues Apple has a problem with (could be
possibility of downloading executable code), but if that issue is
Javascript alltogether then phonegap doesn't stand a chance currently.

As to your comment about "just looking for PhoneGap class libraries",
there wouldn't be anything to look at if all the javascript code was
encrypted prior to loading, unless they have some more sophisticated
tools than browsing the filesystem.

Marius K.

[Vivian Aranha]

Isnt it unfair though that there are a few phoneGap apps on the store and they are rejecting teh new one's.... They should have either rejected all of them all together or accept the new one's too....

I dotn understand their logic.... Even till date some people are getting their apps approved.... its 1 in 10 apps i guess.... but still... wats the criteria???

Viv

--
Vivian Aranha

[Giraldo Rosales]

I think we are getting nowhere with just complaints. Yes, your app got
rejected and another got accepted. Apple is being discret and the only
rep that made contact stated that phonegap was targeted but never said
why.

What we all need to do is figure out what part of phonegap is in
violation. So instead of telling everyone your app was rejected, it
would be more helpful to give a little insight on what it uses. Does
it use external JS? Is it an online app? Etc.

Thanks,
-G

[Jake Sankey]

2 offline apps rejected using PG only for sound...

On Jul 10, 10:44 am, Giraldo Rosales <nitr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we are getting nowhere with just complaints. Yes, your app got  
> rejected and another got accepted. Apple is being discret and the only  
> rep that made contact stated that phonegap was targeted but never said  
> why.
>
> What we all need to do is figure out what part of phonegap is in  
> violation. So instead of telling everyone your app was rejected, it  
> would be more helpful to give a little insight on what it uses. Does  
> it use external JS? Is it an online app? Etc.
>
> Thanks,
> -G
>

[Paul Prescod]

Gerald: I don't agree with your assumption that the apps that get
through can be classified differently than the ones that do not. I
honestly think is is just a matter of what reviewer you get. You can
go insane trying to find a rational pattern in a black-box
bureaucracy. Maybe I'm wrong, but if so, why wouldn't the reviewers
just be explicit about what PARTICULAR application feature is causing
the probhlem.

I think (just a guess) that they are looking for some PhoneGap
classname or method name or directory structure. We know that for a
while phoneungap was getting apps through, so it seems obvious to me
that they are just doing string searches.

What is happening with LiquidGear apps?

[Giraldo Rosales]

Yes, I agree. With Mike's talk with Apple, it seems as though there is a block on PhoneGap and the ones getting through are probably with negligent reviewers. I also agree that they should be more explicit. It seems they blacklisted PhoneGap because of a feature and/or misconception that it is an SDK (and if that was the case, Corona will be blacklisted as well).

Have not heard any problems thus far on the LiquidGear end nor have I heard any rejections with Big5. All three use the same concept. It must have been something in the initial stages of PhoneGap that triggered something.

-G

[Vivian Aranha]

Finally after all my efforts my application is approved. 

I kept on submitting over and over again and today after 2 months after being rejected - my app is finally approved

Viv

[Moo]

On Jul 8, 12:08 am, Dan <d...@dandefilla.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had two apps rejected today. Both had been in review forever. One
> was a month in and the other was over two months.
>
> They were both rejected due to the PhoneGap API.
>
> They say that they have contacted the PhoneGap dev's and asked for
> changes to be made. Is this happening?

This is a very positive sign. This means that the situation is
curable.

As per iPhone Developer Program license agreement says, downloading
and executing remote code is forbidden. This way Apple ensures that
approved applications don't contain evil easter eggs.

Due to company nature Apple cannot directly express what's the
problem, but everyone with some brain can figure it out. PhoneGap can
be simply modified to prevent Javascript execution and loading from
remote servers. All Javascript must be device local. No need for
obfuscation or any dirty tricks.

You can even submit the modified source code to AppStore review in the
note field and show it is not possible to execute remote code with
your version of WebKit control.

That's it. You can even do it yourself. PhoneGap developers don't
exist to serve you... maybe everyone should take the initiative
himself/herself.

[Charles]

On Jul 7, 2:08 pm, Dan <d...@dandefilla.com> wrote:
> They were both rejected due to the PhoneGap API.
>
> They say that they have contacted the PhoneGap dev's and asked for
> changes to be made. Is this happening?

At this time have any any of the PhoneGap contributors actually been
contacted about this and what the specific concerns of Apple are?

[Paul Prescod]

Nachoman is in conversations with Apple. They do not want him to
announce anything, but he says that he expects to hear news within a
week or so.

> On Jul 7, 2:08 pm, Dan <d...@dandefilla.com> wrote:

> ...

[Alberto]

Hi,
I don't have any good news to tell.
Today I got a new update rejection, and a new application rejection...
Thats the fourth app store rejection I got in two months.
I changed all class names, put away unused stuff, remove all code
references to Phonegap... but... nothing worked. As you can imagine
I'm really disapointed with App store review politic about the
"Phonegap API".

With the actual situation my taxi fares applications serie (featured
on Techcrunch) is damned on iPhone using Phonegap. I think I'm moving
to native development, not only on iPhone but also for Android. It
will take a lot of work but it's the only way I can see.

Anyway thanks for you support, and the Phonegap idea.


Best,

Alberto

[steve]

On Jul 10, 7:30 am, Vivian Aranha <vivianara...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isnt it unfair though that there are a few phoneGap apps on the store and
> they are rejecting teh new one's.... They should have either rejected all of
> them all together or accept the new one's too....

Cmon! I already have app in the app store using PhoneGap. Please don't
ask it to be rejected. It is not fair for people that already have app
approved.

[rborn]

Any news on this?


On Jul 16, 5:32 pm, Paul Prescod <pres...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nachomanis in conversations withApple. They do not want him to