Got App rejection reason from Apple:
Upon further review, we noticed that your app only includes links, images, or content aggregated from the Internet with limited or no native iOS functionality. We understand that this content may be curated from the web specifically for your users, but since it does not sufficiently differ from a mobile web browsing experience, it is not appropriate for the App Store.
Basically, we are using UIWebview and safari as well. for show content, we are using UIWebview. and on click of a banner, we are opening a link in safari. I have already give explanation like
We have one admin panel from where we are adding this detail. But based on our requirement we need to redirect a user to specific link or show content. and for make things easy we have used HTML content. But we have used web view in detail page only. Rest of the screen have Native iOS functionality.
So basically we are not fetching website data. we are showing our own backend panel detail in the application.
But still, they rejected the app.
I'm in the same predicament with my app (it grabs content from my company's website like pictures and text and displays it in a native way). To be clear, I'm not using any webviews to display the content except for the Videos tab (see below).
I wanted to share what I've done so far to make it more "native", so you won't waste your time. My application is tabbed, by the way (Research, Blog Posts, Events, Videos, Bookmarks).
Added offline reading capabilities with Bookmarks to read blog posts and research summaries
Added SpeechSynthesizer so reports could be read to the user
Added push notifications for when new content was released
Removed UIWebViews and replaced with Safari Services (I am using WKWebView to embed videos into UITableView though)
Unfortunately, none of that has worked.
Related
I've noticed fairly recently that certain websites on iOS seem to get a more persistent smart banner from Apple. For example on twitter.com and facebook.com I see smart banners like this:
Note how the smart banner doesn't have the usual close cross on the left (and it's slightly shorter than the normal one).
I've looked at the page code and neither twitter or facebook have the meta tag with their app-id linked.
So my question is how did they get these banners? Is this just something Apple has decided to add on their behalf due to the popularity of their sites / apps? Or is there some secret config you can add to a site to get these special banners?
Smart App Banners are dynamic. They are different depending on whether you already have the app installed or not. If the app is not installed yet, the big banner with the close button is displayed. If the app is already installed, the banner from your screenshot will be displayed.
You can find a detailed description about that on the Apple Developer Documentation.
I am trying to implement Branch marketing links in my app. I want for example to be able to create a link to share with users that will route them to a particular screen in the app. I noticed from the Branch docs that for some apps the link just opens the app store and not the actual app (even if it is installed). Being based in Asia I have the feeling that most of our customers will be wanting to share the link via an unsupported app such as Line. If a user is redirected to the app store via the link and then taps “open app”, what happens? Is the link meta data lost? Does the meta data only remain if the link is opened in an app such as mail or notes?
Alex from Branch.io here:
This list in the Branch documentation gives a partial list of apps that support Universal Links, but unfortunately it is not complete. We've tried to cover the most common apps.
Line is using a custom webview (not SFSafariViewController). It doesn't support Universal Links for the initial click, but this is one of the edge cases where Branch can detect the originating app and do some custom behavior. For Line, we trigger your app's URI scheme. This means the behavior your users see when clicking a Branch link from within Line is the same as Universal Links, even though Universal Links isn't actually the protocol being used.
If you want to handle other apps where Branch doesn't have a workaround like this, you could try enabling the deepviews feature. This will cause the link to open a content preview with a button to launch the app (or forward to the App Store if not installed).
When a user with the app already installed clicks the Open button on the App Store page, all the meta data is preserved and they will still be deep linked. Branch doesn't know (or care!) what happens between when the user clicks the link and the app launches, so that gives you plenty of flexibility.
Universal Links have some restrictions - not from Branch but from Apple's implementation. One of these restrictions is Universal Links cannot be opened from SFSafariViewController.
From Branch's docs, Line is not explicitly mentioned but other popular messaging apps may be of interest. I don't have Line myself but whether Line launches websites in it's own browser or the Safari app may give you a clue.
Facebook Messenger - works conditionally
WeChat - works conditionally
Twitter - works conditionally
LinkedIn - works conditionally
Any app using SFSafariViewController - works conditionally
my site is responsive, and it's looking good on Safari on iPhone. But when I browse to my website from my Twitter app on my iPhone, it seems to ignore most of my mobile styling and looks very bad. Is there something I can do to detect if the browser is some kind of mobile app (such as Twitter) and cause the page to load in the default mobile browser instead (Safari, Browser, etc.)?
Edit: I strictly used CSS' max-width media query and targeted HTML5 block elements to change widths into percents. On two navs, I changed the display attribute as necessary.
Turns out it was a caching issue. It loads fine in the Twitter app. Oddly, it didn't before, even after several tries.
To the best of my knowledge, you can't force the site to open in the default mobile browser. The decision whether to open your site in the app's UIWebView or the default Safari browser is made by the Twitter app alone. If the Twitter app was gracious enough to provides any interface for you to choose, it might be possible, but they probably don't. Most app publishers try to keep users inside the app for as long as possible, and throwing them outside to a different app usually goes against this.
Your best bet is probably to try to improve your site's responsiveness to also work inside the Twitter app UIWebView as well (or inside other apps for that matter). If you base your responsiveness on screen width for example (CSS max-width and friends), I assume it should also work inside the Twitter app UIWebView.
The problem you are describing is indeed a very serious and annoying one. UIWebViews inside apps don't implement by default all of Apple's special handlers (that work inside the original Safari). The app maker is expected to implement these manually, and 99% of all apps simply don't do this. It's true for many other apps as well, the Google native search app also opens URLs inside a UIWebView - and sites tend to look lousy there too.
You should also consider filing a bug with Twitter and urge them to improve website compatibility when opened inside their app.
You can't force the user to open the link from a browser from your website. Android WebView is restricted and by default does not allow javascript and other extensions.
You can find more information here: Android WebView VS Phone Browser
I have recently started programming in iOS. I found this really interesting way of showing an Ad in the Flixster app. It randomly pops up a latest movie banner and asks to watch trailer or skip to continue using the app. How is it actually implemented? how can they be pushing a variable screen (may be a view) at runtime? Every time you open the app, you see a different banner.
I work for Flixster and here's how we do it:
Every time the app starts or resumes, the app pings our API to ask for what ads should be shown. Our api gives our app the url of the image to be shown, as well as the click-through url, which can be a regular url, or a custom link to one of our native pages like viewing a trailer, or a movie info page.
We have an admin tool where we can upload the ad image, modify the properties of the ads, or remove old ads and add new ads. However, we've recently started using 3rd party Ad networks like DFP and Admob (acquired by Google) to take over this management.
My company has an app (iOS and Android), to which the following scenarios applies. I'm trying to help point my engineers and product team in the right direction.
When one of our users clicks on a content link from one of our emails, or Tweets or Facebook posts, and they're on their mobile device, we prompt the user with a link to download our app. This is similar to what many apps do, including LinkedIn (see i.stack.imgur.com/glSgJ.png).
I imagine this is mildly effective of driving awareness and downloads of a native app, for new users who came in from social media and various web sources. However, it is not helpful at all for a user like me who already has the app!
1) clicking "No Thanks" keeps me on the mobile web (when I want to be in the native app), and
2) clicking "Download the App" takes me to iTunes App Store page for an app I already own.
SUPER ANNOYING. As a result, I have to manually open the app, and search for the content in question. I'm guessing most users don't do this. More importantly, depending on the UI/UX of the app, I may never get there!
Again, I know we are handling mobile web visits in the same way many other companies (including LinkedIn) do, but it seems we are leaving a lot of potential native app use on the table. I want our engineers to build that elusive 3rd option, "Open In App".
Spotify and Rdio have solved this very nicely. Here are deep content links (in the case of these companies, to a specific song) for the two apps respectively:
http://open.spotify.com/track/2SldBUTJSK6xz43i8DZ5r2
http://rd.io/x/QF3NK0JKWmk
If you have a moment, first grab the free version of Rdio or Spotify apps. Then, if you open those links above from an iOS device, you will see how nice the experience is, for existing native app users: Rdio has a nice "Tap to open in Rdio" link (http://i.stack.imgur.com/B7PuE.png), and Spotify's link is even more clear, "I have Spotify" (http://i.stack.imgur.com/Q3IV6.png). Both apps also include a link to download the app, for new app users. More importantly, both apps cookie the user: future visits to links (whether from email, Twitter, Facebook, etc) on mobile web automatically open the app, instead of prompting you to choose each time. SUPER CONVENIENT.
Questions:
1) How do they accomplish this? I'm initially only concerned about iOS (on which I tested this), but this same situation should apply to Android.
2) Why aren't more apps doing this? It doesn't seem like rocket science, so am I missing a key reason why this might be a bad idea? Half of my problem is convincing the use case.
3) Why don't I see discussions about this technique? I've searched a ton for an iOS solution. I come up with a lot of discussion about URL registrations (mainly app-to-app), but no one actually referring to the type of scenario I describe (mobile web prompt to open native app).
It seems that with minimal engineering, app developers could dramatically increase native app use, converting from mobile web. :)
Android supports deep linking. Please refer to
http://developer.android.com/training/app-indexing/deep-linking.html
Tapstream's deferred deep links can send users to specific views within apps (iOS only), even when the app isn't yet installed on their device.