I would like to know if there is a way to enable action extension programmatically in containing app so that the user don't need to enable it manually.
It's been a long time since the question was asked, but FWIW here is the answer. Yes, I programmatically invoke an action extension by using undocumented NSExtension interface. I learned about this strategy from this post https://ianmcdowell.net/blog/nsextension/. This design is in fact very much usable and technically speaking it works perfectly for me, except for limitations imposed by extensions themselves, particularly memory limitations. For instance, my action extension is limited to 16 Mb, which in my case was very impactful.
Regarding the fact that NSExtension interface is not documented, I opened a source code level support case with Apple to help me implement my design and I asked them about the legitimacy of this interface. The answer was that it would be totally fine if I used it and it should not negatively affect Apple review.
The post I linked to above provided a very useful blueprint, but I had to put in quite a lot of additional code to come up with a working solution. If there is interest in how I did it, I can put together some shareable snippets and post them here.
Related
I have seen so many posts regarding the same but all are outdated or not working anymore.
I am using iOS-Runtime-Headers and everything is just nicely setup. But it said that I can't find out the method in which I can set iPhone's screen display color. This should be possible with private APIs as long as, we've NightMode from iOS 9.3.1.
And yes, I am aware that if I will be using any private APIs, Apple will surely reject it.
Have you check out the GammaThingy project out?
It works a bit similar to f.lux and NightShift and maybe the code of the GammaController there can help you achieve what you want
You may also want to check out GoodNight, which is based off of GammaThingy, but a little bit more "polished". The reason why you cannot find the methods in the dumped headers is because the entire app uses C functions, NOT Objective-C methods. Specifically, it uses the private IOMobileFramebuffer framework (IOMobileFramebufferSetGammaTable is the main function used). I have put together a rather extensive disassembly of it here if you are interested.
Does Apple allow the usage of sysctl.h within iOS applications?
PS: App Scanner, a third party tool that checks code for possible private-API usage seems to think it's okay.
Note:
There is one more question like this : How can I know if I'm using private frameworks?
With the usual disclaimer that nobody can tell you what a reviewer will do, I can say for sure that there are apps in the store that use sysctl functions.
(Minor point: Simply including a header isn't a problem since symbols there shouldn't be visible in your app unless they're used...it's the things you use that might get flagged rather than what's included.)
We are creating an iOS app that does not look like any other app you would find in the app store.
My question is, am I allowed to create custom components such as header bars, tab bars, tables etc. for my app and not get rejected by Apple when publishing the app to the app store?
Months of thought and planning has gone into the UI and flow of the app, so the user experience would be superb, we're just concerned about how apple feels about custom apps/components like these?
Regards
There's nothing inherently wrong with creating an app that's got a completely different look and feel to everything else.
But what I would advise is that you try to use the built-in components as much as possible. In recent versions of iOS Apple have introduced a number of APIs to let you customise their look and feel significantly, and some of the most innovative UIs out there are simple table and collection views that have been hacked to pieces.
This is because Apple's built in components have logged many hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of hours of real-world testing and use, and are thus vastly more stable and field-tested than a totally custom component. Plus, they often have various built in features (such as a scroll view's bounce) that are hard to replicate on your own.
So definitely customise your interface as much as you like, but while you're doing it think about whether you can harness the built-in UIKit classes rather than totally re-inventing the wheel.
More and more custom controls appear for iOS every day. If it is so good as you say, Apple will be happy to accept it. Don't worry.
Also take a look at these cocoacontrols
As said before, Apple will not have a problem with that .. as long as you don't use any private APIs. If you are developing these components on your own, you will have to make sure that these will work in future releases (which is not necessarily a bad point) . This may be a problem with third party components, as they may not be continued (or supported in future releases).
I am a developer working on a robotics application for iOS. I do not intend to submit this app to the app store, nor do I have any wish for suggested methods to be apple approved....
I am trying to get bluetooth working, and I think a good place to start is to try modifying the existing apple frameworks. Is it possible for me to modify the frameworks so that when they are built to my iOS device the frameworks will be modified for the app (but not other apps on the same device)?
As a matter of fact, you can!
Objective-C allows you to "swizzle" methods to override their default behavior, and yet still call the original implementation if you want to. You can do this for any number of Objective-C methods, as many times as you want.
If you wish to override behavior that is present in C functions, you will need a little bit more control over the platform. Jailbreaking allows you to use the full power of Jay Freeman's CydiaSubstrate to hook or swizzle both Objective-C methods and C/C++ functions.
While I don't recommend the use of MethodSwizzle per se, the following URL has a good discussion of swizzling http://cocoadev.com/wiki/MethodSwizzling.
But you should really use CydiaSubstrate's MSHookMessageEx and MSHookFunction instead. Especially since you're not submitting anything to the App Store.
Now regarding Bluetooth, I've done extensive work in this field (I developed Celeste, which is a systemwide tweak providing vanilla Bluetooth OBEX support to system apps on iOS). I suggest you look into using something like BTstack, which provides you with access to the bluetooth module from the HCI to RFCOMM levels, and supports things such as SDP and pairing, which you will probably need. It also has the added benefit of not requiring method swizzling, which some people seem to think is some sort of satanic ritual that should be avoided at all costs.
Aside from categories (which extend the functionality of base classes delivered in those frameworks), I don't believe you can "modify" the existing Apple frameworks per se. A better course of action might be to simply create your own framework (or find somebody else's open source, commercial or simply third party framework) and then build that framework into the app that you install onto the iOS devices you want to work with.
While I understand that in order for an iPhone application to be accepted on the App Store, one requirement is that only documented libraries are to be used.
If this is the case, how are certain applications such as "Night Camera" and "Camera Plus" using a camera control that seems to be something other than the one contained within UIImagePickerController?
I have heard of certain cases where a developer has been given "special" access to certain headers that allow for features that would otherwise be impossible if constrained to only using documented libraries. However, given how opaque the application selection process is for the App Store, I would prefer to stick to what is recommended rather than take my chances.
Anyone care to shed some more light on this?
Have you seen this dicussion?
http://blog.airsource.co.uk/index.php/2008/11/11/views-of-uiimagepickercontroller/
and this sample code for a custom picker?
http://www.codza.com/custom-uiimagepickercontroller-camera-view
hope it helps.
You might want to check out a classdump of apple's private framework headers. Run this perl script:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2008/11/dumping-the-iphone-2-2-frameworks.ars
and navigate to the PhotoLibrary directory under PrivateFrameworks. Some of the classes in here look pretty promising for direct camera access.
Using the undocumented API could hurt your chances of passing through the app store, but it's all very subjective - If your product is good, apple will probably let it slide through. I'd recommend making friends with a developer evangelist at Apple.
The UIImagePickerController is a UIViewController subclass that manages a view hierarchy. You are free to play around with the view hierarchy, as those apps are, but it is risky considering that Apple does not document it and could change it on any OS update.
I have not heard of anyone being given special access to libraries, but I have read that there is a minor distinction between undocumented classes and methods and private frameworks. Undocumented classes are a gray area, but private frameworks are definitely not allowed.
The simple explanation is that apps in the store are not supposed to use unsupported APIs, but this is not checked consistently. The apps you mentioned are either using unsupported functions/classes/methods or else are playing with the view hierarchy-- which is itself undocumented even though it can be done with standard APIs.
You could do what they do, and take your chances with it. Just be aware of the risks. Your app might (a) be rejected from the store, (b) be accepted but later booted (this has happened for unsupported API use), (c) be accepted and not booted but break the next time Apple has a new iPhone software update (since unsupported APIs or view hierarchies can change without warning). Or you could get lucky and have none of this happen.