The B2B program Apple has isn't available in my country and in looking for another way to give my apps to a business privately so that only that business or the people in it can use the app. I was wondering , is Apple ok with me putting a password on my app so that anyone can download it but only someone who knows the password can use it?
You're not allowed to publish an app that targets only a certain group of users, says the Apple guidelines for publishing on the app store. With that password restriction you're against that rule.
Now, that being said, you could buy an entreprise developer account and simply use the Over-the-Air system, if you're aware of how it works.
If not, look at my brief description here : https://stackoverflow.com/a/26043004/3603502
Related
I have a client who wants to deliver the app to 50k specific users, at start. Then he wants to go public with the app after some time. However, this could not be seen by users as beta testing, since it's just an "exclusive" earlier possibility to access the app, not tests.
We know these users since they are a part of other service users group. We will probably create accounts for them and distribute login/one-time-passwords by invitation or give them the possibility to log in with credentials from the other service.
I've been searching for the solution (e.g. https://www.knowband.com/blog/mobile-app/share-ios-app-without-publishing-on-apple-app-store/) but still, I'm not sure which way to go. We're still in the middle of development so we can provide a possible solution and even make changes in the onboarding/login process. But we have to have a decision on this matter.
From possible solutions:
AppStore - we would not give the possibility to register in the app and just people with credentials could log in. But is it even possible with an iOS app and not be rejected by Apple? I know that many apps don't have registration within the app (e.g. banking apps) - how do they do that? They just say that registration is available only on some www/in person at the bank and you receive credentials to your account somewhere else?
Enterprise distribution - this is probably not possible since users won't be employees of my client. These are regular people.
VPP - I've heard about it recently and never tried it but isn't it just a "simpler" Enterprise solution and shouldn't users be also employees of my client? Can VPP apps be changed to regular AppStore apps afterwards?
I think right now option 1 seem the most possible one since the app will be distributed to all the users after some time (we will add registration then). Any ideas on the matter? How can we not be rejected using solution 1 during a review?
Solution 1 is possible, you provide apple with certs in App Store connect when you submit to the store. Specifically the field 'Sign-in required'
I would do that, it's got very little time overhead as compared to the other two.
I am making a small app for my colleagues and myself that will contain some calculation tools some manuals and some drawings...
I would want them to be able to download the app from the apple store but since we do not want anyone to have access to the information in the app, I would like only the people with a password to be able to open it and use it.
I don't really want to go the adhoc way, some people are not particularly tech-savvy and I want to keep it as simple as possible...
Neither do I want to distribute the app through an enterprise account..
So is it possible to restrict the access of an app with a password stored locally?
Does Apple allow this?
Basically the first time the app opens, the user will be prompt a view with a password to enter, if he knows it then the app is somehow activated otherwise you can't open it....
I could recommend using TestFlight as a solution. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it but it is part of developer tools. You can give target people codes based on their iTunes account or their unique phone identifier.
If that helps at all let me know! :)
Although it is not clearly stated I think that your app could get rejected if people do not have a possibility to "create an account" and use your app.
An excerpt:
Also, remember that not everyone using your app has an account from
the start. Make sure you explain how to get one, or provide a simple
in-app way to sign up.
Here you can find some more information:
https://developer.apple.com/ios/human-interface-guidelines/interaction/authentication/
One of my clients needs an app that can be visible to anyone on the app store but not necessarily accessed by anyone? For example: It can be accessed by only those people who are attending a seminar or meeting.
How can we achieve this? Any idea or suggestions.
Is there a way to create this kind of app with restricted access?
Have you seen any app like this on Apple Store? if yes, please provide app name or link.
Will Apple approve this kind of application?
You can't put it in the app store and limit it to only certain people. If it's in the store, it can be downloaded by anyone who has access to the store. There are a couple of possibilities that might work, though:
If you have (or can get) an enterprise license, you can distribute the app yourself outside of the app store. It won't be in the app store, but you can restrict access.
Put the app in the app store but require login credentials to access some or all of the app's functionality. A common approach is that without logging in, people can see whatever is on the event's public web site. Attendee-only features require login. Of course this adds the complexity of managing logins. You would probably need to provide Apple with login credentials during app submission.
I would like to create an iOS App for a limited set of people.
It should be possible to download the app for free from App Store, but in order to use it
the idea is that you are required to be a member of the organization, which in this case is a local sports organization.
To solve the problem I thought of giving away activation keys to members that can be entered when they create an account, and therefore only members will be using the app.
Will the app be rejected by App Store? If so, is it possible to go around this in some away?
Thanks.
No you will not be rejected by the App Store.
During the review you will only need to give the access to demo account.
Your app will be available to anyone but you are free to give the credential to any person you want.
edit
Fyi I have such apps. The AppStore only block 'discriminating' app based on carrier or location (you can choose the countries anyway), but you are perfectly in the rules if you give access only to your clients...
edit edit
2.22 like I said is against arbitrary criterias, not linked to the login mechanism
for 11.1 and so on, I understand the point, but in my case (and I think yours) there is no problem if
you sell your service before, the app is just complimentary
you dont sell anything within the app
you dont charge for the app itself or anything within the app, you charge only the use of the server/back office/whatsoever
I guess that Apple dont care, they just don't want to bypass the applestore but I dont think that it is your case.
You should try Enterprise distribution for such purpose.
Yes your app may be rejected. Check the App Store Review Guidelines. In 2.2 it says
Apps that arbitrarily restrict which users may use the App, such as by location or carrier, may be rejected
There are different alternatives.
You can opt in for the Apple Developer Enterprise Program, this'll cost you 300$ a year and requires you to be a legal entity.
If you want to test it with a limited number of people (<1000) try looking into Testflight it was bought by Apple and is deeply integrated in the development process.
No, there will not. You need to to give some demo account info as test data to review while submitting to app store in the iTunes Connect portal.
Demo use case(worked for me): Implementation is like, there need some userid/unique pin to the registered account holders to start the application. At the time they input this pin, authenticate the user with our server and give the permission to let in to the app.
Otherwise you need to go for enterprise distribution. Find more about enterprise distribution here.
We're a small company and have developed an iPad app we would like to give to our customers. I've read through the B2B option but don't like our customers having to register their DUN info with Apple.
Should I just load it in the App store and put in the description that it's a private App? It requires a login so it doesn't matter if other folks download it.
Currently, we're using it in house via the internal tester scenario.
No one but Apple can say for certain what Apple will do in any specific case, but your description suggests it will be rejected.
From Apple's App Review Guidelines (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/):
17.2: Apps that require users to share personal information, such as email address and date of birth, in order to function will be rejected
If you don't have a base functionality that applies to the general public, you will, in all likelihood, need to go Enterprise delivery.
Distributing publicly might be the best option, but I don't think you would get an approval if you describe it as a private app in your description.
Without knowing too much about your business or the nature of your app, it's hard to suggest, but possibly you could add some public usefulness on the front-end of your app, even if that's business info, contact information, a news feed, etc... with the real intent of the app being tucked behind a login portal. (all total speculation).
Distributing the app outside of the app store has a lot of limitations as well: http://mobiledan.net/2012/03/02/5-options-for-distributing-ios-apps-to-a-limited-audience-legally/
I would just submit to the app store and see what happens. Apple may reject it, but that is true in any case. I have an app of this nature, submitted with a couple of test accounts, no problem getting it approved. When the app launches, it pops a logon screen, and has a short message about where to get an account (which won't make much sense to people not in the intended audience).