App Rejection Section 4.2.2 (Minimum Functionality)

App Store Distribution & Marketing General
OutdoorsBlogger OP
Created May ’18
Replies 3
Boosts 0
Views 3.4k
Participants 2

So we got rejected by the app store today. I undstand the reasoning behind this rejection is to prevent repackaging of websites as iOS apps, and so that things that could be Web Apps or PWAs are used in Safari.


We have a Ionic/Cordova hybrid app that uses several native iOS functions that are critical to it's use.


So how much functionality has to be native?

Is Apple steering us away from Hybrid apps?

Has anybody else run into this issue lately?


Thanks so much in advance.


FYI, it's a social network app that utilzes the following native functions among others:

  • Push Notifications
  • Camera
  • Carmera Roll
  • Barcode Reader
  • Action Extension
  • Share Button (send to Messages, Mail, Facebook, etc)
  • Universal Links
  • NSUserDefaults
  • Local Notifications
  • Network Detection
Answered by PBK in 313504022

I suspect that App Review either didn't realize or din't appreciate the fact that you are presenting this "content aggregat[ion], or collection of links" through the social network function of the app.


What you describe, in that it incorporates the camera within the device, most likely passes the 4.2.2 problem. Appeal the rejection pointing out that the app does not include "content aggregators, or a collection of links" but rather input from the social network.

Replies  3
Boosts  0
Views  3.4k
Participants  2
KMT OP
May ’18

Just to be clear...


4.2.2 Other than catalogs, apps shouldn’t primarily be marketing materials, advertisements, web clippings, content aggregators, or a collection of links.


You don't talk about the app's rai·son d'ê·tre, so...my guess is, it's just a marketing tool for your business/brand/product, in which case Apple has long since pushed back against those that simply want to leverage it's worldwide ecosystem for their own gain, meaning this has little to do with the packaging, and all to do with the package.

0
OutdoorsBlogger OP
May ’18

Well it was solved quickly by appealing. Not sure if it was just missed, or if hybrid apps are suspect - from their point of view I could understand why.


@PBK and @KMT, thanks again!

0
KMT OP
May ’18

Good info, thanks for the followup and good luck in the store.

0
App Rejection Section 4.2.2 (Minimum Functionality)
First post date Last post date
 
 
Q