or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple to deny apps using UDID data, lacking iPhone 5 display support starting May 1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to deny apps using UDID data, lacking iPhone 5 display support starting May 1

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Apple on Thursday announced to developers that apps using UDIDs will no longer be accepted by the App Store effective May 1, adding that titles lacking support for the iPhone 5's 4-inch display will also be rejected.

UDID


The move comes after over a year of warnings from Apple regarding third-party use of Unique Device Identifiers, which are leveraged to track users for advertising purposes.

Apple's notice to developers:

Starting May 1, the App Store will no longer accept new apps or app updates that access UDIDs. Please update your apps and servers to associate users with the Vendor or Advertising identifiers introduced in iOS 6

Starting May 1, new apps and app updates submitted to the App Store must be built for iOS devices with Retina display and iPhone apps must also support the 4-inch display on iPhone 5


Because every cellular-connected mobile device has a UDID, the identifier can be used as an incredibly useful tool for advertisers looking to get the most granular data regarding ad impressions. Mounting concern over privacy issues, including location tracking on iOS 4, ultimately prompted Apple to begin deprecating use of the identifiers.

In March of 2012, Apple started to tighten access to UDIDs, reportedly initiating App Store rejections for apps using the per-device information. The move came after a 2011 warning that UDID access would be cut off with the release of iOS 5.

As for iPhone 5 screen support, Apple is ensuring a consistent experience for all iOS device users.
post #2 of 28

Good... Developers have had quite enough time to facilitate the latest aspect ratio.

"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #3 of 28
I hate it when developers just abandon apps for reasons like this though.

I have an Oxford English dictionary app that I paid 30.00 for that they just never updated to the iPhone 5 screen size. They just stopped selling it in the store (so you can't even leave a nasty review), and now sell four or five different versions of it, (each of which is 20-50 bucks). And this is a big time developer too.

I bet there are more developers that will just go "f*ck it" and abandon the app than there are those that will update it to the new stuff.
post #4 of 28

If the app developers want a platform that they dont ever have to update to accomodate larger screens, they need to stick with android.

 

Look at the state of tablet apps for android, they're practically non-existant.

post #5 of 28

Good. Supporting iPhone 5 display isn't that damn hard. I don't understand why many apps still not updated to that aspect ratio even though the developer is actively updating for bug fixes.

post #6 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericblr View Post

If the app developers want a platform that they dont ever have to update to accomodate larger screens, they need to stick with android.

Look at the state of tablet apps for android, they're practically non-existant.

A bespoke italian suit is to Apple as sweatpants and flip flops are to ___________.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #7 of 28

I think supporting the retina display mean bigger app, less (storage) space available for other stuff.

post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I hate it when developers just abandon apps for reasons like this though.

I have an Oxford English dictionary app that I paid 30.00 for that they just never updated to the iPhone 5 screen size. They just stopped selling it in the store (so you can't even leave a nasty review), and now sell four or five different versions of it, (each of which is 20-50 bucks). And this is a big time developer too.

I bet there are more developers that will just go "f*ck it" and abandon the app than there are those that will update it to the new stuff.

Hey, I have that app too and was very annoyed with their useless communication on the issue. The company changed name from "Enfour" to "English Channel". You can download the new version of the equivalent App (which is 'free' but with in-app purchase). If you have the old "Enfour" version of the app installed, you can activate the new version with nothing more to pay. This is a massive pain in the ass and I have no idea why they did it, but it does work and the new version does have iPhone 5 support.

post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by noelos View Post

Hey, I have that app too and was very annoyed with their useless communication on the issue. The company changed name from "Enfour" to "English Channel". You can download the new version of the equivalent App (which is 'free' but with in-app purchase). If you have the old "Enfour" version of the app installed, you can activate the new version with nothing more to pay. This is a massive pain in the ass and I have no idea why they did it, but it does work and the new version does have iPhone 5 support.

 

Some developers are pulling their apps from sale just to release a newer version. This is the only way for them to charge people for updates. It sucks and I hope Apple close this loophole.

post #10 of 28
This is why I love Apple!
This could only be good for users.
post #11 of 28

I love how some people here go "developers have had enough time" and "I hate hen devs abandon apps". Go f*** yourselves, guys. Developers aren't working for free, and just as you guys go "Apple has no reason integrating Siri in iPhone 4", well neither have developers adding features in an app you already bought. Tough life suckers.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

 

Some developers are pulling their apps from sale just to release a newer version. This is the only way for them to charge people for updates. It sucks and I hope Apple close this loophole.


It's complicated, obviously. If Apple starts refusing updates to their apps that do not have (insert feature not supported, such as iPhone 5 screen size), they're forcing you to add workhours to your  bugfixing time, or stop updating your apps, or release them under a new name, "My App 2" or whatever... but Apple's position is also quite logical and good for users in the long run.

The only ridiculous position is the one from users who feel somehow like Gazoobee earlier "entitled" to a free iPhone 5 version of something because he says he paid for an iPhone 4 version, which currently runs as "legacy", if you think about it. Strangely, they're also known Android trolls... I wooonder what's the relationship here.


Edited by lightknight - 3/22/13 at 5:03am

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #13 of 28

My first reaction to requiring iPhone 5 screen support was elation. Then I really thought about it. I've already seen one app update that claims iPhone 5 screen size support, but all they did was make the "Home" screen on the app 4-inches. All the rest are on the old format. Then I thought about all the big games released 2 or 3 years ago that were lucky to see bug fix updates once a year, all from major dev houses. I doubt they'll release further updates now, unless it's "limited" support like on the one app I described.

 

So I'm neutral on the subject now. It's neither a good nor bad thing. New, newer, or very well supported apps were always going to get iPhone 5 support eventually without the push from Apple. Older or less supported apps will now get forced out of the store and, consequently, users will lose what little support they were receiving before.

When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
When a company stops chasing profit and start chasing the betterment of their products, services, workforce, and customers, that will be the most valuable company in the world.
Reply
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

 

Some developers are pulling their apps from sale just to release a newer version. This is the only way for them to charge people for updates. It sucks and I hope Apple close this loophole.

Why Apple wants to close this loophole?  Apple gets a share of it too.

post #15 of 28
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post
This is the only way for them to charge people for updates.

 

That's wrong, though.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123 View Post

I think supporting the retina display mean bigger app, less (storage) space available for other stuff.

 

This is my issue with the universal apps. I don't want some big bloated app that eats up a ton of storage space because it has graphics for every possible variation. 

 

I think it should be how they do video, you pay once and there's separate iPhone, iPad, etc versions. Grab the one you want.

 

or like how Temple Run Oz did it. I got the app and when I first fired it up it detected I had it on a retina iPad and asked if I'd like to get the HD assets. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipen View Post

Why Apple wants to close this loophole?  Apple gets a share of it too.

It is two edge sword. Apple can create a method for developers to charge for major updates without pulling the app and releasing new one. But that can be abused as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That's wrong, though.

Maybe. But this is how Apple do it. When they released Mountain Lion they pulled Lion from sale at the same time. However, you will still be able to download and update older apps you bought from Apple or third party. We think it is wrong because for a while since the App Store opened we were used to getting new features and updates for free.
post #18 of 28
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post
When they released Mountain Lion they pulled Lion from sale at the same time.

 

Hmm… I'm not sure that's quite the same. I'm saying that apps can have paid updates rather than simply 'sequelizing' like some of these seem to be. I've never seen any myself, and I really don't know why more don't, but it's possible.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #19 of 28
The 'Add to Home Screen' option in Safari still generates a 960*640 window (just like the Gallery 1.2.ipa), so I guess Apple needs to do some work before May 1st themselves as well.
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Hmm… I'm not sure that's quite the same. I'm saying that apps can have paid updates rather than simply 'sequelizing' like some of these seem to be. I've never seen any myself, and I really don't know why more don't, but it's possible.

 

The only way for developers to charge for iOS (and likely Mac) apps updates is to release new app. Removing existing app is not required but it is better to remove it to avoid confusion. You need a new app with new App ID or existing customers will just download the update for free.

post #21 of 28
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post
The only way for developers to charge for iOS (and likely Mac) apps updates is to release new app. Removing existing app is not required but it is better to remove it to avoid confusion. You need a new app with new App ID or existing customers will just download the update for free.

 

Why? On the update screen and the stupid modal popup that appears every single time, it explicitly distinguishes "free updates". Every button has a "Free" label on it. All of this is completely unnecessary if paid updates were impossible, and yet it has been there for years

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Why? On the update screen and the stupid modal popup that appears every single time, it explicitly distinguishes "free updates". Every button has a "Free" label on it. All of this is completely unnecessary if paid updates were impossible, and yet it has been there for years

 

Label updates as "Free" doesn't mean there is paid updates. When was the last time you paid for an app update on your iOS device?! I am a developer and I know what I am talking about. If you still think there are paid updates/upgrades in the App Store (Mac and iOS by the way) then check out these links:

 

http://www.macstories.net/stories/why-upgrade-pricing-isnt-coming-to-the-app-store/

 

http://blog.wilshipley.com/2012/03/mac-app-store-needs-paid-upgrades.html

 

http://instaca.st/b/zg

post #23 of 28
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post
Label updates as "Free" doesn't mean there is paid updates.

 

It means there is a distinction necessary, which means they can exist.


When was the last time you paid for an app update on your iOS device?!

 

I specifically talked about that.


If you still think there are paid updates/upgrades in the App Store…


I never thought that. Please actually read my post.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

It means there is a distinction necessary, which means they can exist.

 

I specifically talked about that.


I never thought that. Please actually read my post.

 

There aren't any because IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Apple controls the App Store and they are not allowing developers to charge for existing app updates/upgrade. If you read the links I've posted you will see that it is something developers want and Apple is not giving. The existing of the label "Free Update" doesn't mean there exist "Paid Update". There is no "Paid Update" option for developers. All updates are FORCED to be free by Apple. I don't know of any other way to be clearer than this.

post #25 of 28
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post
There aren't any because IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Apple controls the App Store and they are not allowing developers to charge for existing app updates/upgrade.


Then there's no reason in Heaven or on Earth for Apple to need to have any mention whatsoever of "Free" on their page, on the buttons, or in the forced modal pop-up asking if you're "SURE that you want to download all free updates". And yet they still have it.

 

Doesn't sound like Apple to me. 


The existing of the label "Free Update" doesn't mean there exist "Paid Update".

 

It means one of two things. It means the system is intended to have it but does not yet or that Apple doesn't care at all about usability and simplicity.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Then there's no reason in Heaven or on Earth for Apple to need to have any mention whatsoever of "Free" on their page, on the buttons, or in the forced modal pop-up asking if you're "SURE that you want to download all free updates". And yet they still have it.

Doesn't sound like Apple to me. 

It means one of two things. It means the system is intended to have it but does not yet or that Apple doesn't care at all about usability and simplicity.

Well.. It is not there and never was hence my post about Apple needing to do something about adding some form of Paid Upgrades capability to the App Store so developers don't remove existing apps to work around this limitation.
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

It means one of two things. It means the system is intended to have it but does not yet or that Apple doesn't care at all about usability and simplicity.

Those aren't the only two options. I think it means that Apple doesn't have that option in place -and- the do care about usability and simplicity by making it very clear that updates are free. This type of thing exists in apps outside of the App Store so making it clear that Apple isn't going to sneak in paid updates to users with little to no info is covering both those those items.

Case in point, several months back I updated my iStat Menus. As usual I clicked on the update. I didn't read the fine print on what changed. It was an update and I was happy to get it. Turns out it was a paid update that only got me 14 days of a trial before it ended. I wasn't happy about that. I'd rather them tell them about the major version and price update but not simply sneak it into the regular update cycle.


"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #28 of 28
Allowing UDID access to 3rd party developers was wrong to begin with. A quick reminder: Steve Jobs didn't plan on opening iOS for native app but web apps.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple to deny apps using UDID data, lacking iPhone 5 display support starting May 1
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple to deny apps using UDID data, lacking iPhone 5 display support starting May 1