AppleInsider's official iOS app updated to support iPhone X edge-to-edge display

AppleInsider

Owners of Apple's latest and greatest iPhone X can now take advantage of its edge-to-edge OLED display in the official AppleInsider app, which is now available to download on the App Store.

Version 3.0.1 of the AppleInsider app is a free 44.4-megabyte download on the iOS App Store. As before, it gives readers access to the latest news, rumors, videos, tips and reviews, as well as push notification support for breaking news alerts on all things Apple.

The universal app supports not only the iPhone X display, but also smaller iPhone models, all iPad sizes, and even the Apple Watch. It requires iOS 10.0 or later.

While the app itself is free, it also includes an optional subscription service that removes banner ads. A one-year AppleInsider Pro subscription is available for $9.99.

If you like and enjoy the AppleInsider app, we humbly ask that you consider leaving a review for it on the App Store. Your positive reviews and continued support of the website have helped to allow us to deliver the latest Apple news and rumors since 1997.

You can also find us on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

Whether you keep up to date through AppleInsider in our app, on the web or elsewhere, we sincerely appreciate you reading. Thank you!

racerhomie3

I have been reading AI since 2011. You guys are my main source of Apple news since ,Walt Mossberg left .
I am not disappointed at all.

lkrupp

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

zroger73

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

Both the article on jailbreaking and the article on the app rejection are still up, so...  

http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/12/19/app-store-review-ridiculousness-apple-rejects-appleinsiders-iphone-x-app-update-because-of-news-story-about-jailbreaking

http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/12/15/alibaba-researchers-reportedly-jailbreak-ios-1121-on-iphone-x

polymnia

zroger73 said:

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

Both the article on jailbreaking and the article on the app rejection are still up, so...  

http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/12/19/app-store-review-ridiculousness-apple-rejects-appleinsiders-iphone-x-app-update-because-of-news-story-about-jailbreaking

http://appleinsider.com/articles/17/12/15/alibaba-researchers-reportedly-jailbreak-ios-1121-on-iphone-x

Easiest $64,000 you’ve ever made!

petri

Does the new app have one of those great new features that slows down the experience of using the app the longer you use it? No need to tell us if it does of course.  It’s for our own good.

nhughes

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

We did not make any changes to editorial content. The app rejection was an error, and our editorial brought the error to the attention of the powers that be. Our developers received word that very morning. Happy to finally have it available!

melgross

nhughes said:

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

We did not make any changes to editorial content. The app rejection was an error, and our editorial brought the error to the attention of the powers that be. Our developers received word that very morning. Happy to finally have it available!

Interesting. I don’t suppose Apple told you what that error was? Just an overzealous reviewer, or software that looks for particular terms?

nhughes

melgross said:

nhughes said:

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

We did not make any changes to editorial content. The app rejection was an error, and our editorial brought the error to the attention of the powers that be. Our developers received word that very morning. Happy to finally have it available!

Interesting. I don’t suppose Apple told you what that error was? Just an overzealous reviewer, or software that looks for particular terms?

I have no idea whether it was a human or machine error. I know that our developers have been, at times, frustrated by the lack of transparency in the process, and I know that they are not alone in that feeling. Despite what some commenters have assumed, the editorial we published was not written in a vacuum, and the latest issue was not an isolated incident. The only reason I wrote an editorial this time is because the rejection actually involved editorial content — it spilled over into my domain, a subject on which I am qualified to speak. 

nhughes

racerhomie3 said:

I have been reading AI since 2011. You guys are my main source of Apple news since ,Walt Mossberg left .
I am not disappointed at all.

Thank you for reading, and for the kind words!

libertyforall

 Better late than never 

haitiansonny

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

lkrupp

petri said:

Does the new app have one of those great new features that slows down the experience of using the app the longer you use it? No need to tell us if it does of course.  It’s for our own good.

And I’ll bet you were one those trolls who made feminine napkin jokes about the iPad too. Pathetic.

jSnively

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

mavemufc

Glad you got the issue fixed, App looks good on my iPhone 10, just wish every app would update!

indieshack

Not seen if the update in the App Store...

randominternetperson

jSnively said:

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

That's not my experience.  I had an app rejected once and the reason given was specific, but in my opinion incorrect.  I made an official complaint/escalation and within a few days the app was approved.  I'm the smallest of the small fish and didn't make any sort of public appeal.  I am certain that the mistaken rejection of the latest AI app update would have readily and quickly corrected by following the normal channels.  I'm not buying the "if it weren't for our bully pulpit, Apple would have done us wrong" angle.  I'm sure the publicity didn't hurt you, but it might not have actually helped, and I certainly don't think it was required.

jSnively

randominternetperson said:

jSnively said:

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

That's not my experience.  I had an app rejected once and the reason given was specific, but in my opinion incorrect.  I made an official complaint/escalation and within a few days the app was approved.  I'm the smallest of the small fish and didn't make any sort of public appeal.  I am certain that the mistaken rejection of the latest AI app update would have readily and quickly corrected by following the normal channels.  I'm not buying the "if it weren't for our bully pulpit, Apple would have done us wrong" angle.  I'm sure the publicity didn't hurt you, but it might not have actually helped, and I certainly don't think it was required.

Given our position as a publication, and how many developers we talk to about this exact sort of thing ... do you think it's maybe possible that we have a little more of a solid idea of the realities on this one? You're entitled to your opinion, but maybe consider your sample size.

haitiansonny

jSnively said:

haitiansonny said:

I've been an AppleInsider reader since 2005. I've found the articles posted informative, arguments clearly posed, and an insight and fairness not expected of a website that focuses primarily about the goings on of Apple, Inc. I follow certain topics and one among them is how/if Apple keeps to its' integrity or ethical behavior. Looking at the Editorial article about the initial App rejection: 1) Did Apple impliciitly/explicitly point to the article about jailbreaking? 2) App approval can be known to be far from a transparent process. During the approval process did anyone reach out to Apple? 2a) If they did, what did they say? (-Knowing that I believe there were no instances when Apple would not give any reason at all). I would like to know Apple extent of behavior concerning putting pressure on developers and other entities. The article pointing to 'App Rejection Due to an Article' stated that plainly.

1) Explicitly. We were told it was because of the article, then later told it was a mistake. We don't know for sure it was human or not, but it was most likely a human error given the explanation we received.

2) Of course. Things lined up in such a way that it made sense for us to publish.
    2a) Not going to say. I will say that if we had no publication power we'd still be stuck in limbo.

At the end of the day, this cost us money and time. Most app developers don't have a website they can publish on to get things moving, and that's something worth highlighting. We're happy with the turnaround speed.

Thanks, for the clarification.

Keep up the great work!  Happy Holidays!

melgross

nhughes said:

melgross said:

nhughes said:

lkrupp said:

Okay, so here’s the $64K question. Did AppleInsider have to remove editorial content about jailbreaking in order to get the app approved, or as it is suspected, the original rejection was a mistake made by some overzealous reviewer or automated review process. That’s all we need to know.

We did not make any changes to editorial content. The app rejection was an error, and our editorial brought the error to the attention of the powers that be. Our developers received word that very morning. Happy to finally have it available!

Interesting. I don’t suppose Apple told you what that error was? Just an overzealous reviewer, or software that looks for particular terms?

I have no idea whether it was a human or machine error. I know that our developers have been, at times, frustrated by the lack of transparency in the process, and I know that they are not alone in that feeling. Despite what some commenters have assumed, the editorial we published was not written in a vacuum, and the latest issue was not an isolated incident. The only reason I wrote an editorial this time is because the rejection actually involved editorial content — it spilled over into my domain, a subject on which I am qualified to speak. 

That’s annoying to be sure. I could understand if something dangerous was said, so that they might feel liable for it. But how many articles about jail breaking have been written over the years, from just about everywhere?

petri

lkrupp said:

petri said:

Does the new app have one of those great new features that slows down the experience of using the app the longer you use it? No need to tell us if it does of course.  It’s for our own good.

And I’ll bet you were one those trolls who made feminine napkin jokes about the iPad too. Pathetic.

iPhone user since 2008, MBP owner, early adopter of the iPad which I certainly never joked about.  But yeah sure I’m a troll, and Apple are tippety top.