It seems some here maybe confused that location in the app is being used surreptitiously, or ScreenTime measured surreptitiously. In fact, it is explicitly requested, explained to the users who sign up, and reflected clearly in the app with all the necessary warnings about possible battery issues on generations of devices affected (6 and prior) and used to report on location. And screen time.
Our users are installing the app for both features, knowing both are there, in the same vein as a number of other digital tools Apple has allowed in the store, that use the same approach.
Please re-read the guidelines and the use. No API has been used that wasn't explicitly allowed to be used for said purposes. Location provided location. The public signal that indicates screen off and on was used. Neither was used surreptitiously, rather, used explicitly. Apple says this os OK. They just have an inconsistently applied definition of what qualifies as "location is the primary use".
The debate to me seems to be about whether apple is within it's moral rights. The fact that legally they may be able to do whatever they want (modulo anti trust) seems pretty clear.
Ok. Then consider the following: can I use this app to track my screen time without giving it always-on location access? No. Therefore the app is not using the location API for its intended purpose. They use it to get unlimited background execution time under the disguise of location tracking.
#1 Does not violate TOS. At least the rep spoken to said it does not. It is permitted to apps to known when the screen is on / screen off, via the built-in notification it provides.
Multitasking apps may only use background services for their intended purposes: VoIP, audio playback, location, task completion, local notifications, etc. If your app uses location background mode, include a reminder that doing so may dramatically decrease battery life.
Screen time inference is clearly not an intended purpose for location, since the actual location data obtained has no connection to it (i.e. to #1 above; note we're interpreting "purpose" from the user's perspective). It sounds like the rep is misinformed, or that the TOS needs to be updated with an explicit exception.
In your app configuration, you register your app as needing background capabilities for one or more specific “intended purposes”, and screen time recording isn’t one of them. So I don’t think the wording is actually unclear.
Unfortunately, this is from a phone call with Apple. Supposedly why there are multiple other apps currently in the store, accepted by apple, the do precisely the same approach for reporting phone use.
It is not recommended to enable this capability on iPhone 6 generation and older. Devices after that have on chip acceleration that makes it a minimal drain... it was one of the big hardware advancements a few years back.
You can go download Moment from the App Store right now and find out :)
Yeah I'm going on a downloading spree to get all the ones that haven't been yanked yet!
Related question: now that apps are not backed up when an iPhone is backed up to a computer, is it possible to keep a removed-from-App-Store app when upgrading from one iPhone to the next? Or will I lose all these apps (if they are removed) when I get my next iPhone?
It is of note in this case that "misuse" is perfectly arbitrary. The RescueTime app did use location, only locally on the device, to enrich the information provided to users. It also happened to capture screen time, obviously important to the app. Be clear here: Apple has not said this aspect is misuse. Screen time recording is blessed by Apple. There are at least three other apps active in the app store that do the same thing, and advertise themselves as screen time management tools. It cannot be argued that location is the primary reason the api is used for any of these, but it can be argued that it is an important aspect. Just like RescueTime claims.
Apple's issue here is there is no consistency for "misuse" where misuse is defined as location being secondary or primary to the API use. That is what their review board is claiming, and it so far used in a capricious and anti-competitive fashion.
Description at the link:
"It’s every Apple developers worst nightmare. Your app is doing well, business is going fine, then all of a sudden BAM! Something changes in Apple’s world and suddenly everything is at risk. Sometimes it’s as simple as Apple deprecating an API you depend on. Other times it’s a policy matter - a change in rules that has Apple requesting that you change or remove your app from the store. Sometimes it is a bug in the platform which you have to hack a creative workaround for. No matter what the specifics, developers should be prepared to handle that day when Apple pulls the rug out. After more than six years of working on apps in Apple’s land I’ve had more than my fair share of these experiences. In this talk I will go through four different examples from multiple developers covering the most common situations in which changes in Apple land can disrupt your app. Through these stories I will offer best practices for handling these difficult situations from how to interact with Apple to how to deal with the gripping frustration that can come along with these challenges. The goal of this talk is to better prepare attendees for that inevitable day when something goes wrong and in doing so help reduce the ambient anxiety many developers feel about the possibility of such problems."
Hi, I'm the lead developer of another app in the same space, we've also been blocked from updating our app for several months now. Interesting to see that this is happening to the the whole community of apps that compete with apples own screen time.
The worst answer we've had to our use of the APIs has been "the API might change in the future and your app might stop working" - about the location API
This remember me when my free music app was kicked out of the store with 17 other free & legal music apps ... the exact same day when Apple music was published...
This is why I hate so much Apple and all their products now.
If my memory is correct it was something like "low quality apps are not allowed on the appstore" ... Even if I didn't submitted an update since months and everything was running smoothly with 200k happy monthly users and very high review ratings...
Respectfully, your arguments are weak, and you're playing the crowd with bluster rather than laying out compelling arguments. I've been a RescueTime user before, and it's a real shame it's not allowed on iOS, but again, your arguments here are not strong at all.
> It also happened to capture screen time, obviously important to the app. Be clear here: Apple has not said this aspect is misuse.
In your article, you link directly to a clause:
"Your app is misusing background location for purposes other than location-related features and functionality."
It would seem Apple are directly telling you that this aspect is misuse, on account of they call it that, and the actual disagreement here is "We do not ... agree that this is “misusing” the method". Apple's position seems clear.
> Screen time recording is blessed by Apple
What's your evidence for this? That they provide it themselves? There are plenty of things that Apple bless for themselves to do via apps, and not for 3rd parties to do. Is your evidence that the rules aren't being applied consistently? That's not evidence, that's an appeal to fairness.
> Apple's issue here is there is no consistency for "misuse" where misuse is defined as location being secondary or primary to the API use.
This seems an odd sentence to say just after "Apple has not said this aspect is misuse".
You argument boils down to "everyone else is doing it so why can't we". A reply to your comment shows that Apple appears to be cracking down in general, and as a well-known brand, it shouldn't be that surprising that you're getting targeted first.
"Your app is misusing background location for purposes other than location-related features and functionality."
> It would seem Apple are directly telling you that this aspect is misuse, on account of they call it that, and the actual disagreement here is "We do not ... agree that this is “misusing” the method". Apple's position seems clear.
The problem for is more that it's open and inconsistent interpretation, in their own words, when they decide that. Their position is "clear" with the respect to the other apps in our space that they banned, and then allowed back in. So "clear" to one entity combined (-1) * "clear" to another has the sum of zero clarity.
> What's your evidence for this? That they provide it themselves? There are plenty of things that Apple bless for themselves to do via apps, and not for 3rd parties to do. Is your evidence that the rules aren't being applied consistently? That's not evidence, that's an appeal to fairness.
This evidence is not shareable here for others privacy and respect. It is the combination of content of a number of conversations between app developers we communicate with, and with Apple's conversations with all of us.
> This seems an odd sentence to say just after "Apple has not said this aspect is misuse".
This is admittedly a poor and opaque hint at the above note.
We haven't been targeted first, we are in the pool of targets, and some Apple has let back in. These apps list screen time management as their primary raison-d'etre.
Did you do any other kind of data collection that Apple might have had issues with? Do they get a copy if your source code when reviewing the app?
Also, can you explain a bit more why you need to capture location information for measuring the users screen time? The two things seem pretty unrelated to me (but I’m not an user of the app either).
No other data issue has been cited... There is no other data available on iOS to use for productivity tracking anyway. The app is best used as an out-of-band console / intervention / notification center, however getting a "total screen time across all devices" metric is a much desired feature for users.
As the APIs stand today, the only way the phone screen pick up event can be captured, is if the persistent location capability is in place. Of course, a users location is very informative for work goals and what a users hopes might be for screen time, so it also matters as a data point (think, office vs transit).
So a number of apps have used both together, for the purpose of tackling digital wellness. The decision as to which is "primary" has been applied without consistency by the reviewers.
For me, it's been a revolution at RescueTime. I had a 5 year old and new born when I started.
You structure your day right, you should be able to get done what is useful in a day's work in around 5-6 hours for most days. Otherwise, you need to restructure your day. You're doing something wrong-- excess communications, excess task-switching, excess research, over-engineering or something.
By consistently paying attention to getting the most out of the hours between 0830/0900 and 1530/1600, I am able to get at least 3-4 hours a day with my kids. There's the odd day where I get back on the computer after they are in bed.
The simple truth is you can restructure your work to match your life with kids, you cannot restructure your kids to match your life with work.
What is the compared-to "real social network". Facebook or other online networks? Or derived from studying meatspace communities? I imagine the numbers are very different between the two.
Good question :) I was referring mainly to the small world phenomenon [1], there are also some online networks that have ~6 avg path length like Microsoft Messenger [2]. We were just curious how a fictional network would look like.
It seems some here maybe confused that location in the app is being used surreptitiously, or ScreenTime measured surreptitiously. In fact, it is explicitly requested, explained to the users who sign up, and reflected clearly in the app with all the necessary warnings about possible battery issues on generations of devices affected (6 and prior) and used to report on location. And screen time.
Our users are installing the app for both features, knowing both are there, in the same vein as a number of other digital tools Apple has allowed in the store, that use the same approach.