We were placing an ad that introduced the new app so we asked Apple if it was possible if they could review by a certain date. They did and rejected. Did we really screw up with this request? The rejection was for the 10.6 User Interface. We thought it could be the graphics but you don't get much to go on from Apple. A friend said there are lots of IUI apps but Apple probably didn't think the app had enough native features, so we added air print and resubmitted. We just received the same 10.6 rejection the second time. Do we work on adding some sort of iOS features, change the navigation or change the graphics? Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. [IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/16lhca1.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/294ib8j.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/2vlnwpe.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/2j3s3no.png[/IMG] 10.6 We found the user interface of your app is not of sufficient quality to be appropriate for the App Store. Apps that provide a poor user experience are not in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines. It would be appropriate to incorporate additional iOS functionality within your application. Please evaluate whether you can make the necessary revisions to improve the user experience of your app. If you cannot - or choose not to - revise your app to be in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines, you may wish to build an HTML5 web app instead. You can distribute web apps directly on your web site; the App Store does not accept or distribute web apps. HTML5 is the major new version of HTML and enables audio and video to play natively in the browser without requiring proprietary plug-ins. Using HTML5, web apps can look and behave like native iPhone and iPad apps, and using HTML5's Offline Application Cache, a web app can work even when the device is offline. With web apps, you have flexibility to deliver as much or as little functionality as you desire.

For some reason they hate when its "links". One way to get by that if you did majority of your app in html to place the html inside of xcode instead of linking to a website. I dont know maybe you did that? Did ya ? :)

I had this problem on a very simple phonegap (non-buzztouch) app about 4 months ago that apple rejected. I agonised over what I could do, looked for other peoples comments and I came to the conclusion that apple were looking for something that could not be done in a browser. So I added a shake detection feature, which I used to trigger navigation on a page and the app was approved. Buzztouch doesn't have a shake feature built in and I have been trying to put one together, but it isn't quite there yet.

It's certainly not the graphics. Agree with @coderx regarding links. Perhaps it took a bit for the html to load. Is your Config file up to date. Fred

I have had a look at your screenshots techdesigner, the navigation looks simple, straightforward and the photo's are elegant. From what you have shown us, your app looks easy enough to use. I think it may be possible that the Apple reviewer may have judged that you could have done something similar on a mobile website. This is always on my mind when developing an app, so I try to think of how to use buzztouch features that you could not simulate from a browser, just as a differentiator.

I had this problem one time, and I added a quiz, and Apple approved it.

Yup Yup sometimes apple is a toughie, they want you to take advanatage of the device software rather then the mobile software end. (in other words, native) David buzztouchmods.com

Thanks for all of the suggestions, we will look at them and try to decide which is easiest to add or which is value add for the client. Even though we added the airprint feature to maybe sell Apple we didn't think anyone would ever use the feature. It is like most of you thought, they are looking for more native features. I just received a followup from a Apple to my clarification request- It would be appropriate to add additional native iOS features to the application in order to enhance the user’s experience. Specifically, features that enable the user to interact with the app rather than just consume information are recommended. For ideas on how to improve the user’s experience, you may wish to review the User Experience Guidelines section of the iOS Human Interface Guidelines.

This is becoming a slight concern for me. More and more, we're seeing posts on the forum about how to integrate html5 into apps - players, storage, ebook(!) etc. All stuff that could be done on a website.. Nobodies, fault, it's just easy and quick to add unique functions until something better comes along, but imo it's slowly moving bt apps away from being native apps..

Certainly it's a valid concern, and Apple fights against web apps. But Apple supports use of html in their apps and provides how-to's and sample code. So, it's not about whether it's written in Objective-C or HTML but how you use it & is it (the app) merely a mobile web browser or is it a mobile app. It's a line that's moving and redefining itself continuously. Fred

Apple is now consistently denying submissions where webpages are linked to. If you have nothing else going for your app add some trivial something and after the app is approved remove it from the app via buzztouch.

Perhaps another way to look at it is, if I remove all the web links, is the app worthy of submission. If so, perhaps submit as such, then after it's publish add the web pages. Fred

You asked if Apple holds a grudge... I don't know if they do, but I have read (and believe based on my own experience) that your app gets reviewed by the same person each time you resubmit it. I had an app that was rejected five times. I deleted my submission, changed nothing, and resubmitted under a different bundle name, and it passed on the first try.

You can add a quiz, stuff like that, and after approval just update the app and remove it - know a few people who have done it (me included). Cheers, David. buzztouchmods.com

Just had two 10.6 rejections of this nature. I had exactly the same initial complaint as you, and word for word the same feedback response to my questions about it, it's maddening. The frustrating thing for me is that the most recent rejection was exactly the same format as another app that passed in 40mins only a few weeks ago, so it's maddening. There was also a HUGE quiz in the app, as well as location maps etc, so this is really too much - it seems like they make it up as they go along.

It all depends on your reviewer ;) I heard deleting the app and resubmitting it might work? David buzztouchmods.com

Thanks for all of the suggestions we are going to try pulling the app and resubmitting. There were a couple of people that suggested that. That is by far the least expensive for the client. Not sure if we need to change the name or sign up under the client's name to resubmit. We also don't know if we need to wait a month. Worst case scenario they reject again and we need to start from scratch and build a completely native app. It would really be bad if we started over and Apple rejected that one. Do other people charge the client for the app if Apple rejects it?

Here is some language I included in a Statement of Work for a volunteer project. Note the third bullet: "The app will be designed for iPhone, iPad, and most Android devices, with the following limitations: -The apps will NOT be available on Windows or Blackberry devices. -The navigation portion of the apps will only work on devices with GPS; for example, the navigation will work on an iPhone but not on an iPod Touch. -iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch apps are contingent on approval from Apple. For example, Apple will not approve an app that is limited to advertising. It is possible, although not likely, that Apple will not approve the app. -The app may have limited functionality on Android devices." Because this is a volunteer project, the subject of paying didn't come up. But I think it is fair for a client to have to pay if what they want is essentially an advertisement or doesn't meet Apple's standards. The client is in a better position to take the risk, and in a lot of ways is in more control of the outcome.