If you don’t have enough interactivity, the app will be rejected. This appears to be the case here.
Simply turning the pages and watching videos was the worst thing you could have said since it pretty much confirmed why they rejected it.
Those are the rules and “freedom of the press” is a government rule, not Apple’s.
There was interactivity in navigation, the newspaper has different content when you switch from portrait to landscape, buttons, animations, etc.
I basically used almost all tools available in InDesign, but at the end a magazine is a magazine, not a game...
There are newspapers in the appstore which are basically PDF, others like Drudge report which are just a collection of links without ANY interactivity...
And I beg to differ : freedom of press is a universal value, not a government one.
I am a little puzzled by the response as well because it seems that something that is being published, would primarily be a page turner type document. Apple's response concerns me because to me, that's what it seems most publications would be. Of course, there is some additional functionality you can put in there through DPS but is this required for a publication?
I'm not going to get into the whole freedom of the press thing.
The original description of the app was as a very simple text only app.
Apple has been rejecting them for a long time and referring the users to iBooks instead.
The freedom of the press thing is a joke. Apple is private enterprise, and while I don’t agree with most of what they do, they’re certainly entitled to do it.
It's certainly not a text only application ! 20 videos, and different types of content for portrait and landscape mode plus short cuts for navigation.
But at the end of the day, you want people to read the articles, watch the pictures and run the videos. If you want to create a game, you create a game.
I will stop the freedom of the press stuff, but legally they are on a very thin ice, more specifically in Europe.
You can appeal the decision. FWIW, I had a client’s app rejected for this and we did go through an appeal process.
The clients found a number of very similar apps on the app store and we sent that list to Apple. They reversed the decision.
Whether it’s worth it or not, I can’t tell you.
What a hassle!
yes, apple is rejecting apps because of bad design, or what they / the
reviewer defines as "bad design".
pointing out to similar apps has helped before.
bringing the freedom of press onto the table is a bold move. but it
conflicts with apple offering a "service", and you cannot force them to
print/distribute/sell/store etc.your press content.
but I am no expert and indeed its thin ice.
Am 01.06.2012 23:22 schrieb "Log Home" <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
Re: Application rejection created by Log Home<http://forums.adobe.com/people/Log+Home>in
Digital Publishing Suite - View the full discussion<http://forums.adobe.com/message/4458559#4458559