Duo users also likely have disposable income to spend on in app purchases, maybe click on ads to purchase things, and other monetization. So I do think it's worth building for it.
Developer here. Apple often rejects app submissions if the app doesn't look optimized for some iPhone device or iPad device. So won't be surprised if they reject new apps and updates for not being optimized for the Duo. This could be their way of getting developers to comply.
That seems like a tough road. They've never been able to enforce that iPhone app makers build an iPad-compatible version or vice versa, and this looks exactly like that scenario.
It's mostly enforced, the only exception being apps with a legitimate iPhone-only hardware dependency.
iPhone apps must function on iPad in iPhone-compatibility mode, apps must support window resizability as of OS 27, and apps can't detect iPad and refuse to run. And I don't think this is new, but setting the target to iPhone-only doesn't prevent iPhone apps from running on iPad.
The chat notifications count badge on Reddit website has the same problem for me. Tells me I have messages when I don't. Or won't tell me I have messages when I do.
I always figured this was intentional because i had been deliberately trying not to use the chat feature but they were pushing it really hard in marketing and, well, they got me to click... And also to stop using the site entirely
Has it ever happened where your submission goes to review and then just sits in the "In Review" state for many days? I am talking 4-5 days? or sometimes longer than a week? And then it gets approved?
I've had same experience. Brand new iOS apps are taking weeks. My latest all took 3 weeks to get reviewed and approved. Updates to existing apps are fast though (1-2 days).
Also, sometimes, apps will go in review and then just stay in that state for 3-4 days before approval. No idea why.
I am building the backend of a social media app I am making in Swift. I've previously used Vapor for the web server but right now, I am trying out Hummimgbird.
Has anyone tried either? Would love to hear your experience with them.
Just like how browsers disable or mute auto playing videos, they should be able to prevent back button hijacking until user has clicking a link or button.
Some websites like PC Gamer have some shitty middleware (that seems to be very careful to hide its identity, only appear once per session, and not immediately register on page load, probably to try to delay browsers banning the ever loving fuck out of their practices) that uses pushState to hijack the back button to try to SPAM more articles at you, probably in hopes of grabbing your attention. I would be in favor of permanently banning domains that do this even once (intentionally and not just getting hacked) from ever executing JavaScript ever again and forcing them to switch domains and lose their SEO.
Yeah you'd think this is something Google's stuff would detect and strongly punish, but somehow we ended up in this dystopian crapified parallel universe instead.
They autoplay the video on mute which is not banned. I don't know why news websites do it, seems like wasting traffic and should cost more than the hypothetical income from video ads?
Is my Mac doing something wrong here? Anyway to see what's inside?
https://i.imgur.com/YRQiaVm.png
reply