Hi,
I am the developer of the app in question, accessible hangman, as well as the other games I hve made for iOS.
I am a blind developer myself, that is why I thought htat making games for the blind would be the best approach for me. I chose Apple's platform, instead of Android, because of the way that SwiftUI lets me write the UI via code and change visual appearance of buttons, etc just by adding button shapes, icons, etc.
Now, I do understand that every app needs to go through review every time it is updated, of course. But this is verion 2.5 of the app, this is in no way the first or second version.
So yes, Apple seems to find a new issue when someone just finds a little light in their brain clicking into place, the first version had no such issue. But after 4 or 5 versions, oooooh wait, your app does not comply with blah blah blah.
So, yes, I think this is unfair.
Anyway, I have some news regarding this whole hing, the update was pushed through and approved finally so I'm a bit less worried, they still say I should talk to them on the phone so they're going to schedule a call with me.
Let's see how this turns out. Thanks all.
I wish you luck. Thanks for writing accessible software.
I am not (visibly) disabled, myself, but write software for a demographic that has a statistically high number of folks dealing with various challenges. Accessibility is a big deal for me (as is Usability –Accessibility's redheaded stepchild). I do things like provide localizable accessibility labels, as well as support for things like colorblind access, high contrast mode, and reduced transparency mode.
I have also released over 20 apps in the App Store (myself), since 2012, and am the proud recipient of many app rejection notes.
One of the more annoying things, is that the reviewers are required to select from a menu of rejection reasons. They can't just write "You need to add a plist row to ensure the new permission we just added is presented to the user." Instead, they have to send you some generalized "blanket" reason that includes that requirement, among a list of others that don't apply.
It's easy to panic, when we get these.
In my case, I sometimes need to break out a Ouija board, to figure out what they mean.
Fortunately, I have had very good luck in getting folks on the phone. They still tend to "beat around the bush," but you can usually figure out what they want.
> Anyway, I have some news regarding this whole hing, the update was pushed through and approved finally so I'm a bit less worried, they still say I should talk to them on the phone so they're going to schedule a call with me.
This is the standard corporate playbook at this point.
Screw over lots and lots of people, then opponents will find some sympathetic cases like this one and put them in the news to put pressure on the company to do something.
The company fixes the one specific case that made the front page. Neither the million other instances, nor the systemic problems that led to them, are addressed. But if anyone refers to the case that made the news, the company can say that it turned out alright. "The system works."
It only turns out alright in that case because it made the front page. Things are still broken everywhere else.
Sorry for the tangent, but as a blind user, how do you manage to use HackerNews? I can't get a screenreader to pronounce indentation as the indentation of the comments is done with gif images as spacers. Do you know of a HackerNews app or alternative website that works better form an accessibility poinf-of-view? (I'm using NVDA on Windows).
I’ve had this sort of thing happen to me as well. Often different reasons, for example: one reviewer didn’t like my permission text for camera access.
Twice now I’ve had to appeal the review. Each time the appeal worked in my favor and I was able to publish again. Keep in mind, as part of the appeal process they call you, so you will need to be answering unknown calls for a while. But the people I’ve talked to that handled the appeal process were all very nice.
"I chose Apple's platform, instead of Android, because of the way that SwiftUI lets me write the UI via code"
Unless I'm misunderstanding the feature, this is coming to Android as well (well, it already has, though it's fairly recent), in the form of Jetpack Compose.
Unrelated to your comment, I would love to know more about your dev setup. I am a fellow blind developer and have found XCode to be a mixed bag accessibility wise.
Honestly just wanted to give you a round of applause. I can’t imagine the tenacity it takes to get to the point where you can ship an iOS app as a totally blind person.
Apple has thousands of reviewers, sometimes some of them make mistakes. The best way forward is usually to just submit again, most likely you’ll have another reviewer then that sees things differently.
I don't really understand that every app needs to go through a review honestly. That is a rule we got with mobile OS and they don't really deliver on security ambitions.
Apple killed one of the best voiceover enabled single-player poker simulator about 2 years ago. THETAPoker was absolutely great, and the author invested a lot of time and energy to make the game perfectly self-voicing. Until Apple review falsely identified it as a gambling-app which needs to be banned. The author tried to get someone to listen at apple, and was totally ignored. Now, Apple has a similar poker simulator, called hold'em, which is by far not as good regarding VoiceOver support. It feels like a scam to kick someone from the AppStore who did a very good job just to make your own botched copy-cat app more prominent.
That said, Apple VoiceOver is still one of the best shipped-by-default accessibility systems. However, we have to thank Steve Jobs for this. If it were only for Tim Cook, apple wouldn't even know how to spell accessibility.
> Apple VoiceOver is still one of the best shipped-by-default accessibility systems
Which is frightening, because two years ago I had a terrible experience trying to modify a web app to be accessible using VoiceOver (I gave up after over a week of solid effort).
We couldn’t afford[1] to pay a third party to modify our 100% custom HTML framework[2], and VoiceOver seemed the most approachable for me to try and see how far I could progress on making our web app accessible.
VoiceOver just felt so very buggy - although perhaps the issue was the integration of VoiceOver within Mobile Safari (my dev experience is that Mobile Safari is a steaming pile of problems - current example is that iPadOS15 Safari crashes twice on many pages then goes blank so you can’t use it!).
As a dev, there also needs to be some better online training for using VoiceOver, since small teams do not have easy access to a colleague that uses it.
[1] We could pay 100% blind users to give us feedback, but couldn’t afford to pay a skilled team to consult and do the work.
[2] Custom framework because we started our product before reliable frameworks existed. Modern components are often designed to support accessibility out of the box, which is far preferable!
At a previous company, when I was developing an iOS app, it was difficult to impress upon the business people that there was a very real risk of Apple simply cutting us off. (When Apple wanted to compete in our space, or they cut a deal with a competitor of ours, or they came up with some new idea about "security" or "experience", or simply Kafkaesque random bureaucratic whim with no appeal.)
I then had to explain why "the market" hadn't already corrected that, and why regulators hadn't.
Separate from my professional career, one of the more personal reasons that the reality of the iron-fisted mad-king Apple iOS app store made me sad is... I had hard-won skills at some tricky iOS things, and it would've been very tempting to moonlight on some creative apps that did something new, while also generating side income. But, for this and other Apple developer-hostile reasons, I'd end up aggravated in my spare time, and always with the risk that at some point Apple will stab me in the back. That's no way to spend one's spare time refreshing from the real job.
Some of the reasons Apple comes up with for rejecting developers’ apps are such bullshit. Like I can understand trying to stop scams, malware etc. but this gatekeeping based on Apple’s subjective evaluation of the quality of your app when you have no other option for shipping on iOS is the reason why I just don’t consider it a serious platform. iPhones and iPads are more like iPods to me at this point; cool toys with overpowered hardware that do a few simple things well.
There’s also a lot of irony in Apple judging whether or not your app is good enough. Like does anyone actually think Apple is cool in 2021? To me they’ve just become another boring, stuffy corporation like Dell and HP. The iPhone 13 is so incredibly uninteresting and inconsequential that I couldn’t even remember what number they were on when I was typing this comment. That whole launch just came and went.
I have developed over a dozen iOS apps so I am sympathetic to the frustration as a developer.
But as a user I fully support Apple for curating the App Store experience. Discoverability is a challenge when you have this many apps and it's simply not fun having to wade through so many low quality, user-hostile apps.
You only need to look at the Windows Store to know that curation is an integral part of making a store work.
And the review process is not even good at filtering out spams. I keep hearing about shitty apps with sneaky $199/week subscriptions making to top grossing apps in the Apple App store.
As a developer I have vowed to never develop anything for Apple nor buy any of the products. I know my mutiny is like a drop in the ocean for a trillion dollar company but I strongly agree with GNU stance that Apple's Operating Systems Are Malware(1).
Apple been trying to stifle innovation for profit for a very long time and has been getting away with it. Had it not for the good open-source alternatives I believe computers would just be big dumb bricks with 0 scope of experimentation.
I have an iPhone SE2 for the singular reason that it's the only phone that vaguely approaches a reasonable size (although still too large for my liking) and isn't the most budget of budget phones. I kind of hate it though :-/
I think it's a bit unfortunate that the GNU page mixes some good points with hyperbolic nonsense, and I don't care much for calling them "tyrants" either; seems a bit much...
I think it's slowly shifting. ios is attractive to developers because people pay for apps.
ios is attractive to the masses because, among other reasons, the people who can afford to pay for apps use it.
More increasingly, that seems to be changing, thankfully. I just wish the world had a better alternative than Android. It's hard to protest an overstep of Apple by giving money to Google.
Not directly related but another "today" App Store rejection story for rules being incorrectly applied: I had an app get rejected today for referencing MacPaint in the subtitle. It was in the subtitle because one of the major features is that it exports images to MacPaint format. The reviewer cited their rule about not using Apple trademarks in the title or subtitle. Which is fair enough, except that their trademark on MacPaint expired in 2007 (I checked before submitting actually). I ended up changing the subtitle, removing MacPaint, and the app was approved later today. I did call out in the resolution center that the trademark had expired, but of course I got no reply.
Unpredictable enforcement of rules is the biggest problem with the App Store today. As a small time developer you have to be ready to jump through every hoop Apple puts in front of you, what else can you do really? But then in the next update you get a different reviewer who goes "no those hoops you jumped through were wrong" and penalizes you for it. Rinse and repeat.
> To my surprise, I got an email saying that my app is similar to other apps on the app store and that it is considered spam. Literally.
Please tell me this is a joke, this can't be true. So I can't develop an app and upload it if there's one similar already on the app store? What kind of stupid rule is this?
Hi all.
this is Oriol the developer of the accessible game in question here.
I do agree with some of your points guys, I mean, I'm not against reviewing app updates at all, but in this case, if the review board really considered the app to be spam or whatever, they should have said so in the first version of the app, when it was first posted in september 2020, not after like 6 updates.
That was the main problem here. I have more than 200 users who have spent money on the app, and the new version was just an iOS 15 fix which rendered the game unplayable without this update.
Luckily though yesterday the new update was pushed, they still want me to have a call with them because apparently my app does not comply with their guidelines but let's hope I can clarify this.
I am a blind developer and I know that my apps aren't super nice, I mean I can't make wonderful icons and whatever and while I do pay for logos I just don't earn enough from making games for the blind to have icons everywhere, my players will appreciate sound effects and music etc much more than they will cool icons.
Being blind myself I think I know very well what the needs of my users are, hence the reason why I wanted to make a game for the blind, and it just makes me sad that Apple will consider that this is spam when I know perfectly well there aren't any other hangman games out there made with the blind in mind, and.
I know someone said in a previous comment that with SwiftUI the app should be made accessible automagically. While it is true that the interface is accessible if it is properly made with SwiftUI and its accessibility features, this isn't everything. For hangman for example, I have gestures to announce the current word for example if the word was 'hang' it should say h, 2 blank, g.
Then there is the sounds, music, etc which other apps of its kind do not do as well simply because they're made with a mainstream audience in mind.
The asymmetry in power between 'everyone' and Apple, Amazon, FB is a problem begging for regulation.
If companies are making byzantine and ridiculous claims against other participants, it's bad for business.
This is completely outside the issues of Apple's right to manage apps - if it's going to do so, it has to fairly clear policy and way to redress grievances.
Things like: 'business review' and 'technical review' are separate so that bug updates don't trigger a business reviews. If a complaint is raised to level 2 and there are problems, it goes to some kind of level 3 mediation, possibly by an outside party. It also might be reasonable for Apple to require a small fee for new feature release review i.e. $100 to release a new version and have the business review. They could even consider having 3rd parties do the reviewing and only have Apple weigh in if there is a conflict. Etc..
Arbitrary and bad business operations are not good for anyone in the long run.
Oh well, that's what you get when decisions are made by a combination of algorithm and sweatshop call center.
I have to admit that software for blind people sounds like a fascinating specialty. I'd love to get into it but being not-blind (came close though) probably gives one false theories on design. I love the angle of making software that requires only a microphone and a speaker, it would be an amazing way to rethink the world.
Unrelated, but if you tweet photos, please take a moment to add alt text. I started doing it a few months ago and it's remarkable how easy it is not to (and how much of an impact it can make when you do).
It's very common for an update to not respect rule X since there are literally thousands of rules.
First you can appeal/answer them (like you did).
In the scenario where they still reject your update you can still make a new executable by bumping up the version identifier.
Try to make some change that answer their previous objection.
In this case I would add/change a line in the description or title of the app specifying is for blind users.
You could modify the feature to their demands but I'm not sure it applies in this case.
Then you submit again.
You will get a new human reviewer which may have a different opinion from the previous reviewer who rejected you.
Be kind and respectful but keep appealing/resubmitting/explaining/asking what you can do.
Don't give up.
It's very time consuming but usually you will always get meaningful updates published in the end.
I was going to write a snarky comment about upgrading too early, but:
"Exploring images with VoiceOver: Explore people, objects, text, and tables within images in more detail with VoiceOver. Navigate receipts and nutrition label values intelligently in logical order. And move your finger over a photo to discover a person’s position relative to other objects within images."
"Voice image descriptions in Markup: Markup lets the user add image descriptions that can be read by VoiceOver. Image descriptions persist even when shared and can be read in a range of supported apps on iPhone, iPad, and Mac."
"Per-app settings: Customize display and text size settings on an app-by-app basis. Bold or enlarge text, increase contrast, invert colors, add color filters, and more for only the apps you want."
"Magnifier app: Magnifier finally becomes a default app on iOS, so you can use your iPhone as a magnifying glass to zoom in on objects near you."
It seems like some types of rules should be enforced once and other types should always happen.
I’d imagine a rule to check the existing market and determine if there are too many duplicates should be on first submission only and not enforced again unless the app category or title has a material change.
I got a call from apple.. They want me to change the app icon, apparently that was the issue. I don't believe it thoughh, the appeal responder actually said that "your app has voiceover but the rejection still applies". It doesn't make any sense, they still said oh I'm sorry and we will handle it better in the future blah blah.. Let's see if changing the app icon does something. Anyway the game is back with the iOS 15 update, so if anyone wants to try it out...
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1528856181
Unfortunately this sort of thing is pretty much inevitable when a large org like Apple makes itself the single bottleneck for all apps. No org that big can actually serve everyone's needs
(Cue people whose needs it serves coming to tell me all about it)
This is particularly evil in light of the fact that security updates are bound to OS versions. I tried to update my iPhone the other day to iOS 14.8 for the security patches, but it wouldn't let me. It would only let me upgrade to 15.0. So now I have a choice: I can either have the security patches, or I can have this (previously approved) app. I can't have both.
This specific app is not an issue for me (I'm not blind) but there is another app that I do rely on that has also not been upgrade to 15.0 so I'm still faced with the same dilemma. And unfortunately, this particular app (Foreflight) is iOS-only.
[+] [-] ogomez92|4 years ago|reply
Now, I do understand that every app needs to go through review every time it is updated, of course. But this is verion 2.5 of the app, this is in no way the first or second version. So yes, Apple seems to find a new issue when someone just finds a little light in their brain clicking into place, the first version had no such issue. But after 4 or 5 versions, oooooh wait, your app does not comply with blah blah blah. So, yes, I think this is unfair. Anyway, I have some news regarding this whole hing, the update was pushed through and approved finally so I'm a bit less worried, they still say I should talk to them on the phone so they're going to schedule a call with me. Let's see how this turns out. Thanks all.
[+] [-] ChrisMarshallNY|4 years ago|reply
I am not (visibly) disabled, myself, but write software for a demographic that has a statistically high number of folks dealing with various challenges. Accessibility is a big deal for me (as is Usability –Accessibility's redheaded stepchild). I do things like provide localizable accessibility labels, as well as support for things like colorblind access, high contrast mode, and reduced transparency mode.
I have also released over 20 apps in the App Store (myself), since 2012, and am the proud recipient of many app rejection notes.
One of the more annoying things, is that the reviewers are required to select from a menu of rejection reasons. They can't just write "You need to add a plist row to ensure the new permission we just added is presented to the user." Instead, they have to send you some generalized "blanket" reason that includes that requirement, among a list of others that don't apply.
It's easy to panic, when we get these.
In my case, I sometimes need to break out a Ouija board, to figure out what they mean.
Fortunately, I have had very good luck in getting folks on the phone. They still tend to "beat around the bush," but you can usually figure out what they want.
[+] [-] AnthonyMouse|4 years ago|reply
This is the standard corporate playbook at this point.
Screw over lots and lots of people, then opponents will find some sympathetic cases like this one and put them in the news to put pressure on the company to do something.
The company fixes the one specific case that made the front page. Neither the million other instances, nor the systemic problems that led to them, are addressed. But if anyone refers to the case that made the news, the company can say that it turned out alright. "The system works."
It only turns out alright in that case because it made the front page. Things are still broken everywhere else.
[+] [-] bellweather49|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwbrandsma|4 years ago|reply
Twice now I’ve had to appeal the review. Each time the appeal worked in my favor and I was able to publish again. Keep in mind, as part of the appeal process they call you, so you will need to be answering unknown calls for a while. But the people I’ve talked to that handled the appeal process were all very nice.
[+] [-] V-2|4 years ago|reply
Unless I'm misunderstanding the feature, this is coming to Android as well (well, it already has, though it's fairly recent), in the form of Jetpack Compose.
[+] [-] kolanos|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ksec|4 years ago|reply
Normal procedure of Apple to avoid any written communication.
[+] [-] binkHN|4 years ago|reply
You might want to look into Google's new UI toolkit, for Android, called Compose.
[+] [-] spoonjim|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Grustaf|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 123pie123|4 years ago|reply
Could you post on how the conversation went?
[+] [-] raxxorrax|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Gulfick|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] juancn|4 years ago|reply
It's a staple of large corporations struggling scale processes and at the same time properly handle edge cases.
[+] [-] mlang23|4 years ago|reply
That said, Apple VoiceOver is still one of the best shipped-by-default accessibility systems. However, we have to thank Steve Jobs for this. If it were only for Tim Cook, apple wouldn't even know how to spell accessibility.
[+] [-] robocat|4 years ago|reply
Which is frightening, because two years ago I had a terrible experience trying to modify a web app to be accessible using VoiceOver (I gave up after over a week of solid effort).
We couldn’t afford[1] to pay a third party to modify our 100% custom HTML framework[2], and VoiceOver seemed the most approachable for me to try and see how far I could progress on making our web app accessible.
VoiceOver just felt so very buggy - although perhaps the issue was the integration of VoiceOver within Mobile Safari (my dev experience is that Mobile Safari is a steaming pile of problems - current example is that iPadOS15 Safari crashes twice on many pages then goes blank so you can’t use it!).
As a dev, there also needs to be some better online training for using VoiceOver, since small teams do not have easy access to a colleague that uses it.
[1] We could pay 100% blind users to give us feedback, but couldn’t afford to pay a skilled team to consult and do the work.
[2] Custom framework because we started our product before reliable frameworks existed. Modern components are often designed to support accessibility out of the box, which is far preferable!
[+] [-] bangonkeyboard|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neilv|4 years ago|reply
I then had to explain why "the market" hadn't already corrected that, and why regulators hadn't.
Separate from my professional career, one of the more personal reasons that the reality of the iron-fisted mad-king Apple iOS app store made me sad is... I had hard-won skills at some tricky iOS things, and it would've been very tempting to moonlight on some creative apps that did something new, while also generating side income. But, for this and other Apple developer-hostile reasons, I'd end up aggravated in my spare time, and always with the risk that at some point Apple will stab me in the back. That's no way to spend one's spare time refreshing from the real job.
[+] [-] moosebear847|4 years ago|reply
'... why "the market" hadn't already corrected [Apple's ability to cut people off], and why regulators hadn't.
[+] [-] _qbjt|4 years ago|reply
There’s also a lot of irony in Apple judging whether or not your app is good enough. Like does anyone actually think Apple is cool in 2021? To me they’ve just become another boring, stuffy corporation like Dell and HP. The iPhone 13 is so incredibly uninteresting and inconsequential that I couldn’t even remember what number they were on when I was typing this comment. That whole launch just came and went.
[+] [-] threeseed|4 years ago|reply
But as a user I fully support Apple for curating the App Store experience. Discoverability is a challenge when you have this many apps and it's simply not fun having to wade through so many low quality, user-hostile apps.
You only need to look at the Windows Store to know that curation is an integral part of making a store work.
[+] [-] pornel|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cglace|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Crazyontap|4 years ago|reply
Apple been trying to stifle innovation for profit for a very long time and has been getting away with it. Had it not for the good open-source alternatives I believe computers would just be big dumb bricks with 0 scope of experimentation.
(1) https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.en.html
[+] [-] arp242|4 years ago|reply
I think it's a bit unfortunate that the GNU page mixes some good points with hyperbolic nonsense, and I don't care much for calling them "tyrants" either; seems a bit much...
[+] [-] silisili|4 years ago|reply
ios is attractive to the masses because, among other reasons, the people who can afford to pay for apps use it.
More increasingly, that seems to be changing, thankfully. I just wish the world had a better alternative than Android. It's hard to protest an overstep of Apple by giving money to Google.
[+] [-] WoodenChair|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] paxys|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AbraKdabra|4 years ago|reply
Please tell me this is a joke, this can't be true. So I can't develop an app and upload it if there's one similar already on the app store? What kind of stupid rule is this?
[+] [-] ogomez92|4 years ago|reply
I hope this clarifies a bit what some of you were thinking, if you would like to you can try some of my other games, they are also made with accessibility in mind of course. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/choose-your-face/id1537309376
Thanks all for the support.
[+] [-] jollybean|4 years ago|reply
If companies are making byzantine and ridiculous claims against other participants, it's bad for business.
This is completely outside the issues of Apple's right to manage apps - if it's going to do so, it has to fairly clear policy and way to redress grievances.
Things like: 'business review' and 'technical review' are separate so that bug updates don't trigger a business reviews. If a complaint is raised to level 2 and there are problems, it goes to some kind of level 3 mediation, possibly by an outside party. It also might be reasonable for Apple to require a small fee for new feature release review i.e. $100 to release a new version and have the business review. They could even consider having 3rd parties do the reviewing and only have Apple weigh in if there is a conflict. Etc..
Arbitrary and bad business operations are not good for anyone in the long run.
[+] [-] gtirloni|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PerkinWarwick|4 years ago|reply
I have to admit that software for blind people sounds like a fascinating specialty. I'd love to get into it but being not-blind (came close though) probably gives one false theories on design. I love the angle of making software that requires only a microphone and a speaker, it would be an amazing way to rethink the world.
[+] [-] sillysaurusx|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giorgioz|4 years ago|reply
It's very common for an update to not respect rule X since there are literally thousands of rules. First you can appeal/answer them (like you did).
In the scenario where they still reject your update you can still make a new executable by bumping up the version identifier.
Try to make some change that answer their previous objection. In this case I would add/change a line in the description or title of the app specifying is for blind users.
You could modify the feature to their demands but I'm not sure it applies in this case.
Then you submit again.
You will get a new human reviewer which may have a different opinion from the previous reviewer who rejected you.
Be kind and respectful but keep appealing/resubmitting/explaining/asking what you can do.
Don't give up.
It's very time consuming but usually you will always get meaningful updates published in the end.
[+] [-] Jensson|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lozenge|4 years ago|reply
"Exploring images with VoiceOver: Explore people, objects, text, and tables within images in more detail with VoiceOver. Navigate receipts and nutrition label values intelligently in logical order. And move your finger over a photo to discover a person’s position relative to other objects within images."
"Voice image descriptions in Markup: Markup lets the user add image descriptions that can be read by VoiceOver. Image descriptions persist even when shared and can be read in a range of supported apps on iPhone, iPad, and Mac."
"Per-app settings: Customize display and text size settings on an app-by-app basis. Bold or enlarge text, increase contrast, invert colors, add color filters, and more for only the apps you want."
"Magnifier app: Magnifier finally becomes a default app on iOS, so you can use your iPhone as a magnifying glass to zoom in on objects near you."
[+] [-] anomaloustho|4 years ago|reply
I’d imagine a rule to check the existing market and determine if there are too many duplicates should be on first submission only and not enforced again unless the app category or title has a material change.
[+] [-] ogomez92|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] advael|4 years ago|reply
(Cue people whose needs it serves coming to tell me all about it)
[+] [-] lisper|4 years ago|reply
This specific app is not an issue for me (I'm not blind) but there is another app that I do rely on that has also not been upgrade to 15.0 so I'm still faced with the same dilemma. And unfortunately, this particular app (Foreflight) is iOS-only.