Hello. I see you're trying to log into some shitty website that somehow survived 20 years of changing internet. Probably you don't even know what email you used for registration, but there's a chance that some variation of your "all-websites password" will work. Maybe. The catch though is that you have 5 tries, after that your IP gets banned.
Don't shit your pants. The IP ban doesn't actually work.
Oh cool :) I've tried out cursor for a more AI driven development experience, but didn't end up making the switch from Pycharm. I'm just so used to the Jetbrains IDEs that the additional AI capabilities (over the Github copilot plugin) didn't make it worth it for me to switch. But I'm thinking that gap in capabilities may be widening, so I want to give it another shot.
man this post got zero up votes. And we are the only two here. I was so inpsired by the look and feel of https://alexwlchan.net/2025/copying-sqlite-databases/ which is on the homepage right now I thought, if I just make a story look that good, it will also get a lot of votes...
The store blurb lists the data models available in the app, for example, NOAA HRRR and DWD D2, which only cover certain regions in the world. This is important for the user to know before installing the app.
Also, all other weather apps, including Windy and Ventusky, lists the weather models that are available in their app.
This violation notice just doesn't make sense, this is why I wonder if it was an AI process that removed it.
I publish lots of apps and don't have a great explanation either. I guess if you say that you just fixed some bugs, neither the app reviewers nor the users will pay too much attention and just approve/download the update, which is what you want as the app developer. Or it's just laziness. Or a communication disconnect between the person in charge of writing the changelog and the product/development team.
Disclosure: I run https://webtoapp.design where I convert websites into mobile apps (and help publish them).
Basically, yes, wrap it in a WebView. I'd need to see your mobile website to judge it better, but if it looks like a website, Apple might reject it. Your website really needs to look like an app to have some certainty of getting it through if your app only consists of a WebView.
At webtoapp.design we usually include some native components in the apps. Although they might not add functionality (just replaces some website components), they help get the app published.
I guess you'll have to decide based on your hourly rate whether it's worth it to tinker with some self-built solution or if you are also open to going with a finished product. I don't want this to sound too much like an ad, just expanding on the time save (because often you don't think about all the things in advance):
- If your client decides he wants push notifications: A finished solution should already have support for that
- For Apple, you'll also need to set up your Xcode developer environment and manage all the certificates and provisioning profiles (personally, I found that complicated when I started out). With webtoapp.design we handle all of that automatically (we upload a finished build to your developer account) - not sure if some competitors do that too.
I've been working on https://webtoapp.design for for 4 years now (in 10 days). It's my first business, so I've made plenty of mistakes. By now I have someone that handles the easier customer support inquiries and after all the other costs I can live off of it (not an appropriate software engineer salary for Europe, but it's enough).
It can be very frustrating, since I help my customers through the entire app creation and publishing process, so that includes dealing with Google and Apple.
I keep working on it because it's growing slowly but steadily and it provides me a lot of flexibility. I don't know which marketing channels to focus on to speed up growth though, at the moment it's pretty much all SEO.
What a stupid requirement. I run an app builder and offer my users plenty of ways to test their app beforehand, but outside of Google Play, since their system is just cumbersome.
This will make it nearly impossible to get an app published as a small business, since who the hell has 20 users just waiting for your app? It's already a huge struggle to help people with publishing their app.
The road to hell is truly paved with good intentions. All the scam apps will have no problem cheating this system, but honest devs will struggle. I can only hope Google reconsiders this requirement, otherwise it might be worth it to push my users more towards alternative app stores. We already support the Amazon App Store and the Huawei App Gallery (which are a lot easier to publish apps in), but the user base is just not there unfortunately.
> who the hell has 20 users just waiting for your app?
I'd wager that the majority of apps published to app stores struggle to find 20 users total, period. Let alone before public release.
It really seems like an obviously counterproductive measure. I think you're totally right in that the people who will have the least issues passing these new requirements, are those who don't shy away from dishonesty.
Thought that i would atleast create an app that is useful, so spent 1 month developing it, their was more to it but i wanted to publish atleast 1 app. So spent $25 to create account , than spent 3-4 hours publishing app , waited 5 days to get released. Today it was showing " Closed testing " in app status. I was not aware of it. So searched on internet & read about Google's NEW REQUIREMENTS.
This month on 16- Nov i created account on it & that time i was not aware of this new policy!!!!!!
From where the hell i am going to bring 20 testers now !!!!!
I used to predate my blog posts in Wordpress by years. Why would you use todays date? No one reads blogs in order, how pedestrian to follow the old rules.
You can also fool some of Googles date metadata, it's not just the day it's first indexed. Reddit by incompetence screws with it.
AI will go back and change the past. Not even Google/Web Archive can record it all. Is it AI pre-dating or was it missed on Web Archive here? (A: The Facebook comments seem real, so missed by Web Archive, but if Facebook deletes/makes private the data then we are back to not knowing)
