Skip to main content

Hi Experts,

 

One of our customers have raised a question on the Apple ABM process required for FSM iOS app distribution.

“I would like to know whether we can utilize the direct link download mechanism mentioned in Apple distribution methods (link 1 below), as Electrolux have a business case where there are technicians (3rd party) who does not have an Electrolux account, but wants to install the FSM iOS app. Since they don’t have an Electrolux account they won’t have access to Microsoft Intune (ABM), so they will not be able to download and install.

For Android, we are able to sideload the application as it can be downloaded from the FSM Server URL, problem occurs for iOS. I did some research and I came across the below articles from apple, please let me know how feasible is this.

link 1 Go to topic "Make your app available only through a direct link" 
- https://help.apple.com/app-store-connect/#/dev275598f16

link 2 https://developer.apple.com/support/unlisted-app-distribution”

 

Your insights on this would be much appreciated!

 

Thank you

Minindu

Hi @Minindu Somaratne,

If they(3rd party technicians) are sub-contractors, and if it’s possible to have their own ABM account, then we can include those sub-contractors’ organization IDs to same application in AppStore. They can access the app using their own ABM. Each sub-contractors are responsible to manage their ABM/ MDM/ devices/ etc.

Thanks


Thank you @Anjula Priyanath  for your input.

If I understood this right, for this method the subcontractor should have an ABM account. Unfortunately, they will not have this option for having their own ABM account. i.e. As subcontractors can also be a 2 man company, so they will mostly use their personal mobile.

Since we have some limitations, can the ABM direct link method be utilized here, as apple provide the functionality for ABM. I have highlighted below the exact business case for us.

 

 


Hi guys,

I think the “link method” will not work as it requires that the App is set to “public” in App Store Connect and we can only use “private” for distribution.

However, I think the customer can use the App distribution through voucher codes. In their ABM Portal they can generate voucher codes to retrieve the App. The only limitation is that the subcontractor needs to use the same Apple Store region as the customer is registered in ABM.

Best regards
Roman


Hi guys,

I think the “link method” will not work as it requires that the App is set to “public” in App Store Connect and we can only use “private” for distribution.

However, I think the customer can use the App distribution through voucher codes. In their ABM Portal they can generate voucher codes to retrieve the App. The only limitation is that the subcontractor needs to use the same Apple Store region as the customer is registered in ABM.

Best regards
Roman

@roklde,

I guess, it’s not possible to generate common vouchers. If so, they need to generate vouchers for each device(sub-contractor’s). Correct me if I’m wrong.


@Anjula Priyanath yes, that’s correct. In ABM you can choose how many voucher codes you want to generate and it will provide you a Excel-sheet with all the codes.


@Anjula Priyanath yes, that’s correct. In ABM you can choose how many voucher codes you want to generate and it will provide you a Excel-sheet with all the codes.

Thanks @roklde,

Then, I think the possible way would be to generate vouchers to small sub-contractor groups and/ or manage subcontractors OrgID, and OrgName for large-scale ones(if possible).


Just a quick note on Unlisted App Distribution.  As noted, this can only be done for apps that have first been approved for Public distribution on the App Store.  Then the Account Holder of the Apple Developer program has to submit a request to make the app Unlisted.  This has more overhead than the Private distribution via ABM, so IFS cannot directly support it for every customer app.  However, this is a new option Apple just made available in January 2022, so I am hoping they will make it easier in the future.


Reply