Install iOS apps without iTunes account

My apple rep has hinted this has been coming for years (better shared management model). I don't think it's a result of the ChromeOS increase in devices, as much as it's something they've wanted to do, but it has been a low priority.

In any case, I am definitely planning based on this information. We'll suffer another school year with configurator and iTunes (we have to set up iPads in summer, so Fall is too late for us). However, that gives us a good year to demo the new way to manage, work on bugs, etc.

I can't wait and I'm glad I never went down the rabbit hole of setting up apple IDs for all of our shared devices (I was tempted). We still distribute apps (happily) through iTunes and only use Configurator for iOS updates. I'm glad we held out this long. Knock on wood. I am in fear of the asterisks that will come along with the new program.

I am in fear of the asterisks that will come along with the new program.

That is really the question isn't it. I'm hoping for something that will really work well for a shared use scenario.

Reviving this thread as iOS9 is out today. Apple lists this right on the upgrade screen on the iPad as a new feature in iOS9. Anyone know how this works with JSS?

@davidwbeaty I think that's sort of there, but isn't going to work until the next update being released with El Capitan. I haven't been able to get it to work on my non-DEP test iPad just yet. Running through it on my DEP one.

@davidwbeaty Working on the same thing at the moment. Can't seem to get it to work, not sure if it hasn't been fully integrated into it yet? Reading through the release notes didn't make it very clear.

@McAwesome Couldn't get it to work on my non DEP test environment during the beta period either, Just tested with one of our DEP enrolled devices and seeing the same behavior.

It sounds like JSS and the developers have to make some changes too. I am just looking at the details (a little late I know) of the new "no-Apple ID required" idea here. https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/?id=301

According to JAMF's announcement in the 9.8 email more features will be coming along soon, including additional support for 9.0 and 10.11.

Watch for another announcement in a few weeks: we'll provide another product update to support OS X El Capitan when it's publicly available. This next release will add support for the new DEP and VPP enhancements that were announced at WWDC this summer.

Apple has details [http://help.apple.com/deployment/ios/](out )
or here
http://help.apple.com/deployment/ios/
Also check out the video from Their announcement specifically targeted to changes for Education
[https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/?id=301]()
It talks about all the changes.

I spoke with our TAM, he confirmed that this functionality will be in their next release. They will be doing an open beta of that version for testing purposes.

We now have iOS 9.0.2 and JSS 9.81. Apps we have purchased and are using a token (new way) in JSS are working without an iTunes account, older apps (spreadsheet method) are still requiring an iTunes account. Are we doing something wrong?

You need to convert your "spreadsheet" redemption code purchases to Managed Distribution, then you can give them out via your MDM server. JAMF can't do anything if they are redemption codes. Apple KB here.

@adamcodega That resolved our issue! Thanks.

The assign apps to device feature of iOS 9 and JSS v9.81 using VPP MD without Apple IDs is working out great for us! I summarized and posted my workflow for a shared cart deployment here .

~Joe

I have this working on many devices but I have one device that when you try and install the device assigned apps it is asking for an iTunes password? More specifically it says to sign into the store to allow it to manage and install. Again none of my other devices have an iTunes account on them and are not asking for this.

Is this particular device updated to iOS 9 or greater? We had the issue on iPads that slipped through our update process.

Not sure how I missed this thread way back in March, but I just wanted to throw this out there:

Though nobody was under NDA when this information was shared, it very likely was stressed to you to keep information about future features (in this case device-based VPP assignment) under your hats. I know with my customers, I stressed it greatly.

Seeing information posted here that was shared in confidence which, by the way, went through considerable management approval to disclose to you, is disappointing. If there's a particular audience that I'd think would "get it," it's this one.

SEs didn't have to share the information with you. Seeing it posted here is a guarantee that it won't be shared with you in the future.

As you were.

This was widely rumored in March (before this post) I'm not sure what you are getting at. If this was some closely guarded secret Apple forgot to notify their staff.

http://www.macrumors.com/2015/03/06/ipad-education-deployment-changes/

My apologies if this seems crass, but if this was supposed to be a big secret at the time it was all over the Macintosh news arena.

No, you're not being crass, and I'll clarify that I'm not saying this is the only place that the information was found. This is just one place I generally hang out at and can give our perspective provided that I "keep it between the ditches," you know?

I'm generally saying that it was shared in confidence from account teams to customers and that if things like that leak, we're less likely to share those things.

I'll tear the fourth wall down here for a second... Understand that from our perspective, this was releasing information about a future product or service. That is incredibly rare for us to do and it took considerable management sign off to do it. We don't talk about future products or services because there are plenty of times that the plan just doesn't happen. We like to surprise and delight our customers, not walk back our plans when a monkey wrench gets thrown our way. Witness Google walking back device-based encryption by default on Lollipop. Thankfully, to the best of my knowledge, that's resolved with Marshmallow. It's Good For Privacy™.

We did it because it addressed a pain point in both Education and Enterprise realms. To be clear, this wasn't a "leak" on the Apple side. The intention was to inform customers that we knew were experiencing these issues. I can't speak for every SE, but I can say that for me, I was told that I could be picky with which accounts I shared the information with. If it was an account that, in our judgement, would be responsible with it AND was experiencing issues with Apple IDs go ahead and share. If it was an account we thought would be irresponsible with it (read: leak it) we were under no obligation to share it and they'd learn about the change at WWDC with everyone else.

So, that's it. Not going to address it further.

I just want you to know I appreciate your input and certainly I'm not privy to what is or isn't distributed to SE's nor the lengths you have to go to get information for your customers. I also appreciate Apple's, how you say, quirkiness on dissemination of corporate information.

I would say this as a general comment, as an old old mac hand I appreciate more than most Apple's secrecy and desire to "surprise and delight our customers". From an enterprise perspective IT managers like/demand 12-18 month roadmaps. I think this is a pain point more than any other thing. I'm at a hospital and we are expected to plan 12-24 months down the road. Forked OS's and hardware updates requiring new versions of the OS already cause management to grumble. Often in long term planning meetings while everyone else can offer solid roadmaps for vendors, rumors and wishes are all I the lone Mac admin have to offer to management.

Given Apple's fast paced updates and fluidity I don't know the answer but I would certainly be willing to sign an NDA to get a little bit further vision on things.

But I'm beating a dead horse here and not telling you anything you don't already know :)

Glad we can have rational conversations... on the Internet no less!!! ZORMG!!!@~@1~!@~!@13

Amazing.

Anyway... as to your planning part...
I've been there, I get it. I think, however, if your account team is doing its job right you'll be prepared for pretty much whatever we throw at you. Yes, there's a certain amount of "reading the tea leaves" (and in some cases we make it REALLY obvious - eg. new device size form factors at WWDC with Auto Layout etc...) however if you're set up right you're fine. DEP, VPP, MDM best practice, belong to iOS for IT and developer programs, have an AppleCare OS Support Agreement, moved to thin imaging...

If you follow the plan, you'll be fine. I know a lot of IT folks (especially management who haven't been in the nuts-and-bolts for 10+ years) often don't get it. That's our job to help educate them how it's different, why it's different, and why that's good. Technology moves quickly and takes different roads. Trying to predict what you need 18 months down the road is a pointless time consuming endeavor. Remember netbooks? ZORMG!!! APPLE MUST HAVE ONE OR IT'S GONNA DIE~!~!2~~!@~!~2121~~~~!!!!!!!1

They were a flash in the pan. Had everyone prepared for netbooks 18 months down the road, they'd have 14 months of left over plans. We instead went down the iPad road and look where we are now a few years later. Those that had MDM stood up and used it to best practice, were developing apps well, and were generally already prepared with iPhones were pretty much, "Wow that's cool. We can handle this."

I'd rather prepare my customers for what comes at them vs planning for something that has a 50% chance of not even happening.

Secretly I am throwing darts at a printout of your avatar ;)

If Apple had a magic wand/stick/club to convince IT managers that "All Devices need to be AD Bound" should not be written in stone we'd all be a LOT better off, especially in regards to DEP workflows. AD bind really is the stickler in a pure DEP workflow. I have a lot of freedom to develop Macintosh deployment as I see fit here, the only two fast and HARD requirements are AV and AD Bind. There is no room for discussion there.....

IBM is now our poster boy for no AD joining, no third party security software, user enabled self help, lower cost solutions.

They're going to say IBM's doing it wrong and not an Enterprise company? I don't think so.

Have you been listening into the meetings here?! How'd you know what they say round these parts?

We have a special set of skills.