Hello, I've uploaded my first application on applestore and they 've replied : Your app primarily features astrology, horoscopes, palm reading, fortune telling or zodiac reports. As such, it duplicates the content and functionality of many other similar apps currently available on the App Store. While these app features may be useful, informative or entertaining, we simply have enough of these types of apps on the App Store, and they are considered a form of spam. My application is related Turkish Coffee, i have explained unique features and differences from other applications. Added special review notes, and uploaded detailed screenshots. I've not send 2. submission before get replied from Apple, and then i have asked to make a phone call, then they said okay we will call you in 3 days, but no sound again. In this time i have entered much more detail to my application and sent to review again with new features. Buuum: i've got same message again. I don't believe my application reviewed by human, because ther
Search results for
4.3
585 results found
Selecting any option will automatically load the page
Post
Replies
Boosts
Views
Activity
Wouldn't that run afoul of the 4.3 guideline everyone (who makes cookie cutter apps) is complaining about, regarding spamming the store with almost-identical apps?IAP promo codes do exist and do work. I'm not sure that would help the situation much though. Apple really doesn't seem to encourage arbitrarily charging different people different prices for the same product.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
I'm wondering how would one person search for a partiulcar travel guide for Peru in the future. Cos there can only be so many keywords for one app, if it is a contain app, it would not contain all countries in the keyword. Usually if people go to Peru, they would search Peru guide instead of Travel guide.So i think some of you need to stop defending or replying general knowledge about 4.3 .
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
Hi, I uploaded a build version with 4.9, previous was 4.3. App has uploaded successfully and showing version no 4.9 but I am looking OPEN button instead of UPDATE. I wait for to see UPDATE button instead of open more then 24 hour, but till now It is showing OPEN button. Please help me.Thanks in advance
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
There are several reasons for 4.3 rejection, some are not spam by itself but overcrowded category. b) Also avoid piling on to a category that is already saturated;… We will reject these apps unless they provide a unique, high-quality experience. Searching on the AppStore, one can see there are a lot of puzzle games. So may be that's just the reason. If so, have you arguments to convince reviewer that your app creates a unique, high-quality experience ?
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Has anyone tried changing their apps to B2B apps in response? I don't think it's something you can enable once the app's been on the App Store so it's a huge disruption for existing users, but I want to know if it's at least an option for new clients.I'm also getting 4.2.6/4.3 rejections for a white label app for specific clients (my own code, not another service).
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
What a long post just to explain your app was rejected. BTW, what is section 3.2f you refer in your title ? I do not see it in the guidelines. PS: you have posted several times for the same issue and show that you have received a confirmation by reviewer of clause 4.3. And I don't think your financial proposal will help in anyway, will probably have inverse effect. So it is not really useful to repeat the same message again.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
code write by flutter,and I never post by a other account,why?
I got another phone call from Apple.• My account is flagged as a spammer. (It's sad)• The original rejection reason 4.3 is nothing to do with the quality of the app itself. It's based on the spammer flag that is added to my account.• I have to appeal to the review board when I got rejected.• App Review Board originally maintained the rejection, but they have changed their decision last week. They will approve AB Player as an independent app.• That decision hasn't gone through to the reviwer yet. That's why I got rejected yesterday again and I got another copy&paste reply from the reviewer a few hours before the phone call.The above was the fact heard from Apple.The reviewer (who reviews apps on firsthand) thinks I'm a spammer so he doesn't think anything, just copy & paste Guideline 4.3 rejection.That's why he can't tell any particular rejection reason and he doesn't reply anything other than copy&paste message. (Don't waste your time by trying to communicate with the reviewer.)
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
Hi everyone, I'm reaching out to this community for advice and hoping to get some insights from anyone who has faced similar issues. Our social casino app has been rejected twice under Guideline 4.3 (Spam), and we're struggling to understand the specific reasons. App Details App ID: 6753935757 Submission ID: fbb70e69-c91f-49fd-82d7-43c02bbdca4e Category: Social Casino Game (Slots) Our team has been developing social casino games for 7 years. We've had both successful launches and products that didn't work out - we understand this market well. For this new product, we conducted extensive market research and identified a specific gap: modern, high-impact themed slots targeting young male players.focused on modern male-oriented content including sports, beast taming, competitive gaming, and other high-energy themes. We created specifically for these intense, modern themes - not reused from previous projects. Yes, we did reuse some foundational technical components like:RNG algorithms, basic framework st
Here is the list of our apps that got Guideline 4.3 rejection so far...• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id926102392?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after one month)• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1272669652?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after giving up the obsolete version and IP commentary book reader (id1217317638))• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id978926628?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id325361059?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id560440657?ls=1&mt=8 (approved after several phone calls)• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1020070997?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)• https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1217317638?ls=1&mt=8 (no new update is allowed)• https://app-liv.jp/320090110/(told to remove on the phone because it violates Guideline 4.3)
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
I'm experiencing very weird situation now.• Yesterday morning, my app finally got approved.• I have changed a little bit, re-submitted it as an update yesterday.• The app got rejected again this morning.[8 Oct] Build 7534 - Rejected because of Guildeline 4.3 breach[9 Oct] Build 7591 - Approved[10 Oct] Build 7692 - Rejected because of Guildeline 4.3 breachThe differences between these builds are• Bitcode (off for 7591, on for other two)• Firebase Core/AdMob, Fabric, Crashlytics (I removed them in 7591. Other builds contained these frameworks)As well as screenshots and store descriptions.When it was rejected, it was rejected super fast like one minute. When approved, it took 30 minutes.I'm suspecting any one of Firebase Core/AdMob, Fabric, Crashlytics, or the combination of all of these, made the Review Bot think the app was made from a template.Or, it was just a coincidence, or the reviewer showed a temporary mercy for build 7591.I'll keep on checking.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
And as assumed, it got rejected:From Apple4. 3 Design: SpamGuideline 4.3 - DesignWe noticed that your app provides the same feature set as other apps submitted to the App Store; it simply varies in content or language, which is considered a form of spam.The next submission of this app may require a longer review time, and this app will not be eligible for an expedited review until this issue is resolved.
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
For the last 2 years, our team at Panda has had one goal in mind: to change the failing connection application industry. The business model is severely flawed - evidenced in decline of users in match group etc (all public info). We are building the only connections app in the market without paid features – We Don't Play Games”. This in itself revolutionizes a space which currently commodifies human connection; true connections aren’t forged through super-likes, platinum memberships and such pay-to-win models, where users that don’t pay are unfairly disadvantaged. Key Differentiators: Never having paid features 50/50 Male-Female Ratio: Our app will ensure a balanced male-to-female ratio, something not found in other apps, especially in countries like India, where dating apps are dominated by men. This helps create a healthier, more equitable user experience for all genders. In a country like India, how can any connections app succeed with 99.9% men and 0.1% women? Panda Duos: A first-of-its-kind feature where
Topic:
App Store Distribution & Marketing
SubTopic:
App Review
Tags:
App Store
App Review
Xcode
Accessibility
Hi everyone, I understand that Apple is cracking down on generic dating apps, and I totally agree that the App Store is full of low-effort clones. However, our app is a legitimate business with a real user base actively requesting an app version. Been operational since 2020 and serves users in Australia, the US, Canada, and Brazil, with over 57,000 monthly active users (MAUs). This isn’t a reskinned template or a quick-fix dating app—it’s an extension of a platform that users already trust and rely on. Our unique features include: Disappearing Photos & Voice Notes – Messages auto-delete after being viewed for better privacy. Private Galleries with Revocable Access – Users can share and revoke access to private albums anytime. We explained these points in our App Review Notes, but Apple keeps rejecting the app with the same template response about duplicate content in a saturated category. Has anyone successfully overcome this type of rejection for a dating app? Any advice would be greatly appreciated!