Search results for

“4.3”

793 results found

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

Reply to My App Rejected 4.3 Design: Spam

My game has been updated steadily every week on the appstore for several months. When I submitted the updated version for review recently, it was rejected by 4.3, saying that my game has no characteristics. However, there is no other game with unique features such as custom skills on the appstore except my game, so I am puzzled and hope to be re-reviewed. There is another problem. My game has accumulated a part of users on the appstore user side. They are anxious because they cannot update to the latest version and urge me to solve the Apple version update problem quickly. I hope Apple can give me, an individual developer and Apple mobile phone users, a practical solution to this problem, instead of just a 4.3 rejection without specifying the specific reason.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Apr ’25

Reply to My App Rejected 4.3 Design: Spam

There are a number of app genres that the App Store reviewers decided to be too saturated. Among those are astrology, horoscope, palm-reading, and similar tell-your-future-from-your-biometric apps. If your app is one of those, you can't publish it on the App Stores. You could try publishing it as a Developer ID macOS application – use Catalyst if it's an iOS app. However there are other causes of Guideline 4.3 Spam rejection: Publishing similar apps that differs only in content. Publishing white-label apps under your own Developer Account. A competitor's app looks similar to yours. Search the web for How to Pass App Store Review: Guideline 4.3 Spam to find out how to diagnose the problem further as well as some potential solutions.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Nov ’20

Reply to Guideline 4.3(b) - Design - SpamApp rejected under 4.3(b) after following all guidance from Meet with Apple appointment — need specific direction

4.3 (b) is clear: Certain kinds of apps, such as dating,…, and fortune telling, are well established on the App Store and we will not accept new submissions unless they offer a meaningfully different or improved experience. and astrology falls logically into this category of fortune telling.

Community Apple Developers

Jul ’26

Reply to 4.3 Design Spam (Suggestion for Apple)

Seriously bro, this is what gets me mad and upset because my game doesn't even look like any of the games on the market and it gets rejected because of guideline 4.3, and on the other hand there are thousands of apps already on the app store that are spams and copycats of other hit games. This is seriously terrible!

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Jul ’18

Reply to 4.3 Design Spam (Suggestion for Apple)

Hi,I work in a portuguese company and am also facing this issue.Besides suggesting to develop a centralized App to target all our different customers, Apple made the rediculous suggestion that we build a web app. They provide us with the technique to build apps but they want us to implement a website?In every message they sent, they just copied and paste the 4.3 article and failed to give a viable suggestion. The last message from them was to contact them regarding this issue, but I've tried a couple of times (in their working hours) unsuccessfully.As the other developers, we can't implement a centralized App for multiple customers. Each one want an individual App, an individual splash screen, an individual icon.andrefjesus, when they called you, did they just stated and insisted on the 4.3 article or were they open to discussion?Does creating multiple developer accounts solve this problem?

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Sep ’17

4.3 Design: Spam Rejected. Please help me resolve this.

Hi everyone.First sorry for bad EnglishOur app have been rejected. I asked the specific solution but they sent me message belowWe do have an app/game have same feature but we removed it already.Please suggest me how to resolve this issue. Are we need to permanent delete it (how to do it?), or update the old app?From Apple4. 3 Design: SpamHello,We are not able to provide feedback on app concepts or features, but we recommend evaluating your suggestions against the App Store Review Guidelines, as well as the iOS Developer Program License Agreement (PLA), and the iOS Human Interface Guidelines.Additionally, if you are considering implementing any of the following functionality, we recommend reviewing all associated reference material and other resources available on Apple Developer for any additional requirements.- Apple Developer- Apple Copyright and Trademark Guidelines- Game Center- iCloud- In-App PurchaseYou may also choose to post a question in the Apple Developer Forums.Best regards,

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

1.5k

Jun ’18

4.3: SPAM - App Rejected - not reading my replies

Hi, I am a freelance developer who built a CRM and as part of the package provide a ToDo application. I managed to convince a client to get a White-Labeled solution for the application from me & uploaded in the client's developer profile (My profile has full developer access). Now, when I am uploading my original app for my other CRM users - App Store Review team is rejecting the app with the following message: We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences.Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps.. They mention - other developers; but the other developer is me - having full access rights. I have replied to the rejection 4 times with these comments & I feel they are just not reading my comments. Its disheartening to see that all the work you put in, apps get rejected for absolutely no reason. I have already

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review App Submission

426

Jan ’25

Keep getting rejecting under Guideline 4.3 - Design - Spam, even though our concept is unique

Im currently developing a new party game app, but App Store have been rejecting the app because they say they say the following: We found in our review that your app is primarily a drinking game app. Since there are many drinking game apps already on the App Store, your app duplicates their content and functionality. This is considered a form of spam. Your app may include features or characteristics that distinguish it, but it prominently features functionality that facilitate games that encourage users to drink. Therefore, it is classified as a drinking game app and we simply have enough of these types of apps on the App Store. I have tried to add more to the app, than just drinking games, to a point it has unique characteristic (I cant say the specifics uniquness due to strategic reasons). To my understanding, they say they dont take in new drinking game app, but this app doesnt just have drinking games, but other things that no other app has. Does that mean that they also dont take in new party game apps i

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

791

Jan ’24

Appeal for App Rejected Under 4.3(b) – Looking for Insight on Short Video + AI Dating App

Hi all, I’ve been working on an innovative dating app — it focuses on short videos and AI-powered recommendations, rather than static profiles/images and swipe interactions. It includes: Short-form video feeds instead of pictures AI-generated summaries from uploaded videos (hobbies, personality, etc.) AI-driven feed recommendations based on user like behavior Free, unlimited messaging between mutually interested users Inclusive for all genders, non-swipe-based UI Despite these features, the app has been repeatedly rejected under Guideline 4.3(b): Design – Spam. The review feedback refers to duplicative functionality in a saturated category. I’ve filed an appeal and previously raised this in the forums — where I received helpful feedback. I would love any insights, examples, or advice from others who’ve built in saturated categories while navigating this rule. I genuinely believe the app brings something innovation and unique experience to dating app users on iPhone. And it's bringing some freshness t

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

254

Apr ’25

Reply to No response to a Resolution Center reply on a 2.1 Information Needed rejection (7 days)

Thanks — that matches what happened, and it turned out to be the right instinct. An update, in case someone finds this thread later. Something moved shortly after I posted here. Whether the post had anything to do with it, or a support case I had opened elsewhere simply came due, I cannot tell. A response did arrive — just not the one I was waiting for. Instead of an answer on the information request, the submission came back rejected under Guideline 4.3(a). So the Resolution Center thread was never answered on its own terms. In practice the advice above was correct: once you have replied to an information request in full, the thing that moves the case forward is a new build, not more waiting. I did not argue the 4.3(a) call. My honest read is that it may not have been meant for an app like this one, but disputing a spam finding is a slow way to spend a week, and rebuilding is not. So the app was rebuilt rather than defended: a different idea of what the product is, the code written again fr

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Aug ’26

Reply to "No Mail Account"

Something similar here. Running ios 11.3 beta 6 on iphone X and watchos 4.3 beta 4 on apple watch s3. shows no mail account. setup a new account on your iphone. on watch MAIL app. I have tried restoring betas on iphone to no aval.

Developer Tools & Services Developer Forums

Mar ’18

Reply to Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam

Could anyone clarify why Apple Reviewers, when rejecting the app under Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam, do not provide any specific details? Because they don't have to. Your relationship with Apple is governed by the developer agreement that you signed. It says what you and Apple have to do. There is nothing in there that says that Apple has to provide any reasoning for their rejections. See section 6.9.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Mar ’25

Reply to pp rejected under Guideline 4.3 (Spam) dating app with unique BaZi engine

Because Apple explicitly lists dating apps as an established category under 4.3(b), the key question is probably not whether your BaZi engine is original, but whether the submitted app delivers a visibly different user experience from the first few minutes of use. I would stop resubmitting the same build. Prepare a short comparison showing how Kindred differs from the closest dating apps in onboarding, profile creation, match generation, compatibility explanations, synastry analysis and the actions available after a match. Support each difference with annotated screenshots or a brief video from the exact submitted build. Make sure the BaZi experience is central and immediately visible, rather than appearing as an additional scoring layer behind a conventional dating flow. In Resolution Center, ask Apple to clarify whether the concern is category saturation under 4.3(b) or a binary/metadata association under 4.3(a), because those require different remedies. Since the appeal was alrea

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Aug ’26

What are some other actionable items I can do, so that I can get through "Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam" app update rejection?

I have an app which is in the app store since 2022. It is an app with combined features of note taking, todo list and calendar. My most recent app update is rejected with the following message. Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality. Resources Some factors that contribute to a spam rejection may include: Submitting an app with the same source code or assets as other apps already submitted to the App Store Creating and submitting multiple similar apps using a repackaged app template Purchasing an app template with problematic code from a third party Submittin

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Store App Review App Store Connect App Submission

1.3k

Jun ’24

Reply to Design Spam 4.3

I recently did an experiment to figure out why my app update keeps getting rejected under 4.3(a) Design Spam, and the results make no sense. • I removed ALL changes except for minor number tweaks to character movement. • The submitted build is now 99.9% identical to the live App Store version. • This exact same codebase was previously approved and is currently live. Despite this, Apple still rejected the update under 4.3(a) Design Spam. This raises serious questions: 1️⃣ How can a build that was already approved now be classified as spam? 2️⃣ Why is Apple blocking ALL further updates even when there are no functional changes? 3️⃣ What steps can I take to get an actual explanation from Apple? Has anyone else experienced this? How do I escalate this beyond the generic rejections?

Design General

Feb ’25

Reply to My App Rejected 4.3 Design: Spam