Search results for

“4.3”

793 results found

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

I also received this message and the problem is our app has an online version already. We just fixed some bugs and tried to upgrade the version of our application in the AppStore. We tried about 4 times, the reason was always 4.3 Degisn: Spam. We are confused because we didn't change any of the binary or concept or UI, just some inner bugs fix. We tried to appeal but got no reply.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Dec ’23

Reply to iOS 7.1 it's supported by AppStore?

You can still use iOS 7.x as a deployment target in the store, but not w/current tools (Xcode 8.3.2). I'd wonder about doing so, however, as number of users on an iOS that far back is in low single digits.Note that according to iTunes Connect, minimum now for the store is Xcode 6, which supports iOS 4.3 or iOS 5.1.1 minimum deployment.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

May ’17

Reply to Battery Draining Too Fast- watchOS 4.3 beta 2

Watch OS 4.3 dev ᵦ6 (15T5212a)Series 0 42mm sport.Battery life 42% after 12 hours... 2-column activity rings face with fantastical complication. Also, did a mile (indoor walk). Dramatic increase in battery life since last couple of betas. I did remove SIRI as one of my available watch faces if that matters.

App & System Services Core OS

Mar ’18

Reply to Whatsapp Sticker Apps Getting Rejected

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.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Nov ’18

Reply to 4.3 Design Guidelines - Apple please reconsider how this is enforced.

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.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Nov ’17

Need Help: Modern Male-Oriented Social Casino App Rejected Twice for 4.3（Submission ID: fbb70e69-c91f-49fd-82d7-43c02bbdca4e）

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

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

135

Nov ’25

Reply to Concerns About Rule 4.3 Spam Restriction - Enlightenment Needed

Did you try to submit the app under your own developer account? Or did you enroll the client, and submit their customized app through that client’s own developer account? (Note that you could contract to manage each client’s enrollment, which might potentially allow creating some nice ongoing revenue streams for you. Thus, if Apple approves each client’s apps when submitted under their own account, then rule 4.3 could create additional business opportunities for you.)

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Dec ’17

Reply to App rejection Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam

Dealing with 4.3(a) rejections can be frustrating. Since you've already made technical changes without success, I'd recommend escalating to the App Review Board detailing your uniqueness or added value. They may be able to provide clearer guidance on exactly what needs to change to meet the guidelines. You can request an App Review Board review directly in App Store Connect under the Submit an Appeal option.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Dec ’24

Reply to No response from App Review after a 4.3(b) rejection, is this normal?

Hi, almost the same timeline for me as well. My app is not really a dating app, but the reviewer seems to have misunderstood it as one and rejected it under Section 4.3 on August 29. I responded on the same day with answers to all the questions and a detailed explanation of the app flow, but I haven’t received any response yet. I also requested an expedited review and raised a case with the App Review Board, but unfortunately, nothing has happened so far.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Sep ’26

Repeated App Review Rejections: Custom-Built VPN App Flagged Under Guideline 4.3(a), Now Guideline 5.6

Hi everyone, I’m looking for advice from developers who may have experienced a similar App Review situation. Our app, ASK VPN (Apple ID: 679*****), has been rejected multiple times, and I’m struggling to understand exactly what Apple is detecting. Initially, the app was rejected under Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. Apple first stated that the app shared a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept with apps previously submitted by a terminated Apple Developer Program account. After we asked for clarification, Apple later stated that the app shared a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept with apps submitted by other developers, with only minor differences. To clarify an important point: we did not purchase this VPN source code from another developer, and we did not use a commercial VPN template, cloned project, or repackaged source code. ASK VPN was developed specifically for this project. I defined the product strategy, required functionality, user flow, and design direction myself, and used Code

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review App Review

294

Aug ’26

URGENT: App stuck in "Waiting for Review" after Guideline 4.3 resolution (App ID: 6815780013, Case ID: 102982796753)

Hello Apple Staff and Community, We are experiencing a critical administrative pipeline freeze on our latest app submission and are requesting a manual review queue reset from Developer Relations or App Review engineering. App Information App Name: Moneyspire 2027 Apple ID (App ID): 6815780013 Bundle ID: com.moneyspire.moneyspire2027.ios Platform: iOS Case Timeline & Context September 29: Our expedited review request was officially approved. September 29: The build was flagged under Guideline 4.3 (Design - Spam) due to an older version of our app on our account. We immediately deleted/removed the other app from sale to completely resolve the policy conflict and left a message for the reviewer stating this, and then re-submitted the submission. October 1: We filed a formal support ticket (Case ID: 102982796753) explaining that the conflicting app was removed. October 6: We submitted an official App Review Board Appeal. The Problem The app has now been entirely frozen in the Waiting for Review stat

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

142

Reply to Concerns About Rule 4.3 Spam Restriction - Enlightenment Needed

>and also similar design >because as a great part of features will be shared between the apps, we will reuse great (or at least some) of the codeIf app review sniffs out seemingly templated apps in your case, I think your primary concern should be with 4.2.6, instead. 4.3 kicks in when you have more than a few apps...have you a number, yet?Perhaps the best approach is for each client to have their own dev account, and their own unique app. Only app review knows how they will react otherwise.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Dec ’17

Reply to Sign in with apple not working

Hi Jinkal, I come across your question in other post in relation to the “4.3 spam - 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” just wondering if your app has successfully surpass this issue in the end? I’m coming across the same issue. Any lights shed would be appreciated.

Programming Languages Swift

Feb ’21

Reply to 4.3(a) on an update to a live app with 30 approved versions — App ID 6776105247

Since your App Review Board appeal is already pending, I would not submit another build yet. Guideline 4.3(a) specifically concerns multiple Bundle IDs for the same app. Because this is an update to the same live Bundle ID, ask the Board to clarify whether the match involves another app record, an embedded component, your developer-account history, or an unrelated binary. Provide a compact comparison between the approved 1.8.9 archive and rejected 1.8.10: the Git diff and release notes, every Bundle ID in the app and its extensions, embedded frameworks and SDK versions, signing team, entitlements and dependency lockfiles, confirmation that no other app under the account shares the product, assets or code. Then ask Apple to compare 1.8.10 directly with the approved 1.8.9 build and identify the additional Bundle ID or associated app that triggered 4.3(a). Previous approvals do not guarantee approval of an update, but if the only product change is the feedback field and the bundle/dependency in

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Aug ’26

Reply to Bizarre situation involving 4.3 guideline and app that cannot be deleted

By way of an update, even though it would cause our customers to lose their purchase, I've followed Apple's implied advice and deleted the 'new' app and gone back to using the 'old' undeleteable app record (so there's only one app record, no chance of confusion).But my submission has been rejected yet again, citing the same 4.3 guideline. Since the app is not similar to any other app we have... what are they talking about??I'm really out of ideas.

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review

Oct ’17

Reply to A problem I'm going through

App Store Distribution & Marketing App Review