4.3

We are reaching out to seek your guidance regarding our app's approval process. Despite diligently resolving all the issues and strictly adhering to Apple’s guidelines, our app continues to face rejection under Guideline 4.3(b) - Design - Spam. We want to emphasize that our app offers a truly unique experience, unlike anything currently available on the App Store. It is designed to foster real-world social connections and encourage users to explore new locations. Our minimalist black-and-white design, paired with innovative functionalities, sets us apart from other apps. We have carefully crafted every detail to ensure a fresh and distinctive user experience. During our one-on-one app review, we thoroughly explained our app's concept and demonstrated how it differs from existing apps. We are confident that no other app on the market offers what we are trying to bring to users. Given that we were live on the App Store in 2020, but had to postpone our launch due to the pandemic, we believe our app is n

Hello also, I would like to make an appeal on behalf of legitimate developers around the world. How long has item 4.3 be around? It seems like I’ve read that rule many months back. And after seeing all the spam apps on the market I wondered if this rule was even being inforced. It seems, perhaps, they are finally starting to do something about it.What is furstrating for legitmate developers is having to compete with all these thousands, if not millions, of spammed apps. Take Solitaire for example. Just do a search and you will find multiple developers all with the same exact solitaire game spammed 50+ times. Each of these apps are identitcal except for the background and the card back. And they all have 10 to 50—5 star reviews! Many of the reveiws are identical across multiple apps and developers. Do the math. And the worst thing is they utilize the keywords so that these apps appear in all sorts of searches.I trully love Apple’s quote in the Review Guidelines, “Come up with your own ideas. We know y

Hey lifeofjer, I'm really glad you shared this, because we’re going through a very similar situation right now with our app Cloose. Although Cloose isn’t a dating app, Apple keeps interpreting it as one and rejecting us under 4.3(b) – Spam. Our concept is a social map, built around real-time location and spontaneous proximity, where users can connect if they happen to be nearby and active on the map — no swipe mechanics, no auto-matching, no profiles sorted like in dating apps. We even removed all “dating-like” terminology and visuals, including hearts, swipes, and the word “match.” Still, we keep getting the same general response from Apple: that the app doesn’t provide a unique enough experience. To really demonstrate how different our app is, we even created a full walkthrough video showing all the redesigned functionalities, safety mechanics, merge-based interaction logic, delayed/obfuscated location, and more. But honestly, we’re not sure if the review team has watched it. Here’s the video, in c

Regarding different versions of the app for different country App Stores - you choose the countries in which each app is listed for sale. So you could use a different app for different countries. Each different app would actually be just a different version of the same app. But here you would run up against being rejected for '4.3 Spam' https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#spam A better solution would be to have the app detect the country App Store from which it is purchased. I do not know a straightforward way of doing that because currentLocale is set by the user's preference not the user's App Store country. But another way is to make an SKProductRequest for an IAP - any IAP. During the response to that SKProductRequest you would examine the SKProduct's priceLocale.countryCode and that would reveal the counry of the App Store. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/skproduct/1506145-pricelocale?language=objcIn this process there is no need to actually make the purch

I could not get it wrapping at the right place. It looks like SwiftUI wraps to balance as much as possible to have same length text on both lines. No way to directly ask for a lineBreakMode, unless you go through UIViewRepresentable https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58469001/how-can-i-get-text-to-wrap-in-a-uilabel-via-uiviewrepresentable-without-having/58474880#58474880 . how to vertical align top for text High Tide Declare in the HStack (see below) I tested with a longer text just to check Text(1:08 AM (Tue 03) January and more) Why do you define explicit GeometryProxy var ? How to you call to initialise (in SceneDelegate for instance). I changed as follows to be able to test struct TideForecastInfoView: View { // var geometryProxy: GeometryProxy var body: some View { GeometryReader { geometryProxy in VStack { getHeaders(geometryProxy) TideForecastEntryView() // geometryProxy: geometryProxy) .padding(2) } .background(.white) .clipShape(RoundedRectangle(cornerRadius: 14)) .shadow(radius: 8) } } @ViewBuilder

Thanks Jay_limbani for this topic, I'm facing this issue as well. Let me borrow your topic to ask Apple App Review Team to assit me, hope you don't mind. Appreciate and thank you. Submission ID : c845d491-a9e6-46b2-81d1-acb659cf55c6 Dear App Review Team, I hope this message finds you well. Harmonian is not just another app; it’s a heartfelt effort to create a platform where individuals facing life’s challenges can find support, guidance, and hope. It is a unique, ad-free space focused on fostering mental well-being, empathy, and positive engagement—unlike entertainment-driven or generic platforms. Our mission is to make a meaningful difference by helping people connect, share, and uplift one another in a safe and harmonious environment. I understand your concerns under Guideline 4.3(a) regarding similarities with other apps. While certain features may seem familiar, I assure you that Harmonian is fundamentally different in its purpose, execution, and user experience. It is built with a focus on pers

Hi, Unfortunately, I am still facing the same issue. The latest versions have been rejected multiple times under 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.” I’ve carefully reviewed this feedback and made significant updates after each rejection, including adding new features, improving the UI/UX, rebranding, and introducing localization for more languages. Despite these efforts, the app continues to be rejected for the same reason. Here’s a summary of the key changes I’ve made so far: • Added ~10 unique new features • Completely revamped the UI/UX • Introduced new languages (localization) • Implemented TipKit • Rebranded the entire app • Improved security • Added entirely new modes The latest version of the app is vastly diffe

I feel it is less about what differences are inside the application, and more about Apple wanting to reduce the clutter in the Appstore.I am all for reducing the number of junk apps, clones, flappy games, and spam, but to outright tell all developers that they have to combine several games into a container app, some of which just don't belong together is overstretching this guideline.Apple needs to soften up the 4.3 guidelines, and allow developers to continue to publish apps that are branded toward the specific target market. eg: diet apps should not be combined. I as a customer would not want to download an app with multiple varying diets when I'm only looking for one specific one.Same with travel apps - if I want an app that caters to Paris traveling, I do not want NYC, Rome, London, Milan, & other cities in a bundle.The idea behind the agreement is well intended, but it's taken too far, without consideration for marketing & other things that come into play with the Appstore.So the topic i