4.3

Hello, We are developing a multimedia routing platform written in Rust and uses gstreamer 1.20. We are targeting running on Mac Minis (older intel and newer M1/2/3/... w/ 8GB ram) using macOS 14.6.1 I have profiled memory usage using XCode instruments with the allocation tool, stack and heap memory is very stable once the pipelines are up and running. There are between 50 to 100 incoming RTSP streams with multiple webrtc connections, so lots of network and memory bandwidth is being used. However, we eventually see real memory usage increasing in Activity Monitor along with memory pressure increasing, but the heap/stack usage is constant in instruments, so we do not understand this behavior. Page fragmentation is a possibility, but have not been able to prove this with instruments. Please see attached image.You can see that 10-minute run had a total of approx 4.3 GB of allocations, but only 50.17MB persistent. Eventually we see kernel panics in either userspace watchdog timeout: no successful checkins

Hi, Our latest update for Top Scorer 2 was rejected under Guideline 4.3(a) - Spam, despite previous versions being approved without issue. We have been developing this game since 2017, and it is an original creation with unique gameplay, AI, and physics. This update includes super important bug fixes and improvements critical for our user base, yet Apple claims it is too similar to other apps without specifying which ones or what exactly needs to change. Previous version with similar features and design, was successfully approved, we are improving resolutions, updating SDKs and enhancing security for our players, why would you reject it, leaving players with an older version of the game that lacks the vast array of improvements we've incorporated in the game. Has anyone faced a similar rejection? Any advice would be appreciated.

We submitted our application for a review and got rejected with the followings. Review date: February 18, 2025 Version reviewed: 1.0.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We noticed your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps previously submitted by a terminated Apple Developer Program account. 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 Submitting several similar apps across multiple accounts Learn more about o

Hey everyone, We’ve been facing an ongoing issue with 4.3 spam guideline rejections, and I wanted to see if anyone has experienced something similar or has advice. Initially, we got rejected under 4.3, but we complied by adding unique features that helped us pass. These included: ✅ Public tracking profiles ✅ Widgets for stats ✅ Background fetch for updates ✅ No login required After two successful updates, we pushed a third update focused on bug fixes—fixing iPad UI issues and notification improvements—but suddenly, we got rejected again for 4.3, without any clarification. We strongly believe this is a mistake because our app has distinct features not found in any other app. We’ve reached out to Apple for clarification but haven’t received a meaningful response. Has anyone else had a similar experience where a compliance fix worked initially, only to be rejected again later? Any advice on how to appeal this effectively? Would appreciate any insights! Thanks.

Hi everyone, I recently received a rejection for my app submission on the App Store. The rejection reason was: 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. (Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam) However, my game is quite different. It features a unique pixel art style and introduces fresh mechanics, such as cleaning tasks, accepting additional missions from NPCs, and even an idle clicker-style system where players can hire workers to gather in-game points. These elements differentiate it from other apps in the same category. My game's name is quite different as well: My Pixel Market Sim - AppID: 6742187384 Additionally, the code behind the game is completely my own, and I even sell a popular Unity Asset on the Unity Asset Store for this category. So, I can assure you

Our application was first published on December 16, 2012, at 11:42 PM, and has been available on the market for 13 years. Over the years, we have implemented hundreds of updates to enhance and refine the app. Our recent updates are rejected for the reason Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam warning. How can it be for a 13 years old app. Please advice me what to do. Thanks in advance

Hello everyone, We’re facing an ongoing issue with our app being rejected under the 4.3(a) Spam guideline, and we’re hoping the community can offer some advice on how to resolve it. Our app is a free sports application that provides real-time score updates. It also features commentary from several top contributors and journalists. We offer exclusive features that are completely original—we don’t replicate or borrow any designs or functionalities from other apps on the App Store. Additionally, the app includes games that we have personally researched, designed, and developed from scratch without using any third-party libraries. We were flagged under 4.3(a) Spam after a very minor update, which primarily focused on fixing some interface-related bugs. Despite these minimal changes, our app was rejected under the Spam guideline. To address this, we have sent detailed information to Apple Review, including our development roadmap, screenshots of design versions, and even git logs to demonstrate t

Dear App Review team, My app Goodie AI (Apple ID 6741483227) has been flagged as violating Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. I thought I would reach out to the team to explain that Goodie AI is an entirely original concept, and would seek guidance on if we misunderstood what specifically the problem with the submission is. DESCRIPTION Please suggest next steps? We've already appealed, and have resubmitted the app. Thanks! SCREENSHOTS ATTACHED

After months of navigating repeated 4.3 guideline rejections, Apple has now terminated my developer account. This was a fresh app—one I worked hard on, designing it from the ground up with unique features. At first, my app was rejected under 4.3, but I complied with Apple's feedback and was approved. Two weeks later, with no major changes, it was suddenly rejected again for the same reason. I provided proof that this wasn’t a duplicate or spam app—sharing my GitHub repository, design iterations, and direct communication with designers. Still, my account was terminated. I’ve reached out for clarification, but the lack of transparency in the review process makes it difficult to understand what went wrong. This was my first app under this account, and I paid the $99 developer fee like everyone else. I just want a fair review. If there’s a way to appeal this, I’d be grateful for a second look.