“4.3”

Hello, My app was rejected because of App Review Guideline 4.3 – Design Spam. I developed Dynasty of Sic Bo, an exciting game that combines elements of roulette and dice rolling. Players can bet on different dice combinations, testing their luck and strategy to win virtual riches. The game is designed to be simple and enjoyable for beginners while still engaging for experienced players. I’ve tried multiple times to understand the exact reasons for this rejection, but all my efforts have been ignored by App Review. None of the changes I implemented resolved the issue, and I still don’t know what specifically needs to be addressed. The app’s concept, gameplay, and design are entirely original, and I haven’t copied or reused content from other apps. While the game shares a general theme of dice-based gambling, I worked hard to create a unique experience with polished visuals, engaging mechanics, and a dynamic atmosphere. I don’t understand how to proceed or demonstrate the originality of my app, as I ca

Dear all,we are developed app for company/organization.not able ot finish uploading. facing lot of pbmcan any one guide me how to upload app for company usage.Error detailsGuideline 3.2 - BusinessDuring our review, we found that this app was designed for a specific business or organization, including its partners, clients or employees, and not for general distribution on the App Store. Business apps available on the App Store are meant for use by a wide variety of external customers around the world.As this app is not intended for general distribution, it cannot be made available on the App Store. We encourage you to review the other ways to distribute your business app and choose one that better meets your business needs.If you revise your app concept and features to provide substantial value to a wide variety of external customers around the world, we recommend that you also review our App Store Review Guidelines, including, among others, guidelines 2.5.4 - Background Location, 3.2.2 - Unacceptable Business

I am porting an image processing app using a camera developed by Android to IOS, and try to use C++ code used by Android in IOS. Install the necessary library and link the target c++ code using objective-c wrapper. The problem is that when a function with particularly large number of memory allocation/release ends in the C++ code, an error is definitely issued as the local variables are released. Error: Corrupt value: 0x3fc93ba18499360a GBCare(20641,0x16bcfb000) malloc: *** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug GBCare(20641,0x16bcfb000) malloc: Incorrect checksum for freed object 0x11556d1e0: probably modified after being freed. Corrupt value: 0x3fc93ba18499360a Additionally, the same error occurs sometimes at the location where the type of memory is allocated (e.g., cv::Mat.clone, cv:Mat::zeros) and we checked that the correct parameter was included. I don't know what it means, but if you do it as shown in the picture below in Product-Scheme-Edit Scheme, it works normally without errors. I think it

I’ve been rejected four times recently with the reason 4.3 – Design / Spam. I’ve explained the issue in great detail each time, but I haven’t received any meaningful response from Apple’s reviewers. Each time, I tried to make my explanation even clearer, yet the replies I got were identical copy-paste messages, offering no additional guidance, clarification, or genuine support for developers like us. What’s unreasonable is that our latest updates only fixed minor AdMob-related issues — there were no functional or design changes to the app — and yet the app was still rejected without a valid reason. Our app has been on the App Store for 8 years, has tens of thousands of users, and has consistently received high ratings for the value it provides. I’ve already submitted an appeal to the App Review Board, but I haven’t received any confirmation email or notification acknowledging receipt or giving any timeline for resolution. We have already submitted an appeal to the App Review Board, but so far we have

Since April 1, 2022, the App Review Team and App Review Board have been consistently rejecting my app, the reason being, Guideline 4.3 - Design We continue to find 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. This is 100% false because my app has unique features not found on other apps on the App Store. The strange part is the supposedly similar apps don't even offer the features that my app offers yet those apps are able to get their app submissions approved. I should also mention those apps were published after mine. I have provided screenshots, video demos, source code, spoken to App Review team and they are still rejecting the app because of 4.3.0. It appears they are overlooking the information I've been providing and responding with generic responses. Should I file a complaint with the BBB? It's evident that selective bias and unfair treatment is happening with the App Review Te

Our app serial, TaxFreeway, is a Canadian T1 tax return preparing app approved by Canada Revenue Agency. There is a new app release each year for the corresponding year's tax return. We have more than 10 existing Apps (for every previous years) listed on App Store. The App for tax year 2021, TaxFreeway 2021, is listed at Canada government website below. https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/e-services-individuals/netfile-overview/certified-software-netfile-program/detailed-information-taxfreeway.html Apple App Store has accepted the App since December 2021. We recently send a new app update to Apple App Store based on Canada Revenue Agency's latest requirements. The update is rejected by App Store review by following reason: Thank you for your resubmission. However, upon further review, we found that your app is out of compliance with the following guideline(s): Guideline 4.3 - Design We noticed that your app provides the same feature set as other apps submitted to the App Store

I'm seeking advice regarding an App Store review situation. Here's the context: We previously had an inventory management app on the App Store that had significant technical issues and bugs Instead of updating the old version, we made the decision to: Completely rebuild the app from scratch with improved architecture Use a new tech stack for better stability Submit under a new developer account for a fresh start The review team has flagged this as a violation of Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam, citing duplication of content and functionality. Key Details: We are the original creators of both versions The previous version was removed due to technical issues The new version is a complete rebuild, not just a repackaging We maintained similar branding as it's our own product Questions for the community: Has anyone successfully handled a similar situation of rebuilding and resubmitting their own app? What approaches worked for distinguishing the new version from the previous one? Are there specific techn

I said this enhancement report on apple bug Reporter site. Now is closed.why you not see that issue?👿😠Reopen, my report plsss.What missing? very much!!Sample?3rd api (then the developer add more functions for iOS wifi hotspot e.g create wifi hotspot without mobile data)iOS wifi hotspot is always in background (even if no device is connected. even if you leave the menu) + time out option- Why? If other iOS device connect to iOS wifi hotspot, and other iOS device go to standby mode (~1min iPhone and ~1-3min iPad or more) then automatically disconnects from the hotspot (designed first iOS - iOS 10 beta 2)Then wifi hotspot is off. what now? Open settings from iOS wifi hotspot, now hotspot is available again. This is not good!! See my report again!!Again!! This missing!!Since first iOS - iOS 10 beta 2 has not the function in wifi settings: wifi never turn off in standby modeSince iOS 4.3 - iOS 10 beta 2 (iOS wifi hotspot) on a better design and user-friendly concept!!

I recently submitted an app to the App Store which was rejected as spam (Section 4.3). After speaking to an Apple rep, I learned the reason. The app is based on a propietary cross-platform engine which I have been developing for several years. We are not using any third-party software or 'app templates'. A couple of years ago my son and I collaborated on another project - I did the coding using the same engine, but he did the design and content creation. He published it under his own developer account. We worked together on the new app as well. They are both educational apps. The older one is used for learning algebra, and the new one for memorising language vocabulary. They do not look the same and have completely different content. But App's search engines have detected commonality in the code, because much of the underlying engine is the same, and because we are using different developer accounts, has rejected the latest as spam. I wondered if anyone else had encountered this kind of issue, and if

Hi everyone, My iOS app MaxTutor has been repeatedly rejected under Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. Since I developed the app entirely from scratch, and its concept is unique (blending modern AI technology with traditional parental involvement in child’s learning), I’m clueless about what might have triggered the rejection. The only theory I can come up with is that the bundle identifier contains a substring that matches the name of an existing app in the store, but the apps themselves are entirely unrelated in both functionality and design. I was going to change it but that complicated things as I have a macOs version of the app already accepted and using the same bundle id. I’ve responded to the reviewer multiple times seeking clarification, but have never received any feedbacks at all. I’ve also resubmitted the app several times with new features but got rejected for the same reason with identical comments. I finally filed an appeal a week ago but still I haven’t heard anything back yet. Interes

Pls any idea or guide on how i can go about to resolve this, an app review feedback. Review Environment Submission ID: 43e31418-c37f-4b26-9bec-f88d749a70be Review date: November 27, 2025 Version reviewed: 1.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam This app duplicates the content and functionality of other apps on the App Store, which is considered a form of spam. Specifically, this app appears to be identical to apps already submitted to the App Store from other developers. Apps that duplicate content or functionality create clutter, diminish the overall experience for the end user, and reduce the ability of developers to market their apps. Next Steps It would be appropriate to revise your app to provide a unique experience or submit a new app that does not duplicate the content and functionality of other apps on the App Store. 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 Creati

struct TideForecastInfoView: View { var geometryProxy: GeometryProxy var body: some View { VStack { getHeaders(geometryProxy) TideForecastEntryView(geometryProxy: geometryProxy) .padding(2) } .background(.white) .clipShape(RoundedRectangle(cornerRadius: 14)) .shadow(radius: 8) } @ViewBuilder func getHeaders(_ geometryProxy: GeometryProxy) -> some View { HStack { HStack { Text(tide) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.25) Text(time) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.5) Text(height) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.25) } .padding(8) } .frame(maxWidth: .infinity) .background(.gray) } } struct TideForecastEntryView: View { var geometryProxy: GeometryProxy var body: some View { HStack { Text(High Tide) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.25) Text(1:08 AM (Tue 03) January) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.5, alignment: .leading) Text(1.31 m (4.3 ft)) .frame(maxWidth: geometryProxy.size.width * 0.25) } } } Result looks like this 03 should be on th

Hello, When I input Data 1 into SectorMark and then switch to Data 2, my application crashes. Any suggestions for resolving this issue? Data 1 [ReadingLog.PieChartData(id: E24A2F4F-5A80-4734-8497-1AE33EF4F007, hour: 4.3, category: biography), ReadingLog.PieChartData(id: 710C328D-0B58-4329-A3C1-66CC42A9C602, hour: 0.75, category: philosophy), ReadingLog.PieChartData(id: 37F0F9CE-7144-4B78-99C8-921292F6E730, hour: 0.17, category: novel)] Data 2 [ReadingLog.PieChartData(id: E24A2F4F-5A80-4734-8497-1AE33EF4F007, hour: 6.3, category: biography)] Error Message: Exception Type: EXC_BREAKPOINT (SIGTRAP) Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000001, 0x0000000216287cb8 Termination Reason: SIGNAL 5 Trace/BPT trap: 5 Terminating Process: exc handler [1978] Triggered by Thread: 0 Kernel Triage: VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM

Hello everyone, I'm seeking some advice and perspective from the community regarding an appeal I've submitted to the App Review Board. My app, (App ID: 6748638280), was recently rejected under Guideline 4.3 - Spam. We believe this was a misunderstanding, as our app is a highly specialized academic tool for the study of Qimen Dunjia (奇門遁甲), a complex form of ancient Chinese metaphysics. It is a professional calculation engine, not a generic fortune-telling app. We submitted a detailed appeal to the App Review Board two weeks ago, explaining the unique, academic nature of our app and providing a link to a demo video that showcases its innovative features (like its real-world compass integration and its unique data visualization system). As of today, we have not yet received a response. I completely understand that the review process takes time, and I want to be respectful of the board's workload. However, I'm starting to wonder if this length of time without a reply is normal for an appeal. I would be

So I've got a lot of apps that have been consolidated into a container app. Like many of you, I got the 4.3 messages. After some grimacing, I can see the silver lining - for devs, for users, for Apple. But I really wish iTunes Connect would add a forwarding option in our Removed from Sale apps that redirects to the container app. I added a bug-report (feature request) for this already, but I'm hoping more devs ask for this. Reasoning...1. There's gotta be millions of dead app store links already floating around the internet. Why have those links go to this message This app is no longer available in your country's store, when it can just jump to a live app? We can update our own websites, but some blogger that wrote about an app 3 years ago, isn't going to update their links. 2. Its also a dead end for actual App Store users going through their old Purchases. Doesn't need to be. Let us recapture those users. 3. Consolidation was / will be a big ask for many of us. And like I said, I can see the benefi