4.3

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.

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

Hello Apple Developer Community, We are reaching out in frustration after facing multiple rejections for our app, Minglr, under Guideline 4.3(a) – Spam, despite the fact that: • Our app was approved in May 2024 and has passed four updates without any issue related to design or concept similarity. • The current rejection contradicts Apple’s own approval history, despite no fundamental changes to our UI/UX. • We have built Minglr’s design from scratch in Figma (with a full design history to prove it) and yet are not being given the opportunity to provide evidence. • We have requested Apple to clarify which app they are comparing us to, but they refuse to provide details, making it impossible to properly address their concerns. Why This Feels Unfair & Inconsistent • Apple continues to approve apps with identical UI and UX (such as dating apps), yet a completely different social app like Minglr is being flagged without justification. • If a similar app exists, Apple should confirm whether it was subm

Hello, I recently submitted my app to the Apple Store and received a rejection under Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam, stating that my app is similar to others on the store. However, my app has a unique feature set, offers more functionality and content than competitors, and is completely free with ad monetization, unlike most similar apps that require subscriptions. I have spent five months developing this app from scratch, ensuring it provides an original and valuable experience for users. I did not use an app template or repackaged code, and my app is not a reskinned version of any existing app. I genuinely believe it brings meaningful differentiation to the market. I would appreciate any guidance on how I can better communicate my app’s uniqueness to the review team or what specific aspects I should adjust to comply with Apple's guidelines. Thank you for your time and support.

Dear Apple Review Team, I hope this message finds you well. My name is Pouya Saberian, I am from Italy, and my company is based in the United States. I am not a developer myself; I am simply an investor in the technology sector. Recently, I submitted the Quantum app for review and release on the App Store. However, I received a message indicating that my app has been flagged as spam due to its similarity with apps previously submitted by a terminated Apple Developer Program account. I would like to request your assistance in reviewing and resolving this issue. First and foremost, I would like to clarify that I have never had an Apple Developer account before, and this is my first time submitting an app for release on the App Store. I have one employee responsible for creating and maintaining the account. The app has been developed and submitted by my freelance team (which consists of employees from countries such as Pakistan, India, Germany, and the United States). Over time, I have had to hire three differen

Hello, I'm seeking advice regarding my app CloakLine which has been rejected multiple times under Guideline 4.3(a) for being too similar to other apps. App Details: Name: CloakLine Bundle ID: com.ztech.cloakline Current Status: Rejected Rejection History: Initial Rejection: Reason: Similar binary, metadata, and/or concept to other apps Reviewer's comment: Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam Our Response: I've verified that no app with a similar name exists in the App Store This is our original work, not a repackaged app We have only one bundle ID All assets, code, and designs are original Actions Taken: Requested Phone Call: Was told our app has similar functionalities to other apps But no specific details were provided about which functionalities or which apps First Appeal: Added 5+ new unique features Result: Still rejected Second Appeal: Added another 5+ unique features Result: Still rejected Current Situation: We've ensured our app's uniqueness through: Distinctive app name an

We have submitted an app which is published in production, however we are planning to move to use flutter and standardise the development and created the same design but name it to version 2 with new features, we are planning to migrate everything to this app but always get this issue and our appeal seems unable to reach Apple review some how. What should we do in this case?

Hi There! I released an app called Taino VPN with Russian IP on AppStore a month ago. After that, I updated the app successfully several times with minor fixes. Last time I submitted a new release with only small metadata and keyword updates and got rejected by Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam. Original message is 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. I'm now very confused! On Apple's official website Guideline 4.3(a) says: Don’t create multiple Bundle IDs of the same app. If your app has different versions for specific locations, sports teams, universities, etc., consider submitting a single app and provide the variations using in-app purchase. It does not make any sense because I have only 1 app developed from the scratch by me. Also, it does not match with Original reject message and 4.3(a) says nothing about other developers. I hope apple review support could guid

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