Hi everyone, I'm a first time app developer and have been going through the App Store review process for a project I’ve been working on—AquaGUIDE, an accessibility-focused app that pairs with a custom BLE-enabled swim cap designed to help visually impaired swimmers navigate independently. The swim cap device and app have been thoroughly tested and work well together, but I’ve run into challenges getting the app approved, and I’m hoping others might have experience or insight to share. Key Features That May Be Tripping Up Review: Automatic BLE pairing with the cap when in range (connectivity not needed when user is in mid swim) Frequent connect/disconnect cycles in a single session (this is intentional and expected in open water) Auto sending a swim summary over BLE once reconnected, if one exists (won't exist if swim is not yet complete or is canceled due to emergency triggered) The app doesn't send data externally or to the cloud, everything stays local between the phone and the cap. So far, App Review hasn't explicitly rejected for these reasons, but the review team has been confused or inconsistent in their feedback, and I suspect these technical behaviors might be the cause. I want to stay compliant but also preserve the accessibility-first workflow of the device (automatic syncing rather than button or prompt). What I'm Looking For: Has anyone had success getting accessibility-focused apps with external BLE hardware through review? How have you framed automatic pairing or background syncing in a way that Apple accepts? Are there specific guidelines or Apple documentation I can point to for support? Should I consider requesting a review call or filing an appeal? Any guidance, lessons learned, or similar examples would be deeply appreciated. Thanks in advance for your help!

Hi everyone, Our app was recently rejected under guideline 1.1.6, with the note: “the app allows conversations that aren’t real.” The app is an AI livestream simulator – it does not connect to real people and clearly displays disclaimers in the app title, description, and on every screen inside the app (e.g., “AI SIMULATION”, “NOT A REAL BROADCAST”). The purpose is to help users practice live interactions and overcome anxiety through AI-generated engagement, not to deceive anyone. Despite these precautions, the app keeps getting rejected. The review team seems not to test the actual livestream screen (checked via analytics), and just flags it based on assumption. Questions: Has anyone faced a similar rejection for AI or simulation-based features? What worked for you in getting approved? Is there any official example or template Apple accepts for apps that simulate interaction? Any help or experience would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

Hello, Three years ago we launched a business for physicians to get update in topics in internal medicine. People buy a subscription through our website that is a online magazine with weekly editions and topics in internal medicine in Brazil. They are then directed to download either the iOS or Android apps where they can read the editions in their phones. The App also includes social functions allowing for review and comentaries of the topics and editions. When reviewing the Apple Developer guidelines, we were confident we met the definition of a ‘Reader’ App. However, in our latest version update (one that includes a critical bug fix) we were rejected on the basis that the reviewer considered only a design update as justification to not classify as Reader App. Our app main functionally still is to show our weekly editions (for readers and listeners). The social and videos functions ares secondary to the primary purpose and complementary to them. We submitted an Appeal 2 days ago (noting it as urgent due to the bug fix it includes) but the reviewers keep saying that this is not a reader app after three years on the market. Really at a loss on what to do. There is a hugh platform just like our called "Update" and they function as Reader App with no problem. Does anyone have precedents (either supportive or otherwise) on a definition of a Reader App? Appreciate any advice. Kaue Malpighi.

Hello, Three years ago we launched a business for physicians to get update in topics in internal medicine. People buy a subscription through our website that is a online magazine with weekly editions and topics in internal medicine in Brazil. They are then directed to download either the iOS or Android apps where they can read the editions in their phones. The App also includes social functions allowing for review and comentaries of the topics and editions. When reviewing the Apple Developer guidelines, we were confident we met the definition of a ‘Reader’ App. However, in our latest version update (one that includes a critical bug fix) we were rejected on the basis that the reviewer considered only a design update as justification to not classify as Reader App. Our app main functionally still is to show our weekly editions (for readers and listeners). The social and videos functions ares secondary to the primary purpose and complementary to them. We submitted an Appeal 2 days ago (noting it as urgent due to the bug fix it includes) but the reviewers keep saying that this is not a reader app after three years on the market. Really at a loss on what to do. There is a hugh platform just like our called "Update" and they function as Reader App with no problem. Does anyone have precedents (either supportive or otherwise) on a definition of a Reader App? Appreciate any advice. Kaue Malpighi.

Hello I recently discovered that Denmark's (and soon the rest of the Nordic countries) biggest mobile payment service - MobilePay - is seemingly getting away with selling digital products in their app without using IAP. I am confused how this is possible, as I spent a lot of time making sure I understand the rules -- and I'm quite confident I do, so the only conclusion I can reach from this is that this is a violation that has not been discovered. If it isn't, I would like an explanation. So, what am I talking about? First; MobilePay is an app that lets you send money to whoever, essentially a Danish version of CashApp. You attach a credit card, and you can transfer funds using people's phone numbers. Nothing about this is problematic. There are some fees involved, which is also fine. But. You can select to "wrap your money in digital wrapping paper", which can be unwrapped by the recipient to reveal the amount you transferred. This is, no matter how you spin it, a digital product. It adds about 1 USD to the transferred amount, but that amount goes directly to MobilePay, not to the recipient - and isn't a transaction fee. To me that sounds exactly like the kind of payment that is absolutely mandatory to process via IAP - so how are they not? How does it pass app review? Is there something I'm missing? As someone who has been forced to use IAP for a service I would much rather not share the revenue of with Apple, I find this frustrating, and I'd prefer that everyone was subject to the same rules, especially when it comes to big corporate players like the developers of this app. You can read about the conditions of buying digital wrapping paper here: https://mobilepay.dk/app/legal/trading-conditions-da-dk - this page is in Danish but should be easily translatable. A theory I had is that maybe this wrapping paper feature is just not available to the test user they provided to Apple, as it is only sold to customers in Denmark and Greenland. But that's almost worse than an oversight, because in that case, they deliberately hid it from app reviewers. I have attached some photos of how it looks when you select the product in the app and how it just adds the cost on top of the amount you chose to transfer. I just chose a sample transfer of 1 DKK for the amount itself, and the 7 DKK for the "paper" is then added on top. It's not a lot, but given the size of the app's userbase (over 4.5 million according to themselves), we're likely talking a significant chunk of change they're essentially (if you're being cynical) stealing from Apple. What gives? For reference, the app in question is this one: https://apps.apple.com/dk/app/mobilepay/id624499138?l=da (currently ranked 4th in Finance in Denmark)

Hey everyone, I’m submitting my first version of an iOS app to the App Store and ran into an issue I can’t seem to resolve. The app was rejected because during review, Apple couldn’t see the In-App Purchase product on the purchase screen. That’s their only complaint — everything else works fine. Here’s what’s going on: • In debug mode via Xcode, the product shows up correctly, and everything works as expected. • In TestFlight builds, the product doesn’t show up at all — neither for me nor for Apple. • The IAP is currently marked as “Waiting for Review”, not “Ready to Submit”, and it is linked to the current app version in App Store Connect. I’m not sure if the IAP being in “Waiting for Review” is the reason it doesn’t show up in the TestFlight version — but I assumed Apple would still be able to access it for testing. Has anyone experienced this? Do I need to wait for the IAP itself to be approved before it works in TestFlight and can be reviewed? Any insights would be super helpful. Thanks!

Hi everyone, I’m facing a frustrating issue with the App Store review process and wanted to know if anyone else has gone through something similar. I first submitted my app on April 15, 2025. After waiting for nearly 8–10 days with no progress, I ended up rejecting the binary myself out of frustration. I then resubmitted the app on April 24, 2025, but as of today, it’s still showing "Waiting for Review" with no updates or movement. This delay is really affecting my release schedule, and I’m not sure if there’s something wrong on my end or if this is just an unusual queue time. Has anyone else experienced this recently? Is there anything I can do to speed things up or get insight from Apple? Appreciate any help or shared experiences. Thanks

Hello, our app was rejected and we submitted an appeal. We never received any confirmation via email that the appeal was received or being processed. It's been several weeks without any update. Is there anyone that can look into this for us?

As you can see, I am an individual developer. This is my github repository https://github.com/robot518. I am a programmer with more than 10 years of game development experience. What kind of game do I want to make? I want to make a large-scale multiplayer slg game that can be fairly competed, but due to the limitations of R&D funds and personal ability, I can only make a short-game slg game with customizable skills and fair 1v1. There are 4 ways to play the game. The most important way is online 1v1. Single-player 1v1 against the computer is for personal testing. The game also provides an additional 8-player multiplayer battle to enrich the gameplay and customize the skills to rush the rankings. Playing method, players can customize skills to break through the level when encountering bottlenecks through the method of "drawing cards-editing lineups-continuous challenges", and can understand other people's lineup combinations using customized skills by viewing the rankings, so as to achieve the purpose of creation (custom skills) and learning and communication (through rankings). Why make such a game? At present, the more well-known SLG mobile games on the market, such as Rate of Land, Three Kingdoms. Strategic Edition, Three Kingdoms. Plan the World, etc., are all large-scale guild (alliance) multiplayer seasonal SLG games, and have obvious non-fair competition characteristics of krypton gold becoming stronger. As you know, there is basically no relatively fair SLG game where krypton gold will not significantly affect the fairness of the game, so I plan to make such a fair SLG game to fill this market. The Three Kingdoms theme was chosen because Chinese people have a special liking for the Three Kingdoms period. Maybe you are worried that making such a game will affect your income. You can refer to the King of Glory and League of Legends mobile games. It can be seen that fair competition games can still bring rich income. I have provided the github address and figma address which is enough to show the originality of this game. https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/782175 From this post, I learned that my game did have the problem of interface plagiarism in the early stage, but the latest vertical interface has completely solved this problem, and plagiarism is not my original intention. As a personal developer with a programming background, I have no idea about interface plagiarism. I am very grateful for this post for popularizing my knowledge. In response to the 3.2f allegations of the app review received by the complaint number APL156422, I will respond one by one. Submit false reviews for your own application or any third-party application. As far as I know, this game has been online for nearly 3 months since the end of January, with more than 1,500 downloads. I can see a total of 5 reviews, 4 good reviews and 1 bad review. I promise that I did not submit false reviews, and I do not think that the 4/1,500 favorable reviews are still false. If you still insist, I chose to reset the rating when this version is released. I am also happy for you to remove the reviews you think are false, and I will actively cooperate with your instructions. Choose a name for your application that is basically similar to the name of a third-party application to cause consumer confusion, or register the application name to prevent third parties from legally using it. I have obtained the legal software copyright for the game Three Kingdoms War Strategy in China. The software name is Three Kingdoms War Strategy Software. The copyright owner is me, Chen Ye, and the registration number is 2025SR0547228. I have pasted the screenshot of the software in the figma address mentioned above, but I have no right to use this name in the appstore. It has been used by others, so I changed it to the name Three Kingdoms War Strategy SLG. There are a lot of names for Three Kingdoms-type games. My game is indeed a Three Kingdoms war strategy game, and the name and content of the game are completely consistent. There is currently no SLG game on the market that focuses on 1v1 fair competition and short games. My game content description is not misleading and will not be confused with other people's applications. If there is, please point it out clearly so that I can give up making such a SLG game that focuses on 1v1 fair competition and short games (15 minutes) as soon as possible. Engage in bait pricing, false consumer statements, deceptive business practices, violate any applicable laws, or unfairly compete with other developers. This description confuses me, but I still promise to resist it firmly. Conduct other dishonest or fraudulent activities inside or outside the application. This game has not only an Apple version but also an Android version. Their review indicators are different. The Apple Store completed 24 version updates in 2 months, which is a high-intensity task for individual developers. If I accidentally submitted the content of the Android version to the Apple Store, I feel deeply guilty and regretful. As far as I know, the Apple version has submitted several major bugs, which is obviously not my intention. I will be more cautious in handling the Apple version and the Android version separately. Regarding your statement of providing inaccurate metadata describing your app or service, misleading app content, conducting untrue rating and review manipulation, providing misleading customer support responses, providing misleading responses in App Store Connect, participating in misleading purchases or bait-and-switch programs, or conducting other dishonest or fraudulent activities inside or outside the app. I have responded to each point and submitted the latest version for your review. Of course, if you insist that the turn-based SLG of Civilization 6, which takes several days to play, is the same as my real-time SLG, which takes 15 minutes to play, and if you insist that the unfair SLGs produced by companies such as Rate of Land, Three Kingdoms. Strategy Edition, and Three Kingdoms. Plan the World, which can obviously become stronger by krypton gold in large guilds, are the same as my SLG, which is developed by individuals and focuses on 1v1 fair competition. I can only express my deep regret. Finally, thank you for your patience in reading my appeal. I hope my reply will satisfy you and patiently review my newly submitted application. Thank you for your patience, but there are many things in your description that confuse me. I have explained them in detail and hope you can patiently answer my questions in your spare time. Thank you very much.

Hi, I have submitted my app for review since Apr 22, 2025. Today is Apr 27, 2025, I don't see any review so i cancel then resubmit. it still in Waiting for Review status. Please help me look into this issue. We need to release it app. AppleID: 6744486281 Thank you.

I'm using iTunes RSS api for fethching reviews for app store to get customer reviews . In my web-app , I want to show links that will directly open the particular review for an app by the user ,in iTunes or on web . For example , when I make this API call , https://itunes.apple.com/rss/customerreviews/id=1040200189/sortBy=mostRecent/json Response contains: "author": { "uri": { "label": "https://itunes.apple.com/us/reviews/id21684416" }, "name": { "label": "T2theY" }, "label": "" }, "im:version": { "label": "2.1.1" }, "im:rating": { "label": "5" }, "id": { "label": "1431036926" }, "title": { "label": "Love this app" }, "content": { "label": "I use this app to create color boards and to capture simplified shapes as inspiration for art. The best part is they sync seamlessly with all my Adobe applications and appear in libraries automatically. It's so cool and so easy to use. Adobe is making some of the best apps on the market right now!", "attributes": { "type": "text" } }, "link": { "attributes": { "rel": "related", "href": "https:/ } }, "im:voteSum": { "label": "0" }, "im:contentType": { "attributes": { "term": "Application", "label": "Application" } }, "im:voteCount": { "label": "0" } } In above , as far as I cab understand uri : https://itunes.apple.com/us/reviews/id21684416 should take directly to review , however it just opens iTunes's Home and doesn't go any further . Can someone please help me understand how to get link to a particular review that would open iTunes showing that review directly

Hello there! So Im trying to upload an app to the App Store for iphone and Ipad, but from the revision team the same message always appears, the app crash. So I know the "it works on my computer" sounds bad but....works on my computer and my test system. Dont know what to do since I dont know how to replicate the error. This is the rely they sent me: Issue Description The app exhibited one or more bugs that would negatively impact users. Bug description: at time of review the app’s interface went blank at launch. Review device details: Device type: iPad Air (5th generation) OS version: iPadOS 18.4.1 Anyone has any idea on how can I replicate the error and maybe check the logs? Im completely blind on this one.

Hello, after sending my application for review, my application is rejected by specifying the general reasons without adding any screenshot. After correcting the specified deficiencies and errors, I send it to review again, but there is no response for weeks. I am creating an accelerated examination request, but it has no effect. 2 months have passed since the first time I sent my application to review ... I received a rejection response 3 times in 2 months. The investigation does not start, it is only 'waiting for the review'.

In 3.1.3(f) - attached below for reference - it defines and deals with the concept of "Free Stand-alone Apps." In the definition, it has the text "(e.g. VoIP, Cloud Storage, Email Services, Web Hosting)". I interpret this parenthetical to mean that these are four EXAMPLES of Free Stand-alone Apps. In other words, there can be other apps that qualify under this clause, but the four mentioned are examples. Is this an appropriate interpretation, or should the interpretation be that ONLY those four types of apps qualify as Free Stand-alone Apps? 3.1.3(f) Free Stand-alone Apps: Free apps acting as a stand-alone companion to a paid web based tool (e.g. VoIP, Cloud Storage, Email Services, Web Hosting) do not need to use in-app purchase, provided there is no purchasing inside the app, or calls to action for purchase outside of the app.

I submitted a build of my iOS app through App Store Connect, but the submission was rejected. The only message shown is: "Your app version was rejected and no other items submitted can be accepted or approved. You can make edits to your app version below." No specific reason, guideline reference, or additional notes were provided—just a general rejection notice. It's difficult to understand what exactly went wrong or what changes are needed before resubmitting. I've attached a screenshot of the current status for context. If anyone has experienced something similar or knows how to uncover more details in these cases, any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

I'm an indie developer. My latest minor update for my game which has been on the Mac App Store for 13 years and which has spent time at #1 on the download charts just started getting rejected for the following reason: Guideline 2.5.2 - Performance - Software Requirements The app installed or launched executable code. Specifically, the app uses the itms-services URL scheme to install an app. However my app is certainly not installing any apps and to the best of my knowlege it is not using any itms/itunes/etc. type URLs in any way, so I can't figure out what would be triggering this claim. Inquiries as to what app I am supposedly installing or what URL I am supposedly using have yielded 'no further information can be provided'. Has anyone run into something similar? Any ideas on obscure scenarios that could trigger this particular rejection? Or any advice on what one should do in my situation? I feel a bit stuck. Has anyone had luck with the appeal process for this sort of thing (to at least get more information)?

Hello, we are trying to publish an App in Appstore connect. The app will only be available through private distribution from our MDM with a Per-App VPN. The Login is not possible outside of the VPN. How do we get through the mandatory Review? The Guidelines say a Demo mode would help (https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#app-completeness), but this would cost us time and resources, that are not available right now. Is there another way?

I'm building a React Native app (using Expo) for a transport service business. I plan to publish it on the Apple App Store and want to make sure it won't get rejected for simplicity or being too web-like. Here's what the app includes so far: Splash screen with branding 2–3 onboarding screens (explaining key app features) A home screen with navigation options “Request a Quote” form (pickup, drop location, date, vehicle type, notes) “My Requests” screen to view previously submitted quotes (stored in Supabase) About Us and Contact Us pages Light UI polish (basic transitions, proper padding, platform-specific styling) Login/Sign-up using Kinde Push notifications for quote confirmation (using Expo) Using Supabase as the backend I’m keeping it free and lightweight, but native-looking. Questions: Based on the features above, would this app likely pass App Store review Is Login/Sign-up using Kinde (external service) will cause any problem? Are there any App Store guidelines I should be extra careful about with this setup? Would adding simple quote tracking status help improve chances of approval? Should I add more native-feeling interactivity to avoid being seen as a "wrapped websit

Our app submission has been rejected due to issues related to the following guidelines: Guideline 4.8 – Login Services Guideline 5.2.1 Legal – Intellectual Property We’ve reviewed both guidelines carefully and would appreciate any insight or advice on how best to resolve these issues. ** Guideline 4.8.0 – Login Services** Our app uses both custom and third-party login methods, with a strong focus on user privacy and minimal data collection. Here's how our system works: -Custom Login Methods: Phone + MPIN – Authenticates users via secure, encrypted APIs without collecting name or email. Phone + OTP – Only verifies the phone number; no additional data is collected. Phone + Biometric – Uses on-device biometrics strictly for authentication. No biometric data is stored or transmitted. -Third-Party Logins: We offer Google and Facebook login via Expo AuthSession. Only minimal user data (name, email, and ID) is retrieved for authentication purposes. No user data is used for analytics, advertising, or tracking without explicit user consent. All data interactions are encrypted and comply with privacy standards. We believe this implementation is in line with the intent of Guideline 4.8, and we would appreciate any specific guidance if further changes are required. Guideline 5.2.1 Legal – Intellectual Property Our app, BookMyRajshree, is developed, owned, and operated solely by Skill Lotto Solutions Private Limited. We have clarified the following: -"BookMyRajshree" is a privately owned brand under Skill Lotto Solutions Pvt. Ltd. -It is not affiliated with any government entity. -We are not using any government logos, names, or impersonating any government service. -All intellectual property rights related to this brand are held by our company. We understand there may be concern due to the term “Rajshree” being associated with some government-run lotteries. However,we have clearly stated that our app is a private platform and we do not present ourselves as a government-authorized service. We have submitted relevant documentation showing our ownership of the brand but still our app is getting rejected because of the above guideline We kindly ask for your help or any suggestions on how we can resolve these issues in compliance with the guidelines. If there's anything more specific that Apple is looking for in terms of documentation or implementation changes, we’re ready to take immediate action. Thank you in advance for your support!

I'm trying to understand the IAP development process. I created my first Product on App Store Connect and am trying to build my app to use it. However it keeps failing with "Invalid product ID.". From what I've read, this is because the product has not yet gone through review. But what I don't understand is, of course it hasn't gone through review yet, because trying to use it in any capacity fails, even though I'm using a real physical device and using a Sandbox User. Is this the correct workflow? It seems very backwards that I have to submit the product for review, even before I know how it's going to be used. I'm still building the screen for the product page, and haven't even started touching any backend APIs, yet it's asking for screenshots. Am I misunderstanding something here?