4.3 Design Guidelines - Apple please reconsider how this is enforced.

We have spoken to many developers in previous months who have run into issues with the new 4.3 Design Guidelines rules & had their apps rejected, seemingly by a bot, or in general, by a reviewer because of similarities to previous apps. They have been asked to combine their similar apps into one container app.


We understand why Apple is finally cracking down and doing this. They are trying to clean up the Appstore of clones, useless junk & other spam apps.


In the process however, this has seemingly hurt indie developers who are not using templates, and design their own games from scratch. We've spoken with several developers, many who pride themselves in creating unique content such as educational & games for children, receieve these notices with no method to appeal, and auto-responses making the same blanket statement, ending in frustration for the developer & wasted months in development time.


They are asked to combine their apps or games into one "single container app" to reduce the clutter in the Appstore. While the idea of this sounds great in theory, it is flawed in exection, simply because some apps and games are not meant to be combined.


Take a first grade educational app for instance. Say you program a math game that caters to 1st grade kids. Then you use that engine or framework to develop a math game for 3rd or 4th graders. Combining these games would make no sense from a marketing perspective, and from the perspective of a parent who is purchasing the app for their child who needs a math game for first graders only . We have actually spoken to parents and customers in an email survey, who said they would not like this change, and it would make it more difficult for them to find the app they need to install for their child's specific age group. They have asked us to not combine these apps that they have stored on their device, as they like to have separate applications and games for each of their children, in their respective age groups & content supplied.


This is just ONE example or highlight of how this actually ruins the end user experience. Forcing developers to combine apps into one container app does not benefit customers, especially those that are accustomed to having the one single app for it's functionality and purpose. That applies to educational games, tools that target a specific market group, or diet apps that target specific dietary needs and so forth.


Apple - We beg you. Please reconsider this new guideline, and don't be so heavy handed with the rejection notices. We understand the need to clean up the Appstore, and provide a better experience for users, & remove spam, but taking the guidelines this far is not the way to clean up the store.


We feel this is hurting the end user experience, and many of our customers love having the single application or game, rather than one larger bloated file installed on their device.


Don't force developers into combining apps into one container app. It does not make sense for the end user experience, and does not make sense from a marketing or distribution perspective whatsoever, and actually hurts the end user experience. Combining 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th grade math games does not equate to a better store experience, just as combining diet apps from various diets, does not help that person who is trying to get healthy, & wants a very specific diet app tailored to their specific needs.


Please reconsider revising this guideline, as I don't feel we are alone in this battle.


We appreciate the ability to be able to publish games to one of the best Appstores on the market. We hope that Apple revises these guidelines, so things aren't so heavy handed and difficult for indies, who are already struggling to make ends meet in this very competitive marketplace.


Sincerely,


Appstore developer

How is this account able to publish same app every 3 days with 50 chars in the app title:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/developer/free-las-vegas-casino-card-games/id1038615411?mt=8


Appannie link:

https://www.appannie.com/apps/ios/publisher/1038615411/

Sally, it sounds like Apple is forcing you to remove Apps that customers have paid for, without giving the end user any kind of recourse for recovery. Has Apple Review ever suggested to any of us an easy way to get the customer back what they paid for?? Instead they are twisting your arm to commit consumer fraud. Of course the end user will just think that YOU the developer took the app off the shelf and moved it somewhere else to sell under a different name. Us developers need to be the last line of defense against hundreds of thousands of products being removed. How many millions of consumers are losing access forever to products or in-app purchases they just paid for? This feels like an FTC issue. How is this not widespread consumer fraud?

I clicked a few titles. Couldn't find a 2018 copyright. A lot of 2015's and found a 2017. Maybe they haven't gotten their consolidation phone call yet.

that is why I had given Appannie link where we can see the release date of the app. Even though copyright is 2017 but release date is this month and its same app so many times. 4.3 is being torn apart by this guy but how?

http://prntscr.com/jemzzd

I have loyal users of many years. Not many, but they have supported Apple's products for many years.

Apple just keep on damaging user experience by rejecting the updates because of guideline 4.3.


I have to explain to users that I can't update our productivity apps because Apple just don't allow updates even though the updates are ready to be released only if Apple allow to do so.

The apps are keeps on crashing on users' phone and users are unable to access their data accumulated on their phone for several years.

I don't understand why Apple keep on damaging tthier reputation by donig this.

I am not being harrassed by Apple, but users are.

Those of us without an AppAnnie account couldn't see the link. Maybe the release dates are updates? He might be trying to consolidate apps and got a reprieve from the 4.3 requirements for updates

Latest app (for example) is a new publication


https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1174853370

Everyone, lets remember to be proactive on this. Yes, its frustrating, but we need to really insist they give us the right tools to consolidate. Someone "upstairs" is telling Apple Review to insist we do this, so they have their marching orders, so to speak. And as someone is pointing out, they are willing to look at things on a case-by-case basis.


But I think Apple and us devs absolutely have to remember to do what's best for the end-users in all this. Apple has many protections in place for the end-user already. Restore Purchase buttons are required for a reason. If a user pays for a 1-year subscriptions that must be honored.


What I'm getting at is I don't think Apple Review wants to trigger what some lawyer could claim is widespread consumer fraud by removing paid apps (or apps with paid content). Look at the frivilous stuff Apple gets sued for already. Right now in France there's a developer suing Apple for unfair practices. Also we shouldn't be forced to exporse ourselves to something like that too.


So if consolidation is the future of things. We need the tools to protect ourselves.


1. A redirect from the removed app to the consolidated app. So for example, in iTunes Connect if we have to mark an app as Removed from Sale, it should have a simple field for the Apple ID of the new app.


2. The consoldiated app must be able to use StoreKit to query the removed app to check if (A) it was a purchased app or (B) if it had in-app purchases.


That way we can reliably get customers the content they paid for. Every store user has an expectation that their content will stay available for years to come. I'm sure theres some Terms of Use thing when buying in the Store that says "there's no guarantees you can access this forever" to protect Apple (and us). But that shouldn't be used as a means to purge unnecessarily.


I have a lot of Sticker apps that have sold well, and I don't mind consolidating them, but I can't just rip off people by removing the apps altogether.


So file a bug report asking for the above. It won't take long, and it lets the engineers know we need the right tools.

See my most recent post below. Lets ask for the right tools to consolidate.

I agree bro, this is terrible, apps are going to have some similarites between them, there are thousands of apps on the App Store, how can each one be different from another, its not possible.

Who cares. Grab your ball and go home. Apple need not indie developers making mediocre apps.

Excellent points raised. I believe that the problem with 4.3 rule is that Apple does not evaluate at what point the difference in content justifies the existence of a separate app.


We are developing theory test apps for the UK market and were contacted last year demanding some consolidation. We've been able to resolve it with Apple by removing all our paid apps from sale and instead using in-app purchases. I thought that it was a great solution as it indeed reduced the number of apps while allowing us to keep one app per each vehicle category (Car, Motorcycle, etc.) Recently, we've been contacted by App Review, and they now demand that we make further consolidations.


From a marketing point of view, further consolidation makes no sense. Users are accustomed to seeing learning materials being separated by a vehicle category and would be puzzled if such a real-life model did not exist on the App Store. Imagine if you search for Motorcycle Theory Test and all you see are a list of Driving Theory Tests.


The irony of all of this is that while we reduced the number of our apps last year, most of our competitors did not. We've recently conducted an analysis which indicates that if all our competitors were to move to the same model which we have, there'd be 50 fewer theory test apps on the App Store. From our point of view, it would be fair if App Review first ensured that everyone uses the same model with a reduced number of apps. Then, further reevaluation can be conducted on whether some additional consolidation is possible/needed. In our opinion, it would not be needed as setting cars aside; there are at most ten companies shipping apps for other vehicle categories. If all of them release only one app with in-app purchases, it is hard to call ten apps a "clutter".


Hence, we agree that Apple needs to modify rule 4.3. At the moment it says that as long as the variation is only in the content or language, the apps should be consolidated. Instead, they should take the importance of content into account when deciding whether it makes sense to perform consolidation.


Otherwise, it seems like the App Review is forcing us to participate in some programming exercise with no benefit to users, us or Apple.

I completely agree, there should be the possibility of grouping app by category. It is not a technical issue but a marketing issue, and sadly not everywhere in the world the american approach works.


Furthermore I would really, really sometime appreciate the possibility of talking to somebody who is in charge at the app review team, i.e. the person(s) who decide these policies.

Any progress so far? I am in the same boat. My idea was also to publish these types of games, but of course making them different enough with existing apps. My second game got the 4.3 rejection. Both games are completely different in terms of ui design and gameplay, but use the same base code. Which I believe why is was rejected.

4.3 Design Guidelines - Apple please reconsider how this is enforced.
 
 
Q