I understand that this might be an inappropriate question, but I really wanna make sure before I start being "involved" in the App Store.
So, lets say I have developed an application for iPhone with XCode adn want to deploy to the App Store. Also, lets say I want to charge the users for the app. In Google Play, google does not allow you to "earn money" through google play if you live in certain countries (Greece is one of them). Is this the same for the App Store either?
I know I must create a Developer's Account in the app store and that it costs 99$ anually. But in order to charge for the application, do I have to live in (lets say) Russia or USA, or can I do it even if I live in Greece?
Thank you for your patience and your time :)
Is this the same for the App Store either?
No, you can earn money from the first app you sell (even if you sell one single copy).
do I have to live in (lets say) Russia or USA, or can I do it even if I live in Greece?
Doesn't matter where you live. You have the ability to specify in which territories you prefer to provide your app, and the sales reports are sent to you separated by territory.
I just tried to create an Apple ID and selected Greece as country and everything went ok.
I've read in some forums problems a while ago (2010) regarding payment with credit card. The problems were solved by sending a wire transfer to Apple and a PDF with the application (however I think this is not necessary at the moment).
You can try to create a developer account (it's free) and if everything goes well you can then buy the license that you need.
Related
Many companies rely on white labeled apps to provide their services in a more personal way to their customers.
With a few adjustments we can set a logo and a splash screen and even pre-configure our app to our customer needs which has a great impact in their end user experience. Without this my users would need to use the app skipping a lot of configuration steps that in a generic app wouldn't be possible to skip.
According to apple: "Apps created from a commercialized template or app generation service will be rejected"
Now what can we do to to work around this?
Today I saw 4 apps being rejected and others are waiting for revision and I can anticipate that they will have the same ending.
Here's the revision result:
"4. 3 Design: Spam"
Guideline 4.3 - Design
We noticed that your app provides the same feature set as many of the
other apps you've submitted to the App Store; it simply varies in
content or language, which is considered a form of spam.
The next submission of this app may require a longer review time.
Next Steps
When creating multiple apps where content is the only varying element,
you should offer a single app to deliver differing content to
customers. Alternatively, you may consider creating a web app, which
looks and behaves similar to a native app when the customer adds it to
their Home screen. Refer to the Configuring Web Applications section
of the Safari Web Content Guide for more information.
Review the Design section of the App Store Review Guidelines.
Ensure your app is compliant with all sections of the App Store Review Guidelines and the Terms & Conditions of the Apple Developer
Program.
Once your app is fully compliant, resubmit your app for review.
Submitting apps designed to mislead or harm customers or evade the
review process may result in the termination of your Apple Developer
Program account. Review the Terms & Conditions of the Apple Developer
Program to learn more about our policies regarding termination.
If you believe your app is compliant with the App Store Review
Guidelines, you may submit an appeal. Alternatively, you may provide
additional details about your app by replying directly to this
message.
For app design information, check out the following videos: "Best
Practices for Great iOS UI Design" and "Designing Intuitive User
Experiences," available on the Apple Developer website.
You may also want to review the iOS Human Interface Guidelines for
more information on how to create a great user experience in your app.
Of course we can develop web apps, but apple can't forget that many features are only available in native or hybrid apps.
What should we do?
References:
https://blog.summitsync.com/did-apple-just-crush-white-label-apps-4aee14d00b78
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
The current answer is out of date. Apple revised their guidelines in which the customer must have their own Apple account now, paying the $99 a year. You can then submit a white labeled app under that account. We have been doing that the past three months with no problem. They wouldnt allow this approach before but now they do.
The Apple developer account can not be an individual account, but a company, educational or government type.
If you have a few apps under the same company account you can submit the apps if they can be proven to belong to the current company. We have three apps submitted under the same company account because the apps shared similar names to the company however I wouldn't do this for different companies.
We where having the same issue. We have talked to Apple, which where very kind and understanding.
Our app is one used mainly bij employees of a company and there for Apple suggested to use B2B app distribution via Volume Purchase Program.
If your app is just white labeled app that business can use for their customers then you are out of luck. Apple will not allow any white label apps in the app store any more.
Your option is to make one app which can switch between the different customers.
If you app is like web store this can be difficult, but as per Apple's example of the fan app of a football club switch per club should be in one app.
4.3 is a complete mess. With its active enforcement, Apple has indeed opened a Pandora's box. The biggest problem is that this policy is applied randomly.
My experience suggests that there are very few App Store reviewers who are paying attention to it during the review process. However, if you stumble upon such a reviewer, they will put some flag on your file, and all other reviewers will start to evaluate your apps for spam going forward. It seems like nothing is wrong with this approach, but it can lead to a distorted market.
In our case, we are waiting for years now to see Apple apply the same rules to our competition as it did to us. And the most ironic part is that throughout these years we've been ringing all the possible bells. Emails to Apple representatives, release notes, responses in resolution centre – nothing works.
For more details about our story check my Medium post. I have also written a second part which contains the timeline of my discussions with Apple representatives in which I highlighted competitors who violate 4.3, and Apple did nothing :(
So, the first problem with 4.3 is that it distorts the competition given how selective Apple is at implementing it.
The second problem is that the policy itself is too vague. Take our company, Theory Test Revolution, as an example. We build apps which help people pass their UK Driving Test.
Although we focus on theory tests, the reality is that our apps could be used as a platform to prepare for any multiple-choice test. Imagine if we wanted to release a couple of other MCQs apps. For example, to prepare for PADI diving exam and also to prepare for some pilot's licence exam.
How would 4.3 apply in this case? Would Apple demand that we bundle all of them in one app? How would we call it? :) "Any test you can imagine"? :)
There must be some limits. There are cases when marketing needs justify releasing separate apps even if their foundation is the same, as doing otherwise would simply confuse the users. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't care about fair competition enough. I guess their goal is to reduce the number of apps using this policy, with little regard to how fair this process is.
We are waiting for almost three years now to see our competitors being treated in the same way. And who knows – how much longer do we need to wait?
Had a call with Apple on July 13, 2020, 5 PM (GMT)
I had a conversation with the app review team regarding this matter today and I have concluded the following.
You can have the same codebase, same color, and same design for multiple apps but, a big BUT, is that you need to have some unique functionality in the app which provides a different experience to users.
They clearly said it's a difficult thing to do for developers and should take a longer time.
Only a way to know if some unique feature will work out is to send it for a review. It doesn't matter how long you have spent on developing that new feature. They also said they cannot help and is not permitted to insight anything beforehand.
They cleared that this is not a technical or logical issue to be resolved. For example, they are not going to check if the app icon or color is going to match with other app and decide it a spam or not spam but they care how users will be experiencing this app with the "WOW" factor or the app usefulness.
In short, the app must give another perspective to the user and the app should insist the user to use it because it has something new to give.
According to section 4.2.6 of: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#design
Apps created from a commercialized template or app generation service will be rejected unless they are submitted directly by the provider of the app’s content. These services should not submit apps on behalf of their clients and should offer tools that let their clients create customized, innovative apps that provide unique customer experiences. Another acceptable option for template providers is to create a single binary to host all client content in an aggregated or “picker” model, for example as a restaurant finder app with separate customized entries or pages for each client restaurant, or as an event app with separate entries for each client event.
So, rejoice! your apps can in fact be white labeled! they just must be:
submitted directly by the provider of the app’s content
There is nothing you can do to make Apple approve a copy of your app with only images and labels changed, it was their politics since iOS 3.
The only sure way you can do it is by creating a new developer account for the company you are selling the personalized version.
And B2B is also a viable option that also saves your client the 99$ yearly Apple bill.
I am building out a iOS & Android app. My app may not fully scale to support users and have some limited functionality out the gates. I wanted to put an invite list on the front of registration like Mailbox did a few years ago.
I was trying to read the Apple app store guidelines to creating a "waiting list / invite list" and couldn't get a clear picture. I assume Android is more flexible on this, so I figured I could start with Apple's guidelines first.
Here is what I can find.
In Apple's docs, it says under 3.2.2 "UnAcceptable"
(v) Arbitrarily restricting who may use the app, such as by location or carrier.
In this specific case, I am not blocking by location or carrier. I am just putting up a wall to use the app since some of my users can use it in a limited form, but I can't open it up to everyone on Day 1.
I understand I can run a "testflight" release, but I wanted to make our app available in the App Store for anyone to download since it will be publicly available, just not fully ready for a million people to hit it. My understanding is that the testflight release requires a bit more work based on their docs and isn't as simple as just putting it in the public app store so anyone can get to it.
Apple has the ultimate authority for approving and rejecting apps in their app store so nothing on SO can really be perfect advice. If you are really concerned about approval, you can try to contact apple developers support. Here are a few things I would advise:
Make sure in the developer notes for Apple when you submit to them you include a free account.
In the notes for the app store let the users know that it may take up to __ hours for their registration to get activated.
My understanding is you are doing this to handle the volume of users as you are launching the app. Be advised though that if you start restricting users too much you will possibly get poor reviews. Only restrict usage if absolutely required. If you run into issues make sure you are communicating with the users so they understand.
Good luck with you new app!
Concept on howto maintain a trial and purchasable full version of an IOS-app today:
There are lots of dicussions on this topic, but I would like to look at this for my case and how it would be designed TODAY (2015), with actual Apple restrictions.
I have an app which initially loads data from the internet to be displayed. (Trial-Content -> 80MB, 20%, Full-Content -> 400MB, 100%)
I would like to offer the Users to try the app with limited content first.
With limited content: 20% works as like the fullversion. 80% are marked with a question mark. If the users clicks on the question mark I would like to guide the user to the fullversion.
I prefere to have 2 apps (2 builts), because of having 2 separate rankings. Users, which buy an app are rating better, because they are really interrested in the app and will only buy, when they are pleased with the trial app. So an app with inapp purchase has a lower ranking in avarage then a isolated full version (built). But I guess this concept would be rejected by apple, because you have to mention the fullversion in the trialversion and you have to name the trial version as "trial" ? (Sorry for the bad english)
How will this be designed with IOS apps ? Howto guide the User to the fullversion, without beeing rejected by Apple ? (I read popups like "Would you like to purchase the fullversion?" will be rejected. )
In Android I did the following:
I created one app with the full functionality, which is at the same time the trial-version.
I created one purchasable app, which is only an unlocker app.
The trialversion app checks if the unlocker is installed. That way I can differentiate between trial and full and will load the corresponding content.
When clicking on the question mark, I will show a popup saying "Would you like to purchase the full version?".
This is quite a common pattern, you just can't call your "trial" version "trial". Quite often such versions are called "light".
To send the user to the app store to buy the full version you can use the SKStoreProductViewController to display the app store page for your full version directly in your app. This should be OK with Apple.
Your Android solution with the paid "unlocker" app would be possible too. Your apps need to expose an URL scheme and using that you can check if the other app is available. They also could use an app group to communicate. But this will most likely not pass review as apps must do something useful by themselves. They will probably test your unlocker on a device that doesn't have your other app installed and immediately reject it.
I would strongly suggest to reconsider an IAP for this. That's basically the ideal use case for it. You must not be afraid of bad reviews for offering purchases. Trying to send the user to buy another app will probably give as many bad reviews if not more. The IAP flow is much more user-friendly.
As #Sven suggested IAP is recommended in your case.
If you want to maintain two different apps for trial and full version, you can give your trial app name as "APP NAME FREE", I think Apple will not reject the app with name "Free" in App name (I successfully uploaded free and paid versions of same app with this trick).
I have created a course site, let’s say 10 courses. Each price is $1.00. Now I have each course have ios application. If user pays for my course from desktop site, they can use same course from application also.
Now see, if user has downloaded my free app. If user wants to purchase, I have put up a link which redirects user to my desktop site and purchase course. Once he purchased course, he will be back to ipad app and learn course.
In short apple will not get its 30%. Will these going to be approved by app store when they don't get their 30% cut
The rule is pretty easy, the hard part is how Apple review team will understand the contents that you provide in your app.
If your contents can enhance or complete the app somehow and is distributed in a digital format Apple will require the integration of In App Purchase.
I remember that I've read from a blog a case similar to yours. The writer was complaining that the review team was constantly rejecting its app, because it was selling a CDROM containing an HTML course (I guess) that was "started" in the app. The end of the story is that he was able to put the app to Appstore but after a lot of rejecting. Once the Apple review team had understood that he was selling physical good they released the app.
I your case I think that IAP is the way to go.
Reading the point 11 of App store review guidelines will answer some questions.
Is there a way to offer a purchase free of charge for in-app purchases? I'd like to give a free download as a promotional item and not charge the normal price that is listed in iTunes.
You have to code for this in your app. In my app all purchases are registered on parse.com and sync'd between user's devices. I can add a purchase to the class on parse.com for a user and then they get the IAP for free when the data sync's to their device.
Apple don't have any mechanism for this like they do with app purchases unfortunately. The best way I've found is a custom URL scheme, so you can generated a code/string of your custom URL type ://myApp/123456promoCodeFooBar12999 etc, then your app, in response can connect to your server and check this code off against your database (confirming that it has not been used before, and can't be used again on a diff device) before unlocking the feature. This circumvents needing to get UUID's off people etc (which you can't do in code anymore to check against anyway), you just need an email address, send link, user clicks in it, your app opens and away you go :)
edit addition 28 Feb 2014..
an alternate approach might be to submit an separate paid version of the application in which all upgrades are unlocked because they are paid for upfront at purchase time. You may choose to keep this off the iTunes shelf but occasionally put it up, perhaps at a prohibitively high price, $1000 etc, because you can get the normal promo codes off Apple for this one to give to journalists etc, just explain what you are doing to them in your cover letter and I'm sure they'll be more than happy to play ball