I am working on a mobile iOS app that is customized to each client, with their own app icon, startup screen, and a few other changes. Each is then submitted to the app store as an individual app.
This is working just fine so far, but what will happen if there's 1000 clients instead of around a dozen? Does Apple have any rules on quantity, submission rate or uniqueness? Any reviewer would clearly see that the apps are basically the same outside of the branding.
Don't do it. You will get kicked out of the appstore.
Read 2.20 of Apple iOS Guidelines which says that developers that spam appstore with similar apps will be kicked out completely!
Notably developers like AppGratis got kicked for this and many others reasons.
Sorry can't disclose, if you have a developers account though you can check the requirements
from https://developer.apple.com/appstore/resources/approval/guidelines.html
I know this is an old thread but somehow it popped up and the answer selected is not entirely correct. The requester needs the custom B2B program here:
https://developer.apple.com/programs/volume/b2b/
That is specifically made for the purpose she/he asked about: to distribute customized apps to a business without cluttering the app store. There is no cost but your customers will need to join the Apple Volume Purchase Program for Business though that doesn't cost them anything.
The reason I say the accepted answer is partially correct is because obviously one should not spam up the app store with similar apps intended for one business, which is entirely correct. But that does not answer the underlying why they wanted to do this and how they could achieve the result they need which is to use the B2B program.
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!
I'm trying to develop an app that can be used to generate multiple apps. Let's say for now I'm doing an app for fruits, but tomorrow the client will want to create an app for vegetables, and the day after tomorrow for meats, and so on.
So what I'm doing right now is creating an app with same codebase and generating different Targets for each topic (fruits, vegetables, etc.) with its own settings.
That is working really good for now, but I want to make sure that my apps all passes the AppStore review guidelines. The one that concerns me is this one:
4.3 Spam
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. Also avoid piling on to a category that is already saturated; the App Store has enough fart, burp, flashlight, and Kama Sutra apps already. Spamming the store may lead to your removal from the Developer Program.
So I've read some posts that talks about the best way to accomplish doing multiple apps with same codebase, but hadn't seen anyone lately talking about the Apple restriction to this stuff.
If using different targets it's not a solution for Apple to approve, and you know one, I'll be glad to hear it! What I wanna avoid is making one app and make the user select the type of food he wants (following my example scenario). So my goal is having multiple apps for all different topics, and make Apple approve it.
Thanks in advance!
This is great question. I hope someone from apple team can answer this correctly.
My personal experience
Creation of separate app is perfectly fine as long as end app provides something unique compare to other bundleId. In my case We have 100+laws apps having each law app created using same code base but different data and from User perspective they need it in separate app compared to grouped app.
The visual schema should be different in each application. Please try to make different colors, logos, URL's / data for each flavor.
Each app name-should be unique ( Apple doesn't allow you sell app with same name). Adding hypen, or cosmetic name changes will be definitely candidate for app rejection.
Having said that there is no gurantee to get your app approved each time. In appeal also if you try to tell them that similar app is approved, you are at their mercy to get it approved.
For these 2 rules:
11.1 Apps that unlock or enable additional features or functionality with mechanisms other than the App Store will be rejected
11.2 Apps utilizing a system other than the In App Purchase API (IAP) to purchase content, functionality, or services in an app will be rejected.
Is the applicability of these rules reduced/removed if the enablement/disablement of the features/functionality (11.1) or the content purchase (11.2) does not actually occur within the app on the device.
For example, you write an app that requires free registration but if you visit a website outside of the app (and not linked to from the app) to "upgrade" your registration (by paying money) the app gains some more functionality or content next time you use it.
Thoughts?
My thoughts: you'd be violating the guidelines, but your app could get approved, of course. The payment does indeed not occur inside the app, but the application "utilizes" such a system (which is very broad) thus is in violation.
This reminds me of the Newsstand/subscriptions discussions going on before. Basically, if you offer something outside an app, you have to make the same (or better) offer inside the app (via IAP subscriptions). Perhaps this is applicable in your case, too. Although, according to 11.3, you may not offer services outside your app if purchased via IAP (so you may not unlock features on e.g. a website too.)
You'd also try and offer a free app. Once users (somewhere, somehow) upgrade their account, they can access the members only app, a new, separate app. But approval is still questionable, which brings me to my last part:
"We will reject Apps for any content or behavior that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it". And we think that you will also know it when you cross it."
— https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
In short: submit, pray and find out.
What you describe sounds similar to the situation that resulted in apps that used Dropbox being rejected (Link). Apple determined that since the apps that used Dropbox functionality required the user to visit the Dropbox site to sign up those apps were in violation of those rules and were thus rejected.
We have two Apps live on the Appstore. One for free, and one full featured version which is offered to buy. The free app has a In-App-Store so the user may update to the full featured version.
Actually I am thinking about stoping development of the full featured App (which is identical
to the free one at code level). We don't want to blame our customers. It would be nice to give them a redemption code for the free app to unlock all features. All features which will be unlocked this way are bound to the redemption code. All customers who did In-App purchases are "registered" by Apple, so the purchase will be remembered for all devices. Finally all In-App customers would have an advantage over the Pro-Version customers, which is not acceptable for us.
Is it possible to have one (hidden) free In-App purchase, which the user could "buy" if the redemption code is working? Maybe a better question is: What is the best practice for putting two similar Apps together without bugging the customers?
Not possible, I'm afraid. There is no good solution as far as I am aware (I still have a paid and a "lite" version for this reason).
You could raise a bug report with Apple (http://bugreporter.apple.com) but there's no saying if of when they'll ever make a change.
How about this idea:
Add a URL scheme to your lite app which, when invoked, enables the full featured version.
In your next update for the paid app add a button to "Enable all features in the lite version" that invokes that URL scheme (UIApplication's openURL:). This will open the lite app which will then enable all features.
One problem: if somebody else figures out what that URL scheme is, he could write a simple little app that just uses that URL scheme to enable the features in your lite app. Which means that person could get all the features without ever buying your paid app.
To prevent this I would implement this URL scheme in such a way that it only works when called with a secret parameter, maybe the hash of the device's MAC address and a salt. (Not sure if this is the best way, but that would be my first idea)