I don't know where to answer these questions. I uploaded the answers in app review information note section but didn't work. What should I do?
The review message is attached below.
Guideline 2.1 - Information Needed
We’re looking forward to continuing our review, but we need a bit more information about your business model and your users to help find the best distribution option for your app. Our preliminary review of your app suggests that your app may be a good fit for our Apple Business Manager program, which is designed specifically for business apps.
Next Steps
Please review the following questions and provide as much detailed information as you can for each question.
Please describe which kinds of users you expect will use your app. Some common kinds of users are:
Users who are part of a single company (including its partners, employees and contractors)
A limited number of companies which are clients of the developer
The general public
Identify the specific countries or regions where you plan to distribute your app.
What features in the app are intended for use by general App Store users?
How do users obtain an account?
If there are any paid aspects of the app, such as for opening an account or using certain features in the app, please explain how users access the paid content.
Who pays for the paid content?
Since your App Store Connect status is Metadata Rejected, we do NOT require a new binary. To revise the metadata, visit App Store Connect to select your app and revise the desired metadata values. Once you’ve completed all changes, reply to this message in Resolution Center and we will continue the review.
You need to navigate to the app in Appstore Connect, click on "Version History" and then click on "Resolution Center". On that screen is a form where you can reply to the inquiry from Apple. It took me longer than expected to find it.
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 have recently released an app on the app store. I would like to allow some to have access to a free version but have some concerns about offering promo codes. My big question is:
How many times can one promo code be used? I guess I'm concerned about a promo code getting into the wrong hands and being distributed...
Thanks! V
A promo code can only be used once. Sometime developers will post a few of them on Twitter or other marketing channels and people can grab one, however if it has already been entered, iTunes will report it as "already used".
Apple has a good summary of how promo codes work.
We are an university department for further education courses and we are planning to publish our cd based courses as an additional iOS/Android App. As we have almost finished the development process we are now facing some questions regarding the distribution. The basic idea is to publish the app in a lite version for free (including chapter one of the course). After you have completed this chapter you will be asked to enter your login data. Our students will be able to enter thier data to activate (download missing content from our server) the app. If you are not an enrolled student there will be a link to our course page. On this page you can enroll for the courses and of course there is a charge for this.
But Apple only allows purchases via the App Store or as so called "in app buys".
Will we violate this rule with our idea?
I have found some newspaper apps with basically the same concept: download for free. If you have a print subscription for this newspaper you enter your data and can use the app. If not you can subscribe for the online offer via an in app buy.
After days of research we have no clear answer to this scenario.
Any comment appreciated.
There are two possible solution for your situation:
Without In-App Purchase: You can create an app which can have a eBook (in your case, dummy eBook with chapter 1 content) bundled with the App.
By doing this anyone who can download will have access to the dummy eBook as well.
For downloading of additional-contents user can do login and access the eBooks available with their account.
Kindly note as you are not using In-App purchase there shall be no links for user registration, buy inside your app.
All these you can handle at your web-site.
Your app can check for valid user credential using a web-service call, and user can see the contents available for download.
Advantages: 1) You shall not be paying 30 % to Apple as No-purchases are done using your app.
2) This is total compliance with Apple guidelines, this link and part 11 specially will be of interest.
Disadvantage: Users cannot directly buy/register via app and you need to maintain additional services for user login validation/content mapping/download content etc.
Using in-App Purchase:
You can use Apple provided in-App purchase for selling content/ registration of users etc.
Please note Apple shall charge 30 % on your selling price.
Advantages: Users can register and buy directly using your app. In-App purchase guidelines will help more in this.
Disadvantage: Apple will charge 30% on Selling price.
Given what you are trying to do, there really is no clear answer for your question that this community can provide, I'm afraid.
The true answer is entirely up to Apple's current app review policies. You should probably submit the app, explain clearly what you are doing, and if it gets rejected/denied, you can follow up with an appeal to the app review board.
As far as I know, physical items that are purchased are not subject to Apple's 30% cut. However, since you're offering courses / content over the 'net, Apple may want some percentage (between 0 & 30%) of the the profits you're making. Maybe they have a different arrangement with newspaper publishers. Ultimately, you'd need to submit the app and find out what the reviewers and app review board say.
I'm looking for a workaround to allow many users (100+) to download my paid app via a unique code of some kind.
I'm aware of Apple's limit of 50 per release but this will not be enough. Is there a way to gift an app en masse? What about a third-party solution for promo codes? If you've successfully found a way around this limitation, please let me know.
As you mention, Apple only allows you 50 promo codes per update (NOTE: doing an update allows 50 more codes. If you're ok releasing the codes 50 at a time over several updates, this will work for you.)
One thing that you can do is build unlock codes into your app. You can either hard-code the unlock codes or, for a little extra effort, make the whole thing server based. This blog post talks about one such way to do this.
NOTE: in-app unlock codes will only let you give away content to people who already have your app. If your app is in the store with a price associated, and you want to give it away, this won't help you.
You can also buy copies of your own app and give iTunes gift codes to people. This has the downside of costing you 30% (Apple's cut.) That is, if you pay 99¢ for a gift-code for your app and send it to me, you get back 70¢ for the sale, but Apple gets the other 29¢.
You could change the price of your app to free for a day or two and only tell certain people about the sale dates.
If you're a big company (5000+ employees), you can use the enterprise license, but the tone of your question makes me think this might not apply.
That's about it for choices. As one commenter pointed out, any sort of gaming the iTunes system will likely result in your losing your dev license and is probably not worth it.
Good luck!