I would agree with your point if implementation of these guidelines were consistent. You sound like an Apple shill here, much like their generic party line.
They attempted to bring up the same supposedly plausible point only for me to do a 5-second search in their store to find mountains of knock-offs and much worse than that!
The truth is the Apple store already is filled with knockoffs, ripoffs, and cheap copies of hundreds or more nearly identically named/themed/styled apps stuffed with ads, trackers, and aggressive marketing tactics.
Moreover mine was none of the above! Clearly you failed to comprehend that from your reading, which may be why you choose to come here and tow the party line! LOL…
Your point about Apple being publisher (which it has denied in its case against monopoly in court stating that registered developers are “customers” not employees of Apple) does not apply because the yearly fee paid to be given access to the service is before any service is received. If there was an app qualification process prior to registration, you would be right, but there is not, so you are not.
The difference with physical store shelves is that there is literally a limited physical amount of space. With digital stores there is no such limitation. That is the entire impetus for the entire original creation of Amazon! Hahaha
Your point is thus invalid here.
As stated, my app did not fall into the category of a knock-off so your failed reading is really apparent in your rebuttal. You may not believe it since you seem to kiss the ground Apple people walk on, but my original article for this was going to be much harsher, but decided to be fair instead after getting through and thinking about the potential unnecessary struggles of others. It is only because you are coming here with your faux authority and fake face that you are providing an incentive for me to dish the dirt, so be careful what you wish for, not by your words, but your actions!
Your statement about what Apple would or would not accept is completely irrelevant. That is because my appeal was lifted and I was told the technical reason it was rejected and what I needed to do for it to be accepted in the next submission, which — as already explained in the article — had nothing to do with their originally stated reasons. So your point has been overridden by the very content of my article which you have struggled to digest. Maybe you would know that if you had proper reading comprehension?
Do you even understand this reply so far?
As I said a very quick search brought me a pile of search results that were not only knock-offs in the sense of genre and scope of another app; a very common framework for designing any application or game — by the way — in case you needed some basics; but the knock-offs even completely ripped off graphic assets and more. My app, as stated in the article which you seem to have failed at reading properly, had completely original graphics and sound unlike ones available still on the store today!
Where did I say that Apple was “evil” in my article anyway? You are the one now suggesting that if you are keeping score! No one is peeing in anyone’s pool outside of your comments on here! LMAO
I can go ahead and talk about how Apple is “evil” or whatever, but that was not the point of this article; which you clearly missed! The point of this article was to prevent other app developers from facing the same unnecessary and borderline illegal treatment I had and to provide a means for businesses to test their independent marketing abilities within the market.
It is not as if getting your app in the store is going to get Apple to automatically promote it for you, it will still be obscure without its own marketing initiative anyway, so this kind of arbitrary filtering of completely functional and law-abiding digital products that are copyrighted by the submitter is completely unnecessary and unwarranted.
Like I said — I have resisted — even in this reply, to get into the nitty gritty of the real dark sides of my experience which I chose to omit (uncharacteristically for me) diplomatically so as to provide a more fair reading of the experience for a general audience in this niche.
If you want me to do a Part 2 where I go ahead and REALLY spill the beans on Apple, keep pushing! I would love to write it for Apple associate boot lickers like you!!! 😂
