You’ve never seen the app so you are relying completely on presumption?
Why am I not surprised!?
Seems you have trouble reading without jumping to conclusions! As I pointed out my app was not a knock-off due to many reasons, and there are many other apps on the store that are overt knock-offs unlike mine. Thought that was clear but apparently I was right about your weak reading comprehension.
No I’m not complaining the rules are arbitrary because of being rejected then accepted. It’s a legitimate point. Go read 4.3 Guideline yourself and then go and see stories about how it’s been implemented from developers who have experienced it. Not only did I experience it first hand I also did the research to find others on the same boat. That’s also covered in the article and as usual you failed to grasp that.
What you especially don’t get is the warning in my last response to you. If you want me to really spill the dirt on Apple, you’ve just assured it!
You apparently can’t read my article properly judging by your comments on it, thus rendering any so-called opinion you have of it completely irrelevant. Still fun to call you out! LOL
If it’s so simple about whether it was a “knock-off” or not then there wouldn’t be this article in the first place. The more you comment the more bogus you seem! LMAO
I never disagreed with no one benefiting from all kinds of crap in the store; as I said mine was a completely original IP and a completely unique implementation of a well-known genre but with its own specific gameplay twists too. It’s like no one else is allowed to make a one on one fighting game after Street Fighter? Or no one else is allowed to make a new social media site after Myspace!? Do you know how dumb that sounds!? Apparently not, since you keep pushing! Haha…
I not only wrote this article to help fellow developers it’s also just a better business move for Apple to have more choices in their store and more empowerment for independent businesses to be able to promote their own products like Amazon and Google, companies Apple seems to enjoy copying these days with their ditching of skeuomorphism for Google style flat design and introducing an Amazon Prime style streaming service. They are clearly a follower and not innovator, yet they seem to refuse to follow the aspects of those companies that are in line with the US constitution, promoting free market capitalism; giving a level playing ground for all businesses regardless of scope to be able to succeed on their platform.
The issue of sorting through garbage is laughable when they could simply be sorted by rating or Apple’s recommendation. Extremely easy to implement and absolutely not an issue. Like I said in my article the standards for functionality and submission before the guideline in question are already stringent. As I said in my article, if it stopped there I’d praise Apple for it as that was never my problem. My issue was being rejected based on aspects that are not against quality of the app but aspects of marketing which is completely separate unless; the developer is contracted by Apple or Apple offers promotions inclusively with acceptance in the store.
Neither are the case, and therefore Apple having any say over the marketing aspects of the app infringe on proper business practices, while the lack of another viable option for selling iOS apps renders Apple monopolistic, and that’s why they’re being sued for that (see: https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/13/18617727/apple-v-pepper-antitrust-illinois-brick-supreme-court-case-loss).
They should be consistent with what they’ve always done was my point. If they pull out tons of apps to be consistent with new rules it will hurt their business, that’s why they don’t do it and if they treat new submitters completely differently it’s a completely inconsistent implementation of their rules; which is exactly what we have now in their store. Their monopolistic culture ends up extending out into who can or can’t be on the store regardless of legality.
I’m happy if you disagree, but if you bring about points that clearly ignore the content of my article and are just as helpful as an Apple shill at best and simply generic party lines at worst, don’t expect me not to call you out!
Since I told you that if you keep pushing I will really cover Apple’s dark side happily for people like you. Look forward to at least one article where I can go on about Apple’s:
- Predatory practices on children
- Disgusting content in apps marketed to kids
- Very low standards for apps and ads
- Copyright infringing material
- Mafia like demands for snitching on developers
- Intentional degrading of older hardware
- Infringement on the right to fix Apple products even outside warranty
- Infringement on the right for users to run other OSs properly on Mac
- Serious lack of support for independent legal trade of their products
- Higher prices on less practical designs
- Less accessories offered with products
- Predatory practices on developers including system upgrades
- Complicit with communist China and sweatshop style factories
- Predatory practices on casual users
- Increase in anti free speech policy
I’m happy you can inspire me to write all about it! I’ll make sure to credit you for that too! 😀
