Kevin Bostic
Apple's push against app recommendation apps appears to be expanding, as the company is now said to be rejecting apps that allow users to share discovered programs with their friends.
Rejected app AppGratis, image via Numerama
Apple has apparently begun expanding its means of enforcing App Store regulation 2.25 — which bars apps from functionalities that bring them into competition with the App Store — and rejecting apps that encourage sharing recommendations, according to PocketGamer. One developer, whose app is focused on such recommendation sharing, related a tale of receiving a rejection notice for the app's functionality even though the software was shaped to conform with Apple's rules.
"We thought that basing our recommendations on sharing was suitable for Apple, as it had previously stated that if you bake in social or local into your app discovery, you would be fine," the developer said. "I think they aim to be the only provider of recommendations for apps, along with being the distributor."
Regulation 2.25 forms the basis for Apple's app recommendation app rejections. It states "Apps that display Apps other than your own for purchase or promotion in a manner similar to or confusing with the App Store will be rejected."
Recent months have seen Apple increasingly citing Regulation 2.25 and blocking a number of popular app recommendation services, despite them having willing user bases that numbered in the millions. The move is reportedly aimed at cracking down on developers paying for exposure.
Early in April, daily app recommendation service AppGratis was pulled from the App Store despite an identical iPad app from the same company having been approved three days before. The CEO of AppGratis expressed total disbelief at the app's rejection, and the incident even caught the attention of France's digital industry minister, who called Apple's rejection of the app a "unilateral decision" that raised the issue of whether or not the company was being fair in its policies.
Christine McKee
AppleInsider Staff
Chip Loder
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
14 Comments
Are the French being forced to buy and use only iPhones?
This is why the entire world hates Apple. They are bullies who have no legitimate reason to do something so incredibly cruel & damaging like this. Damaging to developers, and damaging to customers. No wonder Android has gained so much traction.
This is why the entire world hates Apple. They are bullies who have no legitimate reason to do something so incredibly cruel & damaging like this. Damaging to developers, and damaging to customers. No wonder Android has gained so much traction.
lololololololololololololololololol.
Do I misunderstand the story? The ONLY clear new fact it contains is "One developer, whose app is focused on such recommendation sharing, related a tale of receiving a rejection notice for the app's functionality even though the software was shaped to conform with Apple's rules." ONE developer's story. That's not a larger "tightening" all by itself. How many times have developers in the past cried wolf--and sometimes there's a wolf. Sometimes there isn't. Sometimes the wolf is a single mistake (out of millions) and Apple reverses the bad decision of the person that made the rejection. Sometimes the rejection has a good reason, even though we may feel bad for that particular developer's story. Meanwhile, AppShopper Social is a new app (which sounds much like the rejected one) that was JUST approved a week or two ago, and is still on the store--as are MANY other alternative app store front-ends. Search and see. There are dozens, right now! Appsfire is another one I use. Two or three rejections in a couple months does suggest there MIGHT be a recent crackdown, but if so, how much of one and what are the details? Do Apple's rules hurt users? (I would say sometimes yes, and developers like to say so, that's for sure--as they walk to the bank.) Do those same rules also HELP users? (Undoubtedly--but of course any time Apple does something different, trolls and stock-manipulators make two lists: a list of the advantages to burn, and a list of the disadvantages to shout from the rooftops.) People are extrapolating and inventing most of this story, it seems. AppGratis abused push to send [I]ads[/I] (among other issues) and got rejected a few weeks ago, then raised a bunch of PR for themselves because Apple let them get away with it for a while before catching them. Now we have this second anecdote a few weeks later... and that's about it, right? TWO "examples"? The rest is guesses and pot-stirring? (People who use AppShopper as a third example are stretching: the old version was rejected ages ago, in line with rules we've known about for a very long time. The NEW version DOES have social sharing and is alive and well. AppShopper is back--and I like it! But even if it weren't, and it had to become a web app with email sale-notifications instead of a real App Store app, both I and Apple would be fine with that. Other store front-ends can go that route as well and forget the rules.) I do believe Apple is [I]probably[/I] cutting back on the ocean of App Store front-ends (which actually helps avoid user confusion and stops the store from "breaking" when someone uses a front end Apple can't update). I don't (yet) believe Apple is cutting back on ALL of them or rejecting "social sharing" as a blanket principle. I can sympathize with this developer not knowing exactly how or even if they can fix this; and if they can drum up awareness online, maybe that will be good PR for them AND help move Apple to clarify matters. But I need more evidence (like the app not coming back, and AppShopper Social being pulled as well, along with others that have social sharing) before the AI "more" headline is justified. "the company is now said to be rejecting apps that allow users to share discovered programs with their friends" Sounds scary! Light the torches! Astroturfers unite! But... this new "rule"... is it... true? "It is now said." Gotcha.
The truth is Apple is a company fight for customer. Their stand on the view from customer side. Not like most of company they only focus how to make money. So many people just don't get it. Google use everyone's data to earn money. More data they collect the more money they can earn. Samsung is so greedy. They release S3 as cheap phone now column go up they want to make more money they increase price of s4. Apple is opposite. They spend tons of work design a good product, when volume go up cost go down they bring down the price. If their is only Apple play in this area, the world is more peace and beautiful.