I thought we could have a bit of humor here at the expense of the stupidest App Store reviewers.
I’ll start us off with my most recent rejection of “Fun Card Studio 2”. Rejected because the name and functionality are similar to another product called “Fun Card Studio”. That would be because “Fun Card Studio 2” is version 2 of “Fun Card Studio”. Seriously! I ended up writing the reviewer a letter explaining the differences between the two applications!
So what’s been your most stupidest reason for rejection?
Haven’t been rejected yet (fingers crossed, ModTools update waiting for review)
However I haven’t tried to submit Answers yet, and that could potentially have problems.
I encountered that same problem, Sam. After comments from reviewers, I finally figured out that they don’t want you to change the name of the update to your app. (I. E. adding a 2) they prefer you resubmit Fun Card Studio and internally show version 2. That actually kinda makes sense so as to avoid user confusion.
I understand, originally I didn’t actually want to call it “Fun Card Studio 2”, but as there is no way to release a paid update for an application and you can’t have two products on the App Store with the same name, I ended up calling it “Fun Card Studio 2”.
In that case they need to stop everyone else from doing it, not just us smaller guys. Even better devise a mechanism whereby we can release paid updates. Not everyone develops software to help sell their hardware!
Looks like I’m going to have to appeal, as the reviewer has not responded to me since the initial rejection!
Anyway, I thought I’d start this thread because it seems a funny rejection reason and I wondered if others have similar reasons for rejection that they’s like to share.
If you do not use the versioning but add ‘Pro’ you could get away with it.
So call your v2 -> Fun Card Studio Pro - this will not be rejected for sure.
What happens when Sam needs a “Fun Card Studio Pro” update???
I was going to call my new app “Fun Card Studio 3” - Guess I will need to change the name of my app then
[quote=152135:@Richard Summers]What happens when Sam needs a “Fun Card Studio Pro” update???
I was going to call my new app “Fun Card Studio 3” - Guess I will need to change the name of my app then :)[/quote]
I’m going to have to figure out how to paid updates on the App Store, I’ve just written a nice message to the reviewer, so lets see if anything will change.
I stop using apps that do this. It’s far less user friendly than a paid upgrade even though it’s almost the same thing. I just don’t like the feeling - it’s kind of like someone dangling a prize above your head.
True, but atm this is how you make ‘big’ money. People seems to accept this way of expanding apps - most certain for iOS apps.
We for sure need this in the iOS Framework.
on the MAS store, I have dropped apps that started doing that and bought newer (to me) apps that didn’t do it. Even if it cost me more. I rather have one upfront cost then the “death by a thousand paper cuts” method of in app purchases.
It’s ok. One paid the first release, few could give up on updates with extra-features (don’t know why, does not affect the current functionality) and some will desire to pay extra few bucks to activate them. This is better than releasing once and the dev giving up of upgrading their software due to the lack of financial compensation of doing so.
Did you even read the rest of my post? You’ve only quoted my first sentence so I’m not sure you cared for the rest, which explains why users give up on the software titles that behave so poorly.
Those that are happy to pay for upgrades get a bad feeling from the in-app purchase method. Simply put, it is poor tact.
Yes, I’ve read. And how would you implement a “paid upgrade” if it’s not possible unless you use this feature?
Sam couldn’t put a price on his Fun Card Studio upgrade. Then he “tried” to release a “Fun Card Studio 2” to contour that and was blocked. The only way is “people must acquire new features INSIDE the app”. Not a dev choice. An Apple imposition.
(fingers crossed, ModTools update waiting for review)
