It's a copy of a website
Many customers ask us to develop Apps that are nothing more than the reproduction of functions (or the contents of a website). These Apps are no longer accepted by Apple as they lack the so-called minimum required functionality.Let's take an example:A business app that features a product catalog, news list, and business contact page? failed!A restaurant app that provides information on the menu, opening hours and a form for requesting reservations? failed!An App from a start-up that provides a demo on how a service works and allows some users to test some functions: rejected!This is often called Minimum Functionality and can be read in Apple's guidelines:“Your app should include features, content, and UI that go beyond that of a simple website packaged into an App. If your app isn't particularly useful, unique, or “app-like,” it doesn't belong in the App Store “.It's too simple an AppIf your app is too simple then it doesn't deserve the name “App”.It may sound a little cryptic but it's true!If your app only plays a song Special Data or video, displays a brochure or advertisement, it offers too limited an experience and is considered too simple for the App Store.In essence, apps should not primarily be marketing materials , advertisements, web clippings, content aggregators, or a collection of links.Apple is quite brief on this:“Apps that are simply a song or movie should be submitted to the iTunes Store. Apps that are simply a book or game guide must be submitted to the iBooks Store. “It is a copy of an existing AppIf the app you are trying to make is a copy of another app in the App Store then you have a good chance of being branded as a Spammer.It can often happen unintentionally too. For example, are you trying to duplicate an existing app to change its name? This could lead to a duplicate issue and your app could be rejected.Once your App is marked as a duplicate, the problem could be quite annoying. Once Apple considers your app a duplicate copy, it's difficult to fix without making major changes to your app's functionality.Also in this case let's listen to what mother Apple says:“If your app has different versions for specific locations, sports teams, universities, etc., consider submitting a single app and provide the variations using in-app purchase.”Apps created by a commercialized template or app generation service fall under the same umbrella and “will be rejected unless submitted directly by the app content provider. “(Section 4.2.6)Too limited audienceWe are often encountering this problem with corporate apps.
http://www.asiadata.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Special-Data-3-300x150.png
Lately, all the business apps we have presented have been rejected by Apple as they are aimed at an audience that is too small.Apple justifies this position by saying that the Apps present on the store should be of interest to the general public, while corporate apps should follow a different path, namely publication at Enterprise level .The problem is particularly thorny because Apple recently does not issue the Enterprise certificate for organizations with fewer than 100 employees. Which obviously creates a void for all those small and medium-sized companies (which in Italy are the majority) who want to have a company App but don't have the possibility of publishing it.The solutions in this case can be distribution via an MDM - (for example airwatch) and coincidentally Apple is launching its MDM service or via a distribution in Test Flight.Both solutions are quite difficult in production and for significant user groups (>30) with owned devices, both paths are difficult to follow.
頁:
[1]