I searched for a thread like this but couldn't find one. The free version of our game was first submitted in September. Within a week, it came back 'Your App was REJECTED'. The reason: We used the keyword 'Demo'. Free versions cannot be called a demo nor a trial version. We had build a new binary in order to resubmit, just so that we could change a single keyword. We haven't had any problems since. I'd like to hear experiences from other developers- I know there are some crazy rejections out there.
Apparently it's a rule somewhere in the guidelines about the word "demo" Stupid rule. I can see why Apple want to avoid a load of demos mixed in with the real apps. I guess 'lite' or 'free' does appear slightly better to customer perceptions.
Probably because having lite versions looks better. Apple boasts about its 120,000 apps, or whatever, but they really couldn't claim that if half were called demos. "Lite version" sounds like a fully functional app, just with a few less features than the "pro version".
it might be because the words demo and trial are associated with other things like construction(demolition) and litigation a trail could also mean an ordeal or strugglesp some apps might have it in thier title or there might be apps that demonstrate some sort of yoga move karate kick to the groin martial art skill that some people might like to practice and master. apple might have started to disallow these words for trial version apps in an ongoing effort to to improve whatever it is blah blah blah im tired of typing you probably know what i mean
yep. we've had our share of issues - one of the first http://www.slashgear.com/apple-rejected-app-store-game-over-keyword-disagreement-1055771/ http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/apple-rejecting-apps-based-on-non-relevant-keywords-2009098/ http://www.macplus.net/itrafik/depeche-48992-rejete-pour-un-mot-clef we used the word "facebook" if you dig into the developer pages; they have a bunch of guidelines around keywords (now).. which you can read and get a good idea of what you should and should not do. it is very frustrating you need to resubmit a binary for this - they should just be removing the bad keywords for you and approving your application.
Bingo. The apps have to be fully functional apps. That's why they don't allow you to show locked levels in your "lite" version(read the second half of this blog post for more info: http://gamesfromwithin.com/at-the-mercy-of-apples-whim) Annoying, but at least they're somewhat consistent.
For a lot of developers, I think getting rejected over a keyword would suck, just because you have to resubmit a new binary and start the process over. That rejection actually helped us in the long run. The original name of our game was simply called 'Flick'. Doing a google search for flick return a mess of irrelevant links. 'Flick' also closely resembles the f-word when capitalized. And then there are the mess of games titled 'Flick Bowling', 'Flick Fishing', which could cause confusion. That extra week allowed us to rethink the title, and make the change to 'Flickitty' before resubmitting. It also bought us some time to update a few things that would have appeared in the first update. Flickitty never actually had a 1.0 version- we entered at 1.01. At this point, I'm not sure the keywords actually do anything.
Unless you're ngmoco, in which case you're even allowed to put a 'locked levels' screenshot as the game's #2 image in the App Store. Check out Star Defense Prelude.
My latest app Insulting Monk was first rejected for using the bundle-display name iMonk. It was then rejected for using the japanese sign "Kuso" in the background of my title-screen. I guess, both are understandable(ish). Anyway, friday the app was released and I'm happy to tellyou that the sales are exceeding 2 copies a day!
Fwish recently had a rejection for an app that allowed the user to make it seem like the iphone screen cracked. - Rejected on the grounds it might confuse users into thinking their screen was actually broken.
I can just imagine the Apple Reviewer for that one: He starts up the app, and screams "AAAAAaaaahhh! This app just cracked my SCREEN! REJECT! REJECT!" as he pounds away at the Big Red Reject Button.
If you look on eBay, almost all the "for parts" iPhones are there because of cracked screens. I think Apple might be a bit sensitive on the subject
Over the weekend, I wrote about our latest app being rejected for the same reason as our previous app (which we had fixed in our previous app, and which was also fixed in our initial submission of our latest app). After some back and forth, our latest app is now thankfully approved. For reference, here are a couple related sites - they summarize a few of the rejection letters that have been made public, and, *EDIT: if you haven't already, =)* it's good to familiarize yourself with these sites before submitting an app to iTunes: http://appreview.tumblr.com/ http://www.mobileorchard.com/avoiding-iphone-app-rejection-from-apple/
We actually paid attention to other horror stories of rejection before we submitted our app. Prior knowledge of the process led us to a few changes and helped us to decide what to include in the free version. While we knew we couldn't call it a 'demo' on the splash screen or icon, we didn't think it would conflict as a keyword/tag. Other games seem to have used it. But now we know.
Whenever you get frustrated with rejections just give this blog entry a read, always makes me laugh: http://daringfireball.net/2009/05/diary_of_an_app_store_reviewer
this guy should be shot. what an ass. specifically: "I should have let it sit for a week, I know, but I couldnt help myself." what type of reviewer is this? this is crazy. if this is real; it should really be brought to the attention of apple - this isn't reviewing content; it's like he has a quota on how many apps he must reject.
I'm pretty sure it's just a joke... I doubt any real app reviewers are allowed to publicly talk about any part of the process
I'm not sure how I feel about that guy. On one hand, it is kind of funny because I know a lot of developers that are just complete asses themselves. On the other hand, I know a lot of developers that are honest and hard-working, and they deserve to be treated better than that.
