How To Get An App Approved

How To Get An App Approved

This is the story of my five-month-and-counting process for getting one of my apps, MineIDs, approved by Apple. What follows is the most hypocritical, illogical, and unspecific thread with the review board that I’ve ever seen. I’ve inserted my commentary with italics.

At first, the app was pretty basic but still very useful to people who run Minecraft servers or use world-building tools. It looked like this when I first submitted it, and in mid-December I caved and used iOS 7 UIKit.

Binary Rejected

Apple Oct 12, 2013 03:56 PM

2.21

Your app is primarily a game guide for Minecraft. Game guides provide functionally more like books than native iOS apps, and are therefore not appropriate for the App Store, as noted in the App Store Review Guidelines. I’m at a complete loss as to how this was ruled at all. It makes zero sense. Has this happened to anyone else?

Books should be submitted to iBooks. To work with Apple on iBooks distribution, first verify that your content meets the following requirements:

Note: An ISBN is not required if you have a free book agreement and choose to offer your book free in iBooks.

Visit iBooks Aggregators for information on working with the iBooks aggregators. No thanks.


Oct 12, 2013 04:20 PM

Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Could you elaborate on how this is classified as a “game guide?” This app, in my opinion, is a reference app similar to what one might use to search for different medicines and learn their effects. As an app, this allows more deep user interaction with the data that is separate from simply reading a list or a block of text.


Apple Oct 14, 2013 10:32 AM

Hello Christopher,

We are writing to let you know the results of your appeal for your app, All Block IDs for Minecraft.

The App Review Board evaluated your app and determined that the original rejection feedback was not accurate. Why am I the one attaching this error? It’s your job.

However, the following issue/s were discovered during our evaluation:

2.12: Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected. Understandable and, although erroneous, this is a legitimate complaint.

We found that your app provides a very limited amount of content and features. It only provides two lists of text for the user to tap. It would be appropriate to add more interactive and dynamic features to the app so as to enhance the user’s experience. By doing so, you will ensure that your app is engaging for the user.

We understand that there are no hard and fast rules to define useful or entertaining, but Apple and Apple customers expect apps to provide a really great user experience. Apps should provide valuable utility or entertainment, draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content, or enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.

We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate additional content and features to be in compliance with the Guidelines. For information on the basics of creating great apps, watch the video The Ingredients of Great Apps.

We hope you will consider making the necessary changes to be in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines and will resubmit your revised binary.

Best regards, Tina App Review Board


Oct 14, 2013 05:46 PM

Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

This app is a quite valuable utility, many people google the very things that I allow users to swiftly scroll through. As you can see from google’s own trend statistics people search for this information hundreds of times daily. By allowing those users to save time and spend more time playing and less searching (and in turn, less google), people will be able to enjoy their time spend using their device and playing more as the app becomes an enhancing aspect to their everyday life.

This app engages the user by being simple and easy to use, instead of spending a few minutes using Google to find a piece of information they instead out their iPhone and open this app. Their lives have been simplified and made more enjoyable through its use. Excuse my poor grammar, not sure what happened here.


Apple Oct 15, 2013 04:29 PM

Reasons

2.21: Apps that are simply a song or movie should be submitted to the iTunes store. Apps that are simply a book should be submitted to the iBook Store. I guess Apple can’t change the reason once an app was rejected?

Hello Christopher,

Thank you for your response. However, we find that the 2.12 rejection is still valid. Currently, your app provides users with two tabs of text that they can tap for brief additional information. This does not provide sufficient interactivity for the App Store.

It would be appropriate to add more features and content to the app so that it is more engaging for the user. By doing so, you will ensure that your game guide provides an optimal experience for the user.

We hope you will consider making some additions to your app and look forward to reviewing your revised binary.

Best regards, Tina App Review Board

RESUBMITTED

If I remember correctly this is when I added the tabs and the other views, allowing for the user to read about the block/item that they were searching for. This app was made to be a reference, not a game, which I think confused Apple. They rejected it:

Apple Dec 2, 2013 04:07 PM

Reasons

2.12: Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected 2.12

We found that your app only provides a very limited set of features. It only provides lists of text. While we value simplicity, we consider simplicity to be uncomplicated - not limited in features and functionality.

We understand that there are no hard and fast rules to define useful or entertaining, but Apple and Apple customers expect apps to provide a really great user experience. Apps should provide valuable utility or entertainment, draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content, or enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.

We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate additional content and features to be in compliance with the Guidelines. For information on the basics of creating great apps, watch the video The Ingredients of Great Apps.

RESUBMITTED

I hoped I would get a different reviewer if I resubmitted:

Apple Jan 15, 2014 02:12 PM

2.12

We found that your app only provides a very limited set of features. While we value simplicity, we consider simplicity to be uncomplicated - not limited in features and functionality.

We understand that there are no hard and fast rules to define useful or entertaining, but Apple and Apple customers expect apps to provide a really great user experience. Apps should provide valuable utility or entertainment, draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content, or enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.

We encourage you to review your app concept and evaluate whether you can incorporate additional content and features to be in compliance with the Guidelines. For information on the basics of creating great apps, watch the video “The Ingredients of Great Apps”.


Jan 16, 2014 09:20 AM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Hi, I filed an appeal yesterday. What is the status of that appeal?

This was the text of the appeal:

MineIDs is a reference app similar to what one might use to search for different medicines link and learn their effects. As an app, MineIDs allows deeper user interaction with the data that is separate from simply reading a list or a block of text from a website. The app works hand in hand with all command features in the Minecraft game. Unlike other Minecraft apps in the store link, MineIDs allows the user to interact with the Gamepedia Wiki, allowing users to network with others and learn more about the game without even leaving the app.

In the 2.12 reasoning, Apple stated “Apps should provide valuable utility or entertainment, draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content, or enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.” Lets take a closer look at this decision.

“Apps should provide valuable utility….” I’m assuming that by “value,” Apple is implying that the app must be “useful or important.” MineIDs replaces the need for a user to memorize or search Google for the command reference IDs they need to play the game. As you can see from Google’s own search statistics people search for this information thousands of times daily. By allowing those users to save time and spend more time playing and less searching (and in turn, less Google), people will be able to enjoy their time spent using their device and playing more as the app becomes an enriching addition to their everyday life. Furthermore, it is extremely useful to individuals running Minecraft servers. MineIDs delivers a simple, searchable reference for the new block names that recently replaced block IDs in referring to specific in-game objects. Referencing block names is necessary for server developers to use world-building tools effectively.

“…draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content…” MineIDs offers users a searchable list of every single block, item, mob, potion, and enchantment ID in the Minecraft game. A quick search in the AppStore turns up a few quiz games link a blueprint list link a wallpaper app – literally a list of images – link and a few miscellaneous apps like this list of servers link. The content available inside of MineIDs is not only complete but also 100% unique, no other app on the store allows the user to have deep interaction with data the way MineIDs does. Not only is the content unique, but also is the way to access it. Users simply need to search and tap on what they’re looking for; they’re able to read and explore to learn more about what they are playing with.

“…enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.” As I stated in the above paragraph, the apps that are on the store already simply don’t cut it. The apps that act similar to MineIDs either aren’t up to date link or incompatible with the latest iOS release link. MineIDs uniquely allows users to accomplish a task that no other app on the store currently allows them to do.

Therefore, the 2.12 rejection has been erroneously applied to an iOS app that does not violate any section 2.12 of the review guidelines. This section states that “Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected.” This app is not a website bundled as an app, nor does it lack entertainment value as outlined above.

This app engages the user by being simple and easy to use, not by being cumbersome and bloated with features. We believe this App Review Board ruling was in error and look forward to hearing back soon.


Apple Jan 16, 2014 11:07 AM

Reasons

2.12: Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected.

Hello Christopher,

We are writing to let you know the results of your appeal for your app, MineIDs: All Item, Block, Mob, Potion, and Enchantment IDs for Minecraft.

The App Review Board evaluated your app and determined that the original rejection feedback was not accurate. The app is no longer in violation of the 2.12 guideline. Apple seems wishy-washy, first 2.21, then 2.12, then 2.2 again, now its not 2.12… Something seems fishy.

However, the following issue/s were discovered during our evaluation:

10.6: Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined, creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex or less than very good it may be rejected. Seriously…

While the app provides a substantial amount of content, users are only able to scroll through and search static text. The app lacks interactive features and does not integrate with iOS features.

Apps should do one thing really well without being overly simplistic and missing functionality that people would expect to be there. They should also avoid being so complicated that people are confused about what the app does and how to use it. They should meet people’s expectations and have features that are easy to identify and use.

Apps should be fast and responsive. They should launch quickly, scroll information smoothly, load screens and content without delay, and immediately respond to pinches and swipes and other gestures.

They should integrate well with iOS and other apps. For example, they should allow text selection and other relevant content to be shared with other apps or people. They should initiate a phone call, launch a web page in Safari, or view a street address in Maps when a phone number, URL, or address is tapped. Where appropriate, and with the users’ permission, apps should use personal information stored on the device such as contacts and photos.

To help you gain a better understanding of iOS user interface design we recommend:

1) Looking closely at apps such as Safari, Mail, Stocks, Weather, Photos, Messages, Calendar, Maps, Music, and Settings. These Apple apps demonstrate many of the concepts outlined above and are great examples of how to organize information, display content, and navigate through screens.

2) Watch the iOS Development Videos. These videos are of sessions presented by Technology Evangelists at recent iOS Tech Talks and provide lots of programming and design tips.

3) Watch the video The Ingredients of Great Apps which uses some award winning apps on the App Store as examples of how to make a great app

4) Watch the video iPhone and iPad User Interface Design for practical design tips you can use right away

5) Carefully read the iOS Human Interface Guidelines and double check that your app’s user interface adheres to these valuable guidelines.

6) Read the App Design Basics section of the iOS App Programming Guide.

It takes time and effort to create well-designed iOS app, but the benefits are worth it. Well-designed apps are used day after day instead of being ignored or deleted, they’re talked about and gifted by people, they chart higher in the App Store, they’re more popular, and they receive higher ratings and better reviews.

Best regards, Meri App Review Board

RESUBMITTED

I added, like Apple said, text selection, Sharing, and the ability to launch a Webview with the item’s respective Wiki link. They said:

Apple Jan 21, 2014 08:39 AM

10.6

We found the following issues with the user interface of your app:

Did not include iOS features. For example, it would be appropriate to use native iOS buttons and iOS features other than just web views, Push Notifications, or sharing. Apple literally asked me to add these. Native iOS Buttons? What? I’m using stock iOS 7 UIKit.

These examples identify types of issues discovered in your app but may not represent all such issues. It would be appropriate to thoroughly evaluate your app to address these types of issues.

Resources for learning how to improve your app:


Jan 22, 2014 05:14 PM

Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

What do you mean by “it would be appropriate to use native iOS buttons?” The app uses stock UIKit.


Apple Jan 23, 2014 04:01 PM

Thank you for your response. It would be appropriate to add additional native iOS functionality to the application in order to enhance the user’s experience. Specifically, features that enable the user to interact with the app rather than just consume information are recommended. For ideas on how to improve the user’s experience, you may wish to review the User Experience Guidelines section of the iOS Human Interface Guidelines. This app isn’t made to be a game, it’s meant to be a reference. Apple is trying to make this simple reference that is incredibly useful with world-building tools and other command-based Minecraft mods into a piece of gross bloatware.

For technical assistance, you may wish to consult with Apple Developer Technical Support. Depending on your questions, be sure to include any crash logs, screenshots, or steps to reproduce the issues you’ve encountered.


Jan 23, 2014 04:17 PM

Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

How does “additional native iOS functionality” pertain to a rejection on the basis of User Interface?


Apple Jan 24, 2014 06:51 AM

Reasons

10.6: Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined, creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex or less than very good it may be rejected.

Thank you for your response. It would be appropriate to enhance the user interface of your app. Gee, thanks for the specificity.

Resources for learning how to improve your app:


Jan 24, 2014 04:25 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

What is the specific problem that Apple sees with this application? There is nothing wrong with the user interface of MineIDs.


RESUBMITTED

Apple Jan 31, 2014 08:32 AM 10.6

We found the following issues with the user interface of your app:

It would be appropriate to add additional native iOS functionality to the application in order to enhance the user’s experience. Specifically, features that enable the user to interact with the app rather than just consume information are recommended. For ideas on how to improve the user’s experience, you may wish to review the User Experience Guidelines section of the iOS Human Interface Guidelines.

These examples identify types of issues discovered in your app but may not represent all such issues. It would be appropriate to thoroughly evaluate your app to address these types of issues.

Resources for learning how to improve your app:


Feb 4, 2014 02:24 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Can someone please explain to me how this update was approved today (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/block-ids-for-minecraft/id472920441?mt=8) for an app that does far less than mine, yet somehow this full-featured app gets rejected on the basis of 10.6?


Apple Feb 5, 2014 07:11 AM

Thank you for your response. On occasion, there may be apps on the App Store that don’t appear to be in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines - they may have been approved before the current Guidelines were available or for other reasons. We work hard to ensure that the apps on the App Store are in compliance and we try to identify any apps currently on the App Store that may not be. It takes time to identify these occurrences but another app being out of compliance is not a reason for your app to be


Feb 5, 2014 06:27 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Did your message get truncated?


Apple Feb 6, 2014 04:26 PM

Thank you for your response. On occasion, there may be apps on the App Store that don’t appear to be in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines - they may have been approved before the current Guidelines were available or for other reasons. We work hard to ensure that the apps on the App Store are in compliance and we try to identify any apps currently on the App Store that may not be. It takes time to identify these occurrences but another app being out of compliance is not a reason for your app to be.

For technical assistance, you may wish to consult with . Apple Developer Technical Support. Depending on your questions, be sure to include any crash logs, screenshots, or steps to reproduce the issues you’ve encountered.


Feb 11, 2014 04:20 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

I’m not sure you understand. The app I mentioned is not in violation of any guideline - hence it’s approval on February 2. Given Apple’s decision in that case that the app was not in violation of any rule, why is this more full-featured one facing such a dilemma?


Apple Feb 12, 2014 05:29 PM Thank you for your feedback.

If you wish to appeal your review, you can submit a request to the App Review Board. The App Review Board was created for developers to appeal an app review they have concerns with. Once the App Review Board has completed their evaluation, they will contact you directly with the decision.


Feb 12, 2014 08:41 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Again, I’m not sure you understand what I mean. It’s pretty clear this ruling is a mistake, surely I don’t need to make an entirely new appeal to correct it. I simply asked why, given that other apps that have fewer features are approved because they don’t violate the review guidelines, my app was rejected. Thanks in advance for your clarification.


Apple Feb 13, 2014 04:51 PM

Thank you for your response. On occasion, there may be apps on the App Store that don’t appear to be in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines - they may have been approved before the current Guidelines were available or for other reasons. We work hard to ensure that the apps on the App Store are in compliance and we try to identify any apps currently on the App Store that may not be. It takes time to identify these occurrences but another app being out of compliance is not a reason for your app to be.

It would be appropriate to add additional native iOS functionality to the application in order to enhance the user’s experience. Specifically, features that enable the user to interact with the app rather than just consume information are recommended. For ideas on how to improve the user’s experience, you may wish to review the User Experience Guidelines section of the iOS Human Interface Guidelines.


Feb 14, 2014 11:17 AM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

I think you’re misunderstanding me. The app I was referring to was approved on February 2nd, after you ruled my app as rejected. Seeing as the apps on the store do not violate the review guidelines, why is my more useful and full featured app being rejected?


Apple Feb 14, 2014 02:29 PM Reasons

10.6: Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined, creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex or less than very good it may be rejected

Hello,

Thank you for your inquiry. Please keep in mind the App store review guidelines is a living document, and new apps presenting new questions may result in new rules at any time.


Feb 14, 2014 03:34 PM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

It appears so me that it became more lenient. My app was submitted in October and has received an inordinate amount of flack from the review board. Apps submitted in February in the same exactly category as mine have been approved. Again you misunderstood me: my app was submitted before February second, then rejected, but an app submitted after mine (I’m assuming all developers have to follow the same guidelines) was approved even though it had far less function than mine. If the document is truly living, my app should be approved. It’s clear that Apple doesn’t see apps with less functionality as in violation of this rule, how does adding functionality detract enough to warrant rejection?


Apple Feb 17, 2014 12:55 PM

Hello,

Thank you for your response. It would be appropriate to add additional native iOS functionality to the application in order to enhance the user’s experience. Specifically, features that enable the user to interact with the app rather than just consume information are recommended

While there may be several solutions to address this issue, we do not provide direction on how a developer should design or manage his apps as we believe these are critical business decisions best left to the business owners. However, you may wish to search or post to the Developer Forums for information about how other developers have handled this, or similar, situations.


Feb 23, 2014 09:23 AM Christopher Sardegna, [[email protected]]

Like I stated in my above complaints, this ruling is in error. This app, approved three days ago, has far less functionality than mine (literally makes a number go up when you tap the shape on the screen) link.

My app has far more functionality than other apps Apple is currently approving. My apps stand at a higher bar. Why am I seeing such prejudice against my software? Clearly the featureset is more than adequate, what else is at play here? Apple has been using circular reasoning and playing a cat and mouse game with a legitimate piece of software that enhances a users’ ability to play a desktop computer game. The iOS apps I have listed here and above do nothing to use iOS functionality or allow a user to do anything that makes their device better. What gives?


Apple Feb 24, 2014 05:09 PM

Reasons

10.6: Apple and our customers place a high value on simple, refined, creative, well thought through interfaces. They take more work but are worth it. Apple sets a high bar. If your user interface is complex or less than very good it may be rejected Thank you for your feedback.

If you wish to appeal your review, you can submit a request to the App Review Board. The App Review Board was created for developers to appeal an app review they have concerns with. Once the App Review Board has completed their evaluation, they will contact you directly with the decision.


As requested. I filed an appeal.

Text of the appeal:

MineIDs is a reference app similar to what one might use to search for different medicines link and learn their effects. As an app, MineIDs allows deeper user interaction with the data that is separate from simply reading a list or a block of text from a website. The app works hand in hand with all command features in the Minecraft game. Unlike other Minecraft apps in the store link, MineIDs allows the user to interact with the Gamepedia Wiki, allowing users to network with others and learn more about the game without even leaving the app.

In the 2.12 reasoning used earlier, Apple stated “Apps should provide valuable utility or entertainment, draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content, or enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.” Lets take a closer look at this decision.

“Apps should provide valuable utility….” I’m assuming that by “value,” Apple is implying that the app must be “useful or important.” MineIDs replaces the need for a user to memorize or search Google for the command reference IDs they need to play the game. As you can see from Google’s own search statistics link people search for this information thousands of times daily. By allowing those users to save time and spend more time playing and less searching (and in turn, less Google), people will be able to enjoy their time spent using their device and playing more as the app becomes an enriching addition to their everyday life. Furthermore, it is extremely useful to individuals running Minecraft servers. MineIDs delivers a simple, searchable reference for the new block names that recently replaced block IDs in referring to specific in-game objects. Referencing block names is necessary for server developers to use world-building tools effectively.

“…draw people in by offering compelling capabilities or content…” MineIDs offers users a searchable list of every single block, item, mob, potion, and enchantment ID in the Minecraft game. A quick search in the AppStore turns up a few quiz games link a blueprint list link a wallpaper app – literally a list of images – link and a few miscellaneous apps like this list of servers link. The content available inside of MineIDs is not only complete but also 100% unique, no other app on the store allows the user to have deep interaction with data the way MineIDs does. Not only is the content unique, but also is the way to access it. Users simply need to search and tap on what they’re looking for; they’re able to read and explore to learn more about what they are playing with.

“…enable people to do something they couldn’t do before or in a way they couldn’t do it before.” As I stated in the above paragraph, the apps that are on the store already simply don’t cut it. The apps that act similar to MineIDs either aren’t up to date link or incompatible with the latest iOS release link. MineIDs uniquely allows users to accomplish a task that no other app on the store currently allows them to do.

Therefore, the 2.12 rejection has been erroneously applied to an iOS app that does not violate any section 2.12 of the review guidelines. This section states that “Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected.” This app is not a website bundled as an app, nor does it lack entertainment value as outlined above.

Subsequently, Apple ruled that the App violates section 10.6. After several truncated and vague messages, Apple essentially laid out the idea that the Review Guidelines are a “living document” (Feb 14 2014 @ 02:29pm) and that apps presenting new questions may result in new rules at any time. Let us take a look at the timeline:

On October 12, 2013, Apple rejected MineIDs based on 2.21, then retracted the ruling and said on October 14, 2013 that it’s actually violating 2.12. I added a lot of new functionality and resubmitted. On December 2, 2013, Apple again rejected MineIDs on the basis of 2.12. I resubmitted again and found another 2.12 rejection on January 15, 2014. At this point, I filed an appeal arguing that 2.12 was not a valid reason for rejection. On January 16, 2014, Apple replied to the appeal, saying the following:

“The App Review Board evaluated your app and determined that the original rejection feedback was not accurate. The app is no longer in violation of the 2.12 guideline… However, the following issue/s were discovered during our evaluation: 10.6”

Apple requested as part of that reply that I add “Native iOS Buttons.” MineIDs uses stock iOS 7 UIKit; the buttons are naturally native. This was a false premise. After another resubmission, Apple rejected MineIDs again on the basis of 10.6 on January 31, 2014. On February 3, 2014, however, a different developer called Shawn Webster released an iOS application in the same exact category as mine with far less functionality. His app, located at link, is not only less functional but also does not conform to any of the iOS 7 UI standards outlined in the freshly-updated iOS 7 Human Interface Guidelines. Seeing as Apple previously stated that the review guidelines are a living document, this overly simplistic app and its approval clearly demonstrate that MineIDs goes above and beyond what the review guidelines call for. It’s important to note that this app was approved AFTER MineIDs was rejected, not before.

On February 4, 2013, I brought this to the attention of my reviewer. After waiting a week to get clarification on another truncated message, Apple again said that the review guidelines are a living document. If the document is truly living, my app should not be penalized for having a larger and more extensive feature set than the rest of the applications on the store. I asked Apple on February 14, 2014 “It’s clear that Apple doesn’t see apps with less functionality as in violation of this rule, how does adding functionality detract enough to warrant rejection?” Apple replied that I should go ask the developer forums on February 17, 2014.

On February 23, 2014, I wrote Apple again. Another application, link, was approved in a similar category with far fewer features than MineIDs. Again, if the document is living, why are apps with fewer features being approved and apps with more features being rejected? Apple refused to answer that question, telling me to appeal to the Review Board.

My app has far more functionality than other apps Apple is currently approving. My apps stand at a higher bar. Why am I seeing such prejudice against my software? Clearly the feature set is more than adequate, what else is at play here? Apple has been using circular reasoning and playing a cat and mouse game with a legitimate piece of software that enhances a users’ ability to play a desktop computer game. The iOS apps I have listed above do nothing to use iOS functionality or allow a user to do anything that makes their device better. What gives? MineIDs engages the user by being simple and easy to use, not by being cumbersome and bloated with features. We believe this App Review Board ruling was in error and look forward to hearing back soon.


On March 3, 2014, 4:12 pm, 7 days after the above appeal was submitted, Apple approved MineIDs. You can download it here!