Our app I was rejected, reason: Your app is primarily a book and is therefore not appropriate for the App Store.

This is the first application of our studio that wants to develop interactive books. Naturally, our application is a book, but it is not possible to publish it in EPUB format, as the reviewer advises to do, since it has many interactive functions that are designed to attract young readers. Our studio spent more than 4 months developing the application, 3D characters, entertaining animation, music, sounds, a convenient interface, and marketing materials were created.

We told reviewers about all this, but we always get a refusal with the same wording.

This is despite the fact that the Apple Store is full of interactive books that, for some unknown reason, were allowed.

We do not understand such injustice.

It also cannot be said that we copy existing applications and do not provide anything new. First of all, our book is a unique story, then we made our own design for the pages, which is significantly different from existing analogues, we specially wrote music for the book, which others do not do.

Please tell me, if we add children's mini-games to the book, will this allow us to publish the application? Or will it be a waste of time? Since this will all also remain a book at its core. Does Apple really dislike children so much that they only allow children to read only printed books?

Please advise what can be done. We really believe that we have created a cool interactive book that many people will enjoy if we are given the opportunity to publish it.

If not, then difficult times will come for the studio, since we spent a lot of effort and money on development and do not even have the opportunity to show our work. This puts an end to all our plans. All because of the person who decided that the book should be in the book section, and the fact that it is full of interactivity does not bother him.

  • I suggest you read all App Review Guidelines if you haven't. The description of the app you provide seems to violate 4.2 Minimum Functionality.

    If the main function of your app is to show a book content, whether or not you have invested tens of millions of dollars developing it, whether or not you hired someone to compose music, it's still a book, isn't it? Your book has a unique story. And therefore, it should be admitted, you mean? You may want to have a content that a book can't have.

  • If I were you, I would either accept a defeat and move on or download similar "interactive" books that you say are accepted into the App Store and find out how they make it. What I wouldn't do is take the case to the Appeals Board. The Appeals Board often takes the side of the reviewer FYI. If they do, that will be the end of your project.

  • Tomato, why do you think a book should be exclusively in textual form? What if I want to release a book where I can choose the storyline, interact with characters, and listen to music that corresponds to each chapter? Is there an electronic book format that allows for this?

    Why does Apple, leveraging its monopolistic position, decide what children should read and in what format?

Replies

Many games have a plot or instructions that need to be read - one could also call them a book and subject them to the rules of section 4.2, but this is not enforced.

You are simply suggesting that I lose a million dollars, accept it, and move on. It seems you haven't encountered such situations where a formal, indifferent approach to rules jeopardizes very valuable things. I would be interested to see how you would react.

  • Several years ago, I had a macOS application and an iOS app that goes with the former. The iOS app was accepted into the store. They've rejected our macOS application, saying there already existed a similar product. We simply accepted a defeat and moved on. Who cares about how much money we have lost?

  • As far as I understand, a monopoly position does not give the right to do whatever you want. A monopoly position is a big responsibility. Naturally, if they write in the rules that they do not take the same programs, then you had the opportunity to write a better program than the existing ones.

  • If your program was really better, then Apple with its actions is making everyone worse. And you, as a developer and users who are forced to use a worse application and Apple itself, which receives dissatisfied users... this needs to be corrected! In our case with the book, we could not copy anyone, since we have a completely unique story.

We cannot be blamed for not reading Apple's rules before starting the work. Firstly, there are plenty of books like ours on the Apple Store, and I have downloaded them, and they are no better than ours. Secondly, we didn't create a traditional book; we crafted an interactive story! It's a significant distinction. Do you think we would invest so much time in programming the interface if our book could simply be printed? Thirdly, what minimal functionality are we talking about if our book has 33 pages, each with interactive elements, 3D characters, voiceover, and highlighted spoken phrases? Can this be considered minimal functionality?