Apple Rejecting Apps With Pricing Info Like 'Free' in App Title

[MacRumors]

Apple has started blocking developers from promoting their apps by using a price in the app's name, reports VentureBeat. For approximately the last month, apps that use "free" or other pricing information in their metadata have been blocked in iTunes Connect submissions.

Apps that use "Free" in their titles are receiving the following rejection notice after being submitted for review:

Your app's name, icons, screenshots, or previews to be displayed on the App Store include references to your app's price, which is not considered a part of these metadata items.

Please remove any references to your app's price from your app's name, including any references to your app being free or discounted. If you would like to advertise changes to your app's price, it would be appropriate to include this information in the app description. Changes to your app's price can be made in the Pricing and Availability section of iTunes Connect.

An Apple spokesperson VentureBeat contacted confirmed the changes but declined to offer any additional information.

Given that there are still dozens of apps in the App Store that use "Free" in their title, such as Disney's "Where's My Water? Free" or "Doodle Jump FREE," it appears this is a new policy that will affect app submissions going forward. It's not clear if Apple will make apps that are already in the App Store implement a title change.

In related App Store news, Apple appears to have mistakenly approved Metadata, an app that sends a notification when a U.S. drone strike is reported in the news.

The app, which had previously been rejected a dozen times before, was approved this morning and then pulled just hours later, suggesting its temporary approval was an accident. Previously, the app was approved in 2014 and was in the App Store for almost a year before being removed.

Article Link: Apple Rejecting Apps With Pricing Info Like 'Free' in App Title

 

[coolfactor]

GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!

 

[WordsmithMR]

That related news. Yea. Super related.

Instead of "Free" we'll just end up seeing "Lite" more often.

 

[autrefois]

"Free" is not allowed. They should know the correct term now is "Get" (or will they start rejecting those, too?!).

 

[calzon65]

Headline: Apple rejects app named "Freedom of Choice" for containing the word Free ... news at six o'clock.

 

[TMRJIJ]

Why not just rename it 'Lite', or 'Gimped', or 'Trial', or 'w/ ADs' or 'low tier' or....

 

[redheeler]

In related App Store news, Apple appears to have mistakenly approved Metadata, an app that sends a notification when a U.S. drone strike is reported in the news.

The app, which had previously been rejected a dozen times before, was approved this morning and then pulled just hours later, suggesting its temporary approval was an accident. Previously, the app was approved in 2014 and was in the App Store for almost a year before being removed.

So why doesn't Apple just block every major news app for reporting violent crime or attacks because someone may find it "objectionable"? Probably because this has more to do with censorship than objectionable content...

 

[Rainshadow]

What would be great is if Apple allowed You to test an app for free for 24-48 hours and then it locked and prompted you to pay for it after the trial.

Kind of like the other app stores

That would help cut down on a LOT of lite versions and would likely entice me to buy more apps.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

If there's a drone strike that relates to me I won't need an app to be notified.

(no I'm not heartless about others being affected, just some gallows humor)

 

[sniffies]

AppsGoneFree is now known as AppsGone

 

[wigby]

GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!

Nothing will change. Apple sucks at search algorithms so instead of identifying the apps with "free" in their title and penalizing them with low search results, Apple scrapes the database for the word free and calls it a day.

 

[Seoras]

Nice one Apple. I like it. I wish it would go further than just forcing them to change at app update review.
Actively searching for and removing Apps already on the store.
A lot of developers rarely release updates due to the way the App store has "all time rating" and "current version rating"
There's a knock on effect with the keyword ranking in app search results for resetting your current rating back to zero with an update. Apps with with low current ratings get fewer installs too I've noticed.
In this respect Play is superior.
Apple's making a lot of positive changes to the store. I hope this is something they don't miss on working on.

 

[SkimPappa]

AppsGoneFree is now known as AppsGone

It isn't Apps Gone Free anymore, it is "AppAdvice" or "AppAdvice Daily" now, they changed their name already

 

[macTW]

Finally. Besides some games, "free" in the app name means junk app.

 

[now i see it]

Free is good because you can get a taste for what the app is like (limited functions, annoying ads) to allow you a chance to decide whether you want to part with your hard earned $1.99 for the "pro" version. But I agree with cool, there's a lot of cesspool floatsam drifting around inside the App Store. Mostly junk. So hard to find anything.

 

[tennisproha]

I'm glad. They're not running an online amateur hour store here. Disney of all ****ing companies should be more professional than that. That's absurd.

 

[Santiago]

Great, now I wish Apple would put more support into the trial-then-pay model by distinctly labeling apps that have one-time IAP vs repeatable IAP in the App Store. One-time IAP is fine; it's a way to have a free app you can try then pay for the useful features, or to sell DLC in games where you pay once for extra content. Repeatable IAP, though, is a sign of a toxic "free-to-play" product that's designed to be awful and annoying unless you pay repeatedly. I always look at the top IAP for games before getting them, and if it's got anything like "Bag of 100 coins" then forget it, I'm not downloading it.

 

[sudo1996]

It's good in a way, but it was useful to have "free" in the title when there was a paid and a free version of an app so you could easily identify.
[doublepost=1490752388][/doublepost]

Finally. Besides some games, "free" in the app name means junk app.

Bloons Tower Defense 4, a popular and high quality game, had a "free" or "lite" version. I forget exactly which word they used, but it was in the title. Obviously meant that the free one was the demo version.

 

[Cineplex]

Tim's taking care of the important problems this week. What a stupid policy and waste of everyone's time.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Dev will find a work around.

 

[sparkso]

This is actually pretty old news in the dev community. If Macrumors want the latest breaking changes from the Apple store review process, they really should follow this site and this section in particular. http://iphonedevsdk.com/forum/business-legal-app-store/

 

[tentales]

Apple has started blocking developers from promoting their apps by using a price in the app's name, reports VentureBeat. For approximately the last month, apps that use "free" or other pricing information in their metadata have been blocked in iTunes Connect submissions.

A step in the right direction in cleaning up the Games store, I mean App store.

Now, for all us non-gamers, can we please get a store that removes 80% of what we're not interested in and having to browse past. The App store is like a huge Toys-r-us store with a few detail shops hidden amongst the aisles of time-wasters.

Furthermore, too many Apps with too many iAPs options. Trial & pay once is all we need. I rarely visit the App store anymore, unless I already know the name of the App I'm looking for.

 

[ghost187]

Good Job!

Next Up: Put a hard cap on in app purchases per month. For example, no app should require you to pay more than $100 per month. In addition to this, they should not allow developers to sell the same in-app purchase more than once, unless it is a subscription. Games like Clash of Clans use casino like tactics to exploit kids or even adults into spending thousands of dollars. Most SuperCell games have over $20,000 USD of IAPs, which is required to compete with other "Max Level" members. These micro transaction games are cancer, and Apple would do the right thing here by putting a hard cap to protect its customers.

 

[pat500000]

First time in long time to say this: good job apple

 

[BuddyTronic]

GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!

I really wish Apple had a better way to search apps. I mean, the process of searching for apps could be improved SO easily it is just baffling to me that they have not implemented any improvements to searching for apps. So much junk and app pollution it's almost like spam these days.

Years ago the Mac had a good "search" function, then they had "Sherlock" and now "Spotlight", and it's like the idea of searching for files has become a totally lost art - it's incredibly dumb how poorly Apple has implemented "find" and "search" functions in iOS, Apple OS, and the App Store, and even the friggin music store! I mean dang it's stupid how poorly ANY apple search function works. I mean finding stuff DOES NOT work with Apple these days - nobody has noticed? Anyone out there remember Eudora for Email? It was awesome and it had a search function that worked. With Apple Mail app and Spotlight I cannot find anything anymore (for the last 10 years).

Sorry to rant, but I just got to thinking how much better search functions were back in the 1990's. The world has gotten dumber in some ways. Or maybe I am just old?

I think this idea of "top 40" music, or the "top grossing movies" is stupid. Who cares what music or movie is making the most money? Same for apps. I mean I will glance at what is trending popular, but if I come to look for a calculator app that has some spreadsheet type functions in it, I want to get some relevant results from the App Store - instead I get crap. Meta data that is searchable would be nice. I think Apple collects meta data for apps, but then their stupidly designed search engine misses the point entirely. Just a gut feeling. Hope I'm not wasting your time with my rant.