When I was preparing to submit a new application to App Store Connect, I received a rejection message that says the following. The Support URL provided in App Store Connect, https://www.xxx.net/?p=8034, does not direct to a website with information users can use to ask questions and request support. I immediately accessed the website at the said URL. And I saw a comment box after scrolling further down. Shockingly, this is the 2nd time in a year for me to receive this same rejection. Just jump to a conclusion without scrolling further down, huh!? What a group of professional reviewers... I don't think this is a mistake. It must be part of a series of sabotage campaigns that started in March or April of this year.

I'm finally able to get my Preview Videos accepted. But I often end up waiting for at least one hour. Sometimes, it takes several hours. I don't know why it takes so long. I hope Apple, Inc. will do a better job so that I can go to bed. This is silly.

You get your software title approved and then receive an email message that says it's Ready for Distribution." Don't trust them. You go there and then find out if it's actually being distributed. Sadly, this is the 5th time of the year where they remove the software title in question. I don't think it's a mistake. I am certain that someone is doing it on purpose. I have never received a followup answer.

We get a message that says that our software submission has been approved. Some 10 minutes later, I go there and then find out that it has been deliberately removed by somebody at Apple, Inc again. Right, again... I don't know who is doing it. This is the 4th sabotage incident this year. I have sent a message by clicking on Contact Us. Every time I make an inquiry, a lady replies and says that she will have somebody contact us. But we never receive a followup. I don't know who is doing it. We definitely don't appreciate this type of harassment or sabotage by Apple, Inc. because we have to go there every time they approve our submission. This is a total waste of time. And it's nothing but stupid. They do it whether it's a new software submission or an update. They do it whether the development platform is iOS or macOS. No, we never use manual release.

I submitted a new app in the morning of December 30th, last year. A reviewer picked it up 2 days ago and then rejected it by saying that the Send button remains disabled. Of course, it remains disabled because the user is supposed to select a message out of 300 of them. The app comes with a how-to-use guide, which states that you need to select a message by tapping the Select button. Now, the reviewer is MIA. I don't necessarily blame the reviewer for not having read the user guide thoroughly. But I wonder why they don't just ask instead of jumping to a conclusion? They often reject the app for simple reasons these days. And they are often wrong. I understand that everybody makes a mistake. But they are wrong 4 out of 5 times. Last year, a reviewer rejected the app by saying that the user is not able to ask a question at the support site when in fact it was just the matter of scrolling down further. This is the type of reasons I strongly suggest they ask instead of jumping to a conclusion and then rejecting the app. It's quite difficult for me to make plans while dealing with reviewers if they are this sloppy.

I updated my OS to Tahoe 26.5 several days ago. Now, I'm developing a new macOS application under it. What I notice about it is that it can take the application at several seconds to select a file or a folder with NSSavePanel, NSOpenPanel and .fileImporter. First, I thought it's just my application. But it's not. Preview acts the same. First, a progress wheel keeps rolling several seconds. Then it will disappear, and you won't be able to select a folder for another several seconds. Why do they make it more difficult to use every time they release a new OS version? Why don't Reviewers notice when they test it? Wait for 10 seconds or more just to select a file or a folder? It's disappointing. I wish I could go back to macOS 15.7.

I have a new desktop software submission for macOS. It has to do with designs. The application serves two different roles of users. If they select the design leader role, they will get to create design projects. If they select the design follower role, they will not be able to create design projects. But they will get to view ones from the design leader. When the application starts up, it will prompt the user to select a role. If they click on the role acceptance button, they will be prompted for confirmation. The application also comes with a built-in tutorial that explains that design followers will not be able to create design projects. I knew the reviewer will play dumb and reject this software submission after selecting the follower role by claiming that he or she cannot create a design project. So I've given repeated warnings under Apple Review Information, telling them to select the design admin role if they want to test-create design projects. But they still fail and play dumb by starting that he or she cannot create one. The screenshot the reviewer provided me with indicates that he or she has indeed selected the user role. What's the point of this playing-dumb cycle of stupidity? No matter how many filters I place so that they won't select a wrong role, reviewers still manage to play dumb and fail. I already waited for 5 1/2 days for this new submission to be reviewed. Why do they reject every single new submission I make? Reviewers are wrong 6 or 7 out of 10 times. What a waste of time and resources... I think I'm infected with the mad cow disease.

I submitted my last macOS application with IAP on Oct. 23rd, 2025. I was able to test-purchase a non-consumable product with the StoreKit configuration file at that time. These days, every time I test a new macOS application with the configuration file, a purchase process fails. The thing is they all now fail if I test the store with existing applications that were once working. Xcode shows the following debugging error. Purchase failed with error: systemError(Error Domain=NSCocoaErrorDomain Code=4099 "The connection to service created from an endpoint was invalidated from this process." UserInfo={AMSDescription=An unknown error occurred. Please try again., AMSURL=http://localhost:53272/WebObjects/MZBuy.woa/wa/inAppBuy, NSDebugDescription=The connection to service created from an endpoint was invalidated from this process., AMSStatusCode=200, AMSServerPayload={ All my iOS apps don't exhibit the same problem. This StoreKit fiasco only happens for macOS applications. And I'm thinking that it all started to occur after I began using Xcode 26. Not a single line of code has changed. But the applications that were once able to process IAP all now fail. And I'm suspecting that it's Xcode 26 that is responsible for this failure. My Xcode version is 26.2, by the way. Any macOS application developer experiencing the same problem?

When I was reading a topic written by somebody, suddenly, the web browser (Safari) directed me to this Unauthorized error page. What the hell is this, Apple, Inc? It seems that things are quite chaotic about what Apple, Inc. does these days. I hope they will manage to sort things out.

I submitted a software update for one iOS app several days ago. It was approved two days ago. I received a message about distribution that said The status of your app has changed to Ready for Distribution I happened at the iTunes Connect website at that very moment in order to submit a totally new iOS app to the App Store. Its status said 'Removed from App Store.' I thought it was a rare mistake. Unfortunately, it's not. The one that I was submitting was approved some 15 minutes ago. I received the 'Ready for Distribution' message by email. Yet, it's been removed from the store as you see in the screenshot below. As you see in the 2nd screenshot below, it says that it's Ready for Distribution. But it's not? So is this a new norm? And we have to go back the iTunes Connect website to change the app status every time we submit a software title and then get it approved?

Am I the only one wasting my time having preview videos processed? I've been waiting for hours. I wasted an hour just trying to sign out of an iCloud account yesterday. Now this process is taking a big chunk of my valuable time. Pardon me for saying it, Apple, Inc. But this is stupid and so unproductive.

I have several macOS applications that use CloudKit. I need to test and finds out what happens when the user signs out of their iCloud account. That's because the application may lose data after signing out and then signing in again. Every time I do that, it'll take 15, 20 minutes... I don't time it, but it takes quite a gigantic time to sign out as the spinner keeps rolling. Why does it take so long to just sign out? This sign out effect is untestable because it takes a long time to sign out of an iCloud account and then make changes to the code and then test again. In case you need to know, my system version is Sequoia 15.7.

I have a desktop application developed in SwiftUI that shows property locations on the map. That's NOT the main feature. IF you give the application permission to access your location, the blue dot will appear on the map. If you don't, the blue user dot won't appear. That's the only difference with location services. In other words, the application has no use of user's current position beyond showing it on the map. Since it's just the matter of showing or not showing the blue dot on the map, the application doesn't really need to use the location service. Anyway, the reviewer is talking about something else by rejecting the application in two aspects. Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage Guideline 5.1.5 - Legal - Privacy - Location Services As I said earlier, the application only wants to show the blue dot on the map so that you can see your property locations relative to your current location. In code, it's something like the following. Map(position: $propertyViewModel.mapPosition) { ForEach(propertyViewModel.properties) { property in Annotation("", coordinate: CLLocationCoordinate2D(latitude: property.lat, longitude: property.lon)) { ... } } UserAnnotation() } So I'm hit with two rejection reasons with this one line. UserAnnotation() And the reviewer is talking about something like the app is not functional when Location Services are disabled. To resolve this issue, please revise the app so that the app is fully functional without requiring the user to enable Location Services. Well, I can remove the UserAnnotation() line if I want to put this application through the review process. Nothing will become dysfunctional, though, if you decide to reject permission request. So would you remove it or would you play along with this reviewer if you were me? It's been three or four days since rejection. As you can imagine, the reviewer doesn't bother to answer as to What are the exact coordinates that the application has allegedly collected What won't work as a result of location permission request refusal. This isn't the first time I get my app rejected. I've probably had 150 to 200 of them rejected in the past 15 years. And just because a reviewer rejects your app for a bizarre reason, would you give in? Remove this feature and that feature because the reviewer is incompetent such that he or she makes his or her decision based on imagination? What do you think?

I have a desktop application that shows some real estate properties chosen by the user. The application shows those GPP locations on the map. The SwiftUI code is something like the following. import SwiftUI import MapKit struct ContentView: View { var body: some View ZStack { mapView } } private var mapView: some View { Map(position: $propertyViewModel.mapPosition) { ForEach(propertyViewModel.properties) { property in Annotation("", coordinate: CLLocationCoordinate2D(latitude: property.lat, longitude: property.lon)) { Button { } label: { VStack { Image(systemName: "house.circle.fill") .resizable() .scaledToFit() .frame(width: 48) .foregroundStyle(colorScheme == .light ? .white : .black) ... } } .buttonStyle(.borderless) } } UserAnnotation() } .mapControls { MapUserLocationButton() } .mapControlVisibility(.visible) .onAppear { CLLocationManager().requestWhenInUseAuthorization() } } } The application only wants to use the CLLocationManager class so that it can show those locations on the map relative to your current GPS position. And I'm hit with two review rejections. Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage Issue Description One or more purpose strings in the app do not sufficiently explain the use of protected resources. Purpose strings must clearly and completely describe the app's use of data and, in most cases, provide an example of how the data will be used. Guideline 5.1.5 - Legal - Privacy - Location Services The app uses location data for features that are not relevant to a user's location. Specifically, the app is not functional when Location Services are disabled. So I wonder if the application is even required to have 'NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription' and/or 'NSLocationUsageDescription'? just in order to show user's current location so that they can see property locations relative to it? The exact location privacy statement is the following. The application needs your permission in accessing your current location so that it will appear on the map

I'm ready to submit a new app with 3 subscription plans. But the status of the group remains 'Prepare for Submission.' And it won't change. All the individual subscription plans have the 'Ready to Submit' status. I have triple-checked individual plans to see if there is anything missing. No. Nothing is missing. There are no pending business contracts to review, either. I have even deleted an existing group and created a whole new subscription group. And I still end up with this prepare status. Am I the only one having this subscription group difficulty? One thing that I realize is that the status appears as 'Ready to Submit' on individual subscription plans. But their respective localization pair of display name and description get the Prepared status. The display name and the description fields are both filled for all three plans. What a nice, merry, merry Christmas. I don't know what else I can do to resolve this Prepared madness. I've been stuck for 4 hours.