My "crap app" got rejected for being of "minimal functionality" even though it duplicates the functionality of a physical device found in many restrooms in Japa

My "crap app" got rejected for being of "minimal functionality" even though it duplicates the functionality of a physical device found in many restrooms in Japan, so it seems Apple is indiscriminately applying their policies regardless of application quality, leading to some making it through and others not. Case in point: http://createdigitalmusic.com/2009/03/16/apple-rejects-free-iphone-tool-for-artists-because-of-minimal-user-functionality/ http://createdigitalmusic.com/2009/03/16/apple-rejects-free-... I would hardly call this as having "minimal functionality". Yet Apple thinks so. But neither I nor Apple should have that call beyond apps that are illegal, overly resource intensive or malicious. The market should be able to decide. This behavior hinders development across the board, especially when you have no insight into why an app is rejected or what it will take to get it approved. Will Shipley has a great post on his blog about this very issue: http://wilshipley.com/blog/2008/09/iphone-app-store-let-market-decide.html http://wilshipley.com/blog/2008/09/iphone-app-store-let-mark...