02-22-2013 02:37 AM - edited 02-22-2013 02:43 AM
I'm browsing BB World and I found surprisingly high amount o mass **bleep** producers, thant clearly point to Dev Alpha C program.
These people definitely don't produce high quality apps but clearly point to get as much Dev Alpha C points as possible. They also block review process.
I spent three months learning BB10 platform. I produced about four or five apps with intention to give some utility to users as I wanted to help BB to get good quality apps.
But in "competition" with people mentioned above (and I'm sure it is just tip of the iceberg) I have no chance to get Dev Alpha C.
My most popular app has 71 reviews and 4.5* rating but it does not matter. 200 points for **bleep** are equal to 200 points for popular app.
02-22-2013 03:19 AM - edited 02-22-2013 03:28 AM
And you are suggesting what? Every developer has it owns styrategy, how to develop apps and which kind of apps. RIM wanted large quantity of apps, portathons was a tool for that, i guess they don't want again same situation like it was with Playbook. It's their legitimate marketing strategy.
If you spent many months developing few apps for BB10, than they are high quality apps, and should be B4BB. That will give you high point boost to get DevAlpha C, right?
02-22-2013 03:30 AM
02-22-2013 03:40 AM - edited 02-22-2013 03:42 AM
I don't think it's good for users, but RIM was stimulating that, i guess high numbers of apps in BBWorld are theirs adut in selling BB10 phones. If you are from EU, and I think you are,and attended Amsterdam Jam, just add release of one of yours app for Q10, and you will get DevAlpha C for sure. In DevAlphaC T&C they say, it is one device per developer, so in that case, your eventual points for Dev C is not an issue.
AppStore and Google Play stores are bragging with high number of apps, so RIM wants to do the same.
02-22-2013 03:50 AM
02-22-2013 03:59 AM
I'm too annoyed with this ridicoulos wait time for approvals, but that's not developers fault, RIM did not prepare itself well for this number of apps, it's their fault.
02-22-2013 01:41 PM
Although multiple rupunzels aren't exactly appealing to users, or probably what Blackberry really wants from developers, keep in mind that quantity over quality is what Blackberry wanted from the portathons. They may not admit it, but that's simply how the portathons were set up. And from a marketing perspective, there is nothing wrong with that -- they had a certain number of apps needed for the BB10 release, and it was a unique way of getting there.
Now, as to the Alpha C, they could be a bit more strict, perhaps taking into account quality of certain developer apps, or weigh things based on the fact as to if they think the developer will port their apps to the device. But that may be a bit too much work for them, seeing as they have had a backlog of apps to review as it is.
And even in a mass of mediocre apps, there may be some gems, even if simple gems. I expect there are some developers out there who will look at the original poster's apps and say they are too simple also, so don't deserve an alpha C -- it's all relative. Maybe it would be best if Blackberry also took into account how likely they thing said developer will use the Alpha C for porting, vs someone who just wants to collect devices (not sure if there is even benefit to that, if they end up bricking them)... but that adds a layer of complexity to the rule process that may just create more problems.