08-16-2011 03:16 PM
08-16-2011 07:03 PM
08-16-2011 08:17 PM
08-17-2011 05:58 PM - edited 08-17-2011 06:00 PM
Ya the spotlight is a totally different issue.
What I'm concerned with is the Top 25 rankings.
Top 25 should reflect the 25 apps that users are purchasing most on the Playbook, or at least a revolving selection of the top 50 or 100 (this would be preferable, to spread the wealth a little). This way quality apps, with momentum can rise to the top.
Blackberry downloads should not be taken into account.
RIM, if you're listening, you need to do every little thing you can do to make sure your Playbook dev's are making money. You need them in a huge way, and every bit counts. Playbook Apps == QNX Phone Apps, and this is the future of your entire company.... the truth is devices are not really rated on hardware anymore, they're judged on the size and quality of their app stores.
Trim the Blackberry apps from Top 25, and figure out some upgrades to AppWorld that improve discoverability. A top 25 for the entire market is at best a bare minimum.
09-07-2011 05:34 PM
09-07-2011 06:33 PM
Another visibility issue I've raised in the past is when a vendor updates a large set of apps that are all identical except for (one supposes) pointing to different online content.
Case in point: several weeks ago, I noticed this effect for an app tied to my local newspaper, the Calgary Herald. Simultaneously with this app being on the "Recently Updated" list, that list was more than half occupied by the same app, with names for the various city newspapers across the country that it represents. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that all these apps are not radically different; they are essentially the very same app, but conveniently launch up pointing to one or another of the same company's newspaper sites. But together they occupied more than half of the available 25 slots for recent updates.
Last week, there was another example, whose name escapse me at the moment, but this time they filled nearly all 25 recently updated slots. It was obviously a case of updating the app, when each instance of the app points to some different content.
I don't begrudge the vendor the opportunity to update their software, and to be noticed. But there needs to be a better way of handling this than just taking over most of, or in the recent case nearly all of, a particular list on App World.
09-07-2011 06:44 PM
@KenSalmon, right on! I've been whining about that for a bit too.
The "last week" example would have been Skylab, with a bazillion cloned "Offline GPS" apps which apparently bundle a mass of OpenStreetMap tiles for various regions.
They flooded the Newest list, pushing a bunch of people out within hours if not minutes of them showing up, so those people got effectively zero exposure, killing their first few days' worth of sales. They also did some trivial updates and flooded the Recently Updated section, also flushing out anyone legitimate.
(Possibly worse than that, they write fake reviews, vigorously remove negative reviews, and so far nobody I've heard of is happy with what they bought. That wouldn't necessarily matter, but combine it with the flooding with cloned apps, and it's really a wonder RIM hasn't thought it might not be a good idea to have a vendor doing these things and getting such excellent visibility courtesy of RIM.)
Solutions to this problem could include some form of detection for "cloned" apps (my own name for these near identical ones) and only showing one of them.
Better yet, use a rate-limiting filter, preferably a so-called "token bucket". RIM, this is a well-known technique for managing this sort of thing better, allowing bursts (e.g. 3 apps at a time) but not allowing anyone to flood the system. Please investigate it with some urgency.
09-08-2011 08:38 AM
The only suggestion is that if a developer gets caught up in a app SPAM attack, is that they increase the version and update it a week later. Does not help those with new releases, but it is hard to defned against. The only thing that could be done is to stagger mass updates from one particular vendor. For example, if more than 6 updates occur in 1-2 days from a single vendor, the remaining apps will be delayed 1+ weeks and then repeat logic until all have been released. It would force the vendor to be more particular in how and when they do the updates.
Like anything, there has to be balance in the community.
09-08-2011 08:59 AM