Welcome!

Welcome to the official BlackBerry Support Community Forums.

This is your resource to discuss support topics with your peers, and learn from each other.

inside custom component

Built For BlackBerry

Reply
Developer
Posts: 248
Registered: ‎11-22-2011
My Device: Blackberry Playbook
My Carrier: vodafone

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

@ jetstreamblue

I went from AIR to Cascades last year, because of the poor transition perfomance. Everything perfomed pretty well, except the transitions, so i feel with you.

 

The crucial point is indeed the "user benefits" criteria. Its fuzzy and  not objective and I have the feeling to be at the mercy of the reviewer - an awkward situation.

 

 

Adding more features to differentiate is a point i can not accept too. This means, that i need to test and analyse every single competing app before.  Maybe Your app can not do more than the competing apps, but is better designed and cheaper. Why not give the user the opportunity to choose between similar apps in the B4BB section.

 

Another example: What happens when i want to make a nice Cascades clock and the clock will offer the exact same features like the default clock but has a different design to fit the taste of special group. It might not qualify, because it has not more features than the default clock. Or will it? Who knows?

Sorry, BB the current situation is rediculous.

 

BB should provide us a checklist of OBJECTIVE criteria and guarantee us to get the label when the checklist is OK.

 

 

Developer
Posts: 6,541
Registered: ‎10-27-2010
My Device: HTC One, PlayBook, LE Z10, DE Q10
My Carrier: Verizon

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

When we get stage3D, the transitions will be smoother. At the same time, I dont think developers should be penalized because BB is not using the latest AIR.
Developer
Posts: 6,541
Registered: ‎10-27-2010
My Device: HTC One, PlayBook, LE Z10, DE Q10
My Carrier: Verizon

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

Checklist would be nice but hard. For BB to say what each category of app should and should not do is not their place.

Adding more features to some apps can be hard. Some apps reach a wall of what it should do without be too cluttered.
Developer
Posts: 248
Registered: ‎11-22-2011
My Device: Blackberry Playbook
My Carrier: vodafone

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

@ jtegen, I did not mean a checklist for a special category. 

 

I refered to the current checklist of B4BB criteria which contains the "user benefits" criteria.

This checklist should be objective and comprehensible. In the current state it is not, especially because of the "user benefits" criteria.

Developer
Posts: 6,541
Registered: ‎10-27-2010
My Device: HTC One, PlayBook, LE Z10, DE Q10
My Carrier: Verizon

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

I meant the comments of adding more features to app XYZ based on similar apps in the same category. If an app meets all the "criteria" and provides some objective user benefit, I dont think BB should be telling devs to add more features to get BFBB. Now if they say, an app has to have (say) three major user benefits to qualify, then that would help.

Problem is, "user benefit" to one might not be a benefit to another.
Developer
Posts: 248
Registered: ‎11-22-2011
My Device: Blackberry Playbook
My Carrier: vodafone

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

"Problem is, user benefit to one might not be a benefit to another." Exactly!

 

My rejected app has benefit for at least 3 users who gave it 5 stars.

Others see no benefit at all, and thats OK.

This means the question of user benefit can not be answered by a single reviewer.

 

This issue will be a source of frustration now and in the future.

 

BB should adjust this criteria. Its the user who should decides if the app has benefit for him.

 

Developer
Posts: 6,473
Registered: ‎12-08-2010
My Device: PlayBook, Z10
My Carrier: none

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

That phrase sort of hits the nail on the head.

Clearly The Dive Plan has very limited user benefit, except to those users to whom it provides a lot of benefit!

White Noise provides substantial benefits to the 700 or so people who have purchased it on the PlayBook, and given it eight 5-star reviews (and one 4.5 star). A lot of these people are even "BlackBerry people", who travel and stay in hotels a lot, and use it to help them sleep better.

As georg22 pointed out above, his own app provides certain types of people a real benefit.

Only one of these three apps is approved, however. One is rejected for want of adequate user benefit, and another because it performs a "simple single function".

I think it's more about the benefit perceived by the reviewer involved, and without any appeal process, or a process which (perhaps?) involves more than one person looking at it, this might result in unwarranted initial rejections.

You know what might work better? If an app can achieve a substantial number of purchases on its own merits, then that should count towards it being granted Built For BlackBerry certification. Clearly if enough people really like the app then despite anything a reviewer may think, it is providing real user benefits.

Peter Hansen -- (BB10 and dev-related blog posts at http://peterhansen.ca.)
Author of White Noise and Battery Guru for BB10 and for PlayBook | Get more from your battery!
Developer
Posts: 6,541
Registered: ‎10-27-2010
My Device: HTC One, PlayBook, LE Z10, DE Q10
My Carrier: Verizon

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

So you're suggesting, that a BFBB should not be considered unless it has X downloads, Y star ratings from at least Z users (with less then T denied reviews)? Or if that is not what you are saying, it might be.

Interesting.

This would remove the "benefit" issue in some way and let the market decide its usefulness. Letting the app be on the market first for a bit of time would give a broader review base for BFBB reviewers to consider.

However, the app would still need the other criteria for BFBB consideration (flow, UX, UI, services, etc.).
Developer
Posts: 248
Registered: ‎11-22-2011
My Device: Blackberry Playbook
My Carrier: vodafone

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more

I like this idea too.

 

And the other criteria are comprehensible.

Developer
Posts: 6,473
Registered: ‎12-08-2010
My Device: PlayBook, Z10
My Carrier: none

Re: Got a chance to talk to BlackBerry about B4B and more


jtegen wrote:
So you're suggesting, that a BFBB should not be considered unless it has X downloads, Y star ratings from at least Z users (with less then T denied reviews)? Or if that is not what you are saying, it might be.

Interesting.

This would remove the "benefit" issue in some way and let the market decide its usefulness. Letting the app be on the market first for a bit of time would give a broader review base for BFBB reviewers to consider.

However, the app would still need the other criteria for BFBB consideration (flow, UX, UI, services, etc.).

John, not quite. I would never suggest something so absolute as "should not be considered" until X.

 

I do think, however, that a more holistic approach is reasonable, and could include concrete evidence from hard empirical data along with the purely subjective "reviewer's gut feeling".

 

For example, with White Noise, I know that many people have never heard of white noise, or tinnitus, and do not suffer from problems sleeping. If I hit a reviewer like that, they'll look at it and so "No, silly little app that performs a simple single function" and reject it (as happened).

 

If I hit a reviewer who happens to need such a thing, they may say "Oh, nice. This looks like a well-done, serious tool for helping one sleep." and approve it.

 

I think there's room for both subjectivity and objectivity, together... if an app is brand new, and the reviewer perceives no real benefit, they can reject it. If the developer appeals with justification for the need for the app, through a defined process, they can take a second look, and examine evidence including user reviews, downloads to date, and possibly additional supporting material from the developer.

 

I'm not saying White Noise is a clear win, but I would say that there's substantially evidence that it provides a very real user benefit.

 

(The sad thing in my case is that it wasn't rejected for lack of user benefit, but because of the catch-all "simple single function" clause. I think that's plain silly, considering that the same clause was always in the rules even for the free PlayBook offer, and yet this app was approved two years ago under that program. It's better (and less simple) than it was back then too!)


Peter Hansen -- (BB10 and dev-related blog posts at http://peterhansen.ca.)
Author of White Noise and Battery Guru for BB10 and for PlayBook | Get more from your battery!