On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Phill Wiggin <[email protected]> wrote:
> For the record, I (at least) am not opposed to adding more space. I just > see from your primary argument that you're not looking at the situation from > a consumer's standpoint. > But I am. I want to give the consumer the CHOICE to read as much as they want. Why is that so difficult to understand? You're looking at this from a marketer's perspective. This is important of course but marketing types also have a habit of thinking they're more "clever" than they really are. > >> I wouldn't be surprised to find that most of that demographic react > better to short bursts of information and taglines (e.g. effective > marketing), rather than 100% accurate app descriptions. > > > I wouldn't either, but what is the harm in giving people the option? > > Most consumers aren't as detail-oriented as developers are; they don't > respond well to "too much" information. > So what? No one would be forcing consumers to read "too much" information. If you don't use the extra space properly, that's your problem. But shouldn't developer and users have that OPTION? > Look at how many people buy iPads. They don't _care_ what it's full > potential is. They don't _care_ what all the features are. Frankly, when you > try to explain all the features, their eyes glass over and they retreat... > They walk away because you're explaining too much for them. (I've worked > retail in the past, and I've seen this exact situation in my extended family > even recently.) > Again, making ridiculous comparisons. You cannot compare a hardware device that has the Apple brand, marketing, and recognition behind it with an app in the Android Market. If the iPad was a brand new product being distributed by a no-name company and was being pitched with 325 characters and two screen shots, how many people do you think would pay what it costs for it? Hmm? > You say "Yes, and the majority of people that you referred to that don't > have the attention span to read more text won't bother, won't see the full > potential of your app, and will just move on. " Whereas, if (in your > descritpion) you tell them _why_ they should care and what 1-2 killer things > your app does, that may convince them to try it out if they don't have to > read a treatise dealing with all the features you packed into your app. > > I'm just saying that information overload is a bad thing for non-technical > people, (likely) the vast majority of the app consumers. > And I'm not saying that these descriptions should be a space for writing the sequel to War and Peace. My app does more than 1-2 killer things that make it stand out. A simple, concise, bullet point list of features of my app runs way over 325 characters. I'm not going into technical details, I'm not explaining how things work - I'm just listing clear, to the point features and there is not enough room to do even that. > (Locale) "And do you suppose their description would be that short if it > didn't need to be?" > Yes, I believe their description is best served by being short. As much as > Locale does, their market description is short, succinct and includes links > to further information. It clearly states what the purpose of the app is > and doesn't get overly verbose. It's just about the perfect amount of > information to pique someone's interest. > They could do exactly that and then go into detail with a "read more" section, which I've been suggestion. No need for a link (that's not even clickable, how many people will actually go their browser and type it out, regardless of how short?) and anyone that likes what they read in the intro can get more info, IF THEY SO CHOOSE. Isn't it better to give users more than they need and let them CHOOSE how much to consume, then not give them enough? > > As a user, it would be nice to have the OPTION to read as much as I > wanted to determine if an app was worth my time without having to navigate > to a website or download the app and try it out to find out if it does what > I want. > > Yes, but _you_ "as a user" aren't a typical user. If you want to target > the group that matches _your_ methods of finding apps, you're going to be > targeting a minority of the market's user-base. That's really the point I'm > trying to get across. > You're telling me that the typical user doesn't like options? That if given the choice of only reading 325 characters or reading 325 characters with THE OPTION to read more, they'd choose the former? The point I'm trying to get across is that regardless of what the "typical" user does or doesn't do, EVERY user likes options. And that given more space, developers could chose the best way to market their product, since different products require different methodologies. If you overload the user with information THAT'S ON YOU. YOU screwed it up and YOU lost a customer. The way it it now though, there is no choice. I don't have any option but to use this magical 325 number that someone pulled out of their ass. > The poster who was comparing prices of boxes of cereal to the text on them > is looking at it from a marketing prospective. > >From any perspectives, those analogies, like the one to the iPad, make no sense - not to me at least. You're comparing Apples to a Buick. > And even if you don't agree (or think it's stupid, base-less, > hare-brained...etc) the fact is: effective marketing sells products. > I really want to say "no sh*t", but I don't want to be rude again =) Of course effective marketing sells products. But guess what? Effective marketing also employs more than 325 characters and two screenshots. That's why companies shell out millions on TV, print, and internet ads. Go tell the Coca-Cola marketing team that they have to continue selling their product but only using 325 characters on their website and two pictures of their product. Easy right? Any one clever enough can do that, right? > There are a lot of stupid products on the market that people buy because > the Marketing is good. And there are awesome products on the market that > die a quick death because their marketing is bad, mistargeted, or > ineffective. > OK. > I'm just saying that Locale did a good job of using that limited amount of > space in promoting their product. > Yes they did, good for them. But what works for *ONE* specific app does not necessarily work for all others. > So, if we (as developers) are creative and succinct, we should be able to > live with that space constraint until/unless Google decides to give us more. > Well, we currently HAVE to be creative and succinct and live with that space now, don't we? There is no other option. > But I'd dearly love a "changelog" section.... Who couldn't use one of > those? =) > Not me ... I have a website for that ... I wouldn't want to "overload" the "typical user" with "too much technical information" ... >=) On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Brad <[email protected]> wrote: > Apple has it right with its 4000 char limit. > Holy sh*t, seriously!? (Never owned or developed for the iPhone). No WONDER Apple and the Apple store has been such an epic failure! They're overloading their stupid users with like 13 times more information then they really need! Thank you Google Market team for saving the Android developers and users from themselves! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TreKing <http://sites.google.com/site/rezmobileapps/treking> - Chicago transit tracking app for Android-powered devices -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
