Personally I don't think $25 is going to protect anyone, as has been 
said already $25 isn't a lot of money, and all the fee will do is 
attract malicious software which is aimed to make money quickly to cover 
the cost.

Spammers will pay upto $1 per email, and premium rate call routing 
services can cost the earth per minute. I think that when we see malware 
(and it will be a when not an if), it'll hit hard and hit fast to ensure 
the $25 is recouped as quickly as possible.

Al.

Muthu Ramadoss wrote:
> Here's my take:
>
> 1. Google, take the 25$.. keep the market clean.
> 2. Run a monthly contest, and award say like 100$ for the best app of 
> the month.
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>
>     Guys,
>
>     First of all, I'm back! Second of all, what is up with the whining?
>     $25 dollars is not bad at all. It will help keep everybody honest.
>     Specially if anybody is trying to to post malicious apps. As mentioned
>     by other people, you do not have to post your app in the android
>     market. Go ahead and host it in your own website.
>
>     On Oct 24, 5:22 pm, "Shane Isbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>     > The problem is less the money but more the situation. You had a
>     lot of
>     > developers come in last November when Android was nothing but a
>     buggy SDK.
>     > These developers worked their tails off (in part because of the
>     money Google
>     > was dangling in their faces), some quit there jobs, wreaked
>     their lives for
>     > it. Then when the ADC was over, Google had a bunch of apps and a
>     largely
>     > tested SDK.  Google could now go to the carriers and say, "We
>     have something
>     > to offer."
>     >
>     > Then Google clammed up, withheld the SDK, didn't tell the
>     community about it
>     > and refused to respond to answers when it became known. Strike 1.
>     >
>     > Then the developers waited for the open system to deliver their
>     apps and be
>     > able to compete against those on the inside track. Google
>     witheld that
>     > option as well: Strike 2
>     >
>     > Now we find out about the 30% witholding and 25 dollar fees.
>     It's not that
>     > these are very different than industry norms, but to some
>     developers, who
>     > were sacrificing so much, to find out they were a tool for
>     validating
>     > Android for Google, only to have to start shoving money out of
>     their pocket,
>     > adds salt to the wound. Maybe Google should donate that 25 fee
>     to a good
>     > cause, if its just to discourage bad apps from the app market. I
>     also think
>     > Google should wave the fee for all ADC entrants, after all
>     haven't they
>     > proven their commitment to the platform?
>     >
>     > Shane
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Ed Burnette
>     <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>     >
>     > > Not to worry, you can always host a .apk file on your web site
>     (taking
>     > > care to give it the right MIME type) and educate people to
>     turn on the
>     > > "Allow install of non-Market applications" option. Or use one
>     of the
>     > > other app stores. Or stick a Paypal donate button on your site and
>     > > collect $25 from fans then use that to pay Google. Lots of
>     options.
>     >
>     > > On Oct 22, 3:12 pm, "Ewan Grantham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>     > > > Well, I'm going to have to seriously rethink releasing a
>     free application
>     > > if
>     > > > I have to pay for the privilege. Yes, I know I can use the
>     alternate
>     > > markets
>     > > > if I don't want to pay, but that cuts out a lot of potential
>     users.
>     >
>     > > > Would have been nice to have been told about this before I:
>     > > > a) coded the app
>     > > > b) put it in the wild on a couple of the alternate marketplaces
>     >
>     > > > because now I either have to withdraw and resubmit, or
>     decide it's not
>     > > > something worth the trouble.
>     >
>     > > > Anyone who has pulled down a copy of "Mars Lander" care to
>     tell me
>     > > > (privately at my email address, not through the list) if you
>     think it's
>     > > > worth a couple of bucks or not?
>     >
>     > > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Mark Murphy
>     <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     > > >wrote:
>     >
>     > > > > Al Sutton wrote:
>     >
>     > > >
>     >http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/10/android-market-now-ava.
>     > > ..
>     >
>     > > > > Even more than the $25 is the 30% cut for the carriers.
>     That definitely
>     > > > > leaves plenty of room for competing markets, particularly
>     if developers
>     > > > > pass some of the savings on to the consumers.
>     >
>     > > > > --
>     > > > > Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy)
>     > > > >http://commonsware.com
>     > > > > _The Busy Coder's Guide to Android Development_ Version
>     1.3 Published!- Hide quoted text -
>     >
>     > - Show quoted text -
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> take care,
> Muthu Ramadoss.
>
> http://mobeegal.in - mobile search. redefined. +91 98403 48914
>
> >


-- 
Al Sutton

W: www.alsutton.com
B: alsutton.wordpress.com
T: twitter.com/alsutton


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" 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-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to