Hi, Yes I agree that could help drive a more sustained effort over longer periods of time by providing ongoing incentives driven by actual/ external measures.
But I'd be disappointed to see iFart type apps being rewarded through ADC based around their Market performance, even if that is what users want. I think these types of apps deserve all their accolades through the revenue they already earn, such one hit wonders are fun and amusing. It's certainly fascinating to see their download volumes and revenues generated. But there's not much innovation involved with something that's just automating various pre existing practical jokes, regardless of popularity. And I think an ongoing contest would tend to favour those with better resources and reward the already rich and dilute the excitement and tension of one off contest. Whatever its final form I think it's great that ADC will happen again, I was beginning to wonder too given the poor financial circumstances being suffered around the world this year. Regards On Mar 20, 7:10 pm, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > The way I look at it is that each month the best selling app sets a > benchmark for where developers need to raise their game to. I can see > two ways Google could handle repeat winners; > > 1) A one win per year rule. Once an app has won one months prize it's > excluded from the competition for the next 11 months, but the problem > with this is that once an app wins there is little incentive to continue > development. > > 2) Take it as a sign that it's a hit application. If the weather channel > wins month after month after month then, well, that's what users think > is the best app out there and nobody has come up with something better. > > The reason I suggested it to be a long running repeating competition is > to encourage development. If a developer doesn't win one month they know > that next month they're starting from the same place as everyone else > and so if they continue to improve their app they could win in the next > month. > > The running of the original ADC was probably the best way to do things > at that stage of Androids evolution, but if you look at some of the top > prize winners they're promise hasn't really materialised. For example; > > Softrace : The web page just says "coming soon". > Locale : Still listed as being in beta on the market. > Life360 : Still being built. > Ecorio : 3* app, problem reports, and no signs of an update since 1.0.0 > > And although there are great apps out of the prize winners, I would have > expected that as we're 5 months after the consumer launch those > companies receiving the $275,000 cash injection prizes would have > delivered a final product by now. > > To me the best way to measure whether developers are delivering what the > user wants is to look at user feedback, and, as Googles responsible for > the ADCs and Googles running Market where users have an opportunity to > provide feedback, it seems logical to put the two together. > > Al. > > > > gjs wrote: > > Hi, > > > ADC1 also served as a platform for Google to harvest cool ideas from > > developers, eg: enkin - > > >http://www.enkin.net > > > - as you agreed to allow Google to create apps derived from ideas in > > your submission ( or something to that effect ) > > > I think ADC gives you that chance to showcase something to Google, > > over and above applications that may actually be immediately useful or > > commercially viable. > > > To me it was a chance to 'shoot for the stars' even if it wasn't > > actually immediately practical. > > > If ADC II is (just) based on performance of the existing apps in the > > Market, then it is just retrospectively rewarding whats already been > > successfully done - and Shop Savvy, Breadcrumbs, The Weather Channel > > etc etc etc may as well resubmit their original applications for ADC > > II... > > > I hope it retains some of the spirit of the first rounds. > > > Regards > > > On Mar 20, 4:46 pm, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> To me the best metric of quality and user friendly capabilities is > >> people wanting to use the app, hence why I can see a Market position > >> based competition making sense. > > >> Al. > > >> Ivan Soto wrote: > > >>> If my application sells for like $.99 and the top seller is selling > >>> around 600 to 1000 a month, a lot of developer would be spending $1500 > >>> just to make themselves to the top. The price would be more than that > >>> amount. > > >>> Just a thought. > > >>> I don't like that idea. I really prefer a challenge that favor towards > >>> the quality and user friendly capabilities. > > >>> my 2 cents. > > >>> Ivan Soto Fernandez > >>> Web Developer > >>>http://ivansotof.com > > >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Dan Morrill <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >>> We have considered and are considering ideas along those lines. > >>> That is *not* to say that that's what we are going to do, so > >>> don't take it as confirmation. :) But yes, many different > >>> structures are on the table. > > >>> - Dan > > >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >>> Dan, > > >>> Thanks for the clarification. > > >>> How about making the ADC II a set of awards which are given to > >>> the best > >>> selling apps in each category each month for the next couple > >>> of years. > >>> This would allow the Android user community to vote on what is > >>> good for > >>> them, give developers a reason to push their apps to the limit > >>> of what > >>> they can do, and allow Google to focus the prizes on groups > >>> delivering > >>> what people want. > > >>> Just a thought. > > >>> Al. > > >>> Dan Morrill wrote: > >>> > Oops. Looks like that page was collateral damage when we > >>> did the move > >>> > to developer.android.com <http://developer.android.com> > >>> <http://developer.android.com>. We're > >>> > looking into it; thanks for pointing it out. At any rate > >>> the content > >>> > that would be there refers only to the first Developer > >>> Challenge. > > >>> > Regarding the second Developer Challenge, it definitely > >>> isn't canceled > >>> > but we haven't announced plans for it yet. We said we would > >>> by last > >>> > year (sorry about that), but we're still working on how to > >>> structure > >>> > it. The world is quite a bit different now than it was when > >>> we ran > >>> > the first ADC, so we want to make sure the new > >>> rules/structure make > >>> > sense, and we are of course taking into consideration everyone's > >>> > experiences with the first ADC. The second ADC will > >>> definitely not be > >>> > a clone of the first ADC. > > >>> > We expect to have all this finalized and announce rules within a > >>> > couple months. The event itself will likely run in the > >>> second half of > >>> > the year. > > >>> > - Dan > > >>> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Al Sutton > >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> > >>> wrote: > > >>> > Very very recently though. Googling for "android > >>> developer challenge" > >>> > still brings up the 404ed page as the top result. > > >>> > Al. > > >>> > Anonymous Anonymous wrote: > >>> > >http://developer.android.com/ > >>> > > try in here.. its moved i guess > > >>> > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Eelke Folmer > >>> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>> > > <mailto:[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>>>> > >>> > wrote: > > >>> > > This (http://code.google.com/android/adc.html) > >>> gives a > >>> > 404 which is > >>> > > weird for a google site. > >>> > > Is this challenge cancelled? I hope not...... > > >>> > -- > > >>> > * Written an Android App? - List it at > >>> http://andappstore.com/* > > >>> > ====== > >>> > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales > >>> with the > >>> > company number 6741909. The registered head office is > >>> Kemp House, > >>> > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > >>> > The views expressed in this email are those of the > >>> author and not > >>> > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's > >>> associates, or it's > >>> > subsidiaries. > > >>> -- > > >>> * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/* > > >>> ====== > >>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > >>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > >>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > >>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > >>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, > >>> or it's > >>> subsidiaries. > > >> -- > > >> * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/* > > >> ====== > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > >> subsidiaries. > > -- > > * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/* > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
