And who would trust a certification which had been shown to certify Horsey poo-poo?
What you've got to remember is that the certification process will either be trusted by users or not depending on the quality of certified apps, and you've also got to remember that unless you pay testers and charge for certification you'll end up with a scheme which is either backlogged due to lack of resource or lets through things it shouldn't. Al. -- * 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. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of lbcoder Sent: 03 August 2009 17:52 To: Android Discuss Subject: [android-discuss] Re: It's the Apps, Stupid! And you're missing the point that that is a terrible idea. It is not good to allow somebody to elevate their app just because they have a pile of $$ behind it since it isn't MERIT based and doesn't in any way reflect the quality of the app. You'll end up having a few high budget developers getting their horse crap at the top. On Aug 2, 8:20 pm, Ian <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe I could have stated differently... > > I'm not advocating banning apps. All apps would be allowed, just some > can get a "seal" of Google. The small fee would cover some basic > testing, etc. Looking into the future, we have other phones coming > and no easy way to tell that an app will work the same (or at all) on > them. > > Apple has been getting bad press for being too restrictive but that > does not mean the cert process would be the same for Android. In > fact, being more open would be a selling point. > > I think many commenters here are thinking like developers and not > consumers, which would be a big mistake. Consumers like feeling they > are getting that mark of confidence and there is nothing wrong with > Google putting their "name" on the line..... it already is anyways! > > Reviews do help consumers but I bet many consumers would pick iPhone > over Android simply bcos they feel they are getting better and safer > apps, illusion or not. > > On Aug 2, 6:38 pm, lbcoder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > No. > > The market has nothing to do with confidence. > > If you don't trust the software author, don't download it. > > If you buy it and don't like it, refund it. > > If all the comments are negative, kinda tells you something about the > > app. > > Charging a fee for publishing software doesn't make that software any > > better. It is also a bad idea for google since it will put their name > > on the line. > > > On Aug 1, 12:32 pm, Ian <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Anyone think Google should have a certification process for apps? > > > Continue to allow most apps but for an extra small fee have apps given > > > a seal of approval? This would give confidence in the market, > > > something iPhone users enjoy and Apple uses for marketing.- Hide quoted > > > text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
