One of the things I'm considering in regards to social encouragement is tighter integration with facebook. That way you can see app comments from friends etc. This would move away from the star rating system, moving it more toward which people like the app and your connections to them.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Jeffrey Kesselman <[email protected]>wrote: > As others have said... wisdom of the masses is the best soln you have. The > only other soln that scales (by choking the scale) is the Apple sort of 'you > must be blessed by US to be here" that no developer wants. > > Just come up with an easy to use rating system and then default to showing > the highest rated apps (with over a certain number of ratings) first. Maybe > reserve a special rotating space for "not yet rated" apps. > > Finally, to avoid outright spam, consider charging a quarter a listing. > Thats not much to a real developer but will be pretty expensive to anyone > just trying to spam. Spam advertising runs on a busing free channels, so > make it not-quite-free. > > What really needs work however is the ease and social encouragement of > rating. I have close to 2,000 downloads on my app and maybe 8 ratings > total. Thats a pretty terrible responding %. > > > > > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Jason Arora <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned: Mob games where users can >> buy point "apps". Most of these Mob games artificially increase their >> visibility by having 5 or more apps for the same thing ($1, $2, $5, >> $20, etc). >> >> These kinds of "point" apps should be restricted to in-app purchases. >> >> On May 19, 9:06 am, Shane Isbell <[email protected]> wrote: >> > You guys have provided excellent feedback and it has gotten me to >> thinking. >> > Many years ago, I was a quant doing portfolio benchmarking and >> time-series >> > forecasting and this problem of ranking applications is very similar to >> > portfolio benchmarking (for some inexplicable reason this didn't occur >> to me >> > before). >> > >> > With some basic factors like Eric mentioned, I can create a model that >> will >> > rank applications and that takes into account factors such as spam. Also >> > rankings can have some type of exponential smoothing factors (weighting >> > recent events more). >> > >> > For sure, I'll put a spam button on site initially and then after >> getting >> > more than a handful of apps start implementing some basic models. >> > >> > Keep the ideas coming! It is helping a lot. >> > >> > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Eric F <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Limiting developers to 5 apps isn't going to reduce the number of bad >> > > apps at all. It is also not going to reduce the number of spam apps. >> > > It is simply going to make the task of putting up spam apps more >> > > tedious. The real spam solution is to mark apps as spam and have a >> > > good algorithm to detect quality user spam reports and prevent >> > > malicious use of the spam button (somebody marks the official eBay >> > > client as spam for example). >> > >> > > Just use a sensible system and it will work out. I feel like because >> > > Android market doesn't even make an attempt to solve these problems >> > > you think these problems are gigantic. They are not. Clearly identify >> > > the problem of the Android market. You either have to know the name of >> > > the app you want and search (this does not support discovery). Or you >> > > get to look at Top (Paid/Free) and see a list of the most widely known >> > > apps you've looked at 100 times before (also does not help discovery >> > > much. we all know there's a twitter client). Or you can look at "Just >> > > in" (overwhelmed by an uncontrolled spam problem, and hence does not >> > > help discovery). >> > >> > > Simply solve the spam problem and "Just in" becomes helpful. Add a >> > > view that allows an app that is two weeks old has an average of 4.5 >> > > stars and 300 ratings to be listed alongside an older established app >> > > with ~4-5stars with 70,000 ratings and you are almost there. >> > >> > > Go one step forward and say users who rated X and Y also at 5 stars >> > > like you did also installed app Z which you don't have yet, take a >> > > look! >> > >> > > All of these suggestions improve the situation without making honest >> > > developers your adversary. >> > >> > > -E >> > >> > > On May 19, 8:21 am, Shane Isbell <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > My intention is to allow additional apps on a case-by-case basis. >> > >> > > > When thinking about any new app store one of the most critical >> issues is >> > > > discovery: how are people going to find an app they want? What I'm >> trying >> > > to >> > > > do here is to reduce the resistance between a user finding an app >> they >> > > want >> > > > and actually purchasing that application. Having lots of apps that >> people >> > > > don't want means lower sales for top apps. >> > >> > > > So you can put your five top apps in front of users without having >> to >> > > worry >> > > > about being flooded by dictionary apps, free apps, spam apps or apps >> that >> > > > have little potential of generating sales (dead space). Every bad >> app >> > > loses >> > > > your top app sales. >> > >> > > > Does this make sense? >> > >> > > > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 7:34 AM, westmeadboy < >> [email protected] >> > > >wrote: >> > >> > > > > I agree with plusminus. A limitation of 5 apps doesn't make any >> sense. >> > >> > > > > 1. Over time, any given dev will release more and more apps. Also, >> as >> > > > > the dev (house) grows it has the capability to release more apps >> in >> > > > > any given time frame. Both of these indicate that a hard app limit >> > > > > does not make sense. >> > >> > > > > 2. If there is no support for add-ons then you need to provide a >> way >> > > > > for devs to make their various "flavours" of an app visible - see >> what >> > > > > I wrote about bilingual dictionaries. >> > >> > > > > 3. Provide a way for users to mark apps or devs or both as spam >> and >> > > > > then use that spam information to decrease app/dev >> visibility/ranking >> > > > > in search results. >> > >> > > > > On May 19, 4:06 pm, plusminus <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > > Huh 5 Apps... I have 29 in there while I'm writing this. More in >> the >> > > > > > pipe =D >> > >> > > > > > On 18 Mai, 18:33, Shane Isbell <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > Everyone, thanks for the feedback. To reduce spam. I've >> decided to >> > > > > limit the >> > > > > > > number of apps to 5 for zappmarket. >> > >> > > > > > > Based on developer feedback (which was great), I've also >> decided to >> > > > > scrap >> > > > > > > version 1 of zapp. Either I couldn't address specific needs of >> > > > > developers >> > > > > > > (like piracy) or many core needs were being addressed >> elsewhere. >> > > > > Developers >> > > > > > > did provide a few key pain points in regards to selling apps >> that >> > > > > aren't >> > > > > > > being addressed but this requires a completely different >> approach >> > > to >> > > > > > > traditional app markets. I'm working on a new version of >> zappmarket >> > > to >> > > > > > > provide a solution. I'm still at least a month away (no >> specific >> > > date), >> > > > > but >> > > > > > > I'll keep you guys posted. >> > >> > > > > > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API >> Guru) < >> > >> > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > > > > Perhaps a limit of 5 with additional apps upon approval by >> > > Google. It >> > > > > > > > could be a simple thing like Godaddy has for requesting >> IP's. You >> > > get >> > > > > > > > one, you can get two more by just asking and if you want >> more >> > > than >> > > > > > > > that, you have to have a good reason. >> > >> > > > > > > > -John Coryat >> > >> > > > > > > > On May 4, 2:27 pm, Shane Isbell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > So maybe put a hard limit to the number of apps a single >> > > developer >> > > > > can >> > > > > > > > > upload? >> > >> > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 4:49 AM, westmeadboy < >> > > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > There are lots of bilingual dictionary apps out there. >> One >> > > > > company has >> > > > > > > > > > over 100 I think. Clearly they use the same engine for >> each >> > > and >> > > > > just >> > > > > > > > > > change the content. Not sure if this is considered spam. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Ideally they would just have one app on the market and >> then >> > > > > through >> > > > > > > > > > that app users could pay for/download whatever >> > > > > content/dictionaries >> > > > > > > > > > they want. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > The problem with this is that the content/dictionaries >> would >> > > not >> > > > > have >> > > > > > > > > > the necessary visibility in the Market. Therefore, the >> vast >> > > > > majority >> > > > > > > > > > of users, when searching for say a Chinese-English >> > > dictionary, >> > > > > would >> > > > > > > > > > not realise they could use that app to fulfil their >> needs. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > When searching the Market, I'd like to see Google >> > > Search-style >> > > > > results >> > > > > > > > > > where apps from the same dev are grouped so you only see >> the >> > > > > first 3 >> > > > > > > > > > and a link to "more apps", just like how Google Search >> groups >> > > > > results >> > > > > > > > > > by website. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > When browsing a category, I would do a similar kind of >> > > grouping. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > I really hope Google Market brings in proper support for >> > > add-ons >> > > > > which >> > > > > > > > > > would make all this a little easier to manage. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 6:45 pm, Eric F <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > I would say junky apps would include Themes, >> Background >> > > > > Wallpapers >> > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > > > Content as apps. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Themes are everywhere, for home screen replacements I >> don't >> > > > > even have >> > > > > > > > > > > installed. They aren't spam, I'm sure many of them are >> > > actually >> > > > > > > > > > > reasonably decent and shouldn't be removed from the >> market. >> > > But >> > > > > I >> > > > > > > > > > > think they should when uploaded to the market be >> required >> > > to >> > > > > put in >> > > > > > > > > > > some kind of "requires aHome to be installed". And the >> end >> > > > > user's >> > > > > > > > > > > market should have a setting for "Hide add-ons for not >> > > > > installed >> > > > > > > > > > > apps". And while apps like Locale, the big draw is the >> > > number >> > > > > of >> > > > > > > > > > > plugins it has for it, so if users didn't see that >> they >> > > might >> > > > > not >> > > > > > > > > > > understand how big that ecosystem is, so having that >> option >> > > be >> > > > > off by >> > > > > > > > > > > default would be ok with me (even though I think most >> users >> > > > > would >> > > > > > > > > > > prefer it on) >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > The Background Wallpapers and Content as apps is where >> > > someone >> > > > > > > > creates >> > > > > > > > > > > an app that does nothing more than say, show 1 funny >> image >> > > (as >> > > > > > > > opposed >> > > > > > > > > > > to connect to a remote site and allow users to browse >> > > through a >> > > > > whole >> > > > > > > > > > > content set). Or the app is just a scanned version of >> a >> > > comic >> > > > > book, >> > > > > > > > > > > etc. For one thing, it would benefit the user the most >> if >> > > > > content >> > > > > > > > > > > providers adopted a sub-platform for distribution that >> > > wasn't >> > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > > > market (but I think billing, and getting paid is >> something >> > > hard >> > > > > to do >> > > > > > > > > > > so I don't see this happening). But it would be better >> if >> > > > > people >> > > > > > > > > > > downloaded some e-Reader type application off the >> market, >> > > and >> > > > > then >> > > > > > > > > > > bought comic books through that application. Better >> user >> > > > > experience, >> > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > user who wants 1000 comic books on his/her phone >> doesn't >> > > have >> > > > > an app >> > > > > > > > > > > drawer that is ungodly, etc. >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Since it's unrealistic that the above will ever >> happen, I >> > > don't >> > > > > know >> > > > > > > > > > > how much thought went into the market categories. Did >> they >> > > do >> > > > > market >> > > > > > > > > > > research to >> > >> > ... >> > >> > read more ยป >> >> -- >> 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]<android-discuss%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en. >> >> > -- > 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]<android-discuss%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en. > -- Shane Isbell (Founder of ZappMarket) http://twitter.com/sisbell http://twitter.com/zappstore http://zappmarket.com -- 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.
