On 01/26/2012 12:44 PM, Nathan wrote:
On Jan 25, 9:54 am, Lie Ryan<[email protected]> wrote:
On 01/24/2012 12:57 PM, Nathan wrote:
I think the crappy part is that the developer decided to publish
hundreds of versions of almost similar apps instead of consolidating
everything into a single app with multiple image options.
There is already an app that does that. There's a system app that lets
you choose your wallpaper.
There just might be people who are just looking for forest wallpaper,
and therefore expect a title that says forest wallpaper, an icon that
portrays forest wallpaper, screenshots that show forest wallpaper, and
a description (if they read that far) that talks about forest
wallpaper.
Sure, there might be some people who prefer the Kitchen Sink wallpaper
app that is 400 megabytes and has 400 scenes (no offense if that is
your app), and will install it hoping it has forest wallpaper, even
though its not in the title or any screenshots. But without some sort
of market data, I wouldn't assume those people are in the majority.
I'm not the type of person that care much about wallpaper, but if I'm
searching wallpapers, I'd much prefer browsing through a 3MB application
that sorts its 1000s of wallpapers in sensible categories and downloads
them on-demand. If I'm just looking for forest wallpaper and the
wallpaper browser has a forest category, they can state so in the app
description so they would show up in search results.
As a plus, since it's a single, unified, well-written app, it will have
a unified, high download count and likely high rating which would make
me less wary about it being rogue, which means I'd be less wary about
giving Internet permission. And the high rating, high download count
would make it more likely to show at the top of market search results.
With the thousands of small apps strategy, looking at the diminutive
download count would be a huge disincentive, and if I noticed that it
has a 5-star, it turns out only 1 person has rated the app. That's just
a turn off.
And if you penalize that developer, you'd certainly have to penalize
Google too. They have thousands of entries in their movie section. You
look a little deeper and you'll find that all movies have the same
code, just different content. By your logic, they must be
spammers.
The best scenario though, would be for Google to include a dedicated
wallpaper section in the Market for the category, just like what they
did with Movie and Books. Ideally, people searching for regular
applications wouldn't be bothered by the irrelevant results from
wallpaper section and there will be a more well-thought UI for
previewing the wallpaper rather than abusing the screenshot section.
Also, ideally installing a wallpaper would be a one-click thing like
installing a Firefox's Persona, which is feasible with either a
dedicated section in market or a third party wallpaper browser, but
would never happen with thousands of tiny wallpaper apps scattered about
in the general application section of the market.
--
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.
