It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Ian » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 04:27:48 GMT


Sponsored Links
 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.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by lbcoder » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 06:38:37 GMT


 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.




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~


Sponsored Links


It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Andrew Hays » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 06:53:13 GMT


 If you've been watching the news recently, many people are unhappy with the
Apple App Store selection process because of how random it is, and
applauding the Android app market and Palm Pre web app market.
I think this alone is good enough reason to stick to the way things are
being done.  It goes against Google's "open" policy that they are trying to
push, otherwise in my opinion.  If someone wants to make a "baby-shaker"
app, then even though it's in bad taste, they can make it and publish it.
 That's all it takes, and in my opinion, that's all it should take.
------------------
 http://andrewhays.net 
 http://ashays.livejournal.com 







--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Incognito » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 07:47:41 GMT


 You mean take 20 steps backwards. No. I think is a waste of time.






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.






      

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Disconnect » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:11:55 GMT


 Everyone seems to be missing his point. Too quick to go "OMG not like
apple!".. he didn't say "vet entries to the appstore" (ahem, they do that
already..  http://is.gd/1ZGFi ) but do something similar to the 'featured'
apps, or the 'recommended by tmobile', etc.

There is nothing wrong with the idea ("We think this app does what it says")
and google is big on selling position (whether its search position, ad
position, even been some questions about market results sorting being
biased) but there's a huge manpower gap there.





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Kent Loobey » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:15:51 GMT


 The great thing about the Android system is that it is open.  So if you think 
that people want an endorsement before they buy then YOU can set up a site 
that does exactly that.  You can even charge for your endorsement.  If you're 
right then you will make a bundle.  It really doesn't matter if we on this 
list think it is a good idea or not.




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Caleb Eggensperger » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:19:59 GMT


 I could see maybe adwords type ads in the market, but only if they are
clearly delimited from the organically ranked content. Paid placement is a
bad idea.







-- 
Caleb Eggensperger
 http://calebegg.com/ 

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Ian » Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:21:33 GMT


 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.





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by lbcoder » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:52:12 GMT


 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.





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Jason Van Anden » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:58:43 GMT


 Ian,

What is your motivation for bringing this subject up?

Are you a consumer with an Android based phone frustrated by the quality of
the Apps on the Android Market?
Are you a developer trying to decide what platform to develop for?

Other?

j

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Brian Conrad » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:05:26 GMT


 Palm was an open market from the beginning.   All you had to do was get 
an ID from them for your apps.  And Palm themselves didn't have a 
market, instead companies like Palm Gear and Handango sold the apps.   
Programmers who do niche market products should not be penalized because 
those doing the certification process don't have a clue about the 
program they are looking at.  And yes there are clueless jerks posting 
negative comments on programs they either don't understand, don't like 
the idea of or just want to be malicious for kicks (probably the main 
reason for negative comments).  But if you make a demo available people 
interested can decide whether they want to purchase or not.







--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Al Sutton » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:27:45 GMT


 nd 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: android-discuss@googlegroups.com
[mailto:android-disc...@googlegroups.com] 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, 8:20pm, Ian <pale.cold.f...@gmail.com> wrote:


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Muthu Ramadoss » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:35:52 GMT


 An official certification program for developers would be a good idea, but i
don't support the google seal for apps idea.

take care,
Muthu Ramadoss.

 http://linkedin.com/in/tellibitz 
 http://androidrocks.googlecode.com  - Android Consulting.

Sent from Tamil Nadu, India
Mike Ditka < http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mike_ditka.html> ;  -
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given us arms."





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Al Sutton » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:43:39 GMT


 Out of interest, how much would developers be willing to pay to cover testing 
costs?

AndAppStore has some links to OEMs who may be interested in this idea, but 
they'd probably want to ensure testing was appropriate so that it wouldn't 
tarnish their brand, so it will cost.

As I understand things the current costs on other platforms for "certification" 
are;

Apple : US$99 per year for unlimited apps
Microsoft : US$99 per submission
RIM : US$200 in advance for every 10 apps

So, given the number of Android devs who'd want to be involved would be quite 
low (because it's not a requirement for free apps and most Android developers 
produce free apps), I can see it costing around the US$75 - US$100 USD per app 
mark.

What do people think to this?

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.

From: android-discuss@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:android-disc...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Muthu Ramadoss
Sent: 04 August 2009 08:35
To: android-discuss@googlegroups.com
Subject: [android-discuss] Re: It's the Apps, Stupid!

An official certification program for developers would be a good idea, but i 
don't support the google seal for apps idea.

take care,
Muthu Ramadoss.

 http://linkedin.com/in/tellibitz 
 http://androidrocks.googlecode.com  - Android Consulting.

Sent from Tamil Nadu, India
Mike Ditka< http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mike_ditka.html> ;  - "If 
God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given us arms."
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Ian 




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.





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



It's the Apps, Stupid!

by Muthu Ramadoss » Tue, 04 Aug 2009 15:55:30 GMT


 Apple's 99$/year for unlimited apps looks great.

take care,
Muthu Ramadoss.

 http://linkedin.com/in/tellibitz 
 http://androidrocks.googlecode.com  - Android Consulting.

Sent from Tamil Nadu, India
Pablo Picasso< http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/pablo_picasso.html> ;
- "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."






--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~



Other Threads

1. OOT WTA: Anggota Republik Mimpi G1

Maap pinjem jalur mods,
Iseng tengah malem aja,sambil nyangkul di ladang
As subject,adakah selain orang2 ini yg jadi masters of G1 dan berkutat dgn
HTC Dream G1.
Buat nambah2 silaturahmi juga.Mohon maap jika tak berkenan.
Suhu/i :
1.Jefri Priambodo
2.Ichan
3.Dantez
4.Enya Anggia
5.Justinus
6.Jei W
7.........
8.........
9.........

Waks ..lupa ketinggalan Adityo(Tyo)

Salam kenal nyubeeh :)

Trimsss

@nukudroid
thenukudroid.wordpress.com

-- 
"Indonesian Android Community [id-android]" 

2. Why my logger can`nt record mos t log info锛

Hi,all:

The below is my logger define:

 private final static String SERV_LOG_PATH =
"/data/data/com.mid/serv%u.log";
 private final static String ERR_LOG_PATH = "/data/data/com.mid/error.log";
static {
        try {

            // init to error logger
            servLogger = Logger.getLogger("service");
            FileHandler servHandler = new FileHandler(SERV_LOG_PATH, 1024,
5, true);
            servHandler.setFormatter(new SimpleFormatter());
            servLogger.addHandler(servHandler);
            errLogger = Logger.getLogger("error");
            FileHandler errorHandler = new
FileHandler(ERR_LOG_PATH,1024,1,true);
            errorHandler.setFormatter(new SimpleFormatter());
            errLogger.addHandler(errorHandler);

        } catch (IOException e) {
            Log.e("TAG", e.toString());
        }
    }
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I user the servLogger.info() to record my log info ,but the log file can`nt
record the most log,so what happen ?
Anyboy can help me!

THX!!

-- 
Boern Z

-- 

3. Sprint Hero Android 2.1 Lost Copy Protected Apps Access

4. How to export mediaplayer on 2.2?

5. Buku Android Programming

6. Multi touch di Spic

7. Multicast through virtual router of the emulator