10 ms·

Amazon Underground

350 points by acjohnson55 11y ago

mordrax 11y ago
> Actually free I'm feeling a bit sad that I'm overjoyed to hear that this category exists. Paid, Free, Actually free I like how they explain up-front that they pay the authors instead of perhaps another hidden payment model within 'Actually free' that ends up charging users.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- agumonkey 11y ago
  Nothing surprising after a decade of unlimited internet under specified limit.
hackuser 11y ago
Isn't this the same model that funds most websites? Zero cost in exchange for advertising and, I'm guessing, giving up your private information - with all the positives and negatives associated with that model. I'm too lazy to check: Does Amazon say what private info is collected? Info on phones can be much more personal and more accessible to other applications.
- 72deluxe 11y ago
  Not sure but the app does request permission for everything on your phone: http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004GJDQT8/ref=sr_1_28?tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=22be1a79ec3c46e386bebddb073312f5&s=mobile-apps&ie=UTF8&qid=1440594086#mas-app-permissions http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004G... Thanks to mkaziz above for the link, apologies for the repetition
serve_yay 11y ago
Interesting. Curious about the reaction to Google Play not allowing such an app. (I'm guessing restrictions on app stores are ok when Google does them)
- btilly 11y ago
  Here is my best guess. And it really is a guess. Everyone with an app store wants to own the app store market. It is a land-grab to establish a monopoly. Amazon has to be worried about this because if you own the app store, you choose the default way that people read books on the device. Which means that they can cut Amazon out of the book-selling business to that person. Amazon doesn't want that. So they have been trying to make the Kindle work. And to install their bookstore as an app. And to try to make their app store viable. And so on. It is all a long-term play to be in a position to not lose a core business when everyone switches to reading on devices.
- mkozlows 11y ago
  The key difference on Android is, and has always been, that you can get apps from off of Google Play. Google's store is just a store with its own policies, and you can install apps from anywhere (including other stores) if you want. Which is why there is an Android version of this, and no iOS version.
valhalla 11y ago
Is the reason Amazon isn't releasing this for iOS because of Apple's closed ecosystem or is Google just a bigger competitive threat?
- anindyabd 11y ago
  Amazon's own OS is a fork of Android, and the Amazon Appstore consists almost entirely of Android apps you could also get through Google Play. So it makes sense they'd do it for just Android.
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago
  Closed system. There isn't a good way of doing this on iOS that isn't complicated. Too complicated for the average user.
- jrowley 11y ago
  It wouldn't be feasible to do this on iOS. It'd required everyone of their customers to jailbreak their phone, and then all of the app developers would violate the TOS with Apple by releasing the app in ways that circumvent the app store.
- dandroid1 11y ago
  Because it's a pain in the ass to sideload apps on iOS.
- jlawer 11y ago
  iOS doesn't allow apps to be installed outside a few apple controlled processes without a JailBreak. I don't think Amazon would want to launch a product dependent on JailBreaking. Unless Apple is forced to provide an API for alternative app stores, I can't see this ever being allowed. Unless of course apple rips off the idea and does it themselves.
  - valhalla 11y ago
    Could Apple take legal action if Amazon were to try that? (hypothetically of course)
sigmar 11y ago
Took me a minute to find out what "actually free" means: https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/understanding-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do... "Interstitial Advertisements When a user launches an Amazon Underground app for the first time, a welcome message in the form of an interstitial ad plays. In subsequent times that a user either launches or resumes the app, paid interstitial ads will also sometimes play." Interesting. So amazon deals with putting in the ads and the app dev gets paid for every minute the app is used. Seems like an interesting idea, probably useful for games that are very engaging (read: time drain)
- modeless 11y ago
  Finally, someone figures out the real reason Amazon is doing this. Thank you for doing the job all the journalists reporting on the press release failed to do.
  - ilovehops 11y ago
    If ^ is true, why does amazon feel the need to disclose this at all? Seems like a weird set of words that either displays culture or product. They could easily say nothing and sign the same deal.
  - austenallred 11y ago
    Of course there are ads. Amazon never implied that there wouldn't be. This isn't Amazon trying to be sneaky. The opening lines say that everything is free and developers get paid according to use. How did you expect that would happen? It has to be subsidized in some way, and in the context of an app store that means ads. When you download an app in the app store it says "free" not "free with ads" because you don't have to pay any money for it. It's still, technically, free.
    - aiiane 11y ago
      Not mentioning ads at all in an announcement about a service that adds ads to apps to replace the fee isn't being sneaky?
gp7 11y ago
This sounds like a good idea; I won't be using it
sahaj 11y ago
One problem with Amazon App Store on Android phones is that if I replace my Android phone, I have to start all over again. Using the Google ecosystem, it's a matter of signing in and all my backed up apps and data are reinstated. There's a lot more friction to keep using the Amazon App Store/Underground app than there is with Google Play Store.
- grogenaut 11y ago
  untrue, you re-add the amazon app store and your apps are back. Google also recently changed it so it doesn't force reinstall everything, you choose what you want re-installed. Or at least it did in 5.2. I actually prefer it as some apps are garbage
thezilch 11y ago
If you want to browse their apps to see what is "actually free" before going through all the trouble of their app: http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=rw_tiny?&node=11350978011 http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=rw_tiny?&node=11350978011
swehner 11y ago
Totally uninteresting.
eloff 11y ago
I see this as hugely superior to the freemium model, both from the perspective of the user and the app developers. App developers no longer need to cripple their apps and sell in-app band-aids to make money. The developers of the more entertaining and engaging apps will make more money. End users no longer spend a bunch of time on a game only to find out they need to pay to advance to the next part, or bypass some artificial restriction that shouldn't be there. It just seems like a much more civil relationship.
- gdeglin 11y ago
  This model comes with a few problems: 1) High quality games that are meant to be completed quickly will make less money relative to poor quality games that stretch out gameplay. 2) Developers become incentivized to stretch out gameplay to increase revenue. 3) Amazon Underground is covering the costs for now. But if users were asked to pay themselves, I'm sure many would balk at the idea of paying per-minute to play games. All that aside, this is an interesting idea. I could see episodic games particularly benefiting from this model -- so long as they don't fall into the trap of stretching out gameplay to increase revenue.
  - theli0nheart 11y ago
    How are 1) and 2) different than the status quo? Aren't developers already incentivized to keep users in their app for as long as possible? More touch points -> more IAP buying opportunities -> more money. > 3) Amazon Underground is covering the costs for now. But if users were asked to pay themselves, I'm sure many would balk at the idea of paying per-minute to play games. As I understand it, it's not a pay-per-minute sort of deal. You'd pay the same price every month and the revenue would be divied out based on usage (like Netflix).
  - pazimzadeh 11y ago
    Point 1 and 2 seem like the same thing, but I agree.
  - dvogel 11y ago
    Points (1) and (2) are true for ad-supported games in general. What Underground provides is a way for games developers to be able to provide a low-barrier ad-supported version of their game while being completely unconcerned with ads. It essentially allows the developer to engage in two different business models (pay-for-install and ad-supported) without that dual-model creeping into the implementation of the game. In that respect, this developer-player inter-mediation is more of a threat to Valve's Steam than it is for Google's Play store.
azernik 11y ago
They reaaallly want the Amazon app store to happen on Android, don't they? We'll see if free content will be enough to get non-tech-savvy users to go through the trouble of installing an .apk file.
- zobzu 11y ago
  I dont know but thats how i want my app store to be so im installing it.
  - nindalf 11y ago
    I'm genuinely curious about your stance. You would prefer more ads to paying? I thought more tech-savvy people prefer to pay small amounts for apps, so that they are the customer.
  - ossreality 11y ago
    ... what is how you want your app store to be? The thing is a god damn nightmare to install, even for someone who is really trying and is savvy. So many god damn redirect loops.
x5n1 11y ago
meh. wonder if this will be affected by their employment fiasco, it definitely impacts my interest in trying their services.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
buzz27 11y ago
they ... actually think i'll read that stupid sideways fake ye olde typewriter typefaced "letter"?
- serve_yay 11y ago
  Repeating my call for each HN post to have a new, separate comments section specifically for shitty comments about the page itself as opposed to the ideas contained therein
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - untilHellbanned 11y ago
    Why isn't the page itself relevant?
    - buzz27 11y ago
      do none of you find the "whiff of the subversive" design oddly incongruous with the author?
      - goldenkey 11y ago
        I for one do...
    - untog 11y ago
      It's like the theory of HTML and CSS - content vs presentation. Much like HTML and CSS, reality is a blur of them both, but we can still aspire to separate them as much as we can.
curiousjorge 11y ago
don't know what this means exactly. are we getting free apps? how are they paying devs?
sb23 11y ago
Australia is left off the list of countries. I can still sign in with my Australian account, using the US option though.
robmiller 11y ago
Downloading now and it is coming from Akamai. Surprised it isn't coming from AWS.
- AndrewUnmuted 11y ago
  Having just left a career at Amazon that spanned nearly 5 years, I can say with experience that it is not so uncommon to find this happening. I worked at a subsidiary, and we had to bill Amazon Corporate for our own AWS use. Being a media-oriented company, this particular subsidiary is sometimes a bit of an expensive AWS customer. As a result, my former department, to this day, uses a Hightail (formerly, YouSendIt) dropbox as its only means by which customers can deliver files to the support and quality assurance teams.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
    > I worked at a subsidiary, and we had to bill Amazon Corporate for our own AWS use. Well, doesn't Amazon have a philosophy that ALL interaction between departments must be via services?
mordrax 11y ago
From the author's pov, it's an interesting proposition. Take sorcery for example: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dbanjo-apps&field-keywords=sorcery http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dba... I bought this and played it for about an hour to completion. For my hour, I'd have made them $0.12. Instead, I paid $4.64. So for them to get to the same profit using this model, they'd have to attract $4.62/$0.12 = 38 times more users. i.e instead of having 1000+ downloads, they'd need to be in the 38k+ downloads range and for everyone to have played it to completion. I see two problems for this particular game. 1. Fighting fantasy based games are a niche market so is there going to be a large enough user base to support this? 2. I'd say that the length of a typical gamebook shouldn't be more than 1-2 hours as it will get very complex. So they're kind of capped re per player usage. Since it's a niche market, I don't imagine there would be hundreds of thousands of people trying this out for 5 minutes each.
- zrgiu_ 11y ago
  remember that you paid $4.64, but 30% of that went to Amazon anyway. Generally, about 2-3% of the people who would download a free app would also pay for it, which could make Underground a good choice. People who haven't paid though, aren't as invested, and are more likely to quit using that app sooner. Also, there's the niche issue: it's very possible that fighting fantasy fans are more likely to pay for their apps, which means none of these numbers applies to them.
- zephyrthenoble 11y ago
  There are also a lot of people out there who would not be willing to pay the $4.64 dollars. By using this model, developers can get both the people who want to buy it through the store and people who don't want to spend any money to play it, which might end up being more total profit.
driverdan 11y ago
There are serious privacy implications of this. Is there a separate privacy policy for this? Will there be cross app user tracking / retargeting? Are there any privacy opt-outs?
zrgiu_ 11y ago
This is Android - what about apps that run mostly in the background ? A music player, fitness tracker, activity tracker? What about apps that run continuously, like a launcher ?
- 72deluxe 11y ago
  Time to write a live wallpaper!
pervycreeper 11y ago
To install, it requires a rear-facing camera for some odd reason.
justin_vanw 11y ago
I bought my daughters Kindle Fire's for Christmas. It doesn't have the Google Play store. 99.99% of the apps available, either free or even paid, are cookie cutter, mass produced, generic garbage. Almost all the free apps were complete junk. Besides that, the Kindle Fire is a fundamentally useless device for kids. The kid mode was so buggy as to be useless. Take more than a few minutes of video and the wifi won't work. Some bug about if the disk is full wifi fails to work. There's just about no way to get the videos off the device, and no way for kids to do it. Download 2 movies? The wifi stops working. Install an app? 80% of the time, it never shows up in the menu. The entire experience was stunningly bad. Amazon's entire Android device category is garbage. People complain about the extensions to Android by Samsung, etc, but honestly at least those other companies don't fundamentally ruin the device.
- eclipxe 11y ago
  Did you contact CS? Amazon's customer support is amazingly good and would take care of that for you ASAP.
  - shawabawa3 11y ago
    Customer support will be happy to refund your purchase, but there's nothing they can do about a fundamentally bad product
    - eclipxe 11y ago
      This clearly sounds like defective hardware that could be replaced.
      - justin_vanw 11y ago
        The hardware is fine, it's a software issue.
- tootie 11y ago
  If your kid is reading at a first grade level or so, the best device for her is a Chromebook. It can play all the little flash games on nickjr.com or pbskids.org, but is also a tiny functional computer with a full keyboard and trackpad.
biot 11y ago
I got an email from Microsoft today with this kind of "letter". See https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNSgnyfWEAAvd9J.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNSgnyfWEAAvd9J.jpg:large I hope this doesn't become a trend, like using a picture of laminate flooring as a website background was a number of years back.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  This actively discriminates against people who find certain typefaces difficult, those using assistive technologies, and those using mobile devices. It's also not machine-friendly, so search engines can't index it and Ctrl+F doesn't work. There's probably plenty of other reasons people can give for why plaintext is better. I wish people wouldn't do this. It's not even necessary to get the desired effect. CSS has had rotation, custom fonts, custom backgrounds and such for a long time.
  - blacksmith_tb 11y ago
    I am very sympathetic to your position, but CSS support in email clients is still surprisingly primitive (e.g. MS using Word's html rendering engine in Outlook). If you look at the source of most html emails that you get, they will be using tables for layout...
    - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
      The rotation is really the only thing I'd expect problems with. Surely Word supports background-image: ?
amaks 11y ago
Fuck you, Amazon. And your security hole, too.
hosh 11y ago
Well played, Amazon.
Animats 11y ago
Amazon's announcement probably violates FTC advertising rules. "The FTC’s longstanding guidance to companies is that disclosures in their ads should be close to the claims to which they relate – not hidden or buried in unrelated details – and they should appear in a font that is easy to read and in a shade that stands out against the background. Disclosures for television ads should be on the screen long enough to be noticed, read, and understood, and other elements in the ads should not obscure or distract from the disclosures." Every once in a while, the FTC does clamp down on this.[1] [1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/09/operation-full-disclosure-targets-more-60-national-advertisers https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/09/opera...
wasyl 11y ago
Worth noting that "The Amazon Underground program is currently available in the US, UK, Germany, and France."
amrrs 11y ago
Amazon's attempt to create its own App-based-Ad-Network? Fighting Ad-blocker or Killing Google?
shade23 11y ago
Isnt this how the Amazon App store would work on the kindles? Instead of one free app a day,you have several apps free.
frozenport 11y ago
Doesn't fit in my browser windows: http://postimg.org/image/okkmeowkf/850ce136/ http://postimg.org/image/okkmeowkf/850ce136/
- kristopolous 11y ago
  try scrolling.
  - frozenport 11y ago
    Doesn't seem to scroll.
    - kristopolous 11y ago
      sad, it worked for me. sorry about that
alblue 11y ago
This Trojan horse gives Amazon complete control of your device, from network connections to cameras to data. But don't look at that! Free shiny! Pay no attention to the virus behind the curtain.
hyperpallium 11y ago
What is security like on Amazon's appstore? It has all-encompassing permissions. always online? Must the apps be used online, for monitoring usage and downloading ads - or can they be run offline, with the Amazon appstore app uploading stats/downloading ads when connected? (I ask this because I run games in "airport mode" and "stop" them afterwards, as a security measure, having been burned).
argklm 11y ago
The discussion linked here, may also be interesting for you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9752948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9752948
mkaziz 11y ago
Did anyone look at the list of permissions? Amazon isn't paying developers for interstital ads ... it's paying them to have an excuse to track everything on your phone: http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004GJDQT8/ref=sr_1_28?tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=22be1a79ec3c46e386bebddb073312f5&s=mobile-apps&ie=UTF8&qid=1440594086#mas-app-permissions http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004G...
- 72deluxe 11y ago
  My word that's a massive list. That's insane.
haser_au 11y ago
Seems like Amazon are trying to replicate WeChat by creating a platform that people don't leave to use apps. By owning this 'ecosystem', Amazon can (a) collect all sorts of data from what apps people use, how long they use them, when they use them, etc. and (b) can provide ads (as Sigmar states) that are very targetted. Smart play. It's definitely disruptive...
ck2 11y ago
So what's the direct download url for Amazon_App.apk ? Oh here we go: https://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android?dl=1 https://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android?dl=1 Take off the ?dl for a better splash page http://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android http://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android
smonff 11y ago
I hope underground is no copyrighted or a trademark right now, it would really be ridiculous.
PhrosTT 11y ago
I actually tried to install this, but stopped when it prompted me for permissions. It literally asked for every permission I can imagine (read and write my files, all contacts, all calls & texts, all sensors, etc etc etc).
- jcfrei 11y ago
  Amazon is apparently almost desperate to establish their own apps marketplace.
sleepychu 11y ago
The sideways text made this very hard to read!
Havoc 11y ago
So where are the actual apps? After jumping through all those hoops I get a 4th damn amazon app on my phone that just takes me to the amazon storepage? And displays the unground banner at the top (again) that leads to a blank page with just a refine search button on it? Tempted to uninstall them all...except the Kindle.
mikemee 11y ago
My (still incomplete) analysis of whether it's worth it for my apps... I have some paid and freemium puzzle apps on Amazon and Play that would fit this model well, because they don't currently have ads, large numbers of people play them for free without ever buying, and the puzzles take 10+ minutes to solve and people often play for 20-30mins most days. So, this was intriguing to me. However, as always, the devil is in the details. Some things that I haven't seen (much?) in other comments yet: - to be accepted to Underground, you have to have an existing app on Play or Amazon. - the submitted app must be "substantially similar to or better". I.e. no stripping out extra volumes or removing key features - that app must not already have ads - you have to seamlessly migrate state for players already using your game (i.e. help your current paid? users move to free (for them)) - Amazon can show ads at the end, as well as at the beginning - you can't change your mind and withdraw the app within the first 3 months - if you do withdraw your app, you must continue to support it for anyone who has downloaded it (including keeping backend servers running etc) - it's not permitted to tweak your app to try and game it for extra time spent - if your app uses subscriptions, it's not eligible - lots of fine print here, fwiw: https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/legal/da#AmazonUndergroundSchedule https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/legal/da#AmazonU... I ran basic numbers for my apps through Amazon's convenient calculator (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/calculator https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/ca...). It's impossible to know some of outcomes, notably: how much appearing in Underground will canibalize my existing apps in either Play or Amazon? If I niavely assume that all my usage & IAP payments switch immediately from Play & Amazon combined, to be just Amazon Underground, the numbers for one of my apps works out as: - Number of user engaged minutes last month: 728300 (according to Flurry session tracking) - Revenue for this app: USD$1446.37 (this is for 2 months prior, but close enough) So, if I go to the calculator and enter 728300 minutes into Amazon, 0 mins for Google, $1446.37 Amazon revenue, $0 Google revenue, and 0% increase for both, then I get the magic number of $1457. I.e., $10 more with Underground. But ... does this really mean anything? On the dev/web jockey side, I figure about a day per app to adapt and submit it. Some of the steps needed for my apps are: - rebuild the app with a different package name (presumably so it doesn't conflict with a prior installed version of my app - ideally remove all IAP (if it is already Amazon IAP, then they'll just make it free anyway, but if it's Play, then rip it out / replace with "Unlock" instead of "Purchase" and skip the calls to Google). I have Amazon IAP already, but I'd spend a few minutes to make them all free instead. And maybe a few more minutes to remove the Amazon IAP support library. Then a few more minutes to resolve build errors. Then a few more minutes to test that I didn't screw it all up. (Repeat.) - create a new app listing at the Amazon web site, following their carefully detailed criteria (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/migrating-your-app-to-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do...) - add an "Actually Free" sash to my icon (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/migrating-your-app-to-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do...) - build, test, repeat TL;DR: I'm on the fence. Switching would indeed capture revenue from the 90% of users who never buy extra volumes. However, it could kill revenue from those who do. Other intangibles: - will it annoy the customers who have paid me so far - by definition my best customers. Will they ask for refunds? - will iOS customers demand something simlar? - should I promote this to my customers? - should I jump in REALLY fast (today!) so all the early Underground adopters find my apps because there will be fewer to choose from initially For now, I'm sitting tight. I've had a strict "no ads" policy in all my apps so far (and no spyware either), so I'll see how it evolves. One related detail: my app revenue for Android used to be evenly split between Amazon and Google Play. For the past twelve months, Amazon has been declining, even though Play (and iOS) have been gradually increasing. I'm not sure if this reflects declining Kindle Fire adoption, decreased visible of my apps in the Amazon store, or ... ? I hope this adds some data to the commentary...

350 points by acjohnson55 11y ago

> Actually free I'm feeling a bit sad that I'm overjoyed to hear that this category exists. Paid, Free, Actually free I like how they explain up-front that they pay the authors instead of perhaps another hidden payment model within 'Actually free' that ends up charging users.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
agumonkey 11y ago
Nothing surprising after a decade of unlimited internet under specified limit.

hackuser 11y ago

Isn't this the same model that funds most websites? Zero cost in exchange for advertising and, I'm guessing, giving up your private information - with all the positives and negatives associated with that model. I'm too lazy to check: Does Amazon say what private info is collected? Info on phones can be much more personal and more accessible to other applications.

72deluxe 11y ago
Not sure but the app does request permission for everything on your phone: http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004GJDQT8/ref=sr_1_28?tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=22be1a79ec3c46e386bebddb073312f5&s=mobile-apps&ie=UTF8&qid=1440594086#mas-app-permissions http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004G... Thanks to mkaziz above for the link, apologies for the repetition

serve_yay 11y ago

Interesting. Curious about the reaction to Google Play not allowing such an app. (I'm guessing restrictions on app stores are ok when Google does them)

btilly 11y ago
Here is my best guess. And it really is a guess. Everyone with an app store wants to own the app store market. It is a land-grab to establish a monopoly. Amazon has to be worried about this because if you own the app store, you choose the default way that people read books on the device. Which means that they can cut Amazon out of the book-selling business to that person. Amazon doesn't want that. So they have been trying to make the Kindle work. And to install their bookstore as an app. And to try to make their app store viable. And so on. It is all a long-term play to be in a position to not lose a core business when everyone switches to reading on devices.
mkozlows 11y ago
The key difference on Android is, and has always been, that you can get apps from off of Google Play. Google's store is just a store with its own policies, and you can install apps from anywhere (including other stores) if you want. Which is why there is an Android version of this, and no iOS version.

valhalla 11y ago

Is the reason Amazon isn't releasing this for iOS because of Apple's closed ecosystem or is Google just a bigger competitive threat?

anindyabd 11y ago
Amazon's own OS is a fork of Android, and the Amazon Appstore consists almost entirely of Android apps you could also get through Google Play. So it makes sense they'd do it for just Android.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
Closed system. There isn't a good way of doing this on iOS that isn't complicated. Too complicated for the average user.
jrowley 11y ago
It wouldn't be feasible to do this on iOS. It'd required everyone of their customers to jailbreak their phone, and then all of the app developers would violate the TOS with Apple by releasing the app in ways that circumvent the app store.
dandroid1 11y ago
Because it's a pain in the ass to sideload apps on iOS.
jlawer 11y ago
iOS doesn't allow apps to be installed outside a few apple controlled processes without a JailBreak. I don't think Amazon would want to launch a product dependent on JailBreaking. Unless Apple is forced to provide an API for alternative app stores, I can't see this ever being allowed. Unless of course apple rips off the idea and does it themselves.
- valhalla 11y ago
  Could Apple take legal action if Amazon were to try that? (hypothetically of course)

sigmar 11y ago

Took me a minute to find out what "actually free" means: https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/understanding-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do... "Interstitial Advertisements When a user launches an Amazon Underground app for the first time, a welcome message in the form of an interstitial ad plays. In subsequent times that a user either launches or resumes the app, paid interstitial ads will also sometimes play." Interesting. So amazon deals with putting in the ads and the app dev gets paid for every minute the app is used. Seems like an interesting idea, probably useful for games that are very engaging (read: time drain)

modeless 11y ago
Finally, someone figures out the real reason Amazon is doing this. Thank you for doing the job all the journalists reporting on the press release failed to do.
- ilovehops 11y ago
  If ^ is true, why does amazon feel the need to disclose this at all? Seems like a weird set of words that either displays culture or product. They could easily say nothing and sign the same deal.
- austenallred 11y ago
  Of course there are ads. Amazon never implied that there wouldn't be. This isn't Amazon trying to be sneaky. The opening lines say that everything is free and developers get paid according to use. How did you expect that would happen? It has to be subsidized in some way, and in the context of an app store that means ads. When you download an app in the app store it says "free" not "free with ads" because you don't have to pay any money for it. It's still, technically, free.
  - aiiane 11y ago
    Not mentioning ads at all in an announcement about a service that adds ads to apps to replace the fee isn't being sneaky?

gp7 11y ago

This sounds like a good idea; I won't be using it

sahaj 11y ago

One problem with Amazon App Store on Android phones is that if I replace my Android phone, I have to start all over again. Using the Google ecosystem, it's a matter of signing in and all my backed up apps and data are reinstated. There's a lot more friction to keep using the Amazon App Store/Underground app than there is with Google Play Store.

grogenaut 11y ago
untrue, you re-add the amazon app store and your apps are back. Google also recently changed it so it doesn't force reinstall everything, you choose what you want re-installed. Or at least it did in 5.2. I actually prefer it as some apps are garbage

thezilch 11y ago

If you want to browse their apps to see what is "actually free" before going through all the trouble of their app: http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=rw_tiny?&node=11350978011 http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=rw_tiny?&node=11350978011

swehner 11y ago

Totally uninteresting.

eloff 11y ago

I see this as hugely superior to the freemium model, both from the perspective of the user and the app developers. App developers no longer need to cripple their apps and sell in-app band-aids to make money. The developers of the more entertaining and engaging apps will make more money. End users no longer spend a bunch of time on a game only to find out they need to pay to advance to the next part, or bypass some artificial restriction that shouldn't be there. It just seems like a much more civil relationship.

gdeglin 11y ago
This model comes with a few problems: 1) High quality games that are meant to be completed quickly will make less money relative to poor quality games that stretch out gameplay. 2) Developers become incentivized to stretch out gameplay to increase revenue. 3) Amazon Underground is covering the costs for now. But if users were asked to pay themselves, I'm sure many would balk at the idea of paying per-minute to play games. All that aside, this is an interesting idea. I could see episodic games particularly benefiting from this model -- so long as they don't fall into the trap of stretching out gameplay to increase revenue.
- theli0nheart 11y ago
  How are 1) and 2) different than the status quo? Aren't developers already incentivized to keep users in their app for as long as possible? More touch points -> more IAP buying opportunities -> more money. > 3) Amazon Underground is covering the costs for now. But if users were asked to pay themselves, I'm sure many would balk at the idea of paying per-minute to play games. As I understand it, it's not a pay-per-minute sort of deal. You'd pay the same price every month and the revenue would be divied out based on usage (like Netflix).
- pazimzadeh 11y ago
  Point 1 and 2 seem like the same thing, but I agree.
- dvogel 11y ago
  Points (1) and (2) are true for ad-supported games in general. What Underground provides is a way for games developers to be able to provide a low-barrier ad-supported version of their game while being completely unconcerned with ads. It essentially allows the developer to engage in two different business models (pay-for-install and ad-supported) without that dual-model creeping into the implementation of the game. In that respect, this developer-player inter-mediation is more of a threat to Valve's Steam than it is for Google's Play store.

azernik 11y ago

They reaaallly want the Amazon app store to happen on Android, don't they? We'll see if free content will be enough to get non-tech-savvy users to go through the trouble of installing an .apk file.

zobzu 11y ago
I dont know but thats how i want my app store to be so im installing it.
- nindalf 11y ago
  I'm genuinely curious about your stance. You would prefer more ads to paying? I thought more tech-savvy people prefer to pay small amounts for apps, so that they are the customer.
- ossreality 11y ago
  ... what is how you want your app store to be? The thing is a god damn nightmare to install, even for someone who is really trying and is savvy. So many god damn redirect loops.

x5n1 11y ago

meh. wonder if this will be affected by their employment fiasco, it definitely impacts my interest in trying their services.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

buzz27 11y ago

they ... actually think i'll read that stupid sideways fake ye olde typewriter typefaced "letter"?

serve_yay 11y ago
Repeating my call for each HN post to have a new, separate comments section specifically for shitty comments about the page itself as opposed to the ideas contained therein
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- untilHellbanned 11y ago
  Why isn't the page itself relevant?
  - buzz27 11y ago
    do none of you find the "whiff of the subversive" design oddly incongruous with the author?
    - goldenkey 11y ago
      I for one do...
  - untog 11y ago
    It's like the theory of HTML and CSS - content vs presentation. Much like HTML and CSS, reality is a blur of them both, but we can still aspire to separate them as much as we can.

curiousjorge 11y ago

don't know what this means exactly. are we getting free apps? how are they paying devs?

sb23 11y ago

Australia is left off the list of countries. I can still sign in with my Australian account, using the US option though.

robmiller 11y ago

Downloading now and it is coming from Akamai. Surprised it isn't coming from AWS.

AndrewUnmuted 11y ago
Having just left a career at Amazon that spanned nearly 5 years, I can say with experience that it is not so uncommon to find this happening. I worked at a subsidiary, and we had to bill Amazon Corporate for our own AWS use. Being a media-oriented company, this particular subsidiary is sometimes a bit of an expensive AWS customer. As a result, my former department, to this day, uses a Hightail (formerly, YouSendIt) dropbox as its only means by which customers can deliver files to the support and quality assurance teams.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  > I worked at a subsidiary, and we had to bill Amazon Corporate for our own AWS use. Well, doesn't Amazon have a philosophy that ALL interaction between departments must be via services?

mordrax 11y ago

From the author's pov, it's an interesting proposition. Take sorcery for example: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dbanjo-apps&field-keywords=sorcery http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dba... I bought this and played it for about an hour to completion. For my hour, I'd have made them $0.12. Instead, I paid $4.64. So for them to get to the same profit using this model, they'd have to attract $4.62/$0.12 = 38 times more users. i.e instead of having 1000+ downloads, they'd need to be in the 38k+ downloads range and for everyone to have played it to completion. I see two problems for this particular game. 1. Fighting fantasy based games are a niche market so is there going to be a large enough user base to support this? 2. I'd say that the length of a typical gamebook shouldn't be more than 1-2 hours as it will get very complex. So they're kind of capped re per player usage. Since it's a niche market, I don't imagine there would be hundreds of thousands of people trying this out for 5 minutes each.

zrgiu_ 11y ago
remember that you paid $4.64, but 30% of that went to Amazon anyway. Generally, about 2-3% of the people who would download a free app would also pay for it, which could make Underground a good choice. People who haven't paid though, aren't as invested, and are more likely to quit using that app sooner. Also, there's the niche issue: it's very possible that fighting fantasy fans are more likely to pay for their apps, which means none of these numbers applies to them.
zephyrthenoble 11y ago
There are also a lot of people out there who would not be willing to pay the $4.64 dollars. By using this model, developers can get both the people who want to buy it through the store and people who don't want to spend any money to play it, which might end up being more total profit.

driverdan 11y ago

There are serious privacy implications of this. Is there a separate privacy policy for this? Will there be cross app user tracking / retargeting? Are there any privacy opt-outs?

zrgiu_ 11y ago

This is Android - what about apps that run mostly in the background ? A music player, fitness tracker, activity tracker? What about apps that run continuously, like a launcher ?

72deluxe 11y ago
Time to write a live wallpaper!

pervycreeper 11y ago

To install, it requires a rear-facing camera for some odd reason.

justin_vanw 11y ago

I bought my daughters Kindle Fire's for Christmas. It doesn't have the Google Play store. 99.99% of the apps available, either free or even paid, are cookie cutter, mass produced, generic garbage. Almost all the free apps were complete junk. Besides that, the Kindle Fire is a fundamentally useless device for kids. The kid mode was so buggy as to be useless. Take more than a few minutes of video and the wifi won't work. Some bug about if the disk is full wifi fails to work. There's just about no way to get the videos off the device, and no way for kids to do it. Download 2 movies? The wifi stops working. Install an app? 80% of the time, it never shows up in the menu. The entire experience was stunningly bad. Amazon's entire Android device category is garbage. People complain about the extensions to Android by Samsung, etc, but honestly at least those other companies don't fundamentally ruin the device.

eclipxe 11y ago
Did you contact CS? Amazon's customer support is amazingly good and would take care of that for you ASAP.
- shawabawa3 11y ago
  Customer support will be happy to refund your purchase, but there's nothing they can do about a fundamentally bad product
  - eclipxe 11y ago
    This clearly sounds like defective hardware that could be replaced.
    - justin_vanw 11y ago
      The hardware is fine, it's a software issue.
tootie 11y ago
If your kid is reading at a first grade level or so, the best device for her is a Chromebook. It can play all the little flash games on nickjr.com or pbskids.org, but is also a tiny functional computer with a full keyboard and trackpad.

biot 11y ago

I got an email from Microsoft today with this kind of "letter". See https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNSgnyfWEAAvd9J.jpg:large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNSgnyfWEAAvd9J.jpg:large I hope this doesn't become a trend, like using a picture of laminate flooring as a website background was a number of years back.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
This actively discriminates against people who find certain typefaces difficult, those using assistive technologies, and those using mobile devices. It's also not machine-friendly, so search engines can't index it and Ctrl+F doesn't work. There's probably plenty of other reasons people can give for why plaintext is better. I wish people wouldn't do this. It's not even necessary to get the desired effect. CSS has had rotation, custom fonts, custom backgrounds and such for a long time.
- blacksmith_tb 11y ago
  I am very sympathetic to your position, but CSS support in email clients is still surprisingly primitive (e.g. MS using Word's html rendering engine in Outlook). If you look at the source of most html emails that you get, they will be using tables for layout...
  - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
    The rotation is really the only thing I'd expect problems with. Surely Word supports background-image: ?

amaks 11y ago

Fuck you, Amazon. And your security hole, too.

hosh 11y ago

Well played, Amazon.

Animats 11y ago

Amazon's announcement probably violates FTC advertising rules. "The FTC’s longstanding guidance to companies is that disclosures in their ads should be close to the claims to which they relate – not hidden or buried in unrelated details – and they should appear in a font that is easy to read and in a shade that stands out against the background. Disclosures for television ads should be on the screen long enough to be noticed, read, and understood, and other elements in the ads should not obscure or distract from the disclosures." Every once in a while, the FTC does clamp down on this.[1] [1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/09/operation-full-disclosure-targets-more-60-national-advertisers https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/09/opera...

wasyl 11y ago

Worth noting that "The Amazon Underground program is currently available in the US, UK, Germany, and France."

amrrs 11y ago

Amazon's attempt to create its own App-based-Ad-Network? Fighting Ad-blocker or Killing Google?

shade23 11y ago

Isnt this how the Amazon App store would work on the kindles? Instead of one free app a day,you have several apps free.

frozenport 11y ago

Doesn't fit in my browser windows: http://postimg.org/image/okkmeowkf/850ce136/ http://postimg.org/image/okkmeowkf/850ce136/

kristopolous 11y ago
try scrolling.
- frozenport 11y ago
  Doesn't seem to scroll.
  - kristopolous 11y ago
    sad, it worked for me. sorry about that

alblue 11y ago

This Trojan horse gives Amazon complete control of your device, from network connections to cameras to data. But don't look at that! Free shiny! Pay no attention to the virus behind the curtain.

hyperpallium 11y ago

What is security like on Amazon's appstore? It has all-encompassing permissions. always online? Must the apps be used online, for monitoring usage and downloading ads - or can they be run offline, with the Amazon appstore app uploading stats/downloading ads when connected? (I ask this because I run games in "airport mode" and "stop" them afterwards, as a security measure, having been burned).

argklm 11y ago

The discussion linked here, may also be interesting for you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9752948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9752948

mkaziz 11y ago

Did anyone look at the list of permissions? Amazon isn't paying developers for interstital ads ... it's paying them to have an excuse to track everything on your phone: http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004GJDQT8/ref=sr_1_28?tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=22be1a79ec3c46e386bebddb073312f5&s=mobile-apps&ie=UTF8&qid=1440594086#mas-app-permissions http://www.amazon.com/Amazon-com-Amazon-Underground/dp/B004G...

72deluxe 11y ago
My word that's a massive list. That's insane.

haser_au 11y ago

Seems like Amazon are trying to replicate WeChat by creating a platform that people don't leave to use apps. By owning this 'ecosystem', Amazon can (a) collect all sorts of data from what apps people use, how long they use them, when they use them, etc. and (b) can provide ads (as Sigmar states) that are very targetted. Smart play. It's definitely disruptive...

ck2 11y ago

So what's the direct download url for Amazon_App.apk ? Oh here we go: https://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android?dl=1 https://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android?dl=1 Take off the ?dl for a better splash page http://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android http://amazon.com/gp/mas/get/android

smonff 11y ago

I hope underground is no copyrighted or a trademark right now, it would really be ridiculous.

PhrosTT 11y ago

I actually tried to install this, but stopped when it prompted me for permissions. It literally asked for every permission I can imagine (read and write my files, all contacts, all calls & texts, all sensors, etc etc etc).

jcfrei 11y ago
Amazon is apparently almost desperate to establish their own apps marketplace.

sleepychu 11y ago

The sideways text made this very hard to read!

Havoc 11y ago

So where are the actual apps? After jumping through all those hoops I get a 4th damn amazon app on my phone that just takes me to the amazon storepage? And displays the unground banner at the top (again) that leads to a blank page with just a refine search button on it? Tempted to uninstall them all...except the Kindle.

mikemee 11y ago

My (still incomplete) analysis of whether it's worth it for my apps... I have some paid and freemium puzzle apps on Amazon and Play that would fit this model well, because they don't currently have ads, large numbers of people play them for free without ever buying, and the puzzles take 10+ minutes to solve and people often play for 20-30mins most days. So, this was intriguing to me. However, as always, the devil is in the details. Some things that I haven't seen (much?) in other comments yet: - to be accepted to Underground, you have to have an existing app on Play or Amazon. - the submitted app must be "substantially similar to or better". I.e. no stripping out extra volumes or removing key features - that app must not already have ads - you have to seamlessly migrate state for players already using your game (i.e. help your current paid? users move to free (for them)) - Amazon can show ads at the end, as well as at the beginning - you can't change your mind and withdraw the app within the first 3 months - if you do withdraw your app, you must continue to support it for anyone who has downloaded it (including keeping backend servers running etc) - it's not permitted to tweak your app to try and game it for extra time spent - if your app uses subscriptions, it's not eligible - lots of fine print here, fwiw: https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/legal/da#AmazonUndergroundSchedule https://developer.amazon.com/public/support/legal/da#AmazonU... I ran basic numbers for my apps through Amazon's convenient calculator (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/calculator https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/ca...). It's impossible to know some of outcomes, notably: how much appearing in Underground will canibalize my existing apps in either Play or Amazon? If I niavely assume that all my usage & IAP payments switch immediately from Play & Amazon combined, to be just Amazon Underground, the numbers for one of my apps works out as: - Number of user engaged minutes last month: 728300 (according to Flurry session tracking) - Revenue for this app: USD$1446.37 (this is for 2 months prior, but close enough) So, if I go to the calculator and enter 728300 minutes into Amazon, 0 mins for Google, $1446.37 Amazon revenue, $0 Google revenue, and 0% increase for both, then I get the magic number of $1457. I.e., $10 more with Underground. But ... does this really mean anything? On the dev/web jockey side, I figure about a day per app to adapt and submit it. Some of the steps needed for my apps are: - rebuild the app with a different package name (presumably so it doesn't conflict with a prior installed version of my app - ideally remove all IAP (if it is already Amazon IAP, then they'll just make it free anyway, but if it's Play, then rip it out / replace with "Unlock" instead of "Purchase" and skip the calls to Google). I have Amazon IAP already, but I'd spend a few minutes to make them all free instead. And maybe a few more minutes to remove the Amazon IAP support library. Then a few more minutes to resolve build errors. Then a few more minutes to test that I didn't screw it all up. (Repeat.) - create a new app listing at the Amazon web site, following their carefully detailed criteria (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/migrating-your-app-to-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do...) - add an "Actually Free" sash to my icon (https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/docs/migrating-your-app-to-amazon-underground https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/underground/do...) - build, test, repeat TL;DR: I'm on the fence. Switching would indeed capture revenue from the 90% of users who never buy extra volumes. However, it could kill revenue from those who do. Other intangibles: - will it annoy the customers who have paid me so far - by definition my best customers. Will they ask for refunds? - will iOS customers demand something simlar? - should I promote this to my customers? - should I jump in REALLY fast (today!) so all the early Underground adopters find my apps because there will be fewer to choose from initially For now, I'm sitting tight. I've had a strict "no ads" policy in all my apps so far (and no spyware either), so I'll see how it evolves. One related detail: my app revenue for Android used to be evenly split between Amazon and Google Play. For the past twelve months, Amazon has been declining, even though Play (and iOS) have been gradually increasing. I'm not sure if this reflects declining Kindle Fire adoption, decreased visible of my apps in the Amazon store, or ... ? I hope this adds some data to the commentary...