7 ms·

Google's mismanagement of the Android Market

96 points by mbateman 16y ago

drivebyacct 16y ago
Google's open ecosystem is one of it's largest advantages. The examples of copyright infringement is a continuation of the hands off policy. I'm sure if Usher filed a DMCA, they would be removed instantly. Additionally, the last example was dumb because it's obvious that it's just an MP3 search engine that is downloading from various http sites. Finally, there are problems with discoverability in the Android Market which is why a fix is one of the top three features of Android 3/Gingerbread. tl;dr: much fear mongering for very little to truly be concerned with. If you want Steve to tell you what you can and can't download, go buy an iPhone. also, the bluehost favicon is tacky
DLWormwood 16y ago
Why in the wide, wide world of sports does a "iTunes App Store" app even exist in Android's storefront? Who would download such a thing, even assuming it's some kind ad-impression scam app?
- skbohra 16y ago
  The whole iphone/ipad business works because there are people who don't care about openness, things which look obvious to me and you are not as obvious. Many businesses work just by exploiting the ignorance of buyers. Apple is master of that art.
  - czhiddy 16y ago
    Apple grew to become the 2nd largest US company by market cap through customer ignorance? Yeah, that sounds plausible.
    - skbohra 16y ago
      Its not the ignorance of users by company, its the ignorance of mass about the open standards we talk about. Being big doesnt mean you are doing it all good.
      - ThomPete 16y ago
        The proof is in the pudding. Whether you like apple or not and there is certainly much to not like about them even if you like most of their products, you can't ignore that they have built the strongest digital ecosystem out there. Stronger than FaceBook or any other competitor. Contrary to most others this ecosystem is built on paying customers which is quite an accomplishment. It includes both music, video, applications and now the Apple Store app which gives you access to the apple products. I don't even want to know how many people will be tempted to press buy on that one. This is not about ignorance of mass, it's about reducing the friction to almost zero while still maintaining some level of quality. In all other business situations this is the main goal. What really baffles me about the Android App store is just how much friction there is. It's a complete mess to be quite honest. Even though google should be applauded for their open approach, let's not forget that they do this for one thing and one thing only. To expand the reach of their adds.
        ThomPete 16y ago
        "ads" not "adds" sorry
    - stretchwithme 16y ago
      hence the raving over how non-category-defining the hardware is.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- bradleyland 16y ago
  Someone who is interested in running the cool new app they saw on someone's iPhone. Most consumers aren't nearly as interested in learning the ins-and-outs of what Android is versus iOS as you and I are.
drivebyacct 16y ago
Oh, how did I miss the tacky but as of the last week, popular new attack... Google's OS is far more secure and segmented than any other smartphone OS out there and that CNET article is the biggest load of FUD I've ever seen. The application clearly indicates what permissions it needs. The criticism is that apps request permissions for things they shouldn't need. Please explain to me how that is a problem with the OS? That's like blaming Windows because Sun packages Yahoo toolbar with the JRE installer. The application identifies what it wants permissions to. If you don't want the live wallpaper to have access to your physical location and your google account, don't fucking install it. I'm tired of these petty attacks on Android, nearly as much as I'm tired of the ridiculous attacks on the iPhone 4 over this past weekend. The iPhone/Android stuff that makes it to the front page of HN is more fanboyish than other places and that makes me sad.
Groxx 16y ago
So, the moral of the story: Google needs to make their Android store more like Apple's app store. The openness is getting filled by crap / spam / questionably-legal apps. Someone actually admitting that there's a benefit to filtering! Who saw that coming?
- dejb 16y ago
  Android users and developers aren't totally dependent on their app store like iOS users are since they can install software from outside the store. This is where the openness comes in, NOT because of what they chose to allow in their app store. For this reason Google could actually make their app store a lot stricter than Apple's without attracting the same level of criticism. However I think that both companies are keen to see the 'total apps available' number increase regardless of quality.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    But how many non-geeks will be installing software outside that store? The first doorway matters, and it's been left wide open. There's even a note pinned to the frame inviting vampires across the threshold. Personally, I'd think a multiple-store method should work best, where each store can control what's in it. A "kid-safe, parent-approved" store would be useful, as would "experimental", "anything goes", and "cryptic dogma but generally good". A way to select which ones you want to look in, and you're golden. Though I realize I've just described a package manager with configurable sources. (unless this is possible currently? haven't heard anything, and it would make the blog post nearly a moot point...) --- edit: I was referring to the openness of the store, not the platform, as evidenced by referring to "[Google's] Android store". Maybe it would've been clearer if I said "Android Marketplace"? Should I edit it while there's time? The openness of the platform is utterly fantastic, I wouldn't want them to change that for anything.
    - dejb 16y ago
      > But how many non-geeks will be installing software outside that store? Depends how strict the app store policy is I guess. If Apple allowed this option then I'm sure a lot of geek and non-geek users would take up the option. > Personally, I'd think a multiple-store method should work best Agreed. Payments would be difficult and I guess they would want to discourage a 'pirate store' as well. But different listing criteria would be useful. > I was referring to the openness of the store, not the platform >> Someone actually admitting that there's a benefit to filtering! Who saw that coming? I don't think the idea that assisting users to filter their options was ever controversial or surprising. With your multiple-store idea the openness of any particular store wouldn't be such an issue.
jsz0 16y ago
A few other issues: -- There's no in-app upgrade option. If you install a lite or trial edition you have to search the Market for the full version and install it on top of your lite/trial version. So if you happen to search for an app, buy it, and install it sometimes it just won't work (because you were supposed to install the lite/trial first) -- Apps without meaningful descriptions should be deleted or hidden by default. A changelog is not a description. -- Apps that start off saying "doesn't work with..." should be deleted or hidden by default or only shown on the Android devices it does work with. -- It would be fantastic if you could sort searches by downloads, ratings, etc. You'd think since Google is a search company they could figure this one out. Maybe in 2.2?
- orangecat 16y ago
  Apps without meaningful descriptions should be deleted or hidden by default. A changelog is not a description. Related to that, the 325 character limit for app descriptions is absurd.
  - sundarurfriend 16y ago
    I see a lot of developers complaining about this, but from the point of view of a user, that feels like the limit of how much users (me) would be willing to read per-app. In my experience, it's rare that an app cannot be adequately described in that space.
    - orangecat 16y ago
      Your comment contains 257 characters. Do you seriously think adding 72 more would allow you to effectively describe an app of any significant complexity?
      - sundarurfriend 16y ago
        It's difficult, but it's mostly doable, and more importantly, necessary. People don't read, and even if you had a longer description people aren't going to read more than a few lines of it. So instead of losing out because people didn't read the whole of your description, I see this as an incentive to place everything within the region people will read. However, I do agree that with apps of increasing complexity (WaveSecure comes to mind), you'll have to leave out a lot to fit in the space. In these cases though, I feel the rating and comments should give the user enough push to try the app, after which your app can describe itself all it wants.
skbohra 16y ago
the link doesn't work for me Edit: it works now
jrockway 16y ago
The Internet has child porn! Let's all switch to AOL!
ajmurmann 16y ago
The problem is not only the existence of such Apps on the store but that they rank so high. Google should know how to give good apps a prominent spot and rank scam apps low. That would solve many problems without censoring or banning anything.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Judging from the people trying to buy an Evo on launch day, it wouldn't surprise me to find that the apps listed are the most popular. Some of the best apps simply aren't popular. Locale is an essential, but it's $9.99 price point (!!!) makes it unattractive to all but the most hardcore users. Free ringtones may be useless, but people like free, even if it's shitty.
  - adbge 16y ago
    If that's the case, maybe Google should "feature" apps based on more metrics than simply popularity, if they don't already. It would be neat to see some sort of app suggestion engine where Google shows you personalized app results based on your download history. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I think we're going to see a lot of quality-of-life (and fragmentation) issues ironed out once Android hits a more stable release cycle where development is more focused on optimization and bugfixes than adding new features.
nl 16y ago
One weakness of the Android market that isn't discussed as frequently as it should be is that most [1] developers can't actually sell apps for Android. Unless you live in one of the countries listed on http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?answer=150324 http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?an... you can't sell paid apps. Too bad for all those Indian & Chinese developers who've built out the Apple AppStore's inventory. On Android those positions in the catalog get filled up with free, half finished apps that the developer abandoned when they realized they couldn't sell it. And those free apps remove opportunities for paid apps to develop. [1] Yes - I understand a lot of apps come from countries on the list. I still argue it excludes more than it includes. [edit: corrected link to country list]
- rodh257 16y ago
  yeah this really sucks. Just got my first Android Phone, and am keen on getting stuck into developing for it, but I am Australian, so I'll have to go around the long way. If Google wants to catch up to iPhone in terms of apps available, it should be putting more emphasis on this.
- fierarul 16y ago
  Wow, I didn't even know they don't cover the whole of the EU countries -- disappointing.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    It doesn't even cover Canada, which is a close geographic and legal neighbor of Google.
    - fierarul 16y ago
      Yeah, this simplifies matters quite a bit.
- sundarurfriend 16y ago
  Sidetracking a bit, is it possible for developers from those countries to display ads and raise revenue from them? It appears as though Google is encouraging that as the primary business avenue on the Android, and a lot of Android app developers make equal (if not more) money from ads as from sales.
dalore 16y ago
Isn't this just an opportunity for somebody to start their own android store and police it better?
- nooneelse 16y ago
  Also, if you don't like the browsing experience in the Market application, there are alternatives for that too. Like AppBrain, which lets you browse for things online, organize what you find into lists, and queue applications for install on the phone.
rodh257 16y ago
Given the openness of android, can we make our own 'better android market' application + website? May not be worth the time investment given most people would use the market anyway, but might make Google wake up...
- zsouthboy 16y ago
  Another point is that the Market application is Google proprietary - when you grab the AOSP source, you don't get the Google apps (Maps, Market, etc.) Android is open source and manufacturers can use it without the consent of Google, but to include the goodies above they have to go through a vetting process (not saying that's a bad thing). A completely open source implementation / replacement of the Google apps would be very useful.
Tichy 16y ago
I had somebody steal my content and create an iPhone app from it, too. The copyright holders should contact the Google Market about the infringements. That said, the market certainly is not perfect yet. But not too bad, either.
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
Kind of reminds me of Google's mismanagement of Youtube. That's full of copyright infringement and yet folk seem quite happy to put their stuff on there. I doubt they would have grown so big, or been able to win their recent lawsuit, if they'd had to green light every item that went up in advance.
extension 16y ago
The Android market does not make me want to buy apps. This is its greatest failing. Apple's app store actually feels like a store. It's fun to spend money there. There are many different ways to discover new apps of all types. Each one typically has as much info and screenshots as I want to see. In the Android Market, I have the category charts that never change, the firehouse of junk and spam that is "just in", or search, which is only really useful if you already know the name of the app you want. The descriptions are tiny, the screenshots are ugly and often missing, and the comments are mostly YouTube caliber. If they can't make it fun to buy Android apps then the whole platform is going nowhere.
- ajscherer 16y ago
  I don't believe I've ever had fun buying PC software, but that platform went somewhere. What is your reason for believing the smartphone market is different?
  - Groxx 16y ago
    "somewhere" being primarily Microsoft, Adobe, and virus scanning applications, all of the above for large amounts of money and frequently purchased as necessities. The market for smaller desktop applications is pretty hard, and seems to mostly get along by the PC user-base being utterly massive, not by any ease-of-use. Applications on OSX are a bit nicer, as there's rarely an install/uninstall process at all, and an enormous amount of the people I know with macs have bought several smaller applications for various minor needs. Nothing that can't be faked by text files / Excel, but a nicer interface makes a difference. Things like Sparkle also mean people update far more frequently. I don't see that much in my Windows-using friends, especially in the non-geek sectors. But OSX has a much smaller market share, and I have a feeling that a lot of the successes are due to things like MacHeist, pulling in $1/2 million+ over a couple days, which do make buying software fun. One can argue that they also dilute the money pool by devaluing them when not on sale, but the amount of effect that has is nebulous at best.
  - extension 16y ago
    Because there is competition in the smartphone market, and someone has already raised the ante from "not fun" to "fun".
nailer 16y ago
I've probably reported about 15 scam or infringement apps in the market to Google. Zero have been removed.
andybak 16y ago
Have a filter option in the Market app a little bit like safesearch. You'd have a single slider. 3 or 5 positions (low moderate high etc). Filtering would work in a metascore comprised of several metrics. The metrics would be opaque and Google would tune them regularly like it does with it's search ranking. Example metrics might be: 1. 'Spam' score based on app description. 2. 'Spammy Developer' score based quite simply on the number of apps released by this developer (this would immediately clean up most dross but people would quickly find ways to game it) 3. User ratings (weighted by the rating given to that user by other users) 4. Ratings derived from Google's web rankings of the app's web presence Problem solved. Can I have some money for that please Google?
- mattparcher 16y ago
  I may be misunderstanding your suggestion, but this system would require Google to admit that there is spam in the store, no? And if there is spam (as we can clearly see) why not just remove it instead of asking the user to manually hide it?
  - andybak 16y ago
    Becuase they would then be committing to a manual review process and all the scaling problems that would incur.
devonrt 16y ago
Agreed. The Android Market is an absolute ghetto compared to Apple's App Store. It makes me think there's room for a third party to build a better, more heavily curated marketplace for Android apps.
jokermatt999 16y ago
You know, despite the Android app store having plenty of these crappy "Free ringtone!" apps, I'd still take it over Apple's controlled/censored (yes, I would call some instances of their app removals censorship) app store. It doesn't really matter though, since I can install whatever I want through .apk anyway, but I'd just like to say that not all users are getting fed up and asking Google to remove apps. That being said, damn browsing Google's App Store sucks. It's horrible. Seriously, there needs to be some much better organization, lengthened app descriptions, easier to use and better filters, and just an overall better experience.
ergo98 16y ago
To reply to the first paragraph of the article- >Earlier this week, CNET ran an article critical of the permission model of the Android Market. Google’s response to the criticism was that “each Android app must get users’ permission to access sensitive information”. While this is technically true, one should not need a PhD in Computer Science to use a smartphone. How is a consumer supposed to know exactly what the permission “act as an account authenticator” means? The CNET opinion piece “Is Google far too much in love with engineering?” is quite relevant here. Is it? Just to be clear, it is my belief that on the iPhone all apps have the run of every bit of functionality provided by the sandbox. Meaning if one app can access contacts, all apps can access contacts. If one app can get your location, all apps can get your location. If one app can pull your contacts and your location and send it to a web service, then all apps can do the same. On Android this isn't the case at all. On install you had to explicitly confirm the required rights. The Android model is a thousand times better, at least assuming they avoid user fatigue where people simply OK anything. It could see improvements for sure, though. For one I'd like to see optional permissions. When I installed Barcode Scanner I was a bit perplexed as to why it asked to access my contact list. Turns out it's because it can create barcodes from contacts. Nonetheless, that should be an optional permission that I could set to yes (checked), no (red x), or ask on demand (cleared), defaulting to ask on demand. It would make me far less nervous about apps that seem to unnecessarily ask for the kitchen sink.
- bombs 16y ago
  This is mostly true, except for location. The iPhone has always asked for permission before providing your location to apps (even to Apple's preinstalled apps, like Maps) and as of iOS 4, you're able to see a list of apps that have asked for your location, whether you said yes or not (with the option to change) and whether the app has accessed your location in the last 24 hours.

96 points by mbateman 16y ago

Google's open ecosystem is one of it's largest advantages. The examples of copyright infringement is a continuation of the hands off policy. I'm sure if Usher filed a DMCA, they would be removed instantly. Additionally, the last example was dumb because it's obvious that it's just an MP3 search engine that is downloading from various http sites. Finally, there are problems with discoverability in the Android Market which is why a fix is one of the top three features of Android 3/Gingerbread. tl;dr: much fear mongering for very little to truly be concerned with. If you want Steve to tell you what you can and can't download, go buy an iPhone. also, the bluehost favicon is tacky

DLWormwood 16y ago

Why in the wide, wide world of sports does a "iTunes App Store" app even exist in Android's storefront? Who would download such a thing, even assuming it's some kind ad-impression scam app?

skbohra 16y ago
The whole iphone/ipad business works because there are people who don't care about openness, things which look obvious to me and you are not as obvious. Many businesses work just by exploiting the ignorance of buyers. Apple is master of that art.
- czhiddy 16y ago
  Apple grew to become the 2nd largest US company by market cap through customer ignorance? Yeah, that sounds plausible.
  - skbohra 16y ago
    Its not the ignorance of users by company, its the ignorance of mass about the open standards we talk about. Being big doesnt mean you are doing it all good.
    - ThomPete 16y ago
      The proof is in the pudding. Whether you like apple or not and there is certainly much to not like about them even if you like most of their products, you can't ignore that they have built the strongest digital ecosystem out there. Stronger than FaceBook or any other competitor. Contrary to most others this ecosystem is built on paying customers which is quite an accomplishment. It includes both music, video, applications and now the Apple Store app which gives you access to the apple products. I don't even want to know how many people will be tempted to press buy on that one. This is not about ignorance of mass, it's about reducing the friction to almost zero while still maintaining some level of quality. In all other business situations this is the main goal. What really baffles me about the Android App store is just how much friction there is. It's a complete mess to be quite honest. Even though google should be applauded for their open approach, let's not forget that they do this for one thing and one thing only. To expand the reach of their adds.
      - ThomPete 16y ago
        "ads" not "adds" sorry
  - stretchwithme 16y ago
    hence the raving over how non-category-defining the hardware is.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
bradleyland 16y ago
Someone who is interested in running the cool new app they saw on someone's iPhone. Most consumers aren't nearly as interested in learning the ins-and-outs of what Android is versus iOS as you and I are.

drivebyacct 16y ago

Oh, how did I miss the tacky but as of the last week, popular new attack... Google's OS is far more secure and segmented than any other smartphone OS out there and that CNET article is the biggest load of FUD I've ever seen. The application clearly indicates what permissions it needs. The criticism is that apps request permissions for things they shouldn't need. Please explain to me how that is a problem with the OS? That's like blaming Windows because Sun packages Yahoo toolbar with the JRE installer. The application identifies what it wants permissions to. If you don't want the live wallpaper to have access to your physical location and your google account, don't fucking install it. I'm tired of these petty attacks on Android, nearly as much as I'm tired of the ridiculous attacks on the iPhone 4 over this past weekend. The iPhone/Android stuff that makes it to the front page of HN is more fanboyish than other places and that makes me sad.

Groxx 16y ago

So, the moral of the story: Google needs to make their Android store more like Apple's app store. The openness is getting filled by crap / spam / questionably-legal apps. Someone actually admitting that there's a benefit to filtering! Who saw that coming?

dejb 16y ago
Android users and developers aren't totally dependent on their app store like iOS users are since they can install software from outside the store. This is where the openness comes in, NOT because of what they chose to allow in their app store. For this reason Google could actually make their app store a lot stricter than Apple's without attracting the same level of criticism. However I think that both companies are keen to see the 'total apps available' number increase regardless of quality.
- Groxx 16y ago
  But how many non-geeks will be installing software outside that store? The first doorway matters, and it's been left wide open. There's even a note pinned to the frame inviting vampires across the threshold. Personally, I'd think a multiple-store method should work best, where each store can control what's in it. A "kid-safe, parent-approved" store would be useful, as would "experimental", "anything goes", and "cryptic dogma but generally good". A way to select which ones you want to look in, and you're golden. Though I realize I've just described a package manager with configurable sources. (unless this is possible currently? haven't heard anything, and it would make the blog post nearly a moot point...) --- edit: I was referring to the openness of the store, not the platform, as evidenced by referring to "[Google's] Android store". Maybe it would've been clearer if I said "Android Marketplace"? Should I edit it while there's time? The openness of the platform is utterly fantastic, I wouldn't want them to change that for anything.
  - dejb 16y ago
    > But how many non-geeks will be installing software outside that store? Depends how strict the app store policy is I guess. If Apple allowed this option then I'm sure a lot of geek and non-geek users would take up the option. > Personally, I'd think a multiple-store method should work best Agreed. Payments would be difficult and I guess they would want to discourage a 'pirate store' as well. But different listing criteria would be useful. > I was referring to the openness of the store, not the platform >> Someone actually admitting that there's a benefit to filtering! Who saw that coming? I don't think the idea that assisting users to filter their options was ever controversial or surprising. With your multiple-store idea the openness of any particular store wouldn't be such an issue.

jsz0 16y ago

A few other issues: -- There's no in-app upgrade option. If you install a lite or trial edition you have to search the Market for the full version and install it on top of your lite/trial version. So if you happen to search for an app, buy it, and install it sometimes it just won't work (because you were supposed to install the lite/trial first) -- Apps without meaningful descriptions should be deleted or hidden by default. A changelog is not a description. -- Apps that start off saying "doesn't work with..." should be deleted or hidden by default or only shown on the Android devices it does work with. -- It would be fantastic if you could sort searches by downloads, ratings, etc. You'd think since Google is a search company they could figure this one out. Maybe in 2.2?

orangecat 16y ago
Apps without meaningful descriptions should be deleted or hidden by default. A changelog is not a description. Related to that, the 325 character limit for app descriptions is absurd.
- sundarurfriend 16y ago
  I see a lot of developers complaining about this, but from the point of view of a user, that feels like the limit of how much users (me) would be willing to read per-app. In my experience, it's rare that an app cannot be adequately described in that space.
  - orangecat 16y ago
    Your comment contains 257 characters. Do you seriously think adding 72 more would allow you to effectively describe an app of any significant complexity?
    - sundarurfriend 16y ago
      It's difficult, but it's mostly doable, and more importantly, necessary. People don't read, and even if you had a longer description people aren't going to read more than a few lines of it. So instead of losing out because people didn't read the whole of your description, I see this as an incentive to place everything within the region people will read. However, I do agree that with apps of increasing complexity (WaveSecure comes to mind), you'll have to leave out a lot to fit in the space. In these cases though, I feel the rating and comments should give the user enough push to try the app, after which your app can describe itself all it wants.

skbohra 16y ago

the link doesn't work for me Edit: it works now

jrockway 16y ago

The Internet has child porn! Let's all switch to AOL!

ajmurmann 16y ago

The problem is not only the existence of such Apps on the store but that they rank so high. Google should know how to give good apps a prominent spot and rank scam apps low. That would solve many problems without censoring or banning anything.

jrockway 16y ago
Judging from the people trying to buy an Evo on launch day, it wouldn't surprise me to find that the apps listed are the most popular. Some of the best apps simply aren't popular. Locale is an essential, but it's $9.99 price point (!!!) makes it unattractive to all but the most hardcore users. Free ringtones may be useless, but people like free, even if it's shitty.
- adbge 16y ago
  If that's the case, maybe Google should "feature" apps based on more metrics than simply popularity, if they don't already. It would be neat to see some sort of app suggestion engine where Google shows you personalized app results based on your download history. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I think we're going to see a lot of quality-of-life (and fragmentation) issues ironed out once Android hits a more stable release cycle where development is more focused on optimization and bugfixes than adding new features.

nl 16y ago

One weakness of the Android market that isn't discussed as frequently as it should be is that most [1] developers can't actually sell apps for Android. Unless you live in one of the countries listed on http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?answer=150324 http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?an... you can't sell paid apps. Too bad for all those Indian & Chinese developers who've built out the Apple AppStore's inventory. On Android those positions in the catalog get filled up with free, half finished apps that the developer abandoned when they realized they couldn't sell it. And those free apps remove opportunities for paid apps to develop. [1] Yes - I understand a lot of apps come from countries on the list. I still argue it excludes more than it includes. [edit: corrected link to country list]

rodh257 16y ago
yeah this really sucks. Just got my first Android Phone, and am keen on getting stuck into developing for it, but I am Australian, so I'll have to go around the long way. If Google wants to catch up to iPhone in terms of apps available, it should be putting more emphasis on this.
fierarul 16y ago
Wow, I didn't even know they don't cover the whole of the EU countries -- disappointing.
- ergo98 16y ago
  It doesn't even cover Canada, which is a close geographic and legal neighbor of Google.
  - fierarul 16y ago
    Yeah, this simplifies matters quite a bit.
sundarurfriend 16y ago
Sidetracking a bit, is it possible for developers from those countries to display ads and raise revenue from them? It appears as though Google is encouraging that as the primary business avenue on the Android, and a lot of Android app developers make equal (if not more) money from ads as from sales.

dalore 16y ago

Isn't this just an opportunity for somebody to start their own android store and police it better?

nooneelse 16y ago
Also, if you don't like the browsing experience in the Market application, there are alternatives for that too. Like AppBrain, which lets you browse for things online, organize what you find into lists, and queue applications for install on the phone.

rodh257 16y ago

Given the openness of android, can we make our own 'better android market' application + website? May not be worth the time investment given most people would use the market anyway, but might make Google wake up...

zsouthboy 16y ago
Another point is that the Market application is Google proprietary - when you grab the AOSP source, you don't get the Google apps (Maps, Market, etc.) Android is open source and manufacturers can use it without the consent of Google, but to include the goodies above they have to go through a vetting process (not saying that's a bad thing). A completely open source implementation / replacement of the Google apps would be very useful.

Tichy 16y ago

I had somebody steal my content and create an iPhone app from it, too. The copyright holders should contact the Google Market about the infringements. That said, the market certainly is not perfect yet. But not too bad, either.

ZeroGravitas 16y ago

Kind of reminds me of Google's mismanagement of Youtube. That's full of copyright infringement and yet folk seem quite happy to put their stuff on there. I doubt they would have grown so big, or been able to win their recent lawsuit, if they'd had to green light every item that went up in advance.

extension 16y ago

The Android market does not make me want to buy apps. This is its greatest failing. Apple's app store actually feels like a store. It's fun to spend money there. There are many different ways to discover new apps of all types. Each one typically has as much info and screenshots as I want to see. In the Android Market, I have the category charts that never change, the firehouse of junk and spam that is "just in", or search, which is only really useful if you already know the name of the app you want. The descriptions are tiny, the screenshots are ugly and often missing, and the comments are mostly YouTube caliber. If they can't make it fun to buy Android apps then the whole platform is going nowhere.

ajscherer 16y ago
I don't believe I've ever had fun buying PC software, but that platform went somewhere. What is your reason for believing the smartphone market is different?
- Groxx 16y ago
  "somewhere" being primarily Microsoft, Adobe, and virus scanning applications, all of the above for large amounts of money and frequently purchased as necessities. The market for smaller desktop applications is pretty hard, and seems to mostly get along by the PC user-base being utterly massive, not by any ease-of-use. Applications on OSX are a bit nicer, as there's rarely an install/uninstall process at all, and an enormous amount of the people I know with macs have bought several smaller applications for various minor needs. Nothing that can't be faked by text files / Excel, but a nicer interface makes a difference. Things like Sparkle also mean people update far more frequently. I don't see that much in my Windows-using friends, especially in the non-geek sectors. But OSX has a much smaller market share, and I have a feeling that a lot of the successes are due to things like MacHeist, pulling in $1/2 million+ over a couple days, which do make buying software fun. One can argue that they also dilute the money pool by devaluing them when not on sale, but the amount of effect that has is nebulous at best.
- extension 16y ago
  Because there is competition in the smartphone market, and someone has already raised the ante from "not fun" to "fun".

nailer 16y ago

I've probably reported about 15 scam or infringement apps in the market to Google. Zero have been removed.

andybak 16y ago

Have a filter option in the Market app a little bit like safesearch. You'd have a single slider. 3 or 5 positions (low moderate high etc). Filtering would work in a metascore comprised of several metrics. The metrics would be opaque and Google would tune them regularly like it does with it's search ranking. Example metrics might be: 1. 'Spam' score based on app description. 2. 'Spammy Developer' score based quite simply on the number of apps released by this developer (this would immediately clean up most dross but people would quickly find ways to game it) 3. User ratings (weighted by the rating given to that user by other users) 4. Ratings derived from Google's web rankings of the app's web presence Problem solved. Can I have some money for that please Google?

mattparcher 16y ago
I may be misunderstanding your suggestion, but this system would require Google to admit that there is spam in the store, no? And if there is spam (as we can clearly see) why not just remove it instead of asking the user to manually hide it?
- andybak 16y ago
  Becuase they would then be committing to a manual review process and all the scaling problems that would incur.

devonrt 16y ago

Agreed. The Android Market is an absolute ghetto compared to Apple's App Store. It makes me think there's room for a third party to build a better, more heavily curated marketplace for Android apps.

jokermatt999 16y ago

You know, despite the Android app store having plenty of these crappy "Free ringtone!" apps, I'd still take it over Apple's controlled/censored (yes, I would call some instances of their app removals censorship) app store. It doesn't really matter though, since I can install whatever I want through .apk anyway, but I'd just like to say that not all users are getting fed up and asking Google to remove apps. That being said, damn browsing Google's App Store sucks. It's horrible. Seriously, there needs to be some much better organization, lengthened app descriptions, easier to use and better filters, and just an overall better experience.

ergo98 16y ago

To reply to the first paragraph of the article- >Earlier this week, CNET ran an article critical of the permission model of the Android Market. Google’s response to the criticism was that “each Android app must get users’ permission to access sensitive information”. While this is technically true, one should not need a PhD in Computer Science to use a smartphone. How is a consumer supposed to know exactly what the permission “act as an account authenticator” means? The CNET opinion piece “Is Google far too much in love with engineering?” is quite relevant here. Is it? Just to be clear, it is my belief that on the iPhone all apps have the run of every bit of functionality provided by the sandbox. Meaning if one app can access contacts, all apps can access contacts. If one app can get your location, all apps can get your location. If one app can pull your contacts and your location and send it to a web service, then all apps can do the same. On Android this isn't the case at all. On install you had to explicitly confirm the required rights. The Android model is a thousand times better, at least assuming they avoid user fatigue where people simply OK anything. It could see improvements for sure, though. For one I'd like to see optional permissions. When I installed Barcode Scanner I was a bit perplexed as to why it asked to access my contact list. Turns out it's because it can create barcodes from contacts. Nonetheless, that should be an optional permission that I could set to yes (checked), no (red x), or ask on demand (cleared), defaulting to ask on demand. It would make me far less nervous about apps that seem to unnecessarily ask for the kitchen sink.

bombs 16y ago
This is mostly true, except for location. The iPhone has always asked for permission before providing your location to apps (even to Apple's preinstalled apps, like Maps) and as of iOS 4, you're able to see a list of apps that have asked for your location, whether you said yes or not (with the option to change) and whether the app has accessed your location in the last 24 hours.