4 ms·

That's a BS answer, and if it's the one Apple wants to give, then they should not be surprised when they 1) are seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build

by benmdi 7y ago

That's a BS answer, and if it's the one Apple wants to give, then they should not be surprised when they 1) are seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on 2) Get treated like a monopolist in courts.

groovybits 7y ago
I'm not sure I understand this reasoning. Why should Apple or Google be responsible for promoting your app? If I walk into a supermarket and I don't see the item I wanted on their front feature displays (meaning I need to walk down the isle to find it), does that mean the supermarket is monopolistic? Does that mean the item vendor should stop selling their product in that supermarket?
- benmdi 7y ago
  Those situations are in no way comparable. It's wild to me you think they are. No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. What we're saying is that if they're going to lock down their platform so that you can't install apps without going through their store, then they shouldn't arbitrarily, with no explanation, destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love. I think you're suffering from the "just world bias", honestly. Look it up if you haven't heard of it. TL;DR is that as much as you want to believe they don't, shitty, unfair things happen everyday. Pretending they don't doesn't help the situation.
  - groovybits 7y ago
    mrkstu's comment was: > If you're relying on Apple (or Google) to feature you in their search results, you're already at their whim with no recourse. But your response is: > No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. Does higher search placement not equate to promotion, in this case? Also, I looked it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis I'm not sure how it relates to my questions.
  - megy 7y ago
    > destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love. And how did they do that? By changing where it appears in one search. wow.
- britch 7y ago
  I like this analogy, but there are some pretty big differences between a supermarket and the app store. The "aisle" on the app store goes on for miles. Sure the product may be there, but if it's a 5-10 minute walk down the aisle to get to it, I don't think may people would look that far. The item is technically there, but it's not exactly accessible. In this example there's also only one supermarket, the Apple app store. With grocery stores your product may not be in an advantageous place at Store A, but it could be right at eye level in Store B, C, or D. With the Apple store, if you're not featured there, you're not featured anywhere. I agree the developer should not be surprised by this. I don't think Apple is acting badly. These are just consequences of having many apps and only one app store.
  - groovybits 7y ago
    > In this example there's also only one supermarket, the Apple app store. My argument was simply about who is responsible for promoting the app. But your point is correct. My response to this: Would having multiple app stores available on iOS really solve the issue that OP is experiencing? If iOS suddenly allowed a user to download apps from multiple different stores, would the number of app downloads for OP increase? How will I know which app store to find OP's app in? From a pure promotional aspect, I would have to know to look for OP's app, which does not sound like it would help OP in this case.
    - thinkharder 7y ago
      I think both the multiple app store and 'apple isn't responsible for promoting your app' are both red herrings. The issue is that the search function in the app store lies to end users. To use the example in the article, if I go to the app store and search for "weigh loss tracker" I get 5 result, none of which is Happy Scale. The default sort is 'relevance', whatever that means, but i can change that to Most Popular. Still no Happy Scale. If I search for "Happy Scale" i get no result. From my perspective as an end user of the App Store, I'm being lied to. The search is not returning honest results that correspond to what I search for. This is not what the end user expects of search, they expect true organic results based on what they searched for, or at worst, a complete list with the apps Apple wants to promote at the top. In this case they are getting a curated subset of those results and not being told this is the case. Also, consider that the app store is unusable without search. There are million of apps, so is no way to browse it to find what you're looking for. If search doesn't return it, it might as well not exist in the app store. Unless this is thoroughly explained somewhere in the dev documentation, then developers are being lied to also. People threw a fit when Google changed the search result UI so that it became impossible to tell paid results from organic results. This is similar but worse. Google just put the paid results above the organic ones. Apple completely removes the organic results at their whim. The author should have been promoting the app thru multiple channels and not relying on the app store search exclusively, this was an obvious mistake. This doesn't justify what Apple did though. It's their app store, and they can do what they want, but this, although legal, is pretty sleazy IMO.
coldtea 7y ago
Well, 1) they're neither "seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on" (they have millions of apps, and hundreds of thousands of devs contributing, including all major software companies, from MS to Adobe, plus they have earned devs by far the most money of off any app store, in fact an unbelievable amount ($120 billion in developer revenue [1]) 2) Nor are they treated like a monopolist in courts. Being the only app store for your own platform is not a monopoly. Being the only platform is a monopoly, and iOS is not only not "the only platform", but is a minority platform (more people use Android). Not to mention that even being a monopoly (which Apple is far from one, and wont ever be due to price) is not illegal: exploiting that monopoly (like Microsoft of yore did) is. [1] https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/01/28/apple-app-store-120-billion-dollars-developer-revenue/ https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/01/28/apple-app-store-120-billi...
megy 7y ago
No it isn't. They changed the algorithm in which apps appearin search. Should they have to go through every change of app order, contact that dev and explain why?

by benmdi 7y ago

groovybits 7y ago

I'm not sure I understand this reasoning. Why should Apple or Google be responsible for promoting your app? If I walk into a supermarket and I don't see the item I wanted on their front feature displays (meaning I need to walk down the isle to find it), does that mean the supermarket is monopolistic? Does that mean the item vendor should stop selling their product in that supermarket?

benmdi 7y ago
Those situations are in no way comparable. It's wild to me you think they are. No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. What we're saying is that if they're going to lock down their platform so that you can't install apps without going through their store, then they shouldn't arbitrarily, with no explanation, destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love. I think you're suffering from the "just world bias", honestly. Look it up if you haven't heard of it. TL;DR is that as much as you want to believe they don't, shitty, unfair things happen everyday. Pretending they don't doesn't help the situation.
- groovybits 7y ago
  mrkstu's comment was: > If you're relying on Apple (or Google) to feature you in their search results, you're already at their whim with no recourse. But your response is: > No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. Does higher search placement not equate to promotion, in this case? Also, I looked it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis I'm not sure how it relates to my questions.
- megy 7y ago
  > destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love. And how did they do that? By changing where it appears in one search. wow.
britch 7y ago
I like this analogy, but there are some pretty big differences between a supermarket and the app store. The "aisle" on the app store goes on for miles. Sure the product may be there, but if it's a 5-10 minute walk down the aisle to get to it, I don't think may people would look that far. The item is technically there, but it's not exactly accessible. In this example there's also only one supermarket, the Apple app store. With grocery stores your product may not be in an advantageous place at Store A, but it could be right at eye level in Store B, C, or D. With the Apple store, if you're not featured there, you're not featured anywhere. I agree the developer should not be surprised by this. I don't think Apple is acting badly. These are just consequences of having many apps and only one app store.
- groovybits 7y ago
  > In this example there's also only one supermarket, the Apple app store. My argument was simply about who is responsible for promoting the app. But your point is correct. My response to this: Would having multiple app stores available on iOS really solve the issue that OP is experiencing? If iOS suddenly allowed a user to download apps from multiple different stores, would the number of app downloads for OP increase? How will I know which app store to find OP's app in? From a pure promotional aspect, I would have to know to look for OP's app, which does not sound like it would help OP in this case.
  - thinkharder 7y ago
    I think both the multiple app store and 'apple isn't responsible for promoting your app' are both red herrings. The issue is that the search function in the app store lies to end users. To use the example in the article, if I go to the app store and search for "weigh loss tracker" I get 5 result, none of which is Happy Scale. The default sort is 'relevance', whatever that means, but i can change that to Most Popular. Still no Happy Scale. If I search for "Happy Scale" i get no result. From my perspective as an end user of the App Store, I'm being lied to. The search is not returning honest results that correspond to what I search for. This is not what the end user expects of search, they expect true organic results based on what they searched for, or at worst, a complete list with the apps Apple wants to promote at the top. In this case they are getting a curated subset of those results and not being told this is the case. Also, consider that the app store is unusable without search. There are million of apps, so is no way to browse it to find what you're looking for. If search doesn't return it, it might as well not exist in the app store. Unless this is thoroughly explained somewhere in the dev documentation, then developers are being lied to also. People threw a fit when Google changed the search result UI so that it became impossible to tell paid results from organic results. This is similar but worse. Google just put the paid results above the organic ones. Apple completely removes the organic results at their whim. The author should have been promoting the app thru multiple channels and not relying on the app store search exclusively, this was an obvious mistake. This doesn't justify what Apple did though. It's their app store, and they can do what they want, but this, although legal, is pretty sleazy IMO.

coldtea 7y ago

Well, 1) they're neither "seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on" (they have millions of apps, and hundreds of thousands of devs contributing, including all major software companies, from MS to Adobe, plus they have earned devs by far the most money of off any app store, in fact an unbelievable amount ($120 billion in developer revenue [1]) 2) Nor are they treated like a monopolist in courts. Being the only app store for your own platform is not a monopoly. Being the only platform is a monopoly, and iOS is not only not "the only platform", but is a minority platform (more people use Android). Not to mention that even being a monopoly (which Apple is far from one, and wont ever be due to price) is not illegal: exploiting that monopoly (like Microsoft of yore did) is. [1] https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/01/28/apple-app-store-120-billion-dollars-developer-revenue/ https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/01/28/apple-app-store-120-billi...

megy 7y ago

No it isn't. They changed the algorithm in which apps appearin search. Should they have to go through every change of app order, contact that dev and explain why?