3 ms·
Imagine what it will be like in 12 months time. Crowded with fluff, multiple applications servicing the same 'need', and lacking the novelty factor that drives
by JacobAldridge 16y ago
Imagine what it will be like in 12 months time.
Crowded with fluff, multiple applications servicing the same 'need', and lacking the novelty factor that drives day one numbers.
Of course, having said that, it makes even more sense that there's some kind of first mover advantage, and it's always great to read a positive story.
- steveklabnik 16y agoDidn't Apple say that they weren't going to accept apps that already do the same thing as other apps, at least at some point? And that there had to be a minimum usefulness to anything that's let in? Of course, this will be arbitrary, but still.
- moe 16y agoDidn't Apple say that they weren't going to accept apps that already do the same thing as other apps That would be very annoying. Choice is good - and with proper categorization and search it would only add value, not remove any. The user-votes should bubble the good stuff to the top, right?
- steveklabnik 16y agoTheoretically. See section 2.8: http://pastie.org/1236378 http://pastie.org/1236378 > Apps that duplicate apps already in the App Store may be rejected, particularly if there are many of them I've been kinda down on users voting on things, lately. I mean, on Reddit, does voting ensure that the best things actually go to the top? Also, you're assuming that users actually want this; most people want a decision made for them. At least, that's what the data I've seen from a few different sites has shown.
- aw3c2 16y agoThat reminds me of patents. Do/Discover something first, have an exclusive right on it for many years.
- steveklabnik 16y agoYeah, sort of. If they decide it, I don't think that it'll be used in a "There are only 5 word processors" way, more like a "1000 fart apps" way.