6 ms·

I expect Apple will take this very seriously. The problem strikes at the core of the value of the their app store. Good, real apps should have good ratings and

by jmull 6y ago

I expect Apple will take this very seriously. The problem strikes at the core of the value of the their app store. Good, real apps should have good ratings and preferred placement. Bad/fake/scammy apps should not. But this is a tough problem to get right. If your criteria for "bad" are too broad you will catch legitimate apps, harming legit developers and their users. Yet, if your criteria leave even a little room scammers can find and exploit it. The scammer's job is to find any and all loopholes to exploit. They will find a small crack and drive a tank through it. The legit app developer's job is to make good apps. They can inadvertently stumble over even simple restrictions, at times. Take this tricky dynamic and tackle it at scale, and it becomes an order of magnitude more difficult. I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. Sadly it would cut down on legit apps too. But it might be worth it overall.

tekstar 6y ago
> $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update Which of the problems exposed in the original twitter thread would be solved by adding these payments?
- warp 6y ago
  I assume the idea is that each update can then be manually reviewed (by an actual human) -- because that's what you're paying for as a developer listing your app. Which should in theory get rid of a lot of scam submissions.
  - tekstar 6y ago
    Apple store already has a human review every update.
    - notriddle 6y ago
      Overworked and underpaid human reviewers.
      - wvenable 6y ago
        Apple is ranked third for profit in the Fortune Global 500 list of the world's largest companies.
      - pornel 6y ago
        No doubt, but one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world could fix that — if they wanted to.
  - robocat 6y ago
    Apple can easily use some of their 30% cut of the scam app profits for validation: Apple certainly makes enough from “successful” scammy paid applications to cover costs as in the article example where Apple is also raking in $10’s of thousands from these fraudulent apps. Obviously free apps need a different mechanism.
  - jmull 6y ago
    Scammers rely on iteration to discover and optimize scam approaches, and to adjust when the platform changes things (e.g., to prevent the scam). Scammers need an order of magnitude or more iteration over a legit dev to be very effective, so a per release fee will hit them much harder than legit devs.
stainforth 6y ago
If I'm Apple and taking 30% cut, and I'm also a monopoly across a subset of consumers, then it's not a big deal really, which is why it isn't fixed.
ogre_codes 6y ago
> I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. Sadly it would cut down on legit apps too. But it might be worth it overall. I don't think fees like this are a good idea. There is a lot of interesting/ free software out there which would be discouraged. Maybe just withholding payment on apps for the first 30 days until reviews start coming in and giving users better tools for reporting scam apps. I do however think reviewers should be given a more thorough check-list on apps which charge more than $20 or $10/ month. An app which suddenly gets a bunch of 1 star reviews should be a red flag and trigger a review as well.
- panda88888 6y ago
  I like the idea of scaling the review effort proportionally to the dollar transaction amount, especially for less known/established developers and publishers.
aeontech 6y ago
Some of the scam apps described in the article are bringing in 200-300K a year…
- egocentric 6y ago
  $300k per MONTH.
_qulr 6y ago
> I expect Apple will take this very seriously. This is not a new problem by any means. Apple has been largely ignoring it for many years, only taking action when there's bad PR like now.
- cutemonster 6y ago
  Could [ if this gets fixed] depend on on how long term the Apple managers KPIs are measured? Say they get bonuses based on the most recent 6 months or 1 year, but if becoming more strict with the App Store apps would make Apple lose money the nearest year (since Apple makes money thanks to the scams), then maybe the problem is almost unfixable?
jamesrr39 6y ago
> $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update It's worth noting that for genuine developers this will incentivize less regular app releases, and push the barrier to entry to be in the app store higher, neither of which is really desirable for a 'trendy' app store. Really the only way I see is for Apple to get better at moderating the apps & reviews on their own app store. I mean, that is part of the deal. if you run a market, you need to make sure the people selling in it are trading fairly, otherwise people will stop coming to your market. With regard to paying for this... well, Apple made $55B profit (not revenue, profit!) in 2019[1] (couldn't find any figures for 2020). I'm sure they'll find some money somewhere. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_revenue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r...
dzhiurgis 6y ago
Does anyone know why app store accepts binaries and not source code instead?
heavyset_go 6y ago
> I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. Many of these apps that game the App Store generate enough revenue that a $100 fee won't be a barrier to entry, but will certainly be a barrier to entry for students, hobbyists, and developers whose apps are pre-revenue. Most apps don't make more than a few hundred to a few thousand dollars over their entire lifetimes, and such a fee will disincentivize ever pushing feature, stability or security updates to them. > It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. The App Store generates billions of dollars of revenue and pays for its own enforcement many times over, it's just that Apple can increase their App Store profits even more through poor enforcement and turning a blind eye to manipulation and scam apps. What would really benefit users is real competition in the mobile app distribution market. It is obvious that Apple and Google are poor stewards of this space and that competition can improve experiences for consumers and developers.
- snowwrestler 6y ago
  Apple and Google have more resources than just about anyone, and struggle to get this right, even though it is obviously in their interest to do so. I just do not get the idea that adding a bunch of other random app stores is going to somehow make for better user experience or security. An obvious move for scammers would be to flood the alternate app store with fake versions of popular apps in the hope that a bunch of people would accidentally install them. Many users are not sophisticated and a scam only needs a few victims to make money. The alternate app store would struggle to moderate against that, and since Apple has no way to reach in and fix it, they would have to cut off an alternate app store at some point when it gets too bad. And then everyone would lose their minds over that.
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    > Apple and Google have more resources than just about anyone, and struggle to get this right, even though it is obviously in their interest to do so. This sounds a lot like you believe that if Apple or Google fail or refuse to do something, then it can't be done. It's in their interests to pay as little as they possibly need to in order to keep the App Store and Play Store money hoses operating. If there was competition in the mobile app distribution market, then I'd agree that it's in their interests to curate their app stores, because competition would wipe them out otherwise. Unfortunately, Apple and Google have leveraged their duopoly in the mobile operating system market to prevent competitors from competing with them in, and improving, the mobile app distribution market. > An obvious move for scammers would be to flood the alternate app store with fake versions of popular apps in the hope that a bunch of people would accidentally install them. There are dozens of app stores for other computing devices and operating systems where this isn't a problem. Competition means that no user is forced to use a poorly curated mobile app store like they are currently forced to use Apple's poorly curated App Store.
Shivetya 6y ago
the big exploit seems to be scamming for money after the app is installed. originally I was going with the idea that an app cannot charge monthly, or by feature, more money than what it originally cost to purchase the app from the store. however this would exclude a lot of reasonable apps. so instead clicking on any application will immediately display all possible charges that could be incurred when installing and using the application. so if a developer has one of those $299 activation clauses it is clearly listed on the app store. if an app will not reveal all post install charges it should be delisted. of course people could bypass apple payment systems and there are many who want to bypass apple entirely but that wild wild west scenario may send people back screaming
- riversflow 6y ago
  >instead clicking on any application will immediately display all possible charges that could be incurred when installing and using the application I mean the App Store already puts whether an app has in-app purchases literally right next the the download button, and the app’s listing has a complete set of possible purchases. So basically already there. I don’t think you can bypass Apple’s payment system, that’s a big no-no. They want their cut!
minikites 6y ago
>I expect Apple will take this very seriously. It's been going on for years, when exactly will they start taking it seriously?
notsureaboutpg 6y ago
>I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. The road to horrible buggy software is certainly paved by charging devs to update their apps while not allowing them any way to charge users for app updates.
SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
I have only been using ios for a few months but I have noticed the App Store is full of so much crap. Coming from Android with FDroid installed it was easy to find free utilities that may have been basic but they were reliable and ad free. Now on the app store the first 100 results is paid or ad filled. I wanted to find a QR code scanner the other day so I could debug the qr codes I was generating and the first app on the store was asking me to sign up for a subscription before I could start scanning codes. Who is paying a subscription to scan qr codes??
- jmull 6y ago
  The built-in camera app scans QR codes.
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    It works for loading safari links I know but I needed something that can show me the text content of the qr code since this was not a link.
    - jmull 6y ago
      It's not limited to links. I know text, links, email addresses, contact info work... probably other things as well, I just haven't tried.

by jmull 6y ago

tekstar 6y ago

> $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update Which of the problems exposed in the original twitter thread would be solved by adding these payments?

warp 6y ago
I assume the idea is that each update can then be manually reviewed (by an actual human) -- because that's what you're paying for as a developer listing your app. Which should in theory get rid of a lot of scam submissions.
- tekstar 6y ago
  Apple store already has a human review every update.
  - notriddle 6y ago
    Overworked and underpaid human reviewers.
    - wvenable 6y ago
      Apple is ranked third for profit in the Fortune Global 500 list of the world's largest companies.
    - pornel 6y ago
      No doubt, but one of the richest and most profitable companies in the world could fix that — if they wanted to.
- robocat 6y ago
  Apple can easily use some of their 30% cut of the scam app profits for validation: Apple certainly makes enough from “successful” scammy paid applications to cover costs as in the article example where Apple is also raking in $10’s of thousands from these fraudulent apps. Obviously free apps need a different mechanism.
- jmull 6y ago
  Scammers rely on iteration to discover and optimize scam approaches, and to adjust when the platform changes things (e.g., to prevent the scam). Scammers need an order of magnitude or more iteration over a legit dev to be very effective, so a per release fee will hit them much harder than legit devs.

stainforth 6y ago

If I'm Apple and taking 30% cut, and I'm also a monopoly across a subset of consumers, then it's not a big deal really, which is why it isn't fixed.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. Sadly it would cut down on legit apps too. But it might be worth it overall. I don't think fees like this are a good idea. There is a lot of interesting/ free software out there which would be discouraged. Maybe just withholding payment on apps for the first 30 days until reviews start coming in and giving users better tools for reporting scam apps. I do however think reviewers should be given a more thorough check-list on apps which charge more than $20 or $10/ month. An app which suddenly gets a bunch of 1 star reviews should be a red flag and trigger a review as well.

panda88888 6y ago
I like the idea of scaling the review effort proportionally to the dollar transaction amount, especially for less known/established developers and publishers.

aeontech 6y ago

Some of the scam apps described in the article are bringing in 200-300K a year…

egocentric 6y ago
$300k per MONTH.

_qulr 6y ago

> I expect Apple will take this very seriously. This is not a new problem by any means. Apple has been largely ignoring it for many years, only taking action when there's bad PR like now.

cutemonster 6y ago
Could [ if this gets fixed] depend on on how long term the Apple managers KPIs are measured? Say they get bonuses based on the most recent 6 months or 1 year, but if becoming more strict with the App Store apps would make Apple lose money the nearest year (since Apple makes money thanks to the scams), then maybe the problem is almost unfixable?

jamesrr39 6y ago

> $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update It's worth noting that for genuine developers this will incentivize less regular app releases, and push the barrier to entry to be in the app store higher, neither of which is really desirable for a 'trendy' app store. Really the only way I see is for Apple to get better at moderating the apps & reviews on their own app store. I mean, that is part of the deal. if you run a market, you need to make sure the people selling in it are trading fairly, otherwise people will stop coming to your market. With regard to paying for this... well, Apple made $55B profit (not revenue, profit!) in 2019[1] (couldn't find any figures for 2020). I'm sure they'll find some money somewhere. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_revenue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r...

dzhiurgis 6y ago

Does anyone know why app store accepts binaries and not source code instead?

heavyset_go 6y ago

> I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. Many of these apps that game the App Store generate enough revenue that a $100 fee won't be a barrier to entry, but will certainly be a barrier to entry for students, hobbyists, and developers whose apps are pre-revenue. Most apps don't make more than a few hundred to a few thousand dollars over their entire lifetimes, and such a fee will disincentivize ever pushing feature, stability or security updates to them. > It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. The App Store generates billions of dollars of revenue and pays for its own enforcement many times over, it's just that Apple can increase their App Store profits even more through poor enforcement and turning a blind eye to manipulation and scam apps. What would really benefit users is real competition in the mobile app distribution market. It is obvious that Apple and Google are poor stewards of this space and that competition can improve experiences for consumers and developers.

snowwrestler 6y ago
Apple and Google have more resources than just about anyone, and struggle to get this right, even though it is obviously in their interest to do so. I just do not get the idea that adding a bunch of other random app stores is going to somehow make for better user experience or security. An obvious move for scammers would be to flood the alternate app store with fake versions of popular apps in the hope that a bunch of people would accidentally install them. Many users are not sophisticated and a scam only needs a few victims to make money. The alternate app store would struggle to moderate against that, and since Apple has no way to reach in and fix it, they would have to cut off an alternate app store at some point when it gets too bad. And then everyone would lose their minds over that.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > Apple and Google have more resources than just about anyone, and struggle to get this right, even though it is obviously in their interest to do so. This sounds a lot like you believe that if Apple or Google fail or refuse to do something, then it can't be done. It's in their interests to pay as little as they possibly need to in order to keep the App Store and Play Store money hoses operating. If there was competition in the mobile app distribution market, then I'd agree that it's in their interests to curate their app stores, because competition would wipe them out otherwise. Unfortunately, Apple and Google have leveraged their duopoly in the mobile operating system market to prevent competitors from competing with them in, and improving, the mobile app distribution market. > An obvious move for scammers would be to flood the alternate app store with fake versions of popular apps in the hope that a bunch of people would accidentally install them. There are dozens of app stores for other computing devices and operating systems where this isn't a problem. Competition means that no user is forced to use a poorly curated mobile app store like they are currently forced to use Apple's poorly curated App Store.

Shivetya 6y ago

the big exploit seems to be scamming for money after the app is installed. originally I was going with the idea that an app cannot charge monthly, or by feature, more money than what it originally cost to purchase the app from the store. however this would exclude a lot of reasonable apps. so instead clicking on any application will immediately display all possible charges that could be incurred when installing and using the application. so if a developer has one of those $299 activation clauses it is clearly listed on the app store. if an app will not reveal all post install charges it should be delisted. of course people could bypass apple payment systems and there are many who want to bypass apple entirely but that wild wild west scenario may send people back screaming

riversflow 6y ago
>instead clicking on any application will immediately display all possible charges that could be incurred when installing and using the application I mean the App Store already puts whether an app has in-app purchases literally right next the the download button, and the app’s listing has a complete set of possible purchases. So basically already there. I don’t think you can bypass Apple’s payment system, that’s a big no-no. They want their cut!

minikites 6y ago

>I expect Apple will take this very seriously. It's been going on for years, when exactly will they start taking it seriously?

notsureaboutpg 6y ago

>I kinda wonder if they shouldn't charge, say $100 to list an app on the App Store and $50-$100 per update too. It's going to cut down on scam apps and pay for enforcement. The road to horrible buggy software is certainly paved by charging devs to update their apps while not allowing them any way to charge users for app updates.

SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago

I have only been using ios for a few months but I have noticed the App Store is full of so much crap. Coming from Android with FDroid installed it was easy to find free utilities that may have been basic but they were reliable and ad free. Now on the app store the first 100 results is paid or ad filled. I wanted to find a QR code scanner the other day so I could debug the qr codes I was generating and the first app on the store was asking me to sign up for a subscription before I could start scanning codes. Who is paying a subscription to scan qr codes??

jmull 6y ago
The built-in camera app scans QR codes.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  It works for loading safari links I know but I needed something that can show me the text content of the qr code since this was not a link.
  - jmull 6y ago
    It's not limited to links. I know text, links, email addresses, contact info work... probably other things as well, I just haven't tried.