3 ms·
Looking at the metrics Apple tracks in the App Store, it seems to me that "engagement" is all that really matters. You could have some huge number of happy user
by jmbwell 4y ago
Looking at the metrics Apple tracks in the App Store, it seems to me that "engagement" is all that really matters. You could have some huge number of happy users, but if they open the app only occasionally, you get numbers in red. Or you could have an app that solves an important issue but only for a small number of users, and you get numbers in red. If you're not releasing hits that people use all the time, you sink. If tons of people don't spend tons of time in your app, you sink.
Author complains about the time required to update libraries, and that's an aggravating process, but that's just an unfortunate part of maintaining an app. The real issue, again it seems to me, isn't that you have to do a lot of work just to increment the version string; it's that, ultimately, modern content ecosystems are designed according to engagement-driven revenue models. And solid, simple, quiet, long-lived, useful or fun little apps simply can't thrive when all the sunlight is blocked by towering marketing-tech giants.
IMHO.
- klabb3 4y ago> Looking at the metrics Apple tracks in the App Store, it seems to me that "engagement" is all that really matters. This has been the name of the game in ad tech like fb, Google and social media in general. I think two worlds are clashing with each other, where consumer tech is somewhat aware of the problems around mindless scrolling and addiction, but the growth & engagement mindset of the 2010s is cemented in the culture. Apple has little reason to follow this model because they primarily make money from selling hardware. Having a software platform that protects the user from this crap is a competitive advantage against Google, who depends on ad-based revenue. Apple seems to have an identity crisis, fearing they lose out on sweet subscription fees and ad revenue, now that most apps are free. This in turn is creating conflicts of interest, where they end up fighting their own customers. If regulators would bark and bite harder around anti-competitive behavior, it might actually force corporations to focus on what they're good at instead of everyone building their own mediocre walled gardens that grow like a cancer and eats the company from within. At least, that's my wishful thinking..
- noobermin 4y agoThey are trying, just look at gdpr. It's just not happening in the US.
- kitsunesoba 4y agoAdditionally, updating libraries periodically is inescapable for any app involving network connections or handling arbitrary user content, because doing otherwise means exposing your users to vulnerabilities. Fully offline, totally self-contained apps are a different matter, but those represent an increasingly small percentage of apps.
- trap_goes_hot 4y agoYou're completely right. And I wouldn't single out just Apple here, they're falling into the same trap as others. And this is going to be a recurring theme across all domains. We're attempting to model things like 'usefullness', 'credibility', 'importance' etc into measurable metrics because of the pressure to scale and monopolize the market. Its scary to think that for all the talk of hiring the 'best and brightest', its these metrics that supposedly the smartest engineers in the world come up with. Its pure hubris on our part. There is a dystopian arc, but I prefer to be more optimistic. I would think a legal mandate that champions interoperability, open data standards, and platform openness will put a dent in this march towards convert the human experience into numbers.