8 ms·

Get Rid of the App Store’s “Top” Lists

222 points by co_pl_te 13y ago

chj 13y ago
Trial mode is the most important. Everything else is secondary. I don't care if you get rid of top list or not, because not every app can enter top list nor be selected by apple's god hand.
vxNsr 13y ago
The option to trial an app is the reason I like the WP Store (lack of apps notwithstanding). The other nice thing that WP Store has is top-rated apps (or the ability to sort by rating) while this is still subject to some of the "top downloaded" issues it's a step in the right direction.
- StavrosK 13y ago
  Don't they all have trials? The Play Store does (sure, it's 15 minutes, but that's usually enough for most people).
Kylekramer 13y ago
Seems to be blaming a lot of ills of the App Store that are larger or unrelated than the top list to the top list. Rich get richer is just the nature of the beast in capitalism. The rock bottom prices are more due to the elasticity of price of phone apps compared to many products. After all, you have prominently reported top lists for movies/games/music for decades and they certainly aren't getting cheaper. Top lists are probably not a good way to encourage quality, but they are hardly the root of the problem and they do encourage sales in a relatively dispassionate way. High quality trolling by claiming Google doesn't care if people hate Android phones, though.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- runjake 13y ago
  He may be trolling, but its probably not far from the truth. Other than releasing the Android source, Google doesn't really play any part in most Android devices on the market. Further, their store is plagued with malware and shady apps that never get removed. I know because I've reported them and continue to see the same apps by the same developers on the Play Store. On the manufacturer's side, they rush out devices with subpar hardware (and hardware bugs), build, and software. And getting system updates is a game of prayer. It's important to remember that for Google, Android is a means to an end: to get people using their services and in turn get eyes on ads and gather demographic info. They aren't selling Nexus devices at cost/a loss for nothing.
  - Kylekramer 13y ago
    OK? And for Apple, iOS is a means to end: to get people using their services and get their money alongside getting their money upfront. It just so happens that delivering quality experiences are a good way of achieving both Google and Apple's ends. People who hate their phones don't see as many ads as people who enjoy their phones. But, of course, we are feeding the troll.
    - schrodinger 13y ago
      I think that the point is that Google makes money regardless of whether you get an Android or an iPhone. Apple does not.
      - evilduck 13y ago
        Google was making more money from iPhone users individually due to higher engagement than Android users.
        josephlord 13y ago
        Is this still true or was that only while Apple were paying for Google Maps?
- TillE 13y ago
  Android has at least been trying new things, though none of them are great. And they've stuck with the same bizarre game categories that have been in place since day one. https://play.google.com/store/apps/category/GAME https://play.google.com/store/apps/category/GAME
gcb0 13y ago
maybe what we need nowadays is a curated list of categories for apps... yahoo can do that and go full circle.
- gcb0 13y ago
  oh, and by curated list i mean by quality, not by revenue, as is with apple store and google store/market/play/whatever it's going to be called tomorrow.
djent 13y ago
I can almost remember a time when the Apple App Store had good enough content - it may be because I was young and had lower standards, or because the content was actually decent. I am ashamed to see so many Mafia Wars clones and DLC EVERYTHING apps in the Top section. Fortunately, Apple has made it very annoying to even look at the Top section, by making it have a horizontal scroll instead of a vertical scroll, and I almost never want to see what's there.
SimianLogic2 13y ago
I think when people say they dislike the "Top" lists, what they're really saying is "I'm already fairly well known and could easily get editorial featuring if we moved to an editorial-only model." This type of system would actually be much worse for indie developers, I think, as they would have to have a connection somewhere to have any hope of getting featured (much like you need to know someone to get onto Steam). Most of us dont have $20-$40k to buy our way onto a top list, but knowing that we could without having to have a publisher or hookup at Apple is a great equalizer.
- chipotle_coyote 13y ago
  No, I'm pretty sure that when people say they dislike the "Top" lists, what they're really saying is pretty much what Marco wrote here. Editors' picks are always a wild card because you don't know on what basis the picks are happening. But your assertion that they're always about the "connections" you have strikes me as, well, very anecdotal. I have some experience on both the submitting and receiving side of magazines, and generally speaking what gets your story accepted is the quality of your story. People often assume you need "connections" to get into big name markets, but big name markets attract big name authors and that makes the barrier of entry much higher. I have no inside knowledge of Steam, but I suspect that's very likely what goes on there: the more developers want to be on Steam, the harder it will be to be on it. Of course, Apple already has editors' pick lists which I've heard really do boost app sales significantly; the question is really whether dropping Top 10 lists would flatten the curve further; I suspect the sales would remain vastly overweighted toward the featured apps no matter what, but perhaps if the featured apps were rotated frequently that would help. I rather like one of the other commenters' ideas of keeping the top 10 lists, but just removing apps you've already purchased from them. The App Store search is pretty bad, as other people have commented. (A lot of people think the changes to the store in iOS 6 made it worse, but it's not like it was good to start with.)
  - SimianLogic2 13y ago
    While it may be a problem that top ten rankings can be bought (I haven't seen any evidence that it is a problem), without those organic downloads from the top of the charts it would be much much harder to build a growth business out of the app store. Turning off the top rankings seems like it would prevent there from ever being another Angry Birds or Instagram... discovery is too hard otherwise. Even an editor ranking is ephemeral. Say you're right and the cream rises to the top--how long would a feature last? A week? Two weeks? Maybe a couple hundred thousand free downloads? I don't know what the organic/non ratio is at most companies relying on paid installs, but my gut would say it's somewhere on the order of 1:1 or better. If you remove the organic installs, CPIs would essentially double overnight and most of these businesses would no longer be able to sustain themselves.
pflats 13y ago
I'd argue that the biggest issue is simply that the App Store interface is terrible, and that results load far too slowly. The prominence of the Top List is only a symptom of that. Suppose you were at at a new bookstore, and each table of books was in its own little room, each isolated from the next. Once you think you want something, you have to unlock the book's acrylic case to take it out and read the dust jacket. You wouldn't go browsing in that store the way you would at a Barnes and Noble. If the deals were good enough, you might check out the Bestsellers Room and the "Recommended By Our Staff" Room. You might even stop by the "10 Bestselling Books About Home Improvement" Room, if that's what you're looking for. But there's no way you're going room to room to room to room to room in hopes finding something else. That's the App Store we have.
- gfodor 13y ago
  It's stunning to me how the App Store has so many downloads and so much revenue and yet still is such a huge piece of trash. It needs to be much faster. It needs to be more engaging. The search needs to be improved. The taxonomy needs a massive overhaul. Users need to be more encouraged to review apps and the review process itself needs to be overhauled. App sellers need to be able to perform legit SEO on their keywords and get insights into where their downloads are coming from. Even buying an app feels sluggish and unresponsive. The recommendation system is crap because they recommend similar apps not complementary apps. The whole thing is just begging to be rebuilt, it's basically the same as when it first launched. It's a huge optimization problem and it's absolutely embarrassing they are not constantly A/B testing, iterating, and improving the experience. It feels like they have no data science team at all working on this product. The fact that the App Store only changes with iOS updates shows they are approaching this product incorrectly. They should have dozens of experiments running all the time trying to drive up install rates. It's probably the biggest example I can think of where Apple really shows that they are unquestionably not Google. It's hard to underestimate just how much of a boost Apple will see if they actually build a real, first-class, fast shopping experience into the App Store.
  - PiersonBro 13y ago
    I agree with your sentiment but be factually accurate if you've looked at the iOS 6 App Store on day one it would differ in a plethora of small details then the one we have now.
supercoder 13y ago
Thats fine for someone to say with no apps in the app store. His previous app kept around 7 - 8 in his category chart and so he definitely benefited from the top charts. Giving total exposure control to Apple would be an absolute nightmare for most developers that didnt have the exposure Marco does. There are plenty of good apps, that Apple arent sometimes interested in, that users are, that do well by climbing the charts rather than being picked by some guy in Cupertino. Marco is completely out of touch.
- ihuman 13y ago
  In the past, when he had apps in the App Store, he still said that there should be no "Top" list.
  - kybernetyk 13y ago
    Yes, because he's a pretty well known and pretty well connected blogger/dev in the Apple community. He would have gotten 'editorially selected' in his scenario on the first day.
- PiersonBro 13y ago
  I agree Apple shouldn't have total exposure control. That doesn't mean that Top Charts is not intrinsically broken. Third parties game the top charts just as much (Or even more) then Apple does. In fact Apple is working towards a system that doesn't have any third party or first party control, Apps Near Me.
gfodor 13y ago
More than getting rid of the top list is that the App Store has a search model from 1995. Let me buy keywords, run experiments, optimize paid placements, and give me tools to perform SEO for organic search. Let me track conversions more easily and bid on a CPI basis for search placements. Build algorithms to figure out paid vs. legit reviews and use these signals to perform search ranking. Add more metadata to apps and give users more degrees of freedom to explore, rate, and discuss apps. App Store search is just as much of a black box as the day it launched. For crying out loud Apple, just copy Google on this one, and there will be a massive lift in revenue for everyone.
Yhippa 13y ago
Are they having trouble getting people to download the Vespa app?
po 13y ago
I had the exact same observation but for another Apple app ecosystem: Game Center. I could not care less how I rank in the global rankings for an iPhone app. Do I care that some 10 kids or idiot savants have scored 100x higher than me? Not really. Maybe if I had actually joined a league or something I would like to know how I ranked globally but otherwise, that's not what you want to show people by default. There is some pride in knowing that you are one of the 10 best people in the world at the iPhone version of carcassone but that pride gets to be enjoyed by exactly 10 people. Everyone else gets to see their relatively low scores compared to total strangers.
- afhof 13y ago
  Percentiles I think greatly help the appearance of rankings. Knowing you are in the top 95% vs. knowing you're a measly 2 standard deviations above the mean.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- MBCook 13y ago
  As someone who was once ranked 81st in the world on a game, it was a blast to see that my score was that high. Maybe it should only tell you past 1000, but it's a great little reward. Over time the app became more popular and and I lost my rank, but it was still cool. I wish Apple would fix the rampant cheating. While my rank was 81st, it was realistically ~60th because many of the top scores were simply cheaters who scored MAX_INT when that was at least 10,000x higher than the next closest score. That is the thing I find discouraging about looking at the scores, that every game is topped by cheaters.
  - reaperhulk 13y ago
    iOS 7 adds some new APIs to help with game score submission cheating.
- robryan 13y ago
  I have never really properly used Game Center, every interaction I have ever had with it has felt clunky.
seeingfurther 13y ago
Apple should create a new category for 1 year. App stores for apps. The best one at the end of the year becomes the official app store.
- xentronium 13y ago
  > The best one at the end of the year becomes the official app store. The best one defined as top 1 in app stores for apps category? :-)
thufry 13y ago
The "Top" lists benefit Apple, which is why the feature remains. "Top Free" lists apps that have managed to get large user bases, such as Whatsapp and Facebook. These apps help Apple get their customers using more apps, which lock them into iOS. "Top Sales" and "Top Grossing" are even more obvious -- while they do encourage the skeeziest business models, they are apps that are proven to make money, and whatever money they make, Apple gets 30% of that. "Top" lists won't go away until their presence starts hurting Apple.
hayksaakian 13y ago
Lists are pointless, all we need is good search. That's why the Web works - search is a solved problem. Search on app stores is archaic and abysmal -- you'd think Google could solve this kind of problem.
- bodegajed 13y ago
  Yeah having almost 700,000 apps in the app store. A search engine would definitely help. How about spiders for apps. I mean they can look for high page rank sites that links to an app for example. they can then score these based from the inbound links.
- inthewoods 13y ago
  ^^^^ This. Apps are a great user experience but App stores really suck for discovery. And given that Google previously worked at solving this problem, you'd think they'd be all over it.
- smackfu 13y ago
  Search isn't a solution for discoverability though. A lot of people use those top lists to see "what are the new games that are out?"
  - hayksaakian 13y ago
    How does it work on the web? You search for sites known to promote games (let's say IGN) and they link you to games. Why does Google/Apple need to curate everything?
kunle 13y ago
Probably the right answer is some combination of - editorial (although this can be gamed in a different way - a bunch of PR/marketing folks with strong relationships with Apple employees would suffice), - reviews/ratings (also gameable) - some algo for how long users continue to own/open/use an app after they download it (almost impossible to game, because it's linked to fundamental use). With this combo - the rich will still get richer, but at least they will continue to be quality.
adventured 13y ago
I find myself agreeing at a basic level with these arguments (which have been around as long as such lists have). However, I've yet to see anybody back up their emotion-driven claims with enough facts and data to actually make a conclusive argument (ie to prove their position). Over and over and over again these types of posts / articles pop-up, and say things just like this: "It encourages shallow, least-common-denominator apps with rock-bottom prices" --- and proceed to not actually provide any data. A single subjective statement isn't good enough. My point is, from a subjective / emotional / weak-on-data standpoint I agree. I don't regard that as a valid argument for change however, as this is a big deal for the apps business. Bring the truck-load of data with you next time (and every time you make such arguments) and let's really end the discussion once and for all. I've seen various relevant clips of data floating around, with a narrow focus; I have to believe someone could put together a comprehensive, overwhelming data-based argument if these claims are in fact true.
gurupanguji 13y ago
> It’s a lot like the Android market. Nobody — not Google, not the manufacturers, and certainly not the carriers — gives a shit if you hate your Android phone or put that cheap tablet in a drawer after a month. They’re optimizing for “top” lists, so they compete on price, flashiness, and huge retail incentives, usually at the expense of quality and long-term satisfaction. I don't get how or why Apple cares about users using their product more than Google. Because they provide support? Apple support for iTunes is terrible. Try getting a refund for an accidental buy by someone else. However, we do have a case in point -- Instapaper on Android. I plunked my money when it came about thinking that it was going to be a great experience. A couple minor updates and Marco didn't care less about the pain it was. He played his self fulfilling statement for sure. These random Google and Android are <insert random expletive> because they don't give a(n) <insert random expletive> statements are unbecoming and disappointing. =(
Steko 13y ago
The alternatives presented are either not easy or not very compelling, especially given that they would reduce Apple's income. I'd be happy with a few more category levels. Exile the pay to win games to their own corner and hopefully introduce some sensible limits.
ellicottvilleny 13y ago
Apple gives zero fucks about Developers. ZERO point ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO fucks. Developers are part of their sweatshop app store that makes billions for apple. We paid over a billion dollars out to app developers, says Tim Cook. Yea, and most app-store developers are working for $0.002 an hour. Nice. Fuckers.
spaghetti 13y ago
I have a few thoughts on this in no particular order: - It would be interesting if the top list gaming mentioned in the article was eliminated by replacing download or install count with something more meaningful like "frequency of app open" or "average time spent in the app per day". These can still be gamed but it's harder than just gaming a metric that relies only on download or install count. - There should still be some sort of collaborative filtering. I favor improving the top list's ranking algorithm over getting rid of the top list. - Giving new apps more chance to succeed or exposure could be implemented similar to how HN includes job postings. Namely the listing is put in the top spot of "the list" for a bit and slowly falls down. In the app store the new app should probably fall rapidly unless user-engagement is high. How to measure that? Download count is too easy to game so other metrics would need to be used. - I think developers should be mindful that they're selling to (in general) everyone and not just other developers. When Marco mentions "high-quality" apps he's speaking from a developer's perspective. And developers often care a lot about details that the general public doesn't notice or doesn't care about if they do notice. - The app store should be faster. The iTunes load time feels too long these days.
- weavie 13y ago
  That would involve sending a message to apple every time you opened and closed an app. How would you feel if Apple was storing details about how often you used your various apps on their servers? I'm sure a lot of people would be outraged
Sealy 13y ago
I think 'top' lists have their purpose but with the addition of a 'time decay' factored in. A perfect analogy is the Hacker News front page to rank trending stories. Over time, the posts will drop down the list based upon a combination of both popularity and how long it has been there. This would keep the top list 'fresh'.
tolmasky 13y ago
Here's an idea: show me the top lists without the apps I already own! Why do I need to see Mountain Lion at the top of the App Store constantly in the #1 position? Just so I can know how little Mac Software gets sold and completely dissuade me from ever considering writing Mac software again? EIGHT of the top 10 apps are Apple apps. Most of which people probably already own (I happen to own all of them). Is this the image of the app store they want? If you really want to compell people to download Mountain Lion, just make it a banner at the top of the store that shows up if you don't have it! The same applies to the iOS App store though. After I owned Angry Birds, why on Earth did I have to look at it as #1 for years? Showing a top 10 with apps you already own filtered out is good for everyone. The top selling apps still show up for new users. After its purchased, it gives other apps a chance to percolate up, which means more sales for everyone, and more 30% cuts for Apple. EDIT: I'd like to point out that the OP's reference to a purely "editorial" list has the exact same problem. I don't understand why the Apple ecosystem seems hell bent on refusing to take advantage of the digital age. Creating a one-size fits all top 10 list, or editorial list, is a fine strategy for a brick and mortar store where they have to show everyone the same thing at the front of their store. And mind you, this is the absolute easiest online market place feature you can possibly program: don't show me what I already own and thus am literally incapable of repurchasing.
- soapdog 13y ago
  I like this idea!
- brianwillis 13y ago
  You might find the genius lists go some of the way toward solving this problem for you. They try show things you're likely to be interested in, and don't show stuff you already own.
  - melling 13y ago
    Now if you could only remind the 500 million other iOS users. Discovery needs to be better. Most people aren't going to dig. If my girlfriend wants an app that she's heard about, I've got to install it for her. Guess who updates the apps on her phone? :-( It's gotta be real easy for most people.
briandilley 13y ago
what makes you think that the criteria for "top" is actual based in reviews? it may or may not be, but a smart thing to do would be to base it on another pre calculated score. something like the formula that reddit uses would work good because it degrades over time. that said, I'm willing to bet that apple cooks that list based on a number of factors.
tuananh 13y ago
The problem with top-n list is the 'long tail' apps. They got very little or none exposure. Apple just need to work on that by adding more novelty and serendipity into the recommendations.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Lockyy 13y ago
I am most annoyed by the Google Play store being unable to seperate games and apps correctly. The app section is littered with games making it difficult to browse apps without being crushed by them. The games have their own section. They should stay in it to prevent this clutter.
chillericed 13y ago
I hear your points as it relates to the "Top Free" list and there is obviously a lot of room for improvement on discovery, but in response to: > The “top” list simply rewards developers for getting as many people as possible to buy or download the app once. There’s no reason to optimize for longer-term satisfaction or higher engagement after purchase. I personally find tremendous value from browsing the "Top Grossing" list. Being in the "Top Grossing" list is some indication on both long term satisfaction and engagement. It tells me that the application has generated real value for their customers and they are speaking with the wallets and not just with their ratings/reviews.
wwwong 13y ago
At the end of the day, Apple's goal isn't to get rich off the App Store. It's to do what they can with the App Store to continue driving sales of iPhones and iPads. At the moment, what they believe is that by promoting apps (via these lists) that promote and show off the iPhone/iPads in the best light is the way to do it.
- Aqua_Geek 13y ago
  Getting rich may not be the goal, but they're doing pretty well for themselves: they've paid out $10B to devs[1], so they've made ~$4.2B. 1. http://9to5mac.com/2013/06/10/tim-cook-talks-numbers-at-apples-wwdc-2013-keynote-407-retail-stores-1m-daily-visitors-6m-registered-devs-more/ http://9to5mac.com/2013/06/10/tim-cook-talks-numbers-at-appl...
bigd 13y ago
I'd be curious to see some math on this. The top ranking is probably following a power law, such as the most cited papers etc. etc. Now, what other weighting algorithm would you suggest? how to find the most interesting nodes? did someone ever published a proper study? What clustering will be predicted?
trevmckendrick 13y ago
Arguing why Apple should incentivize higher priced software is a common but mistaken refrain amongst developers. Apps are complements to the iPhone and iPad. Spolsky has a great post about the competition between complements here: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html Basically, the less apps cost, the more iPhones Apple will sell. It makes the entire ecosystem more attractive to consumers because they know there's 100's of thousands of apps they can buy for < $5. Imagine how much less your mom would want an iPhone if she scrolls through the App Store and finds mostly stuff that's $20 or $30. The platform becomes too expensive for casual users, who are 95%+ of iOS customers.
Aloisius 13y ago
The rich get richer: everyone who downloads an app by browsing the “top” list reinforces or increases the rank of the apps already on it, entrenching their positions and reducing the visibility of anything below the first few pages. Can't you fix this by simply excluding installs that happened via the top list from counting towards the top list? If you install it via search or someone's website or even Apple's editorial area, it counts, otherwise, it shouldn't. Seems like a straightforward way to get rid of the feedback loop. (everyone should probably do this for top lists, "people who viewed this viewed that" systems and probably even some recommender systems)
codereflection 13y ago
Ironically this post is currently at the "Top" of HN. :/
- nwh 13y ago
  Chosen by vote, not by the number of visitors who clicked the outgoing link.
csense 13y ago
This problem is solved with HN headlines by, roughly, making older upvotes worth exponentially less. Anyone want to comment on the merits and drawbacks of applying a similar solution to an app store, and any ideas for mitigating the problems? Anyone want to build a startup: An Android app store with HN-inspired ranking system?
cncool 13y ago
"The “top” list simply rewards developers for getting as many people as possible to buy or download the app once. There’s no reason to optimize for longer-term satisfaction or higher engagement after purchase." This is clearly false. If you have a free app, you obviously want that so you get money from in-app purchases / ad revenue.
pratyushag 13y ago
Stop complaining and game the damn thing i you think it's that easy!
ddoolin 13y ago
No. I like to know which apps are most likely not to suck, thanks.
credo 13y ago
Marco is correct in pointing out that the "top" list approach has a few flaws.However, I think that the "top" list (in addition to Apple's featured list) is the best solution among a list of sub-optimal solutions. He seems to suggest the top-lists should be replaced by a list of apps that Apple classifies as "great software". However, Apple already shows a list of featured apps and this list already has a huge impact on app rankings (and IMO Apple will never be able to create a perfect and comprehensive list) From my experience, I'd say that removing the top-lists will hurt the ecosystem (most users as well as many developers). For example, one of our iPad apps was #1 in the Finance category for six weeks. The media first mentioned this app several days after it became #1. Apple also featured the app a few days after the app became #1 (the app was never priced at the lowest price tiers). The app got initial traction organically and the #1 ranking helped it get even more traction. It isn't realistic to expect Apple to be able to pick a list of "great apps". Following up on my example, we launched a new version of the iPad app a couple of weeks ago, but Apple isn't featuring it on the "new and noteworthy" list even though the app has hundreds of reviews with 2/3 of them being 5-star reviews and another 1/4 being 4-star reviews Relying solely on Apple's featured list and on media-connections or advertisements may work for one class of developers, but for many other developers, the (category-specific) top-lists are helpful. I also think that the top-lists are helpful for users. Removing the list isn't going to make it any more easy for users to search through a million apps in the app store.
- salmonellaeater 13y ago
  Another option is to fix algorithm used to sort the top-list. It's similar to search results, in that a purchase from the top list should be attributed to two* factors: 1) the app's quality, and 2) its current position in the list. Basically, you can separate the effect on purchases of the position in the list from the effect of the app's quality, and then sort apps based on their quality rather than raw purchases. *Maybe I should say, at least two factors. You can go really deep when constructing rankings.
  - __alexs 13y ago
    So apps should have a sort of ELO ranking where they fight with apps in the same category (possibly multiple categories simultaneously) for dominance and the fight is implemented as which app gets bought when displayed to a user at the same time as another similar app?
danmaz74 13y ago
"Nobody — not Google, not the manufacturers, and certainly not the carriers — gives a shit if you hate your Android phone or put that cheap tablet in a drawer after a month. " This is a very misinformed comment. Google doesn't make any money from the initial sale of Android devices, it only makes money if people actually use them, so the opposite is true.
Osiris 13y ago
I've owned my Macbook Pro for a year and a half and I've never opened the App Store except when that annoying "Updates" notification pops up that has no close button. Correction: I did just download the 10.8.4 update from the App Store and I found one app online a while back that only offered a download link through the App Store.
orky56 13y ago
As long as revenue is still getting to Apple, Apple should encourage an environment where users are maximizing their utility from playing games they enjoy and using apps they like. This can only be done by understanding who the person is and/or marketing relevant products. PR & media should take advantage of the nascent nature of this industry and focus squarely on this through bundles, their own curated content, etc. and legitimize mobile despite the small screen and price. App Gratis is an innovative (?) example of this but I'm sure there are many more to be created. If done properly, Apple will begin to realize that the overall market can be maximized by easing their restraints.
kybernetyk 13y ago
> exclusively showing editorially selected apps With the top list system I at least have some chance to get there. With 'editorially selected apps' I wouldn't because I have neither contacts to Apple nor to A-list bloggers. Apple doesn't select apps for features solemnly on quality. There are other factors that sometimes have the stink of corruption to them. (Like the angry birds story: Only a success after Rovio got a publisher who could call up Apple and talk about a feature.)
mbesto 13y ago
So what's the solution then? I don't see a better alternative...
OliC 13y ago
I would imagine that Apple like the headlines they get from runaway app successes like Angry Birds. Along with the subtle "Write apps for iOS and become the next Rovio!" message they send out. These massive hits are usually initially fueled by the "Top" lists so I don't see them being removed any time soon.
tehwalrus 13y ago
many buyers appear to be buying from them as their primary store-browsing channel I just realised - I don't think I've ever "browsed" the app store. I've only ever searched for the thing I'm looking for, and used the first 10 results to gauge whether it exists. It didn't seem worthwhile because I knew there were squillions of apps, so why try to read through them one by one?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
dirkdk 13y ago
Both Apple and Google should take app engagement instead of pure downloads as the main metric to base these top lists on. As Marco says, pure downloads becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, easy to game and does not expose you to new interesting apps. http://blog.mobtest.com/2013/05/app-engagement-is-a-much-better-metric-than-downloads/ http://blog.mobtest.com/2013/05/app-engagement-is-a-much-bet...
gozmike 13y ago
Marco's hit the nail on the head with this one. During our seed round, we had an angel promise us what we thought was a small fortune (!00k) on the condition that 80% of it be used to pay for chart-boosting apps. We thought hard about it and even got on a few calls with US companies (recommended to us by others in the community) who said they invoked a variety of "white-hat" techniques (whose vague descriptions sounded quite grey to me...) to guarantee a quick rise in rankings and app store success. These are companies that are operating despite Apple making efforts to stop this gaming of the app store. Ultimately, we were not comfortable with accepting the term sheet with this clause and we never closed on the deal. I'm thrilled that this happened and I didn't have to give a dime to these sleaze balls. Creating a system that's based on download count rather than curation at this scale isn't good for Apple and it isn't good for iOS Users. There is awesome stuff coming out of both indie dev shops and bigger development houses alike. Apple would do well to drive users towards software that makes its devices sing than to reward whoever has engineered an insidious viral loop or brought a briefcase of cash down to Boston black hats.
Terretta 13y ago
Something Apple could do to let users optionally markedly improve quality of the gaming category "top lists" would be a preference setting to exclude apps with In App Purchases.
programminggeek 13y ago
Um, people like top lists. It is the cheapest and easiest filter. It is the same principle that Google operates on. Make a list of the thing with the most downloads, links, etc. and that is often/usually over time the best. I'm reasonably sure that their search system works largely off of downloads, ratings, reviews, etc. It's not an infallible system, but life isn't about being fair. It's not apple's job to ensure fairness, it's Apple's job to do a good job delivering what people want. A lot of people want what is popular, even if it's not always the best.
TheQwerty 13y ago
Google actually had, what I thought was, a very interesting session about getting discovered in the Google Play store. They're using 80+ signals to steer recommendations including the user's install history, location, and G+ network/reviews. I'd bet Apple is doing much of the same - they may even have had similar sessions at WWDC. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Od2SuL2igA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Od2SuL2igA Certainly worth a watch before agreeing with Marco that no one in the world cares about a user's experience on Android devices after they're sold.
icodestuff 13y ago
I don't agree with one of the premises, namely that editorial picks will be more "fair". I work at a company that competes directly with Apple in many areas. The app I worked on was never featured anywhere, despite getting to the top 3 in our category, and top 15 free overall. Being in the top 10 or even top 25 is the only traffic driver anyone competing with Apple will ever have, unless you're competing with something Apple acknowledges as completely broken (ie, you're Google Maps).
chj 13y ago
The problem with top list is it rarely changes. Day after day, you are seeing the same and expecting the same. What's the point?

222 points by co_pl_te 13y ago

chj 13y ago

Trial mode is the most important. Everything else is secondary. I don't care if you get rid of top list or not, because not every app can enter top list nor be selected by apple's god hand.

vxNsr 13y ago

The option to trial an app is the reason I like the WP Store (lack of apps notwithstanding). The other nice thing that WP Store has is top-rated apps (or the ability to sort by rating) while this is still subject to some of the "top downloaded" issues it's a step in the right direction.

StavrosK 13y ago
Don't they all have trials? The Play Store does (sure, it's 15 minutes, but that's usually enough for most people).

Kylekramer 13y ago

Seems to be blaming a lot of ills of the App Store that are larger or unrelated than the top list to the top list. Rich get richer is just the nature of the beast in capitalism. The rock bottom prices are more due to the elasticity of price of phone apps compared to many products. After all, you have prominently reported top lists for movies/games/music for decades and they certainly aren't getting cheaper. Top lists are probably not a good way to encourage quality, but they are hardly the root of the problem and they do encourage sales in a relatively dispassionate way. High quality trolling by claiming Google doesn't care if people hate Android phones, though.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
runjake 13y ago
He may be trolling, but its probably not far from the truth. Other than releasing the Android source, Google doesn't really play any part in most Android devices on the market. Further, their store is plagued with malware and shady apps that never get removed. I know because I've reported them and continue to see the same apps by the same developers on the Play Store. On the manufacturer's side, they rush out devices with subpar hardware (and hardware bugs), build, and software. And getting system updates is a game of prayer. It's important to remember that for Google, Android is a means to an end: to get people using their services and in turn get eyes on ads and gather demographic info. They aren't selling Nexus devices at cost/a loss for nothing.
- Kylekramer 13y ago
  OK? And for Apple, iOS is a means to end: to get people using their services and get their money alongside getting their money upfront. It just so happens that delivering quality experiences are a good way of achieving both Google and Apple's ends. People who hate their phones don't see as many ads as people who enjoy their phones. But, of course, we are feeding the troll.
  - schrodinger 13y ago
    I think that the point is that Google makes money regardless of whether you get an Android or an iPhone. Apple does not.
    - evilduck 13y ago
      Google was making more money from iPhone users individually due to higher engagement than Android users.
      - josephlord 13y ago
        Is this still true or was that only while Apple were paying for Google Maps?
TillE 13y ago
Android has at least been trying new things, though none of them are great. And they've stuck with the same bizarre game categories that have been in place since day one. https://play.google.com/store/apps/category/GAME https://play.google.com/store/apps/category/GAME

gcb0 13y ago

maybe what we need nowadays is a curated list of categories for apps... yahoo can do that and go full circle.

gcb0 13y ago
oh, and by curated list i mean by quality, not by revenue, as is with apple store and google store/market/play/whatever it's going to be called tomorrow.

djent 13y ago

I can almost remember a time when the Apple App Store had good enough content - it may be because I was young and had lower standards, or because the content was actually decent. I am ashamed to see so many Mafia Wars clones and DLC EVERYTHING apps in the Top section. Fortunately, Apple has made it very annoying to even look at the Top section, by making it have a horizontal scroll instead of a vertical scroll, and I almost never want to see what's there.

SimianLogic2 13y ago

I think when people say they dislike the "Top" lists, what they're really saying is "I'm already fairly well known and could easily get editorial featuring if we moved to an editorial-only model." This type of system would actually be much worse for indie developers, I think, as they would have to have a connection somewhere to have any hope of getting featured (much like you need to know someone to get onto Steam). Most of us dont have $20-$40k to buy our way onto a top list, but knowing that we could without having to have a publisher or hookup at Apple is a great equalizer.

chipotle_coyote 13y ago
No, I'm pretty sure that when people say they dislike the "Top" lists, what they're really saying is pretty much what Marco wrote here. Editors' picks are always a wild card because you don't know on what basis the picks are happening. But your assertion that they're always about the "connections" you have strikes me as, well, very anecdotal. I have some experience on both the submitting and receiving side of magazines, and generally speaking what gets your story accepted is the quality of your story. People often assume you need "connections" to get into big name markets, but big name markets attract big name authors and that makes the barrier of entry much higher. I have no inside knowledge of Steam, but I suspect that's very likely what goes on there: the more developers want to be on Steam, the harder it will be to be on it. Of course, Apple already has editors' pick lists which I've heard really do boost app sales significantly; the question is really whether dropping Top 10 lists would flatten the curve further; I suspect the sales would remain vastly overweighted toward the featured apps no matter what, but perhaps if the featured apps were rotated frequently that would help. I rather like one of the other commenters' ideas of keeping the top 10 lists, but just removing apps you've already purchased from them. The App Store search is pretty bad, as other people have commented. (A lot of people think the changes to the store in iOS 6 made it worse, but it's not like it was good to start with.)
- SimianLogic2 13y ago
  While it may be a problem that top ten rankings can be bought (I haven't seen any evidence that it is a problem), without those organic downloads from the top of the charts it would be much much harder to build a growth business out of the app store. Turning off the top rankings seems like it would prevent there from ever being another Angry Birds or Instagram... discovery is too hard otherwise. Even an editor ranking is ephemeral. Say you're right and the cream rises to the top--how long would a feature last? A week? Two weeks? Maybe a couple hundred thousand free downloads? I don't know what the organic/non ratio is at most companies relying on paid installs, but my gut would say it's somewhere on the order of 1:1 or better. If you remove the organic installs, CPIs would essentially double overnight and most of these businesses would no longer be able to sustain themselves.

pflats 13y ago

I'd argue that the biggest issue is simply that the App Store interface is terrible, and that results load far too slowly. The prominence of the Top List is only a symptom of that. Suppose you were at at a new bookstore, and each table of books was in its own little room, each isolated from the next. Once you think you want something, you have to unlock the book's acrylic case to take it out and read the dust jacket. You wouldn't go browsing in that store the way you would at a Barnes and Noble. If the deals were good enough, you might check out the Bestsellers Room and the "Recommended By Our Staff" Room. You might even stop by the "10 Bestselling Books About Home Improvement" Room, if that's what you're looking for. But there's no way you're going room to room to room to room to room in hopes finding something else. That's the App Store we have.

gfodor 13y ago
It's stunning to me how the App Store has so many downloads and so much revenue and yet still is such a huge piece of trash. It needs to be much faster. It needs to be more engaging. The search needs to be improved. The taxonomy needs a massive overhaul. Users need to be more encouraged to review apps and the review process itself needs to be overhauled. App sellers need to be able to perform legit SEO on their keywords and get insights into where their downloads are coming from. Even buying an app feels sluggish and unresponsive. The recommendation system is crap because they recommend similar apps not complementary apps. The whole thing is just begging to be rebuilt, it's basically the same as when it first launched. It's a huge optimization problem and it's absolutely embarrassing they are not constantly A/B testing, iterating, and improving the experience. It feels like they have no data science team at all working on this product. The fact that the App Store only changes with iOS updates shows they are approaching this product incorrectly. They should have dozens of experiments running all the time trying to drive up install rates. It's probably the biggest example I can think of where Apple really shows that they are unquestionably not Google. It's hard to underestimate just how much of a boost Apple will see if they actually build a real, first-class, fast shopping experience into the App Store.
- PiersonBro 13y ago
  I agree with your sentiment but be factually accurate if you've looked at the iOS 6 App Store on day one it would differ in a plethora of small details then the one we have now.

supercoder 13y ago

Thats fine for someone to say with no apps in the app store. His previous app kept around 7 - 8 in his category chart and so he definitely benefited from the top charts. Giving total exposure control to Apple would be an absolute nightmare for most developers that didnt have the exposure Marco does. There are plenty of good apps, that Apple arent sometimes interested in, that users are, that do well by climbing the charts rather than being picked by some guy in Cupertino. Marco is completely out of touch.

ihuman 13y ago
In the past, when he had apps in the App Store, he still said that there should be no "Top" list.
- kybernetyk 13y ago
  Yes, because he's a pretty well known and pretty well connected blogger/dev in the Apple community. He would have gotten 'editorially selected' in his scenario on the first day.
PiersonBro 13y ago
I agree Apple shouldn't have total exposure control. That doesn't mean that Top Charts is not intrinsically broken. Third parties game the top charts just as much (Or even more) then Apple does. In fact Apple is working towards a system that doesn't have any third party or first party control, Apps Near Me.

gfodor 13y ago

More than getting rid of the top list is that the App Store has a search model from 1995. Let me buy keywords, run experiments, optimize paid placements, and give me tools to perform SEO for organic search. Let me track conversions more easily and bid on a CPI basis for search placements. Build algorithms to figure out paid vs. legit reviews and use these signals to perform search ranking. Add more metadata to apps and give users more degrees of freedom to explore, rate, and discuss apps. App Store search is just as much of a black box as the day it launched. For crying out loud Apple, just copy Google on this one, and there will be a massive lift in revenue for everyone.

Yhippa 13y ago

Are they having trouble getting people to download the Vespa app?

po 13y ago

I had the exact same observation but for another Apple app ecosystem: Game Center. I could not care less how I rank in the global rankings for an iPhone app. Do I care that some 10 kids or idiot savants have scored 100x higher than me? Not really. Maybe if I had actually joined a league or something I would like to know how I ranked globally but otherwise, that's not what you want to show people by default. There is some pride in knowing that you are one of the 10 best people in the world at the iPhone version of carcassone but that pride gets to be enjoyed by exactly 10 people. Everyone else gets to see their relatively low scores compared to total strangers.

afhof 13y ago
Percentiles I think greatly help the appearance of rankings. Knowing you are in the top 95% vs. knowing you're a measly 2 standard deviations above the mean.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
MBCook 13y ago
As someone who was once ranked 81st in the world on a game, it was a blast to see that my score was that high. Maybe it should only tell you past 1000, but it's a great little reward. Over time the app became more popular and and I lost my rank, but it was still cool. I wish Apple would fix the rampant cheating. While my rank was 81st, it was realistically ~60th because many of the top scores were simply cheaters who scored MAX_INT when that was at least 10,000x higher than the next closest score. That is the thing I find discouraging about looking at the scores, that every game is topped by cheaters.
- reaperhulk 13y ago
  iOS 7 adds some new APIs to help with game score submission cheating.
robryan 13y ago
I have never really properly used Game Center, every interaction I have ever had with it has felt clunky.

seeingfurther 13y ago

Apple should create a new category for 1 year. App stores for apps. The best one at the end of the year becomes the official app store.

xentronium 13y ago
> The best one at the end of the year becomes the official app store. The best one defined as top 1 in app stores for apps category? :-)

thufry 13y ago

The "Top" lists benefit Apple, which is why the feature remains. "Top Free" lists apps that have managed to get large user bases, such as Whatsapp and Facebook. These apps help Apple get their customers using more apps, which lock them into iOS. "Top Sales" and "Top Grossing" are even more obvious -- while they do encourage the skeeziest business models, they are apps that are proven to make money, and whatever money they make, Apple gets 30% of that. "Top" lists won't go away until their presence starts hurting Apple.

hayksaakian 13y ago

Lists are pointless, all we need is good search. That's why the Web works - search is a solved problem. Search on app stores is archaic and abysmal -- you'd think Google could solve this kind of problem.

bodegajed 13y ago
Yeah having almost 700,000 apps in the app store. A search engine would definitely help. How about spiders for apps. I mean they can look for high page rank sites that links to an app for example. they can then score these based from the inbound links.
inthewoods 13y ago
^^^^ This. Apps are a great user experience but App stores really suck for discovery. And given that Google previously worked at solving this problem, you'd think they'd be all over it.
smackfu 13y ago
Search isn't a solution for discoverability though. A lot of people use those top lists to see "what are the new games that are out?"
- hayksaakian 13y ago
  How does it work on the web? You search for sites known to promote games (let's say IGN) and they link you to games. Why does Google/Apple need to curate everything?

kunle 13y ago

Probably the right answer is some combination of - editorial (although this can be gamed in a different way - a bunch of PR/marketing folks with strong relationships with Apple employees would suffice), - reviews/ratings (also gameable) - some algo for how long users continue to own/open/use an app after they download it (almost impossible to game, because it's linked to fundamental use). With this combo - the rich will still get richer, but at least they will continue to be quality.

adventured 13y ago

I find myself agreeing at a basic level with these arguments (which have been around as long as such lists have). However, I've yet to see anybody back up their emotion-driven claims with enough facts and data to actually make a conclusive argument (ie to prove their position). Over and over and over again these types of posts / articles pop-up, and say things just like this: "It encourages shallow, least-common-denominator apps with rock-bottom prices" --- and proceed to not actually provide any data. A single subjective statement isn't good enough. My point is, from a subjective / emotional / weak-on-data standpoint I agree. I don't regard that as a valid argument for change however, as this is a big deal for the apps business. Bring the truck-load of data with you next time (and every time you make such arguments) and let's really end the discussion once and for all. I've seen various relevant clips of data floating around, with a narrow focus; I have to believe someone could put together a comprehensive, overwhelming data-based argument if these claims are in fact true.

gurupanguji 13y ago

> It’s a lot like the Android market. Nobody — not Google, not the manufacturers, and certainly not the carriers — gives a shit if you hate your Android phone or put that cheap tablet in a drawer after a month. They’re optimizing for “top” lists, so they compete on price, flashiness, and huge retail incentives, usually at the expense of quality and long-term satisfaction. I don't get how or why Apple cares about users using their product more than Google. Because they provide support? Apple support for iTunes is terrible. Try getting a refund for an accidental buy by someone else. However, we do have a case in point -- Instapaper on Android. I plunked my money when it came about thinking that it was going to be a great experience. A couple minor updates and Marco didn't care less about the pain it was. He played his self fulfilling statement for sure. These random Google and Android are <insert random expletive> because they don't give a(n) <insert random expletive> statements are unbecoming and disappointing. =(

Steko 13y ago

The alternatives presented are either not easy or not very compelling, especially given that they would reduce Apple's income. I'd be happy with a few more category levels. Exile the pay to win games to their own corner and hopefully introduce some sensible limits.

ellicottvilleny 13y ago

Apple gives zero fucks about Developers. ZERO point ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO fucks. Developers are part of their sweatshop app store that makes billions for apple. We paid over a billion dollars out to app developers, says Tim Cook. Yea, and most app-store developers are working for $0.002 an hour. Nice. Fuckers.

spaghetti 13y ago

I have a few thoughts on this in no particular order: - It would be interesting if the top list gaming mentioned in the article was eliminated by replacing download or install count with something more meaningful like "frequency of app open" or "average time spent in the app per day". These can still be gamed but it's harder than just gaming a metric that relies only on download or install count. - There should still be some sort of collaborative filtering. I favor improving the top list's ranking algorithm over getting rid of the top list. - Giving new apps more chance to succeed or exposure could be implemented similar to how HN includes job postings. Namely the listing is put in the top spot of "the list" for a bit and slowly falls down. In the app store the new app should probably fall rapidly unless user-engagement is high. How to measure that? Download count is too easy to game so other metrics would need to be used. - I think developers should be mindful that they're selling to (in general) everyone and not just other developers. When Marco mentions "high-quality" apps he's speaking from a developer's perspective. And developers often care a lot about details that the general public doesn't notice or doesn't care about if they do notice. - The app store should be faster. The iTunes load time feels too long these days.

weavie 13y ago
That would involve sending a message to apple every time you opened and closed an app. How would you feel if Apple was storing details about how often you used your various apps on their servers? I'm sure a lot of people would be outraged

Sealy 13y ago

I think 'top' lists have their purpose but with the addition of a 'time decay' factored in. A perfect analogy is the Hacker News front page to rank trending stories. Over time, the posts will drop down the list based upon a combination of both popularity and how long it has been there. This would keep the top list 'fresh'.

tolmasky 13y ago

Here's an idea: show me the top lists without the apps I already own! Why do I need to see Mountain Lion at the top of the App Store constantly in the #1 position? Just so I can know how little Mac Software gets sold and completely dissuade me from ever considering writing Mac software again? EIGHT of the top 10 apps are Apple apps. Most of which people probably already own (I happen to own all of them). Is this the image of the app store they want? If you really want to compell people to download Mountain Lion, just make it a banner at the top of the store that shows up if you don't have it! The same applies to the iOS App store though. After I owned Angry Birds, why on Earth did I have to look at it as #1 for years? Showing a top 10 with apps you already own filtered out is good for everyone. The top selling apps still show up for new users. After its purchased, it gives other apps a chance to percolate up, which means more sales for everyone, and more 30% cuts for Apple. EDIT: I'd like to point out that the OP's reference to a purely "editorial" list has the exact same problem. I don't understand why the Apple ecosystem seems hell bent on refusing to take advantage of the digital age. Creating a one-size fits all top 10 list, or editorial list, is a fine strategy for a brick and mortar store where they have to show everyone the same thing at the front of their store. And mind you, this is the absolute easiest online market place feature you can possibly program: don't show me what I already own and thus am literally incapable of repurchasing.

soapdog 13y ago
I like this idea!
brianwillis 13y ago
You might find the genius lists go some of the way toward solving this problem for you. They try show things you're likely to be interested in, and don't show stuff you already own.
- melling 13y ago
  Now if you could only remind the 500 million other iOS users. Discovery needs to be better. Most people aren't going to dig. If my girlfriend wants an app that she's heard about, I've got to install it for her. Guess who updates the apps on her phone? :-( It's gotta be real easy for most people.

briandilley 13y ago

what makes you think that the criteria for "top" is actual based in reviews? it may or may not be, but a smart thing to do would be to base it on another pre calculated score. something like the formula that reddit uses would work good because it degrades over time. that said, I'm willing to bet that apple cooks that list based on a number of factors.

tuananh 13y ago

The problem with top-n list is the 'long tail' apps. They got very little or none exposure. Apple just need to work on that by adding more novelty and serendipity into the recommendations.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Lockyy 13y ago

I am most annoyed by the Google Play store being unable to seperate games and apps correctly. The app section is littered with games making it difficult to browse apps without being crushed by them. The games have their own section. They should stay in it to prevent this clutter.

chillericed 13y ago

I hear your points as it relates to the "Top Free" list and there is obviously a lot of room for improvement on discovery, but in response to: > The “top” list simply rewards developers for getting as many people as possible to buy or download the app once. There’s no reason to optimize for longer-term satisfaction or higher engagement after purchase. I personally find tremendous value from browsing the "Top Grossing" list. Being in the "Top Grossing" list is some indication on both long term satisfaction and engagement. It tells me that the application has generated real value for their customers and they are speaking with the wallets and not just with their ratings/reviews.

wwwong 13y ago

At the end of the day, Apple's goal isn't to get rich off the App Store. It's to do what they can with the App Store to continue driving sales of iPhones and iPads. At the moment, what they believe is that by promoting apps (via these lists) that promote and show off the iPhone/iPads in the best light is the way to do it.

Aqua_Geek 13y ago
Getting rich may not be the goal, but they're doing pretty well for themselves: they've paid out $10B to devs[1], so they've made ~$4.2B. 1. http://9to5mac.com/2013/06/10/tim-cook-talks-numbers-at-apples-wwdc-2013-keynote-407-retail-stores-1m-daily-visitors-6m-registered-devs-more/ http://9to5mac.com/2013/06/10/tim-cook-talks-numbers-at-appl...

bigd 13y ago

I'd be curious to see some math on this. The top ranking is probably following a power law, such as the most cited papers etc. etc. Now, what other weighting algorithm would you suggest? how to find the most interesting nodes? did someone ever published a proper study? What clustering will be predicted?

trevmckendrick 13y ago

Arguing why Apple should incentivize higher priced software is a common but mistaken refrain amongst developers. Apps are complements to the iPhone and iPad. Spolsky has a great post about the competition between complements here: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.html Basically, the less apps cost, the more iPhones Apple will sell. It makes the entire ecosystem more attractive to consumers because they know there's 100's of thousands of apps they can buy for < $5. Imagine how much less your mom would want an iPhone if she scrolls through the App Store and finds mostly stuff that's $20 or $30. The platform becomes too expensive for casual users, who are 95%+ of iOS customers.

Aloisius 13y ago

The rich get richer: everyone who downloads an app by browsing the “top” list reinforces or increases the rank of the apps already on it, entrenching their positions and reducing the visibility of anything below the first few pages. Can't you fix this by simply excluding installs that happened via the top list from counting towards the top list? If you install it via search or someone's website or even Apple's editorial area, it counts, otherwise, it shouldn't. Seems like a straightforward way to get rid of the feedback loop. (everyone should probably do this for top lists, "people who viewed this viewed that" systems and probably even some recommender systems)

codereflection 13y ago

Ironically this post is currently at the "Top" of HN. :/

nwh 13y ago
Chosen by vote, not by the number of visitors who clicked the outgoing link.

csense 13y ago

This problem is solved with HN headlines by, roughly, making older upvotes worth exponentially less. Anyone want to comment on the merits and drawbacks of applying a similar solution to an app store, and any ideas for mitigating the problems? Anyone want to build a startup: An Android app store with HN-inspired ranking system?

cncool 13y ago

"The “top” list simply rewards developers for getting as many people as possible to buy or download the app once. There’s no reason to optimize for longer-term satisfaction or higher engagement after purchase." This is clearly false. If you have a free app, you obviously want that so you get money from in-app purchases / ad revenue.

pratyushag 13y ago

Stop complaining and game the damn thing i you think it's that easy!

ddoolin 13y ago

No. I like to know which apps are most likely not to suck, thanks.

credo 13y ago

Marco is correct in pointing out that the "top" list approach has a few flaws.However, I think that the "top" list (in addition to Apple's featured list) is the best solution among a list of sub-optimal solutions. He seems to suggest the top-lists should be replaced by a list of apps that Apple classifies as "great software". However, Apple already shows a list of featured apps and this list already has a huge impact on app rankings (and IMO Apple will never be able to create a perfect and comprehensive list) From my experience, I'd say that removing the top-lists will hurt the ecosystem (most users as well as many developers). For example, one of our iPad apps was #1 in the Finance category for six weeks. The media first mentioned this app several days after it became #1. Apple also featured the app a few days after the app became #1 (the app was never priced at the lowest price tiers). The app got initial traction organically and the #1 ranking helped it get even more traction. It isn't realistic to expect Apple to be able to pick a list of "great apps". Following up on my example, we launched a new version of the iPad app a couple of weeks ago, but Apple isn't featuring it on the "new and noteworthy" list even though the app has hundreds of reviews with 2/3 of them being 5-star reviews and another 1/4 being 4-star reviews Relying solely on Apple's featured list and on media-connections or advertisements may work for one class of developers, but for many other developers, the (category-specific) top-lists are helpful. I also think that the top-lists are helpful for users. Removing the list isn't going to make it any more easy for users to search through a million apps in the app store.

salmonellaeater 13y ago
Another option is to fix algorithm used to sort the top-list. It's similar to search results, in that a purchase from the top list should be attributed to two* factors: 1) the app's quality, and 2) its current position in the list. Basically, you can separate the effect on purchases of the position in the list from the effect of the app's quality, and then sort apps based on their quality rather than raw purchases. *Maybe I should say, at least two factors. You can go really deep when constructing rankings.
- __alexs 13y ago
  So apps should have a sort of ELO ranking where they fight with apps in the same category (possibly multiple categories simultaneously) for dominance and the fight is implemented as which app gets bought when displayed to a user at the same time as another similar app?

danmaz74 13y ago

"Nobody — not Google, not the manufacturers, and certainly not the carriers — gives a shit if you hate your Android phone or put that cheap tablet in a drawer after a month. " This is a very misinformed comment. Google doesn't make any money from the initial sale of Android devices, it only makes money if people actually use them, so the opposite is true.

Osiris 13y ago

I've owned my Macbook Pro for a year and a half and I've never opened the App Store except when that annoying "Updates" notification pops up that has no close button. Correction: I did just download the 10.8.4 update from the App Store and I found one app online a while back that only offered a download link through the App Store.

orky56 13y ago

As long as revenue is still getting to Apple, Apple should encourage an environment where users are maximizing their utility from playing games they enjoy and using apps they like. This can only be done by understanding who the person is and/or marketing relevant products. PR & media should take advantage of the nascent nature of this industry and focus squarely on this through bundles, their own curated content, etc. and legitimize mobile despite the small screen and price. App Gratis is an innovative (?) example of this but I'm sure there are many more to be created. If done properly, Apple will begin to realize that the overall market can be maximized by easing their restraints.

kybernetyk 13y ago

> exclusively showing editorially selected apps With the top list system I at least have some chance to get there. With 'editorially selected apps' I wouldn't because I have neither contacts to Apple nor to A-list bloggers. Apple doesn't select apps for features solemnly on quality. There are other factors that sometimes have the stink of corruption to them. (Like the angry birds story: Only a success after Rovio got a publisher who could call up Apple and talk about a feature.)

mbesto 13y ago

So what's the solution then? I don't see a better alternative...

OliC 13y ago

I would imagine that Apple like the headlines they get from runaway app successes like Angry Birds. Along with the subtle "Write apps for iOS and become the next Rovio!" message they send out. These massive hits are usually initially fueled by the "Top" lists so I don't see them being removed any time soon.

tehwalrus 13y ago

many buyers appear to be buying from them as their primary store-browsing channel I just realised - I don't think I've ever "browsed" the app store. I've only ever searched for the thing I'm looking for, and used the first 10 results to gauge whether it exists. It didn't seem worthwhile because I knew there were squillions of apps, so why try to read through them one by one?

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

dirkdk 13y ago

Both Apple and Google should take app engagement instead of pure downloads as the main metric to base these top lists on. As Marco says, pure downloads becomes a self fulfilling prophecy, easy to game and does not expose you to new interesting apps. http://blog.mobtest.com/2013/05/app-engagement-is-a-much-better-metric-than-downloads/ http://blog.mobtest.com/2013/05/app-engagement-is-a-much-bet...

gozmike 13y ago

Marco's hit the nail on the head with this one. During our seed round, we had an angel promise us what we thought was a small fortune (!00k) on the condition that 80% of it be used to pay for chart-boosting apps. We thought hard about it and even got on a few calls with US companies (recommended to us by others in the community) who said they invoked a variety of "white-hat" techniques (whose vague descriptions sounded quite grey to me...) to guarantee a quick rise in rankings and app store success. These are companies that are operating despite Apple making efforts to stop this gaming of the app store. Ultimately, we were not comfortable with accepting the term sheet with this clause and we never closed on the deal. I'm thrilled that this happened and I didn't have to give a dime to these sleaze balls. Creating a system that's based on download count rather than curation at this scale isn't good for Apple and it isn't good for iOS Users. There is awesome stuff coming out of both indie dev shops and bigger development houses alike. Apple would do well to drive users towards software that makes its devices sing than to reward whoever has engineered an insidious viral loop or brought a briefcase of cash down to Boston black hats.

Terretta 13y ago

Something Apple could do to let users optionally markedly improve quality of the gaming category "top lists" would be a preference setting to exclude apps with In App Purchases.

programminggeek 13y ago

Um, people like top lists. It is the cheapest and easiest filter. It is the same principle that Google operates on. Make a list of the thing with the most downloads, links, etc. and that is often/usually over time the best. I'm reasonably sure that their search system works largely off of downloads, ratings, reviews, etc. It's not an infallible system, but life isn't about being fair. It's not apple's job to ensure fairness, it's Apple's job to do a good job delivering what people want. A lot of people want what is popular, even if it's not always the best.

TheQwerty 13y ago

Google actually had, what I thought was, a very interesting session about getting discovered in the Google Play store. They're using 80+ signals to steer recommendations including the user's install history, location, and G+ network/reviews. I'd bet Apple is doing much of the same - they may even have had similar sessions at WWDC. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Od2SuL2igA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Od2SuL2igA Certainly worth a watch before agreeing with Marco that no one in the world cares about a user's experience on Android devices after they're sold.

icodestuff 13y ago

I don't agree with one of the premises, namely that editorial picks will be more "fair". I work at a company that competes directly with Apple in many areas. The app I worked on was never featured anywhere, despite getting to the top 3 in our category, and top 15 free overall. Being in the top 10 or even top 25 is the only traffic driver anyone competing with Apple will ever have, unless you're competing with something Apple acknowledges as completely broken (ie, you're Google Maps).

chj 13y ago

The problem with top list is it rarely changes. Day after day, you are seeing the same and expecting the same. What's the point?