App store shenanigans • Hacker News Board

Re: App store shenanigans

#31

Post by alok-g » Sat, Apr 02, 2011, 3:55 PM UTC

This happen at a much bigger scale really. At Amazon.com too for example. New software versions, camera models, etc. all get fresh ratings and comments, even though sometimes people do mention older versions in their comments.

My point is that it's not just the relatively small app developers, even the big names are playing this game routinely.

I heard in a course on stock investing that mutual fund managers also do this. If their fund fails in the market, they close it and reappear with a different name.

Even with this loophole, much thanks to Amazon which created the rating system benefiting the end users in spite of the damage it at times brings to the manufacturers. Amazon had to choose between manufacturers good vs. end-users good when creating this system, and they boldly chose the latter.

Re: App store shenanigans

#32

Post by willstraf » Sat, Apr 02, 2011, 4:12 PM UTC

EtienneJohnred wrote: post #26

cdixon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think thee crappy apps are mostly a scam and hurt Apple and all of us devs. Sure, Flashlight is trivial but at least it works. Night Vision is a true lie and feels like adware/spyware is invading the IOS world.

Apple knows about these apps and exploits (and various other exploits), yet they do little to get rid of them. Apps like these should be prohibited by the guidelines. Nobody needs hundreds of apps that serve absolutely no purpose at all besides attempt to scam people out of 99¢. Apple doesn't do much about them because the issues aren't in the public eye and from the media's perspective, they're not very newsworthy s…

> 2.3 Apps that do not perform as advertised by the developer will be rejected

> 2.11 Apps that duplicate apps already in the App Store may be rejected, particularly if there are many of them, such as fart, burp, flashlight, and Kama Sutra apps.

They ARE prohibited by the guidelines, and I'm surprised they get approved.

Re: App store shenanigans

#33

Post by mozami » Sat, Apr 02, 2011, 6:19 PM UTC

credo wrote: post #7

>>But when you look on the desktop web you see the overall ratings are vastly lower and that they seem to game the system by releasing "new versions" to reset their ratings and then probably paying people to write positive reviews I've made this point in the past (though not about this app/company or about payments) imo Apple made a mistake in resetting app ratings after every new update/release. Developers who relea…

Another idea: Since Apple knows exactly how much money I've spent in their store, that signal can somehow also be weighed in with my reviews.

This means that reviews by people that have spent a fair amount in the app store would get a better/heavier scores than those that have not yet spent as much money in the store.

Re: App store shenanigans

#34

Post by rkudeshi » Sun, Apr 03, 2011, 12:25 AM UTC

phil wrote: post #28

There's already a refund mechanism; it's just buried, inconvenient, and kinda hard to figure out. I bet a lot of the crapps would go away if more users knew they could get a refund when they got scammed.

Where is it located? AFAIK, the only way to get a "refund" is to contact Apple and claim the app didn't work for technical reasons (didn't install properly, wouldn't start, etc.).

Re: App store shenanigans

#35

Post by mryall » Sun, Apr 03, 2011, 1:46 AM UTC

TillE wrote: post #4

mryall wrote: post #2

A more difficult question is how you solve problems in a gigantic marketplace like the App Store. Better verification of sellers? Verification of review comments? Limiting cross-linking of apps? Tougher review process by Apple? All of these would engender more criticism against Apple for policing their "walled garden" but is there a better way to solve it?

I think a simple flagging mechanism ("this is crap, Steve wouldn't want it in the store, take another look") would suffice. A supposedly curated app store should be enforcing a certain level of quality. And if they're not doing it already, only publish reviews from accounts with a credit card.

Good idea. The benefits of user flagging was one of the more interesting points from Matt Haughey's presentation at SXSW a couple of weeks ago. The entire thing is well worth watching actually:

http://vimeo.com/21043675

Re: App store shenanigans

#36

Post by mryall » Sun, Apr 03, 2011, 1:48 AM UTC

mozami wrote: post #33

credo wrote: post #7

>>But when you look on the desktop web you see the overall ratings are vastly lower and that they seem to game the system by releasing "new versions" to reset their ratings and then probably paying people to write positive reviews I've made this point in the past (though not about this app/company or about payments) imo Apple made a mistake in resetting app ratings after every new update/release. Developers who relea…

Another idea: Since Apple knows exactly how much money I've spent in their store, that signal can somehow also be weighed in with my reviews. This means that reviews by people that have spent a fair amount in the app store would get a better/heavier scores than those that have not yet spent as much money in the store.

This would be susceptible to the same problems as Chris mentions in his post:

> Companies like TapJoy let you pay to get in the Top 25, and then once you are there you can get “organic” downloads by being on the toplists.

If they can arrange to actually buy enough copies of an application to get into the Top 25, reviews posted by those accounts would surely weigh very highly under your proposed scheme as well.