31–40 of 165 posts
What's the alternative? Have a crappy, paid-for, add filled, bloated app promote itself as "Cauliflower Cooker Lite - the #1 free cauliflower app. 100% ad-free".
Metadata like file size, whether there are in-app ads or purchases, etc, should be part of the store's listing - not the title.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"No ads" isn't editorializing, though. Unlike "best" or "#1", it's a statement of fact, and a fact that is probably useful to shoppers.
Could this be in response to apps indicating that they don't have ads even though they do?
I'm actually glad to see editorializing disallowed in app titles. If everybody did it, the store would be a mess. I mean, it's already a mess, but even more so.
"No ads" isn't editorializing, though. Unlike "best" or "#1", it's a statement of fact, and a fact that is probably useful to shoppers.
I really want a way to search for ad-free apps. I don't bother very much with the Android store because of this. If I want my 4 year old to use my phone I don't want her clicking some ad and leaving the app by accident. As a result, I only have apps by the BBC and a couple of others.
So, let's be clear here. The problem is not that they've prohibited people from putting this information in the app title. The problem comes if they've done so without introducing another way for the user to express their preference for ad-free apps. E.g. it should even work better if, hypothetically, the search function prioritized ad-free apps anyway when the user puts "no ads" in the search box. I can't tell if th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"No ads" isn't editorializing, though. Unlike "best" or "#1", it's a statement of fact, and a fact that is probably useful to shoppers.
The presence or omission of a fact is often the result of a conscious editorial choice. It is frequently the intent, not the nature of the words themselves, that underscores the editorial nature of the statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The presence or omission of a fact is often the result of a conscious editorial choice. It is frequently the intent, not the nature of the words themselves, that underscores the editorial nature of the statement.
Buy Uncle Miller’s Corn Flakes — 100% arsenic free!
So, let's be clear here. The problem is not that they've prohibited people from putting this information in the app title. The problem comes if they've done so without introducing another way for the user to express their preference for ad-free apps. E.g. it should even work better if, hypothetically, the search function prioritized ad-free apps anyway when the user puts "no ads" in the search box. I can't tell if th…
Well, we can expect the heat death of the universe before google does something that helps promoting apps that have no ads.
And google doesn't require a share of revenue for mobile ads either.
Some users clearly prefer apps without ads, and will have a better user experience without ads. Google makes lots of product design decisions to attempt to improve user experience (even if they fail often).
Therefore there isn't a clear incentive to prevent the user finding an app without ads.