Agree, I don't see how 25$ will deter a hardcore spammer taking advantage of the system. Haven't seen Google asking for 25$ to fight spammers in any of the other services it offers, except for Android Market. Weird.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Personally I don't think $25 is going to protect anyone, as has been > said already $25 isn't a lot of money, and all the fee will do is > attract malicious software which is aimed to make money quickly to cover > the cost. > > Spammers will pay upto $1 per email, and premium rate call routing > services can cost the earth per minute. I think that when we see malware > (and it will be a when not an if), it'll hit hard and hit fast to ensure > the $25 is recouped as quickly as possible. > > Al. > > Muthu Ramadoss wrote: > > Here's my take: > > > > 1. Google, take the 25$.. keep the market clean. > > 2. Run a monthly contest, and award say like 100$ for the best app of > > the month. > > > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > > > Guys, > > > > First of all, I'm back! Second of all, what is up with the whining? > > $25 dollars is not bad at all. It will help keep everybody honest. > > Specially if anybody is trying to to post malicious apps. As > mentioned > > by other people, you do not have to post your app in the android > > market. Go ahead and host it in your own website. > > > > On Oct 24, 5:22 pm, "Shane Isbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > The problem is less the money but more the situation. You had a > > lot of > > > developers come in last November when Android was nothing but a > > buggy SDK. > > > These developers worked their tails off (in part because of the > > money Google > > > was dangling in their faces), some quit there jobs, wreaked > > their lives for > > > it. Then when the ADC was over, Google had a bunch of apps and a > > largely > > > tested SDK. Google could now go to the carriers and say, "We > > have something > > > to offer." > > > > > > Then Google clammed up, withheld the SDK, didn't tell the > > community about it > > > and refused to respond to answers when it became known. Strike 1. > > > > > > Then the developers waited for the open system to deliver their > > apps and be > > > able to compete against those on the inside track. Google > > witheld that > > > option as well: Strike 2 > > > > > > Now we find out about the 30% witholding and 25 dollar fees. > > It's not that > > > these are very different than industry norms, but to some > > developers, who > > > were sacrificing so much, to find out they were a tool for > > validating > > > Android for Google, only to have to start shoving money out of > > their pocket, > > > adds salt to the wound. Maybe Google should donate that 25 fee > > to a good > > > cause, if its just to discourage bad apps from the app market. I > > also think > > > Google should wave the fee for all ADC entrants, after all > > haven't they > > > proven their commitment to the platform? > > > > > > Shane > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Ed Burnette > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > > > > Not to worry, you can always host a .apk file on your web site > > (taking > > > > care to give it the right MIME type) and educate people to > > turn on the > > > > "Allow install of non-Market applications" option. Or use one > > of the > > > > other app stores. Or stick a Paypal donate button on your site > and > > > > collect $25 from fans then use that to pay Google. Lots of > > options. > > > > > > > On Oct 22, 3:12 pm, "Ewan Grantham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > > Well, I'm going to have to seriously rethink releasing a > > free application > > > > if > > > > > I have to pay for the privilege. Yes, I know I can use the > > alternate > > > > markets > > > > > if I don't want to pay, but that cuts out a lot of potential > > users. > > > > > > > > Would have been nice to have been told about this before I: > > > > > a) coded the app > > > > > b) put it in the wild on a couple of the alternate marketplaces > > > > > > > > because now I either have to withdraw and resubmit, or > > decide it's not > > > > > something worth the trouble. > > > > > > > > Anyone who has pulled down a copy of "Mars Lander" care to > > tell me > > > > > (privately at my email address, not through the list) if you > > think it's > > > > > worth a couple of bucks or not? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Mark Murphy > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Al Sutton wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/10/android-market-now-ava. > > > > .. > > > > > > > > > Even more than the $25 is the 30% cut for the carriers. > > That definitely > > > > > > leaves plenty of room for competing markets, particularly > > if developers > > > > > > pass some of the savings on to the consumers. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) > > > > > >http://commonsware.com > > > > > > _The Busy Coder's Guide to Android Development_ Version > > 1.3 Published!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > -- > > take care, > > Muthu Ramadoss. > > > > http://mobeegal.in - mobile search. redefined. +91 98403 48914 > > > > > > > > -- > Al Sutton > > W: www.alsutton.com > B: alsutton.wordpress.com > T: twitter.com/alsutton > > > > > -- take care, Muthu Ramadoss. http://mobeegal.in - mobile search. redefined. +91 98403 48914 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
