On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Doug wrote:
> If everyone reading this thread just took the time to mark spam apps as
> "inappropriate" (then "Other objection" -> type "Spam") using the market,
> might that cause anyone running the market to take notice?
>
Nope. There was an experiment that some
If everyone reading this thread just took the time to mark spam apps
as "inappropriate" (then "Other objection" -> type "Spam") using the
market, might that cause anyone running the market to take notice?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Develo
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Albert wrote:
> Surely Google could come up with a even better system, right?
Google could do a lot of brain-dead simple, common sense things that would
be fairly easy to implement and vastly improve the Market that for
inexplicable reasons they never do or take
>
> 2. Charging a *small* fee per app would actually work, without unduly
> hurting most legitimate devs. Maybe $5 or $10 per app; if your app
> isn't worth $10 to you to list, how serious can you be? OTOH, even
> such a small fee would stop the spam dead in its tracks. There might
> be a few legi
I really like the idea of charging per app. I can't bear to go through
the 'Just In' category, it's the same crap over and over again.
jsdf wrote:
> For what it's worth, BlackBerry App World has a form of this. You pay
> $200, and are given ten "submissions", after which you need to renew
> for a
For what it's worth, BlackBerry App World has a form of this. You pay
$200, and are given ten "submissions", after which you need to renew
for another $200. Each "submission" triggers a manual review process.
While I don't agree with the high price/submission or the manual
review process, I do t
On 08/06/2010 08:15 PM, samspade79 wrote:
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:07 PM, samspade79 wrote:
Firstly, someone said a "real" developer cannot do more than a few apps.
Please quote whomever said this, I'm not seeing it in the thread.
You're right I must have been dreaming. I thought I saw someo
> I don't know how google could push paid apps but is it a coincidence
> the ratio of paid to free is massively higher on apple?
Because developers from only 9 countries can sell apps?
> I personally wouldn't mind a moderated market place. I know apple aren't
> popular
> here but no one can deny
You're right I must have been dreaming. I thought I saw someone say
that though.
I don't know how google could push paid apps but is it a coincidence
the ratio of paid to free is massively higher on apple? I personally
wouldn't mind a moderated market place. I know apple aren't popular
here but no
> Reading this thread, I understood that one spammer already has 3 or 4
> accounts on the Market. This means he already paid 100 dollars to publish
> apps.
>
> Developing an app costs much more that the 10 $ of publishing fee you
> propose. Even the simplest would require at least a couple of hours
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 12:07 PM, samspade79 wrote:
> Firstly, someone said a "real" developer cannot do more than a few apps.
>
Please quote whomever said this, I'm not seeing it in the thread.
The only reference I see to the word "real" is "Any real developer could
afford $1 to update the app"
Couple of points.
Firstly, someone said a "real" developer cannot do more than a few
apps. I disagree in some cases. I have many apps up because I have a
variation on a theme. I have a sports app per team, so if you want
Manchester Utd news, podcasts, etc, you download my Manchester Utd
version. A
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Maps.Huge.Info (Maps API Guru) <
cor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It would also be a good idea to charge $1 to update as well. Any real
> developer
> could afford $1 to update the app, those who choose to update solely
> to bring their app to the top of the "just in" lis
Any system that's based on number of downloads or user ratings can
easily be fooled. I see apps in the market with 50,000+ downloads that
appeared in a matter of days. I know from watching the market that the
only way an app can achieve that many downloads is if it has been
promoted by a major orga
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Alessandro Pellizzari wrote:
> 25$ is a one time fee. I could then publish 10 apps.
>
I think the likelihood of a single developer publishing 10 useful apps is
very small.
> Reading this thread, I understood that one spammer already has 3 or
> 4 accounts on the
> I used to have ad supported app on market, and from what I can tell,
> there is not even a slight possibility to generate such revenue from
> this crap (50k active user base generated 10$/day revenue on 4.5*
> rated app). Also note that you have to have this money upfront which
> is also a big "
Il Fri, 06 Aug 2010 07:49:47 -0700, a1 ha scritto:
> On 6 Sie, 16:25, Alessandro Pellizzari wrote:
>> If I want to write a useful free or open source app without ads, I am
>> blocked by the cost.
>
> How? You have to pay register fee anyway, so lets set registering fee to
> 10$ and add 10$ publ
On 08/06/2010 04:51 PM, TreKing wrote:
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Alessandro Pellizzari mailto:a...@amiran.it>> wrote:
If I want to write a useful free or open source app without ads, I
am blocked by the cost.
Um ... you're already "blocked" by the cost ...
Follow along with me now:
I like the cost to submit idea. It should be extra beyond the signup
fee. $10 per app would be very reasonable. The money could be used for
the developer seeding program.
-John Coryat
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Alessandro Pellizzari wrote:
> If I want to write a useful free or open source app without ads, I
> am blocked by the cost.
>
Um ... you're already "blocked" by the cost ...
Follow along with me now: currently, you have to pay $25 to sign up as a
developer, yes?
So
On 6 Sie, 16:25, Alessandro Pellizzari wrote:
> Il Fri, 06 Aug 2010 09:05:32 -0500, TreKing ha scritto:
>
> > Actually, I think it's a great idea. What hurts legitimate developers
> > (and users, and the Android platform in general) is this rampant,
> > uncontrolled garbage in the Market. Start
Il Fri, 06 Aug 2010 09:05:32 -0500, TreKing ha scritto:
> Actually, I think it's a great idea. What hurts legitimate developers
> (and users, and the Android platform in general) is this rampant,
> uncontrolled garbage in the Market. Start charging to submit an app and
> you hurt the spammers far
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:14 AM, { Devdroid } wrote:
> On 6 August 2010 11:22, a1 wrote:
> > This will not change anything, the biggest problem with spam is that,
> > well, they spam all categories, so adding additional category is
> > pointless. I think that there should be a publisher fee for ea
On Aug 6, 11:14 am, "{ Devdroid }" wrote:
> On 6 August 2010 11:22, a1 wrote:
>
> > pointless. I think that there should be a publisher fee for each app,
> > this will stop spam for sure.
>
> That's silly idea and would hurt legitimate developers.
Well, *something* needs to be done. Some possib
On 6 August 2010 11:22, a1 wrote:
> This will not change anything, the biggest problem with spam is that,
> well, they spam all categories, so adding additional category is
> pointless. I think that there should be a publisher fee for each app,
> this will stop spam for sure.
That's silly idea an
This will not change anything, the biggest problem with spam is that,
well, they spam all categories, so adding additional category is
pointless. I think that there should be a publisher fee for each app,
this will stop spam for sure.
--
Bart Janusz (Beepstreet)
On 6 Sie, 07:42, metal mikey wrot
You should report this at b.android.com.
-- Kostya
06.08.2010 2:06, samspade79 пишет:
A problem I had the other day was an app that once downloaded
subscribed you to SMS alerts @ $2.99 a month. I'm not sure how it
could do this without some kind of user confirmation but it was very
alarming.
O
You should report this at b.android.com.
-- Kostya
06.08.2010 2:06, samspade79 пишет:
A problem I had the other day was an app that once downloaded
subscribed you to SMS alerts @ $2.99 a month. I'm not sure how it
could do this without some kind of user confirmation but it was very
alarming.
O
An Entertainment category already exists, where wallpapers, ringtones,
and soundboards are supposed to go. Most spammers do not want their
app in the "Entertainment" category, because that category is flooded
already. So they post their wallpapers in the "Social" or
"Communication" category.
If
I second (or second-hundred-thousand) the idea to create a Wallpaper
category. Also a MatureContent category. And in anticipation of a huge
flood of relatively useless/poor quality Apps created by App Inventor,
an App Inventor category.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to t
Spam is not an issue, but the fact that legitamate apps with high
ratings and many users appear AFTER the spam crap with barely a
handful of downloads is a HUGE issue, IMO.
I am to the point where I am close to giving up developing for the
platform.
On Aug 6, 5:58 am, "Gene R." wrote:
> Spam i
A problem I had the other day was an app that once downloaded
subscribed you to SMS alerts @ $2.99 a month. I'm not sure how it
could do this without some kind of user confirmation but it was very
alarming.
On Aug 5, 4:58 pm, "Gene R." wrote:
> Spam is a BIG problem on the Android market, with ma
Spam is a BIG problem on the Android market, with many asian
developers creating multiple accounts and FLOODING the market with
their wallpaper and background apps.
We've been trying to keep track of some of the spammers in this Google
Market Suggestion Thread:
http://www.google.com/support/forum/
Yes, well exactly that I'm worried about the "Just In" view. I want
to upload my application and give users the chance to find out about
my application that way at least once in a while. But now it's a joke
to look there it pure spam! No longer interested my self to look at
the "Just In" since i
34 matches
Mail list logo
