-
- 516
I'm a bit miffed at one developer or two who have produced book and map apps, who instead of consolidating all these books and maps into one single app, are releasing each and every single one as a single app. It may be nice and easy for this particular developer but handicaps all others by simply hogging up all the space in the "newest" section. Is there anyway to remedy this or am I completely off base? Can these type apps be sequestered in a different "new" section as they really are only repeats of the same thing?10-02-11 10:27 AMLike 7 -
- 194
Beakman: 1000% behind you on this. I wrote to my buddy who is VP software there the following today regarding AppWorld and some fixes/tweaks that I'm hoping to see implemented (in particular part of my #2 addresses this):
"1) Reviews. I think many people don't understand the whole review process and there are a LOT of crappy reviews that probably aren't making developers that happy. I think there should be a message that goes out at least the first time you're posting a review that says something to the effect of: "Remember when posting a review that it should be reflective of your views on the application and not where you should ask support questions. If you have a support question, email the developer." Obviously prettied up, but you get the idea. I also have been sparing with my reviews because there does not appear to be any way to edit/change/delete your review later. I think this is problematic. There are many people that have reviewed things before a feature is introduced that probably would like the opportunity to change their review after but cannot. This should be changed so the reviews are a more accurate reflection of the app.
2) Newest/Top Free/Top Purchased/Recently Updated:
These screens should allow you to see 'more' apps by clicking a link as far as you'd like to drill down. Ideally there would be a 'new' banner on the top of each app the first time you see it on the list so you can actually see new apps coming in. That flag would then be removed after you've seen it on your screen once. If you click a few levels down you should always return to the same level (i.e. if you're at the 75th app and you open it up or download it, once you hit back you should get back to the 75th spot). The only way that would change is if you closed and re-opened app world. I think it's especially important if you continue to allow these 'book apps' in which are flooding the lists and pushing apps off the 'newest' screen before they can even be discovered. It's really frustrating and I know I've missed some apps this way and I'd be pretty peeved if I was a developer and 25 'book apps' shoved me off the newest screen. : )
3) The screenshots…
You should be able to double-tap on them to make them full screen. Sometimes they are way too small to get a good feel for the app.
I think with these 3 changes the app world experience will be a much better one. With the oncoming devcon, the android player, and the NDK finally being more available I'm hoping we start to see some more apps and I'm worried without these the app world experience will be subpar and a lot of apps will get 'missed'…"10-02-11 10:54 AMLike 0 -
- 1,746
Two other ideas that might work:
1. Limit the number of apps in the "Newest" and "Recently Updated" tabs to some arbitrarily small number for a given vendor at any one time. A maximum of 3 apps at a time seems reasonable to me.
2. Provide a filter mechanism so that we can ignore certain authors or genres that we are not interested in monitoring. If we choose to ignore these apps, they would not display in the list.Last edited by BuzzStarField; 10-02-11 at 11:18 AM.
10-02-11 10:55 AMLike 0 -
- 516
EDIT- I misread one post to mean the opposite of what was written.
Edit: . . . the fact remains that at best these apps in question are only upgrades/changes on a single app. What they are doing is the equivalent of a supposed dictionary app being released as separate and new with every new word added.
Yes, they have gotten notice and I plan to boycott these certain developers every time I do notice them.Last edited by Beakman; 10-02-11 at 11:04 AM.
10-02-11 11:00 AMLike 0 -
- 5,215
By the way, every single email or call to RIM to complain about this issue will help to ensure it's fixed in something resembling a timely fashion. They do respond, albeit slowly, to such input, even if it's just to issue some sort of statement or pre-announcement about upcoming changes.
We've been told that many App World improvements are coming (without any sort of schedule attached), but so far I don't believe fixes to this major problem have been mentioned.
Squeaky wheel <-- grease... you know how it works.
10-02-11 11:01 AMLike 0 -
- 1,040
These are some great suggestions. I, too, have noticed these issues and have wondered if RIM has noticed that this is making AW a less enjoyable store for consumers. Let's hope the issues are addressed soon.10-02-11 11:03 AMLike 0 -
- 5,369
you can now do this on appworld 3.0 for phones, so i think it would be a good idea, however, currently there is a size restriction on uploadable images, so this would need to be raised otherwise images either wouldnt go fullscreen or they would be stretched and then pixelated not giving a true reflection of the app.
as for the main point of people uploading stuff, i dont think they should limit it, its fair as it is, its a new app, for example the maps, they are different regions, not a new version of the same region, so its not the same. of course i do understand the frustration, however i think limitng devs exposure is a bad bad bad idea. lets say for example when the android player come out, and android dev has a whole catalogue of apps that they convert over. your saying they should be penalised for doing this? that just isnt right. again, i get the premise of the complaint, but id say dont let the few spoil it for all the devs, this is a platform thats trying to gain devs, not alienate them.eprklims likes this.10-02-11 11:53 AMLike 1 -
- 194
Interesting re: appworld 3.0 on the phone - I hadn't noticed that. Hopefully they raise the size limit.you can now do this on appworld 3.0 for phones, so i think it would be a good idea, however, currently there is a size restriction on uploadable images, so this would need to be raised otherwise images either wouldnt go fullscreen or they would be stretched and then pixelated not giving a true reflection of the app.
as for the main point of people uploading stuff, i dont think they should limit it, its fair as it is, its a new app, for example the maps, they are different regions, not a new version of the same region, so its not the same. of course i do understand the frustration, however i think limitng devs exposure is a bad bad bad idea. lets say for example when the android player come out, and android dev has a whole catalogue of apps that they convert over. your saying they should be penalised for doing this? that just isnt right. again, i get the premise of the complaint, but id say dont let the few spoil it for all the devs, this is a platform thats trying to gain devs, not alienate them.
I agree - there shouldn't be a limitation by dev as that would make life difficult for 'good' prolific app writers - especially ones porting their entire catalogue. It's a slippery slope so we'd catch the 'book' ones but where would we draw the line? It's easier I think to implement the ability to see 'more' apps.10-02-11 12:17 PMLike 0 -
- 1,746
Nevertheless users should be given a selection of filtering/search tools so that they control what they a forced to to scan in order to find things that interest them. As it stands, the "prolific" app writer is in total control whereas the interface should be designed with the consumers' needs in mind.Interesting re: appworld 3.0 on the phone - I hadn't noticed that. Hopefully they raise the size limit.
I agree - there shouldn't be a limitation by dev as that would make life difficult for 'good' prolific app writers - especially ones porting their entire catalogue. It's a slippery slope so we'd catch the 'book' ones but where would we draw the line? It's easier I think to implement the ability to see 'more' apps.
Simply increasing the size of the list is not going to solve the problem. If the OP is frustrated at the prospect of scanning through 25 random apps, increasing the number of random apps to 50 or 100 is not going to make him any happier.10-02-11 12:48 PMLike 0 -
- 5,369
im sorry, but thats exactly how life works, just walk into your local supermarket and its the same, they lay out the normal stuff people would want by the new stuff to ensure the shopper sees the new produce.
also if you filter the `newest 25` then it wouldnt be the newest 25 anymore, it would simply be a search.
personally id love to see the kind of category options as on the phone, such as view by vendor/price/rating/newest in any given category, thats what i think is really needed, so then someone looking for lets say a finance app can go into that category and view in order of `newest` and see what they want.10-02-11 01:15 PMLike 0 -
- 1,746
I don't think that you read the OP's post. He is trying to search for new items that interest him and he can't find anything he wants because of the clutter. What the OP wants to see is the newest 25 items that might interest him. - you would think that the software could be designed to facilitate his needs.Last edited by BuzzStarField; 10-02-11 at 01:38 PM.
10-02-11 01:34 PMLike 0 -
- 5,369
no the OP is saying that the current apps in the newest section are `hogging` it because they are `all the same thing` at no point is search mentioned.I don't think that you read the OP's post. He is trying to search for new items that interest him and he can't find anything he wants because of the clutter. What the OP wants to see is the newest 25 items that might interest him. - you would think that the software could be designed to facilitate his needs.
again, the `newest 25 items that might interest you` is not the `newest` so making that the newest category would be wrong.
also if you only have apps that `might interest you` then you`ll never see all the apps, something im sure you can see wouldnt be any kind of encouragement to a developer.
bottom line - one or two devs have released multiple apps, thats life, live with it.10-02-11 01:47 PMLike 0 -
- 42,173
Are you kidding - it's the 21st Century and this is computer data we are talking about - they can do anything they want. They just have to have the incentive to do it.I don't think that you read the OP's post. He is trying to search for new items that interest him and he can't find anything he wants because of the clutter. What the OP wants to see is the newest 25 items that might interest him. - you would think that the software could be designed to facilitate his needs.
Where do we write?10-02-11 01:51 PMLike 0 -
- 1,746
-
- 1,746
10-02-11 02:05 PMLike 0 -
- 516
You are correct in reiterating what I originally stated however, the idea of a filter would be the best compromise/solution for everyone concerned. I left a "review" on one of these book apps and realized after that with 50+ of these clone apps It would make little difference what I or any other buyer thinks. The comments get diluted over the full volume of output.no the OP is saying that the current apps in the newest section are `hogging` it because they are `all the same thing` at no point is search mentioned.
again, the `newest 25 items that might interest you` is not the `newest` so making that the newest category would be wrong.
also if you only have apps that `might interest you` then you`ll never see all the apps, something im sure you can see wouldnt be any kind of encouragement to a developer.
bottom line - one or two devs have released multiple apps, thats life, live with it.
I do strongly disagree with your bottom line conclusion. These ARE the very same apps, only the content is different. Should we describe every Kindle, Nook, or Kobo ebook *** an entirely different application program. Perhaps we should be charged extra for.every book downloaded to cover the "new" program? Would you accept it if every game was realeased separately for each level added?
I'm calling BS on this loophole, it hurts everyone.Last edited by Beakman; 10-02-11 at 02:12 PM.
10-02-11 02:10 PMLike 0 -
- 1,746
I assume that when a user tapped the icon she would be taken to a private "Librqary" dedicated to the set and be free to browse the contents.
I just looked in the eBook category and the maps category in PB App World. It would be charitable to say that they are a mess. I don't see how any potential buyer would have the patience to scan though the hundreds of items available.
Beakman's idea would be a win-win for both authors and consumers of these apps. The developer would have a private category to manage separately from "regular apps". And assuming there were powerful filters available, consumers could quickly find the item that they are looking for.klc99 likes this.10-02-11 03:14 PMLike 1 -
- 1,078
10-02-11 04:11 PMLike 0
- Forum
- BlackBerry PlayBook Forums
- PlayBook Apps & Games
Clean Up AppWorld?
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD