Apple Changes App Ranks, Rejects Pay Per Install

tlhIngan writes "Recently, Apple changed their App Store ranking algorithm to stop ranking apps by download counts and instead use something else, akin to the recent Google changing of their Marketplace ranking algorithm to give more weight to apps' actual usage. As a side effect, Apple has also started rejecting pay-per-install apps ('freemium' apps that request the user to install companion apps to earn in-game currency). These apps were often used to game the charts by artificially inflating the download count and raising the ranking of the app in the App Store. No word on how companies like TapJoy (one of the largest 'culprits') will react."

Comments

"Freemium"?

[Gizzmonic]

Seriously, "freemium"? That has to be the worst mangling of the English language since "doorgasm."

Re:"Freemium"?

[tgd]

I'm surprised anyone on Slashdot is old enough to have had doorgasms. Or floydgasms. Or stonegasms.

Although, you've gotta give to to kids today. Given my choice, I'd prefer a gagagasm anyway.

Re:"Freemium"?

[Kjella]

Compare:
"Freemium is a business model that works by offering a basic product or service free of charge (such as software, web services or other) while charging a premium for advanced features, functionality, or related products and services."
with
"In economics, a damaged good (sometimes termed "crippleware" or product with "anti-features") is a good that has been deliberately limited in performance, quality or utility,[1][2][3] typically for marketing reasons as part of a strategy of product differentiation."

They're exactly the same, "Freemium" is just the buzzword bingo name for it. A game demo is not a demo, it's a feature limited freemium model. Shareware is not shareware, it's a time limited freemium model. Welcome to reality 2.0, where everything has a fancier name.

Re:"Freemium"?

[jdgeorge]

I think there's a fancier name for the ancient tradition of giving unappealing things a more appealing name. As far as I can tell, this "reality 2.0" has been around for all of recorded history.

Re:"Freemium"?

[matrim99]

I believe that you have just taken a Synergistic Comparable Post Opportunity.

Syncompoop for the 2.0 folks.

Re:"Freemium"?

[david_thornley]

So you're saying we need a more appealing word or phrase meaning "euphemism"?

Re:"Freemium"?

[fean]

While I agree that Freemium isn't new, I don't think that it meets your definition for 'crippleware'. For instance, Dropbox, Pandora and Rhapsody both offer free services that are enough for a majority of users. Dropbox has a 5-9% rate (depending on who is giving the numbers) of paying customers... the rest are using the free product. The free product isn't crippled, or have 'anti-features'... The only thing you pay for is additional space. Rhapsody offers free stations, and a limited ability to listen to specific songs. Pandora gives free stations, and a limited ability to skip over songs you don't like. Hell, even Redhat offers it's OS as 'Freemium'... you get 'premier support' if you pay for it ;-)

Demo != freemium
Shareware != freemium

Economics evolves as well, trying to keep up with technology. Things change, regardless of how much grumpy old men complain about it.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[baldass_newbie]

What choice do they really have? Apple is Judge, Jury, and Executioner when it comes to their App Store.

Right? I can't believe some store owners want to have a say in what they sell.
Isn't this America?!?!?!?!

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[gstoddart]

The problem is that they're not deciding what they sell, they're deciding what you can buy or use.

Actually, they're targeting a rather annoying practice of app X saying "Hey, download App Z and get a free W".

Usually the suggested app is a complete piece of crap, but by having a more popular app push it, they might get more downloads than they otherwise would have. You just know that app X is getting paid to shill for other apps and getting a benefit for becoming rather tedious.

I've actually found this to be fairly annoying. Apple isn't telling me what I can I can buy or use ... they're cutting down on the ability of an app I've had installed for all of 5 minutes popping up to suggest that I install all sorts of crap.

Ignore the apple haters

[Anonymous Coward]

Ignore the apple haters, as you should in any thread. They experience an inverse effect of the JOBS RDF, where their personal reality bends and distorts until Apple is always wrong. It makes them do dumb things like promote flash and hate unified, consistent UIs.

Anyway, I'll be glad that Apple is changing their rank system. Searching for apps in the interface is useless because companies gaming the system put endless piles of utter, complete crap. If browsing on the phone pretty much only the hand-picked featured items are worth a look.

Re:Ignore the apple haters

[david_thornley]

If you haven't seen many Apple haters, you've been avoiding the apple threads.

Apple haters typically refuse to consider that an Apple product might be bought for good reasons. They come up with minor issues (such as non-user-replaceable batteries) to claim that Apple products are bad. They frequently claim Apple computers are way overpriced, comparing the Mac price with the cost of other computers with similar CPU and memory specs and ignoring other features. They often mock any praise for Apple as being due to Steve Jobs's reality distortion field or a desire to have a sexual relationship with Jobs.

I find them just as annoying as Apple fanbois, and more common on Slashdot.

Re:Ignore the apple haters

[david_thornley]

User-replaceable batteries have tradeoffs, in that the necessary casing is bulky and either leads to a larger and often less convenient product, or reduced battery size. My first iPhone went three years before dying to something other than the battery. The cost to replace is fairly reasonable, considering what I've paid for specialized batteries before.

Many people find Mac OSX to their liking (I prefer Ubuntu, myself), and buying a Mac is the only straightforward way to get it. Furthermore, features like sturdy laptop casings are hardly obscure and specialized. I've never had telephone support so good from any other place, and that's worth something. PC World considered the Macbook Pro to be the best Windows laptop for more than one year. Worth the price? I couldn't say; that's up to the purchaser.

There are good reasons to buy assorted Apple products, and good reasons not to. I'll get along fine with people who take that view.

Re:Ignore the apple haters

[jo_ham]

But now you're comparing an old candybar phone to a smartphone - of course a 10 year old Nokia phone will last forever (especially with a new battery on it) - those old candybars ran for ages before you needed to charge them. When smartphones came along, even with the bigger battery capacity, the battery life went down because the power consumption was much higher (more powerful CPU, big screen, wifi radio, GPS chip etc).

My iPhone 3G is still working fine to this day with good battery life. I'm sure the battery probably isn;t as good as it was when I bought it (just after release), but it hasn't degraded to the point where I have noticed, and I use it every day. I'd love to upgrade, but not because the 3G is broken or has poor battery life, so that's my anecdote to go with yours dying after 4 hours after a year. I still use mine every day and charge it every two days. The 3G and Wifi are left in "enabled" mode.

I can replace the battery if I need to, but as it stands now, at least a year outside of my contract (I switched to a rolling 1 month contract with my provider), it it still working just as well (subjectively) as when it was new. If the battery does clap out then I can replace it by sending it to Apple or getting a third party battery and doing it myself.

What Apple realised with the iPod and iPhone was that for the vast majority of consumers there was no need to have an easily replaceable battery since the device would either be replaced in the 3-4 year lifespan of the battery (with the lithium polymer batteries they use), or they would send it in for repair (or do the repair themselves). Adding the extra size and complexity of a battery bay made the device less appealing (size and weight) for a tiny gain in usability.

Certainly there are those who disagree - you can't please everyone with product design, but ultimately in those cases you either buy something else or live with the nature of a mass market consumer product. In my case that's the lack of front or side ports on the iMac - a beautiful machine that fits my needs perfectly, except for the fact that all the ports are on the back - something I "fixed" by using a USB hub making it easy to use USB memory sticks.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[mjeffers]

How is this different from what any store does? If I go to Sears I may not be able to buy the same stuff I can get at Target. Walmart may choose not to stock albums by certain groups or NC-17 videos. In a slightly closer model, I can't get all the xbox arcade games I want to play on my WII or even my PC.

Given that there are other smartphones out there with other stores, in what way is Apple's behavior different from any retailer. They choose what they stock. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[BasilBrush]

We would not allow that anywhere else in our lives.

Printers, game consoles, and proprietary razor/blade systems to name three such other examples most of us let into our lives.

Sure, you can often often use non-approved inks in printers by getting syringe based refill kits. But if we're allowing hacks, then you can also Jailbreak an iPhone.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[mjeffers]

Then again if you are fully aware with the situation and buy the device knowing its limitations then more power to you.
And. If you are an idiot who spends money on things with no information other than "It looked cool and all my friends have it."
Then you got what you deserved.

While I wouldn't call people idiots I think this is the key point. Right now you either are saavy enough to know what you're getting and not buy an iPhone/iPad if it doesnt fit your needs or not techy enough that you'll never miss what you don't have.

I also think ever since the early days of video games we've let this into our lives repeatedly. If I wanted to play Sonic, I needed a Sega. If I liked Mario Bros more, I bought NES.

In my experience, the decision was basically similar to this. I got an iPhone because it did what I wanted and had a large and established app store. I knew it wouldn't have everything but nothing does. If the value of having something not availble though Apple is high enough, I can switch phones.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[vijayiyer]

The Linux of razors is the straight razor. It always works, doesn't require proprietary blades, and is very powerful. And if you don't know how to use it, you can end up in a world of hurt.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[mini me]

The real problem is people that own a home that they can ONLY furnish from Ikea.

Virtually all consumer electronic devices suffer from that problem. I don't see any easy way to change the software on my microwave, for example. I don't even see an easy way to install another OS on Android phones, which are supposed to be the most geek friendly of all.

I do agree it is a real problem, but I don't see how it is specific to Apple. The PC is one of the few consumer devices that can be "furnished" by other vendors.

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[MightyYar]

they're deciding what you can buy or use.

Well...

Well, not me, I don't have an iPhone

So what's the problem, then? Apple has a nice smartphone, but they don't even come close to controlling the market. Buy a different phone, right?

Re:Well, I doubt they'll like it.

[rsborg]

The problem is iPads, iPhones and iPods.
The real problem is people that own a home that they can ONLY furnish from Ikea.
WTF?
We would not allow that anywhere else in our lives.

Really? Try purchasing (from 1995 - 2005) a PC without Windows.
Or try purchasing

I posit that your idealized view that we should always have options and freedom of choice (which I agree with) is an un-natural situation, it's only enforced by governmental regulations, international free standards, and group action.

Both consumers and businesses really want functionality (that's usable) first. Folks (and businesses) often don't have time or capacity to actually review competitive options unless the cost of the product requires this (say, home/vehicle purchase for a family), and even then are not very good at it. Competitive options for their own sake aren't usually sought after.