Slashdot Mirror


Developer Calls Amazon Appstore a 'Disaster'

An anonymous reader writes "The developer of the current #2 Top App on Android Market has written a very interesting article giving six reasons why they decided to pull their game from Amazon Appstore. From the article: 'If you are a small indie development team, or possibly even alone, don't bother with Amazon Appstore. Create a great app, publish it on Android Market, and provide great customer support. You will never succeed on Amazon Appstore without a big wallet, or at least an established reputation so that Amazon puts value behind their promises.'"

13 of 241 comments (clear)

  1. HTTP vs HTTPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I almost wanted to stop reading after the first point the developer made. Amazon rejected his application because it used an insecure communication channel over the internet. Cry me a river. I actually applaud Amazon for doing that. But instead he goes on to whine that his server can't handle the additional load caused by using HTTPS. While I can understand his frustration based on the other points he makes, the very first one really doesn't help his case.

    1. Re:HTTP vs HTTPS by JSBiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The developer used http to deliver game levels to the customer. No personal data, no need for security."

      Actually, according to the fine article, Amazon's complaint was about the session cookie, not the levels, as near as I can tell. That might not strike you as important, but it might be that from Amazon's standpoint, that session cookie might be re-used for something else more important, or might be necessary to keep people from making unpaid copies, etc.

      It might not, it's just hard to tell - there's not enough information from the article to tell how important that session cookie is (or is not), from a security standpoint.

      I tend to agree with the Grandparent - the very first point was the weakest of all the developer's complaints (and if it weren't for the other issues, I suspect that developer himself would still be using Amazon Appstore).

      His first item was actually really 3 or 4 items that he lumped together, and I think I disagree with him on just about everything.

      Subclaims:

      A) It takes a long time for them to review your code:

            The whole premise of the Amazon Appstore, that they use as a differentiating feature from the Market, is that Amazon promises to review submissions. Of course that will take time. 2 weeks doesn't sound like an unreasonable time span for such a review, at least to me.

      B) The complaint about SSL which we've already discussed above.

      C) Amazon told him the App was live, but he couldn't find it - OK, that sounds like a legitimate complaint, but I suspect it might just take a day or two to show up in the system. Not sure how that works, but I agree that once the dev is notified the app has been accepted, it seems like it should quickly show up in the listings.

      D) Updates also have to be reviewed - well DUH! I mean, wth good is it to review the original app submission, but not updates? That's just an invitation for someone who wants to peddle malware to submit a "clean" version 1.0, then after acceptance, submit a "dirty" version 1.1 update a few days later.

      If you are going to do security reviews, you've got to review everything. I'm sorry, that's just common sense.

  2. One very good point and a lot of bitching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So his one valid, but I have to admit extremely important, complain is that Amazon doesn't yet filter compatible devices.

    Okay, I have to admit, that's a pretty big one, until they fix that I too wouldn't use their store as a developer.

    But apart from that?
    The review process took 2 weeks? Oh my god! Crazy!
    After one angry mail his app got a sprecial promotion and he got 180,000 donwloads in a single day,
    what shit treatment they give him, bastards!

    1. Re:One very good point and a lot of bitching by c0lo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But apart from that?

      4. Impossible to send refund?

      5. Amazon Appstore is a disaster...
      When attempting to reply to a comment, the system replied with "You must purchase products before you can post comments." (i.e. where's you dialog with your customers?)

      6. What's with the price?
      A short time after the above review arrived, Amazon changed the price of Apparatus to $0.99. We never discussed this change.

      I still find the above compelling enough.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:One very good point and a lot of bitching by cduffy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then maybe his application should have checked for fucking compatibility before it installed itself.

      Android applications have a manifest. The manifest indicates which phones it's compatible with. The Android Market checks the manifest and only displays applications to users with compatible phones. The Amazon Appstore doesn't.

      In what way is this not Amazon's fault? If you're using a part of the Android API that promises to do filtering, anything that claims to be an Amazon application repository should fulfill its part of that contract and... filter! He was doing device compatibility checks in exactly the way that the Android documentation tells developers to do.

    3. Re:One very good point and a lot of bitching by AJH16 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From my read of the article, it sounds like the developer would have been perfectly reasonable. I can understand his frustration with the situation since the information was incorrect and he couldn't respond to it, but he never attacked the reviewer in his article, just said that the claims were untrue and paranoid (both accurate statements). Based on his other statements about customer service and the fact that he said repeatedly that he didn't blame the reviewer make me think your view of the developer is unwarranted.

      You are ignoring the fact that Amazon was ignoring filters for devices that were not supported. He was going to get a ton of bad reviews and completely inaccurate reviews are a part of life as well. If you can not respond to reviews like this to reassure your customers that the concerns are being addressed or are an issue with the store, then your sales will tank, just like his did. I would expect that it would have failed gracefully since his manifest didn't match the device unless amazon somehow is stripping it. It sounds like he was relying on Android's in-built functionality which isn't necessarily a bad thing. He probably could do more to mitigate it, but from my experience Amazon has never been particularly good at letting vendors actually do good business.

      Also, just a side point, "the customer is always right" is a bullshit statement. Good customer service should try to help the customer at all times if at all possible, but some customers will wish to abuse the vendor and so the customer isn't always right. It's an over-simplified statement designed to try to avoid losing sales because of some nit-wit CSR that doesn't understand the customer. A good CSR should be able to point out that the customer is wrong, if they can determine for sure the customer is wrong without being offensive and offer the best resolution that is fair.

      --
      AJ Henderson
  3. Re:Droid is not a monoculture... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it seems like amazon should fire couple of guys though and hire some people with experience in mobile apps. there's a lot to see here, like being unable to comment on your app yourself without creating fake accounts.. it does seem like the store is just hastily done contract job and they hired amaterus to do the dev and customer relations. that's actually like 55% of the mobile sw stores which have existed over the years(since 2002 or so, you think apple invented this shit?). also, the amazon ceo would be wise to not let his store employees run favorites game and thus choose which games get bought, it's ridiculous that "popular games" are hand chosen, that gives enermous power(££€€€$$$) to those who pick 'em and "friendly" corruption, their personal taste and such start to affect the store way too much.

  4. Amazon Appstore's biggest sin by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Amazon wants developers to cough up $100 for the privilege of being listed on their site. Of course they're graciously waive the fee the first year but to me this seems like a deliberate barrier to stop all those scumbags with their free apps and open source ports from bothering listing on the service at all.

    Anyway I think the appstore will succeed when Amazon unleash whatever tablet devices they're cooking up. Doubtless these devices will be locked down so that Amazon's services will be the only thing users can use. The store makes zero sense in any other context than that since I doubt even 0.01% of non Amazon devices would be bothered to manually install another marketplace app when the one they have installed by default does the job.

  5. Re:Droid is not a monoculture... by bgarcia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In other words, nothing to see here...

    Wut?

    Did you read the article? This guy is telling about his experiences dealing with Amazon, and explaining why he believes that small developers shouldn't bother with it, and why it's inferior to Google's offering. This is great, useful information.

    --
    I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
  6. Re:Droid is not a monoculture... by GordonBX · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just because you personally are not interested in a story - because you are "not a developer" - doesn't make this story "not news". If you want a broad range of well-supported apps for your Droid, then you are pretty shortsighted not to care whether the people who write those apps can actually make a living or not.

  7. Re:Droid is not a monoculture... by Heed00 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You seriously can't be this obtuse -- really. The article is aimed at developers -- while it might not be of interest to you since, as you say, you are not a developer it will be of interest to many here who are developers or might be thinking about becoming developers. It's far from "nothing to see" for those who are developers as it describes one persons experience distributing his app through a particular venue.

    --
    Thought thinks itself.
  8. RTFA, whelps! by eyenot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everything about this story suggests that the author is an honest, underselling, competitive and straight dealer. I can't BELIEVE the fuckups here who are badmouthing him, who obviously didn't even RTFA.

    I had a post prepared where I point out the problems but why reproduce TFA? Anyways I hit a stray key and it got lost. I'll try to do a decent job of a synapsis, again, anyway.

    1. The review process took two weeks. He was told he would have to use HTTPS. He grumbles about server load but that isn't the point: he put the extra god damn byte in and put the app back in for review. AND WAITED ANOTHER TWO GOD DAMN WEEKS. Over an "S". Meanwhile, where in the fuck was the policy statement: "make sure your app is secure or you'll have to spend two weeks wishing we'd told you about it beforehand". Because obviously the author had no problem with the security policy; he made the change. So people applauding Amazon for their security policy ought to think about how they go about enforcing it, and whether it's worth the extra review time when they could have said to each other "oh, I have the app open right here mister author, and we'll need to type S right here in order for it to be okay to publish. Agreed?"

    2. Here's the author's main point of contention as far as "costing too much": he can't write the app for every device on the market because he can't go out and buy every fucking device on the market for testing. Why, you ask, would he even want to? Why, you wonder, would he bother caring about every device on the market? Because Amazon doesn't filter. He included a manifest that says what devices to reject or accept when users come to download the app, and Amazon ignored it, letting hundreds and hundreds of people download the app -- free or otherwise (oh, yeah, they made him spend a day giving it away free in exchange for it being visible in the app store) -- and plenty were pissed when it wouldn't work or their screen was too small to see it. The author had already thought about all this, he uses a manifest through another service that properly filters the customer base. Not Amazon. So to be successful through Amazon he'd need to go out and buy all these devices, write and test the app on the devices, and then launch. He'd no doubt need to hire a household of people to aid in the effort so it wouldn't take him four years of full time work to complete. Now do you get the fucking point?

    3. He's used to getting feedback email. He gets plenty of these every day. He uses it to tailor the app to the customer base's wishes. He uses it to launch bugfixes. After his "free day" that Amazon made him go through, wherein the app was downloaded 180,000 times, he got 2 emails. Despite dozens of no doubt unhappy customers. He feels that Amazon isn't doing enough to help customers contact authors.

    4. Part of his business practice is to refund unhappy customers. So people saying he's some kind of greedy person need to talk a walk. Well, Amazon doesn't let you refund your product which is a major "helloooo" point for me. WTF, Amazon!

    5. One customer left a really shitty review that made unjust claims about the game and was rife with paranoia. It was written by an actual paranoiac who claimed the app was "tracking" him. This review became "the most helpful" review and is now at the top of the page when you go to the app. The author was unable to comment-back to the comment. Guess why? Amazon doesn't let authors have free access to their review page. You might feel "secure" about that, but consider the liberties that users can take such as the paranoiac above. The author would have to purchase his own app in order to comment on the reviews. He can't: he's in Sweden, Amazon services only to U.S. customers. He's fucked! Amazon won't do squat about it.

    6. Oh, no, that's right. Amazon did do something: they cut his price in half AGAIN. Without asking him. Now he's the author of a one-dollar app that the top "most helpful" review claims is tied to an ad service and is a tracking device (both lies) with othe

    --
    "Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
  9. Re:Droid is not a monoculture... by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why does that concern me?

    Are you an Android developer? If so, then yes, it concerns you.

    If you are not an Android developer, then shut the hell up. This story is not for you.