Apple's Removal of AppGratis From App Store Just the First Phase of Broader Crackdown

[alchemistmuffin]

Who needs App discovery program? After Chomp got acquired by Apple, and they used some of their interfaces and search engine system into iTunes, the overall App Store experience is far better than any other App Store discovery app available.

AppGratis violated Apple's rule, and they got kicked out, and probably had their developer program membership terminated too, no refunds. And I, for one, am glad that these "spammy" apps are getting cracked down and banned, with developer also kicked out of the membership as well. For me, this is a win win for consumers in short and long run.

 

[TouchMint.com]

This is great stuff for developers that dont pay for rankings. Now what would really be great is if Apple went back and removed all the apps that had paid for rankings boosts.

I just hope Apple does not take it too far and gets rid of apps like Toucharcade where the alternate store front is legit or atleast they say it is legit.

 

[arn]

AppGratis violated Apple's rule, and they got kicked out

Just for historical correctness. AppGratis may have violated one rule (push ads), but the other rule (app promotion app) which may keep them out was put in place by Apple after AppGratis already existed.

arn

 

[ChrisA]

Why in the world would you need an App to do the. Couldn't a web page work as well? You don't need an app for app discovery. A onc a day email could also work.

Apple needs another rule. They should reject apps that are better done with web pages or in this case email.

 

[dcorban]

I use a couple of free app finder apps & they are heavens more useful than Apple's own chart which is loaded w/ annoying freemium junk.

I'm curious how "free apps" are able to pay the publishers of these "app finders" if their app isn't "freemium"? In other words, how or why are apps that generate no revenue paying to be listed by a third party?

 

[charlituna]

Just for historical correctness. AppGratis may have violated one rule (push ads), but the other rule (app promotion app) which may keep them out was put in place by Apple after AppGratis already existed.

arn

The developer agreement includes that Apple can change the rules and if you don't change to follow them you can be kicked out of the store. So when the whole thing happened is moot.

 

[alent1234]

Different analogy since Walmart sells different merchandise than Norstrom. In this case AppGratis leads you to the same product just in a different way. Honestly Apple's stern fist on this is ridiculous - it makes me question their motives.

Consider this- by banning these kind of apps Apple gets to decide what apps stay on top the charts. It also makes if more difficult to find free apps.

That is revenue control on their part. Kind of shady tbh

a lot of the best selling books aren't really best sellers. there are companies that will buy up books at retail to make your book seem like a best seller.

same concept here. devs are trying to get as much downloads to get placement at the top of the charts instead of going the traditional advertising route

 

[arn]

The developer agreement includes that Apple can change the rules and if you don't change to follow them you can be kicked out of the store. So when the whole thing happened is moot.

It's not moot, in the context of what I was replying to.

If we ban you from MacRumors Forums because we created a new rule that usernames can't include the word "tuna", and you complain -- I may be within my rights, but people can't justifiably argue "well, you deserve it because you chose to break our rules".

arn

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Hey, Apple! Why not create a usable App Store interface to start?

The fact that apps like this are popular is proof that you suck.

 

[TouchMint.com]

Hey, Apple! Why not create a usable App Store interface to start?

The fact that apps like this are popular is proof that you suck.

This is very very true. The new interfaces sucks and the search function is pretty bad although it has gotten a little better...

The worst thing is when you search for an app by its exact name and the app is 10 pages to the right that you have to swipe to find.

 

[charlituna]

It's not moot, in the context of what I was replying to.

If we ban you from MacRumors Forums because we created a new rule that usernames can't include the word "tuna", and you complain -- I may be within my rights, but people can't justifiably argue "well, you deserve it because you chose to break our rules".

arn

If the agreement I signed when I signed up said that you can change the rules whenever and however you want and I was amply notified of the change and didn't alter my username than yes I choose to break the rules and I choose to risk getting kicked out.

Such an agreement is in the developer signup. So they have little grounds to whine. Particularly since it really isn't affecting their business by their own admission. If anything they are grousing because they know the blogs will pick it up and they will get free advertising

 

[alchemistmuffin]

Hey, Apple! Why not create a usable App Store interface to start?

The fact that apps like this are popular is proof that you suck.

No, App Store interface is very usable, compared to old interface. It's industrial in some way, and doesn't have skephemorphic elements that got Forstall fired.

The fact that apps like this are popular is that people have not gotten used to the interface, and they need to get used to the interface.

As for the app store rules, remember what Steve Jobs said in the rule description, that this is a living document, and it doesn't matter if the rule didn't apply before. If rule is added, developers have to adapt the rule immediately, or face developer program membership termination.

 

[0815]

I'm curious how "free apps" are able to pay the publishers of these "app finders" if their app isn't "freemium"? In other words, how or why are apps that generate no revenue paying to be listed by a third party?

Wasn't it a 99c app ... so they got some revenue from sale. (But than that raises the question: are users who bought the app getting refunded the purchase price?)

Not sure if it really was a payed app - but either case I am sure they also had a 'featured' section (or preferred placement in searches) where developers of free apps pay to be placed (I get tons of 'offers' from companies that charge money for preferred placements)

 

[charlituna]

Who needs App discovery program? After Chomp got acquired by Apple, and they used some of their interfaces and search engine system into iTunes, the overall App Store experience is far better than any other App Store discovery app available.

There's still a lot of room for improvement. Starting with more consistent metadata and systems to get rid of folks spamming keywords into their descriptions and other stunts. Reducing robot reviews would be another nice item.

And it's not just the App Store, it's all stores. Metadata in the movies etc also sucks. You have soundtracks connected to the wrong item, you have actor searches not pulling up items someone was a major figure in. You have a lack of connections between genres. Take for example Tom Felton, the blonde kid from the Harry Potter films. He's only listed in like 3 of the 8 films and he was a pretty major character in the series. He's also a musician and has had songs up in iTunes for like a year and only recently did they show up if you hit a link with his name. Another example, Stephan Lang from Avatar. His handful of tv show guest spots don't show. Only in the past couple of months did links to is long list of audiobook narrations appear. but if you hit one of his actor links you also get books written by a J Stephen Lang which is not the same guy. I could find other examples as well but you get the idea

 

[JAT]

Couldn't they just do a web-app and that way get around the restriction?

The app anyway sounds like something that should be an web app.

Pull it out of the AppStore and just use a website. Problem solved, no?

Exactly what I was thinking. I think lots more app developers need to think that way about some of their apps.

Not to mention you can then target the android market as well with the same web app.

All the devs and other geeks on this forum say that. But the millions of non-geeks that have smartphones tend towards store apps rather than figuring out alternative methods.

 

[Nunyabinez]

I'm curious how "free apps" are able to pay the publishers of these "app finders" if their app isn't "freemium"? In other words, how or why are apps that generate no revenue paying to be listed by a third party?

What apps like this do is highlight apps that are:

1.Paid apps but have gone free for a limited time.
2.Freemium apps which still make revenue through in app purchases.
3.Paid apps that are discounted for a limited time.

Two of these three cost Apple money, but help the developer by increasing their user base. The freemium apps simply give apps an alternative way to be promoted than by the downloads of iOS users. And Apple doesn't want anyone else to be able to promote an app but them, even though their ranking system is severely flawed, i.e. lots of top apps are pure crap, but once you get a vicious cycle going (some people buy it so it starts to climb the charts so other people buy it because its at the top, rinse, repeat) it's hard to stop.

I like these apps because some paid apps go free for a day or so, and the push lets me know about it in time to get it. But Apple doesn't like it because it's picking their pocket.

 

[arn]

If the agreement I signed when I signed up said that you can change the rules whenever and however you want and I was amply notified of the change and didn't alter my username than yes I choose to break the rules and I choose to risk getting kicked out.

You know I just want to ban you now for kicks?

arn

 

[denmarkguy]

No mention about AppShopper is pulled out from AppStore too.

 

[Rogifan]

All the devs and other geeks on this forum say that. But the millions of non-geeks that have smartphones tend towards store apps rather than figuring out alternative methods.

And how man of those people would know of this app in the first place? It's certainly not going to be promoted on the AppStore

 

[charlituna]

You know I just want to ban you now for kicks?

arn

You really think that scares me. If it gets you up to ban folks because they can be my guest. It's not going to end my world because I got banned from this site. I'll go find another one or I'll sign up with a different email address and it will likely take you ages to figure it out.

By the same token, AppGratis has admitted that they have a website and the app is still working for those that had it so despite their attempts to claim this ban is going to sink them, it isn't. Folks will just go to the site to get the information. A site they might not have known about until all this free advertising from hit whoring blogs

 

[No Pain No Gain]

It's not moot, in the context of what I was replying to.

If we ban you from MacRumors Forums because we created a new rule that usernames can't include the word "tuna", and you complain -- I may be within my rights, but people can't justifiably argue "well, you deserve it because you chose to break our rules".

arn

Nice example. Funny thing is it's not so far from the truth.

 

[TheSlush]

You know I just want to ban you now for kicks?

You really think that scares me. If it gets you up to ban folks because they can be my guest. It's not going to end my world because I got banned from this site. I'll go find another one or I'll sign up with a different email address and it will likely take you ages to figure it out.

Dude. He was kidding.

 

[Squilly]

AllThingsD now reports that Apple's removal of AppGratis is just the first step in a broader crackdown on such apps, with more app discovery services soon to be pulled as well.AppGratis notes that it is "far from finished" and that its 12 million existing users will be able to continue to use the app while the company explores its alternatives, but AllThingsD makes clear that the removal of AppGratis was not simply an error on the part of a reviewer and that AppGratis is "almost certainly finished as an iOS app -- in its current incarnation, anyway".

All that matters to me.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

This seems like a poor strategy. Allowing these apps is how Apple discovered Chomp, the acquisition that eventually became the new App Store. They're losing the opportunity to discover future acquisition candidates in this space.

 

[sbailey4]

Well Said

What apps like this do is highlight apps that are:

1.Paid apps but have gone free for a limited time.
2.Freemium apps which still make revenue through in app purchases.
3.Paid apps that are discounted for a limited time.

Two of these three cost Apple money, but help the developer by increasing their user base. The freemium apps simply give apps an alternative way to be promoted than by the downloads of iOS users. And Apple doesn't want anyone else to be able to promote an app but them, even though their ranking system is severely flawed, i.e. lots of top apps are pure crap, but once you get a vicious cycle going (some people buy it so it starts to climb the charts so other people buy it because its at the top, rinse, repeat) it's hard to stop.

I like these apps because some paid apps go free for a day or so, and the push lets me know about it in time to get it. But Apple doesn't like it because it's picking their pocket.

Exactly what I like about these too. And this is REALLY what its about. I mean Walmart/ Norstrom give me a break. All these link back to the dang Apple Store anyway but as stated you have a chance to get a free app for a day or so that typically you would have to pay for. THATS the beef with Apple I am sure. Not the "its confusing to users" really?!?!?! I open an app, it has one I like, I click it, takes me to app store where I download it. hmmm very confusing yes? "Oh crap I thought I was in apple store not WalMart. oh wait, I AM still in the Apple store whew. That was confusing."