Social media and mobile apps seem to be the new buzz words over at Silicon Valley. In fact, such apps are now a dime a dozen and one could imagine Apple changing their popular catchphrase “There’s an app for that!” into “There are a thousand different apps for that, all of which have the same basic features, but subtle useless differences.”
The problem isn’t that we are approaching the boundaries of utility as far as mobile apps are concerned, it’s just that once an app or social service gets popular, developers start crowding around its concept and make thousands of clone apps, with little in terms of differentiation. We need more unique and original apps that stretch the boundaries of what we can accomplish with our phones and tablets and make you think “Wow! Who would have thought I could do that with this little thing I carry around with me?!” What we’re getting are the same basic concepts, re-hashed to such an insane degree that app stores get crowded with half-baked clone apps and the really amazing ones are drowned out in a sea of filth.
In my opinion, developers should ask themselves three basic questions before designing an app or a social service:
“Has this been done before?”
“If it has, can I do it in a way that is better/more pleasant to use?”
“If no, would I be able to introduce any sort of useful feature except a wacky name?”
And if the answers to all three questions are unfavourable, then the developer should think twice about coding such an app. It would only add redundancy to the app store and contribute to the rising app discovery epidemic.
I shudder to think about all the high quality apps made by independent developers all over the world that haven’t been popularized simply because of an overly saturated market. The amount of lost potential in app markets today is simply staggering.
Apart from market saturation, redundant apps also tend to cause mental saturation. In this day and age, who among us has the capacity to remember a billion app names? If we can’t even remember such a numerous volume of apps, how can we aspire to use them?
In my opinion, authorities like Apple and Google should monitor the apps in their stores not just for quality, but for identity of vision as well. Apps that feel like cheap copies of pre-existing apps need to be banned! I, for one have had enough of my normal friends playing ruddy Fruit Ninja clones and asking me why it doesn’t look as good as it does on my phone!
There are shining examples of how stupendously done apps with a clear and fresh vision can go viral within days of conception. They are the intellectual property of individuals that have worked hard to develop not just the code for their apps, but the core concept as well. And we owe it to those striving developers to make sure that the integrity of that core concept remains preserved.
k33t said:
Social media and mobile apps seem to be the new buzz words over at Silicon Valley. In fact, such apps are now a dime a dozen and one could imagine Apple changing their popular catchphrase “There’s an app for that!” into “There are a thousand different apps for that, all of which have the same basic features, but subtle useless differences.”
The problem isn’t that we are approaching the boundaries of utility as far as mobile apps are concerned, it’s just that once an app or social service gets popular, developers start crowding around its concept and make thousands of clone apps, with little in terms of differentiation. We need more unique and original apps that stretch the boundaries of what we can accomplish with our phones and tablets and make you think “Wow! Who would have thought I could do that with this little thing I carry around with me?!” What we’re getting are the same basic concepts, re-hashed to such an insane degree that app stores get crowded with half-baked clone apps and the really amazing ones are drowned out in a sea of filth.
In my opinion, developers should ask themselves three basic questions before designing an app or a social service:
“Has this been done before?”
“If it has, can I do it in a way that is better/more pleasant to use?”
“If no, would I be able to introduce any sort of useful feature except a wacky name?”
And if the answers to all three questions are unfavourable, then the developer should think twice about coding such an app. It would only add redundancy to the app store and contribute to the rising app discovery epidemic.
I shudder to think about all the high quality apps made by independent developers all over the world that haven’t been popularized simply because of an overly saturated market. The amount of lost potential in app markets today is simply staggering.
Apart from market saturation, redundant apps also tend to cause mental saturation. In this day and age, who among us has the capacity to remember a billion app names? If we can’t even remember such a numerous volume of apps, how can we aspire to use them?
In my opinion, authorities like Apple and Google should monitor the apps in their stores not just for quality, but for identity of vision as well. Apps that feel like cheap copies of pre-existing apps need to be banned! I, for one have had enough of my normal friends playing ruddy Fruit Ninja clones and asking me why it doesn’t look as good as it does on my phone!
There are shining examples of how stupendously done apps with a clear and fresh vision can go viral within days of conception. They are the intellectual property of individuals that have worked hard to develop not just the code for their apps, but the core concept as well. And we owe it to those striving developers to make sure that the integrity of that core concept remains preserved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah kind of like the lack of remotely interesting original posts on this forum, verses the viral like increase in nonsense that seems intended to do nothing but allow some forum users to boost their post count ....
I think the main problem with this fragmentation is that it is in the nature of Social Discovery apps that there is some uniformity in use. To be able to actually find people through it requires that a lot of people are using the same one.
Only people use them for different reasons and therefor there is an app for any of those reasons. Like some want to use them just to stay in touch with their friends and family, others to meet new people (like me when I am going to a new place) and than there is a group that uses them for flirting or organizing sexual encounters (I am not judging)
I think the best innovation for companies would be to invent an app that combines these functions. I haven't been able to find one.
If you know one, please let me know.
Thank you, I enjoyed reading your view. I do share all your points other than the 'vision policing' part.
"In my opinion, authorities like Apple and Google should monitor the apps in their stores not just for quality, but for identity of vision as well."
If the vision could have been identified by the platform's creator then there wasn't a need for the App Store. The platform creator would have created every possibly visioned apps for its platform and not bother about the participation of thousands of developers on its ecosystem. Basically, to identify the visions one would restrict 'ideas' in which it does not go well with the creativity nature of mankind.
I found something on which you can have several profiles. So you can create one for every function you can have for a Social Discovery app. I think its sort of a good idea, because you don't need like ten thousants of profiles spread around over the net. Just use it however you want. I like that idea.
For me it's perfect because I always have a hard time remembering my passwords
It's called Evry'U. I found it through their facebook page that a friend linked me.
Did anybody heard of it?
Related
Taking a speech class and had a chance to write about the Android platform. Figured I'd share here. Enjoy and comment as you will.
I wish to start off by saying welcome to the future. A bold proclamation yes, but with such experiments and ongoing research by numerous scientists today, technological breakthroughs are vast and epic. One of the many platforms so to speak that is having phenomenal breakthroughs is in the mobile systems department. Here lays a couple companies with R&D plans that carter towards certain parties promising slick user interfaces, application channels, and a complete web experience. Couple that with feature rich phones that allow one to text, call, global positioning (GPS), and well, you have a product to sell. Google has done just that. Taking bits and pieces of everything one could ever ask for, and merging it all into its mobile operating system titled Android. Represented by a green round-headed robot figure, Android is passing its two year anniversary, and has surpassed other prominent mobile architectures like Apple’s iPhone software. But what exactly is Android? Why would one desire to chuck away their limited iPhone, or stray away from the Blackberry Enterprise lineup? One word: Open source. Couple that with the experience (the art of customizing your device), and the synchronization aspects of the device for virtually any account you have on the net, and you have a total package.
Having a total package within arm’s reach, and inside your pocket is quite a powerful tool. With Google’s Android platform, there is never a point where you can say No. Any and every idea can and could be coded into the device if you have the means to do so. Open source is the ticket. Asking yourself what this means is actually a very simple question. Open source is the definition of computer code that is freely available to anyone who wishes to find it. Google has opened up the software to all who have a spirit to create and provide applications (Apps) and programs to others. Hackers, coders, and all techy guros have created a plethora of net-libraries ranging from support groups, forums and websites to further help noobies in the process. Sounds like a lot, but in reality, the experience is quite easy going. Competitors like Apple and Blackberry have limited their system to developers by safekeeping some of its computer code. This limits creativity, as it puts restrictions and limitations as to what exactly what one can create. Add to the fact that companies like Apple also screen apps to a much higher caliber, halting smaller apps without much bang in the beginning to be choked to death. It seems as if anything is available for pleasure with Android though. If it doesn’t exist, pop into a forum and jot down a reply on a thread. If that’s not enough, I’m sure you have one friend that has already found solutions in the “Green-Guy”. There is always someone there who has the tools necessary to create it, or rather has already created it in the first place.
From forums and coders who have the know-how and tools to create a mind-blowing experience, the customization factor of Android is truly one of its largest selling points. To be quite honest, each and every android device could be considered a work of art. It’s all in how the user desires it for themselves…how deep the user wants to venture; how deep goes their rabbit? From changing backgrounds and wallpapers, to adding widgets to your home screen, the android spectrum allows one to make the phone their own, morph it into how they see fitting. But how is this different from other products? Surely other phones allow their users to alter what they see on screen. Yet I assert, the android experience is different. Almost, if not every aspect of android is customizable. Icons can be altered, the font can be changed, dates, times, anything can be tweaked. Sites like XDA, AndroidSpin, and AndroidandMe provide great reviews, heads up, and forums to browse through numerous applications, both beta and final. The options are endless, and it’s open in the air to anyone who desires a bit of change. Many new phones come preinstalled with newer software, as you might here Froyo, Éclair or Gingerbread tossed around. These are simply codenames for newer versions of software from Google. If your carrier doesn’t support the newer software, chances are a coder has already made it available for you. Convenience without a price attached!
Free in price is seemingly synonymous with freedom. Freedom to choose. Freedom to enjoy. Freedom to experience. Freedom from a stationary computer. Android is a thriving system that allows you to constantly stay on the up and up. Synchronization appears a mystery as your Facebook, Twitter, email, and numerous other accounts are integrated into the system via apps or at stock. With live widgets that monitor in real time your accounts, any and all social networks, social feeds, and business/personal accounts are updated instantly. No more carrying around a tiring laptop, or waiting to login the networks at any given campus. 3G speeds and now 4G on some carriers are making mobile devices the in crowd, as speeds are comparable to standard net speeds. As many people day are on the up and up, or rather, out and about, a mobile system that constantly allows access to ones desired feeds is grand. Couple that with ability to alter documents on the fly, listen to your favorite music (via Pandora, or from the Phones Internal Memory…think iPod), you have a complete package. It’s not just a Media Device, a Business Device, a Cell Phone, as it truly lives up to the name of Smart Phone.
For me the choice was easy. I thrive off customization, the ability to make my phone a tad different, even faster, or more efficient then what the original company did for me. But as Android ages, everything looks bright and promising. To proclaim dark clouds linger would be insanity. From its initial creation of being open-sourced, to customizing features and its ability to be versatile, Android has shattered the mobile systems realm. As it races to the top, Android allows users to update on the go, with synchronization from virtually every social feed. When people ask me about phones and what should be right for them, there is no question for me. It’s never been a question about what Android can’t do, but what Android does.
<- Laughing Out Loud.
It's full of grammar faux pas, by the way.
Still very well written *only read first paragraph* but I was impressed, not bad Also maybe a bit many commas...
BTW, shouldve been posted in the off topic section
Nice Speech. I Enjoyed reading it.
Sent from Conical. 07
the original link.....http://www.zdnet.com/blog/google/confessions-of-a-google-junkie-or-privacy-what-privacy/3553
Summary: A lot has been made of Google’s new privacy policy and terms of use. I say bring it on.
There are very few aspects of my life that don’t somehow involve Google. My phone runs on Android, my favorite tablet just got an OTA update to Ice Cream Sandwich (!!!), I use Chrome across all of my computers, I develop AdWords campaigns, I use Analytics to develop metrics for the day job and dive into SEO, I handle many of the CBS Interactive Google webcasts, I use Google Docs almost exclusively for productivity, and my wife doesn’t know where I am half the time until she checks my Google Calendar (which, in fact, aggregate two other Google Calendars).
I’m increasingly turning to Google+ as my source of relevant information and opinions, a function previously reserved for Twitter, and I’ve even dispensed with bookmarks, instead using Google Sites to organize important pages and resources.
I live, eat, breathe, work, and play Google and there aren’t many people more aware of Google’s business model and the amount of data it collects than I. So is it just sheer stupidity and naiveté that has me utterly embracing the Google ecosystem and relatively unconcerned about newly announced privacy policies that have caused so much consternation this week? Before you jump down to the talkbacks to tell me how stupid I really am, read on for another couple paragraphs.
As Larry Dignan pointed out in his post about the new policies last night,
Google noted that it already has all that data, but it’s now integrating that information across products. It’s a change in how Google will use the data not what it collects. In other words, Google already knows more about you than your wife.
From my perspective, though, I can live with Google knowing a lot about me. It knows, for example, that I’ve recently developed an obsession with the electric guitar and have been researching inexpensive models that I might just be able to justify as a birthday present to myself. It doesn’t judge, it just shows me the best deals in display ads on the three models of guitar and 2 models of amps I’ve been reading about the most. My wife isn’t aware of this obsession and her take on it would be judgmental (God love her!): “When will you have time to play guitar? And we’re supposed to be saving money! And what’s wrong with your acoustic guitar?”
Taking this a step further, as Google’s new privacy policies and terms of use do, I should expect to start seeing guitar-related apps in my suggestions in the Google Market and the Chrome Marketplace. Guitarists on Google+ should start appearing in suggested people to add to my circles and Google Reader should offer to download Guitar Player Magazine feeds for me. And, more likely than not, I’ll start seeing more guitar-related ads as well.
Google’s goal, of course, is to sell advertising. That’s about 97% of their revenue. By pulling people like me into their increasingly unified ecosystem, they can demonstrate very high click-through rates to potential advertisers and charge a premium to reach highly targeted and yet incredibly vast audiences.
They need to give me something in return
For me to buy into this, they need to give me something in return. Something to make all things Google really sticky. Like a wide array of free tools from Google Docs to Google Music to Google Voice. And cheap tools that I buy for my business like Google Apps and AdWords. Their new policies are designed to be more transparent, but also to pave the way for these tools to talk to each other better, making them even stickier through a unified experience and more relevant services.
Back to the wife comparison that Larry brought up. My wife knows that every Friday night is pizza night in our house. So does Google, since every Friday around 4:30 I pull out my Android and use Google Voice Search to find the number of whatever pizza joint we decide to patronize that week. Fine. Google, however, can actually do something more useful with that information than my wife can (”Where should I order pizza, sweetheart?” “Wherever, just not that place down the road. Or that other place. And make sure they’re having a deal!”).
Come Friday morning, the ads I see on Gmail or Google search should start being pretty pizza-heavy: Dominos, Papa Johns, and a place or two that has an active Google Offer. As I’m driving home that evening, the GPS on my phone should set off an alert when I drive past a well-reviewed pizza place (assuming I’ve set location-based preferences to alert me to destinations with at least four-star average reviews). And the minute I type a P in my mobile browser, Google Instant should leap into action and display nearby pizza places and a news story about a new place to get pizza in the next town.
We’re not quite there yet, but this is the sort of integration and experience that Google is covering in its new policies and terms of use. I know that my privacy red flags should probably be going off. Google has gigabytes of information about me and is using that information to help its advertisers sell products. That’s bad, right?
Guess what, folks? This is the semantic web
And yet, I don’t think it is. Many of the same techies who cry foul over these new policies have also been pushing for the development of the semantic web to make it easier to find what we actually need in the trillions of web pages floating around the Internet. Guess what, folks? This is the semantic web. When our search engines know what we actually mean, when data on the web automagically becomes information we can use easily and quickly, we’ve arrived.
And the semantic web can’t exist without “the web” (whatever that is) knowing a lot about us. It takes data for a computer to understand our needs and process natural language efficiently. Some of those data will necessarily be fairly personal.
Now, if I start getting spam from pizza places or calls on my Google Voice number from Dominos because Google has sold my contact information and preferences to advertisers, we have a problem and I’ll be waving my privacy flag as high as anyone else. However, when I opt in by opening a Google account and staying logged in as I surf the web, I’m not only consenting to the collection and aggregation of data about me, I’m asking that it be done so that the web and related tools can be more useful to me. This sort of data mining lets me work faster, play easier, and find the best pizza in a 20-mile radius.
For its part, Google needs to remain the trusted broker of these data. No, I don’t like the idea that our government could brand me a terrorist and seize these gigabytes of data under the Patriot Act. The alternative, though, is an ever-growing morass of web sites and tools that I get to dig through manually.
And, by the way, even if I’m not logged in to my Google account as I’m doing it, my ISP knows the sites I’ve visited, too, and could just as easily (if not more so) be compelled to turn over this information to the real Big Brother in all of this.
Far more trust in Google than the Feds
Honestly, I have far more trust in Google than I do in the Feds. Google is motivated by money: they need my trust to keep collecting those data to keep making it easier for me to buy things from Google’s paying advertisers. If that trust is broken by inappropriate sharing of data, then my eyeballs go elsewhere and so do the advertisers who target me via AdWords and AdSense. Our government has no such financial motivation. Money talks.
The fact that the speech recognition on my phone kicks ass because I use Google Voice all the time and it’s learned how I talk might be a little creepy, but it’s far more important that I can do a Google search or send a text while I’m driving without taking my eyes off the road.
Welcome to 2012, folks. The semantic web has arrived. Use it well and let’s keep Google’s new policies in perspective. And Google? Don’t be evil. I have a lot of colleagues who will be pointing, laughing, and saying I told you so if you ever are.
Nice article.
I think the key for Google's continued success is to keep the advertising passive, suggestions when you're searching etc. aren't in your face but they work.
You see a lot of people complaining that they've been searching for something online and then all of the adverts on the websites they visit contain something pertaining to that, and they grumble that it's annoying. Personally, I'd much rather see an advert to something that's relevant to me rather than a cluttered webpage of irrelevant information.
By targeting adverts and increasing their relevance to the individual, they are far more likely to be successful. This means that the revenue per advert is going to improve and websites aren't going to need to cover their website in adverts (at the cost of the user experience) to make it profitable.
Plus given the huge amount of free stuff that google gives you, it's a bit rich for somebody to complain that they're trying to get something back off you.
I too would much rather see things directly targeted towards me then just random ads. And everyone is up in arms about google recording what you do. Well i think of it this way, i'm fine with them getting to know me and my behavior and what i do, as long as they keep providing FREE products for me.
Ahh the good old "If they are going to screw me without consent, I would much rather they knew my name, stroked my hair and whispered sweet nothings into my ear while they did it."
I prefer to treat my online habbits like the strange neighbour a few doors down. Say "hi" in passing, and realise that while they probrobly know more than I would want them to from when I've invited them over for coffee and from peeking in my windows as they walk past, know that I don't actually have to put up with their $#!+ if they become too creepy.
Thats why its important there are alternitives and competition, and that we as consumers don't put our eggs all in one basket and be prepared to protest or move on if they stretch the friendship too far.
I know privacy is impossible in this day and age but that doent mean you have to lie back and take it. "because you know it means well and it does give you nice gifts once in a while"
My suggestion is cut your reliance on any one brand and spread out the load.
hungry81 said:
My suggestion is cut your reliance on any one brand and spread out the load.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the author am reliant on Google these days. I'd be happy to look at alternatives. Granted they work on the platforms I needs them to, Android 2.X and 3.2, Linux+chrome, windows XP + chrome, and windows 7 + firefox or chrome. The linux requirement cuts out a lot of things, iTunes/iCloud for example.
Have any suggestions who/where i could go for:
Music
Docs
G+
Gmail
Needs a slick webUI, and the searching ability of gmail
Calendar
I need delegation and the ability for my wife to add me to events and share calendars.
Reader
works on all my devices, and syncs between them
I would very much like my phone to know when I leave work. Now i could do this with some sort of timer, but I end up working somewhat flexible hours, and have a leaving time of anywhere within an hour and a half. I would like it to know that since I now have "buy bread, milk, and eggs" on my to-do list (thanks hun!), that it needs to remind me of that on the way home. Even better if it can just direct me to a store with a deal on one or all of those things.
I like that the first hit in Google I get for cookies is the wikipedia page for http cookies and the second is to pythons cookielib module. Where as I bet my grandmother gets, chocolate chip cookies. The ability for Google search to know that I have a particular artist in my collection, and show me the bind's page near the top of the results without me having to add "band" to my search terms.
Anyways, if and when Google starts selling my data to 3rd parties, I'll export my data and move. Google makes it fairly painless to do that.
So, I'm in an interface design class and one of the more appealing options for an assignment was to make an application for mobile (we've been given 7 weeks to complete it but need to do at least 500 words of development discussion a week even if I somehow finish before then). I'm both glad this was one of the options as I've wanted to make something for a while now (though I seem to have misplaced my idea list) and a little nervous.
Right now I'm thinking something simple, does anyone have any ideas? This week will primarily be research for the professors journal requirements I think.
I will be happy to answer you
However there is no limit of app ideas, but in a simplest way if you are at the learning stage then I would like to recommend you to create an app with simple functionality with simple UI. Some of the examples I want to suggest here is chat application, book reviews, music app, photo sharing etc
Have you ever done one of these murder mystery dinners? They are pretty great, but usually limited to the one box / set of cards you buy. Maybe there is some benefit in bringing this game to the phone / tablet where you have GPS, camera, etc.?
What would I need in order to make a music or video player, or a chat application?
Sharing data sounds tricky.
Murder Mystery sounds interesting, however as it's a game sounds like I'd have to make a ton more assets to make it worthwhile.
One of the other ideas I had was to make a heartrate monitor with in-built journal. I know several of the monitors on the app store charge for the journaling feature. Alas I know not much about how they function other than they use the camera to measure the pulse in your finger.
PHONE-A-TAXI is an exclusive app that may be used in the event of being stranded. With GPS technology, it would detect the nearest taxi rank for whoever has subscribed to the service. To operate this app, one must telephone the taxi company in order to charter a taxi from the person’s exact location, and send it straight to the passenger.
How you would make money?
The app would be free for consumers but, in order to absorb the marketing costs, the developer could charge taxi firms a monthly subscription fee. They could also utilize the existence of social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, etc. to promote the app to potential consumers. The bigger the client base, the more you can charge the taxi firm annually, which would also be beneficial to the taxi company.
Developing a good android application is not an easy task (neither impossible ) especially if you have small or no team. It requires many skills and talents, such as coding, designing sense, music sense, marketing skills and list goes on. You have to keep an eye on everywhere since lack of any aspect can result in poor response form users (which is the last thing an android developer want).
Recently I have developed an android game (Fruiteria) in my spare time and launched it recently on Google play store (see link at the end of this post). It took me about 74 days to build it from scratch. It was a challenging task but I learned a lot from my experience. I would like to share my experience with you today!
Let's discuss what are the things one should never avoid while developing application :
1. Concept and implementation of application
As I said above, there are many aspects to application development. But no matter what you do, You will not be successful by selling poor quality application. So, first thing everyone should think about is a good concept. Your concept can depend on your goals such as business advertising, social work, marketing or simply making money! Also, having a good concept on paper is one thing but it's implementation need patience and constant efforts. If you have a nice concept and willingness to put efforts into it, then consider you are already at the half way!
2. Grow your concept with time
Second point I would like to mention is try not to be stubborn!! If you think that you have the best concept in the world, but the world thinks the other way, then you are in big trouble. After all you are building the application for people. Take suggestions from users and your friends to change and grow application concept. Believe me, it works like magic!
3. Research
Before building your application, try to do some research on what is the market for your application, who are the competitors in market and why they are successful (or unsuccessful), who are your target audience and what do they exactly want. Working on such things will give you a better idea on what needs to be done exactly.
4. Marketing
This one is tricky! If you are an individual, or a small company with almost no capital, then it is hard to put much money in marketing. Especially when there are already giant companies present as your competitors. But that is not the end! Think about creative ways to make your application popular. For example Give it to your friends to use, and tell them to spread it. If you are in college, then sponsor a small event in exchange of application publicity which will not require much money. Make discount coupons and distribute them. In essence, do every little bit of thing that you can. You might not see the effect on first sight, but over time it will accumulate on large scale.
5. Keep in touch
Last thing I want to share is don't leave your application after launching! Keep updating it regularly by adding exciting new features and fixing bugs if any. Respond to user comments and reviews. It gives personal touch and they will start thinking that you care about them. It will definitely increase the user retention and hence the growth of your application..!
I personally have been implementing these principles in my application since the idea came to my mind. Finally I succeeded in development of a good android game (or at least I think so!). But as I said earlier, my success depends on how you respond to it! I am sharing the link for game in case if you are interested in checking out my game. Please let me know how you find it by reviewing it on Google play store!
All the best for your android endeavours. My best wishes are with you!!
Fruiteria link : (I am unable to post outside link on this thread) Please go to google play store and type 'Fruiteria'
Making something Open Source is essentially a tool to crush innovation, and make developers lazy, so they are more like robots without a brain of their own.
It is an easy route to make some money by taking an open source library/ project, introducing ads, repackaging it with your own name and publishing it. Both the platform (e.g Google Play Store) and the developers are happy because they both get to make money without any effort.
The end result: Unhappy users and dumb developers!
Over the last 8 years or more, I have tried hundreds of apps in specific categories like File Managers, Gallery, Music Player, Video Player, etc. Yet I haven't found one that is PERFECT. Although 'perfect' is subjective, extremely few apps are worthy of applause.
If you search for Gallery apps on Google Play Store, you will get thousands of apps. Unfortunately, literally over half of them are identical and copycats of the Simple Gallery app. Rest are total garbage. Clearly, these apps are taking some easily (or freely) available library/ source, changing the name and signature, introducing ads, packaging them and publishing on Google Play Store under different developer accounts. It is quite possible that many of these apps are from the same developer who has several developer accounts. The number of copycats that are allowed to flourish on Google Play Store is simply unbelievable.
This kind of poor vetting by Google Play Store makes for a terrible user experience when people try out different apps, only to find that they all are exact replicas of each other. They are clearly violating the REPETITIVE CONTENT policy of Google Play Store where these apps have absolutely nothing of value to add. They are simply a source of ad revenue for the developers. Google probably doesn't mind that because they get 30% cut from those revenues.
As far as Gallery apps are concerned, there are literally less than 10 unique apps among thousands listed on Google Play Store. Much less actually. There is absolutely no thought/ love given when designing apps. Despite the versatility that Android supposedly offers, the interface, ease of access, features, etc leave too much to desire for.
That said, the question is 'Are Good Android apps very difficult to make'?
Making a good Android Apps is neither difficult nor easy. It requires a good understanding of the needs of the client in the app. And the rest is quality hard work.
nihitthakkar said:
Making a good Android Apps is neither difficult nor easy. It requires a good understanding of the needs of the client in the app. And the rest is quality hard work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about making apps for the market, and not specifically for a client?
As stated in the OP, most apps are pure garbage, or replica of other apps. In other words, no thought or concept, absolutely no love or attention to detail. The Play Store is just a hub to publish some garbage and make money out of it through ads.
Is the amount of effort required in making and maintaining an app too much relative to the money to be made from such apps?
Apps are end results of knowledge imparted in educational institutions. It is pretty clear that the good students don't make apps.
As with Gallery apps, the same is also true for File Managers, Music Players, Video Players, Browsers, etc.
It is easy to relate with Browsers because many are forks of Chromium. The same holds true for other types of apps too.
In any category, there are less than 10 unique apps (even lesser actually) and all the rest (in hundreds or thousands) are either copycats or pure garbage.
Sad and unfortunate truth.
The Google Play Store boasts of roughly 3 million apps today.
I bet there are less than 300 unique experiences (read: apps)! All the rest are copycats or pure garbage.
Making good apps requires a dedicated team and effort.
If you want good apps for yourself, either code them yourself or commission a developer to get it done. And don't expect it to work on all phones.
Because android device fragmentation is a massive problem.
And expecting app development from an Education Institution?
Thats most hilarious **** I have heard. Education institutions don't give 2 Fs about the commercial setup.
karandpr said:
Making good apps requires a dedicated team and effort.
If you want good apps for yourself, either code them yourself or commission a developer to get it done. And don't expect it to work on all phones.
Because android device fragmentation is a massive problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does that take away the opinion expressed in the OP?
Does it counter the fact that the Google Play Store is full of garbage apps?
Does it counter the fact that most apps are essentially replicas of each other?
Does it counter the fact that most apps are simple repackaging of open source resources with very little value to no value being added in the final product?
Does it counter the fact that open source resources are essentially a tool for incompetent developers to make money without any effort?
karandpr said:
And expecting app development from an Education Institution?
Thats most hilarious **** I have heard. Education institutions don't give 2 Fs about the commercial setup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you point me to where I said so?
You may want to read my comment again.
TheMystic said:
Does that take away the opinion expressed in the OP?
Does it counter the fact that the Google Play Store is full of garbage apps?
Does it counter the fact that most apps are essentially replicas of each other?
Does it counter the fact that most apps are simple repackaging of open source resources with very little value to no value being added in the final product?
Does it counter the fact that open source resources are essentially a tool for incompetent developers to make money without any effort?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You stated my opinion. I did mine.
1.) Your opinion. Not fact. There are lot of good unique apps.
2.) Yes and No. Garbage apps use better SEO and have higher visibility. Unlike iOS store ,Play store doesn't curate apps manually.
3.) No they are not. Lot of apps are restricted by System APIs enforced by Google. This is true for Camera and File Manager Apps
4.) Welcome to open source. That's it's selling point. You are free to compile your own version of apps if it bothers you
5.) No it is not. This is a very pigeonholed vision of open source.
Can you point me to where I said so?
You may want to read my comment again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TheMystic said:
What about making apps for the market, and not specifically for a client?
As stated in the OP, most apps are pure garbage, or replica of other apps. In other words, no thought or concept, absolutely no love or attention to detail. The Play Store is just a hub to publish some garbage and make money out of it through ads.
Is the amount of effort required in making and maintaining an app too much relative to the money to be made from such apps?
Apps are end results of knowledge imparted in educational institutions. It is pretty clear that the good students don't make apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This statement here.
karandpr said:
You stated my opinion. I did mine.
1.) Your opinion. Not fact. There are lot of good unique apps.
2.) Yes and No. Garbage apps use better SEO and have higher visibility. Unlike iOS store ,Play store doesn't curate apps manually.
3.) No they are not. Lot of apps are restricted by System APIs enforced by Google. This is true for Camera and File Manager Apps
4.) Welcome to open source. That's it's selling point. You are free to compile your own version of apps if it bothers you
5.) No it is not. This is a very pigeonholed vision of open source.
This statement here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. The 1st point was an opinion, and thats what I said. A 'lot' of good unique apps? 'Lot' could be subjective/ relative, but I would say that even that would be less than 1% of the number of apps available on Google Play Store. Over 99% apps on Google Play Store are garbage.
2. Okay.
3. I don't think you tried out enough apps. In the last one week, I must have tried atleast 50 Gallery apps, and over 70% of them had the exact same UI, Settings, bugs, etc. Some of them had completely misleading pictures on their app page too.
4. I wish I could.
5. With every generalized statement, there are almost always exceptions, and this is no different. So exceptions prove the rule. Give the quality of apps on Google Play Store and the fact that many of them are replicas of each other created from the same code base/ source, it only proves that open-source provided earning opportunities to incompetent developers way more than being a tool to not reinvent the wheel.
As with my statement on educational institution, you have misunderstood it. I said good students from institutions imparting coding knowledge don't make apps (with exceptions of course). That is very evident from the quality of apps we get to see (again obviously with exceptions). It is the lazy and incompetent lot that simply repackages a free resource without adding any value to it and then earn some money through ads.