iTunes App Store Comments: A broken system

Commenting on Commenters

One of the major complaints (especially from developers) of the iTunes App Store is the comment system. First, let's take a look at a couple of the gems I've run across. This one for Twitterrific:

Stupid.. ★

by medicated

So... Twitter is really stupid and an annoying waste of time. And somehow this app just makes it worse.

What an excellent addition to the list of already wonderful comments. It appears that this person hasn't even downloaded and used the app. Feeling so strongly that Twitter is "stupid" they had to write a negative review having never tried it. 

And now another for Exposure:

No Upload? ★★

by Terrible0ne

Is it that hard to make a free app that let's you upload geotagged pix to flickr and then view them on the map at flickr?

My sense is that Terrible0ne has little to no idea what it takes to concept, program, and polish an iPhone app. Now I could be wrong, he might be the genius developer behind some App Store standouts, but I highly doubt it. 

Differences Between Music and Application Comments

Music and movies never change. When someone comments on a Cold Play song it will forever apply. It's set. Applications are completely different. Updates fix bugs and add features. Comments don't reflect this. A commenter might complain about a bug that is present in 1.0, but fixed in 1.1. Unfortunately for the developer that comment is cemented in place for eternity. NetNewsWire represents an excellent example of this.

Nice idea, but ★★

by macguyincali

Those of us who are power users of NetNewsWire on the mac and have a lot of subscriptions, the iPhone application gets so bogged down downloading feeds that it is virtually unusable. I'm hoping they give us some more options for at least choosing a smaller subset of subscriptions or at least make it snappier with the larger set. I have yet to be able to successfully use it as it spends freezes up while waiting to download the hundreds of feeds I have.

This was a legitimate complaint about the 1.0 release of NNW. If you had hundreds of feeds it would take forever to load. Fortunately, Brent is an excellent Mac developer and listened to the complaints and (for the most part) resolved this issue in a later update. NNW now has the ability to remove feeds from showing up on your iPhone (Engadget and Gizmodo were immediately removed for me as they update way too frequently during the day). Unfortunately for Brent that comment is one of the "most helpful" and still shows up near the top of the comments (and more importantly, on the front page). 

Solutions?

One suggestion is that you shouldn't be allowed to comment on an application unless you have downloaded it. To me, this seems like a fantastic idea. It creates a barrier to entry just like the $99 fee to get your application on the iTunes Store. This barrier would help eliminate some of the crap. Obviously some of the crap will still come through (just look at the 50% of what's on the App Store), but imagine if that $99 fee wasn't there. It would be infinitely worse.

Could another possible solution be that you have different comments for each version of the application? The advantage would be that comments about a resolved issue would no longer be present. The disadvantage would be that an applications rating and list of comments would be reset each time. This might give developers incentive to release "updates" just to clear out any unwanted comments. 

Any other thoughts on how Apple can fix the comment system?

iPhone App Review: MotionX Poker ($4.99)

RoccoVersion™: ★★★★★'s; Amazing attention to detail; Secondary goals other than winning a hand; Keeps track of statistics.

Full Version: Apple touts more than 1,000 applications on the App Store. Unfortunately many think that most of those apps are crap. For the most part I agree.

One of the gems to bubble to the top is MotionX Poker (iTS link). The attention to detail, both visually and audibly, is outstanding. The description given by the developer is minimal compared to the rich feature set of the game. Simply put, you shake the phone to roll your dice. Select your hand and shake again. But it is much more than this.

Dice and Tables

There are 39 beautifully rendered sets of dice that you can unlock as you play (you unlock dice by getting 5-of-a-kind). Even more impressive is that each set of dice makes a slightly different sound when you roll them. The "Nomad" dice, which appear to be made of wood, sound very different than the "Immortal" dice, presumably made of some type of metal. This attention to detail not only makes me want to continue to play, but also switch between sets of dice.



Along with the 39 sets of dice are five different tables to play on (you start with two playable tables and unlock the next three). Each new table allows you to bet more and in turn win more. They have put great time and effort into the detail of the tables as well. The Rooster table is covered with felt, and the sound reflects this. The dragon table on the other hand is more of a hard porcelain surface and the sound of the dice hitting it reflect that difference.

Gems

Another feature that isn't mentioned in the developer's description is "gems". Gems are acquired by reaching certain milestones such as "Win with every possible five of a kind", "Earn a comeback bonus and a low hand bonus with the same hand", or "Earn a straight bonus and a repeat hand bonus in the same hand".



These gems (there are 14 of them) keep the game interesting the more hours you play. You can even click the info button next to the gem to see how close you are to attaining your gem.



Statistics

Being able to keep track of your stats is a valuable feature in my mind. Keeping track of your win percentage, what your "luckiest" dice are, and how many winning days in a row you've had keep interest high and boredom low.



It is also a remind of how much time you have wasted building up your bankroll. As of this writing I have spent almost 8 hours trying to attain all 14 gems.

Overall

This game has been able to hold my interest more than any other application on the iPhone so far. With goals (other than winning) to strive for and amazing attention to detail this application is a must buy.

★★★★★ in my book.

iTunes to iPhone Streaming Patent

[via AppleInsider]

A new version of Apple's iPhone Software could provide iPhone and iPod touch users with access to their home computer's entire iTunes media library while on the go without having to first download those media items through a traditional sync, a new company filing has revealed.

Apple has filed multiple patents for ideas that have never seen light outside of the Apple Skunkworks™. Will this be one of them?

I Am Rich...er...Stupid

There has been a lot of speculation around yet another application that hit the App Store and was then removed. "I Am Rich" retailed for $999 and did nothing but sit on your phone. Just a pretty little icon. It was a way to "show your wealth".

Gruber and Kottke both have interesting comments on the subject. Kottke:

What I can't understand is: why should Apple pull I Am Rich from the App Store? They have to approve each app but presumably that's to guard against apps which crash iPhones, misrepresent their function, go against Apple's terms of service, or introduce malicious code to the iPhone.

At this point we don't know if it was the author or Apple that pulled the application.

Why would the author pull it? One thought is from all the bad press it was getting. The App Store is still new enough that new applications are being "reviewed" by bloggers that normally wouldn't touch the subject. Armin indicated in his description of I Am Rich that he would (or did) have other applications available for sale. He may have feared his other applications wouldn't sell as well with I Am Rich tainting his reputation.

One could also argue it was because of Apple's refund policy on purchases from the App Store portion of the iTunes Store. Gruber states:

If everyone who “buys” this app is then demanding a refund or credit card chargeback, you can see why Apple, or perhaps its author, Armin Heinrich, would take the app down.

I have not read through the license agreement that application publishers agree to when submitting their application to the store. One might assume that if a refund is given by Apple on an application purchase that Apple keeps their 30% share and the developer must refund the full amount to the customer. If this is the case there is no wonder Armin would want the application removed. One refund and he would be out $300. But, at this point, we don't know if that is how the process works. [UPDATE: Gruber confirms "that with the App Store, developers pay the refund fee."]

This does bring up another interesting question (which may be answered in the iTunes Store EULA): Are all sales final from the App Store? If not, and a refund is issued, would Apple remove the application from your phone (you got your money back, they get their app back)? We already know Apple has method to remove "malicious App Store applications. Could something similar be used for refunds?

While some say it is the price we pay for having the App Store available on the iPhone, I don't like the thought of Apple being able to remove items I have paid for at any time.

Finally, here is a screenshot of a review from a supposed "buyer" of the app:

Really? I call fake. Either that or stupid. It is not Apple's place to decide if an application is worthy of being on the store. They should vet apps for malicious code and content (porn, etc.) and then let customers decide if they are worth paying for.