Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1.    #1  
    IMO, it's silly to think it'll be open. Palm controls it and says they'll approve apps. That alone tells you it won't be "open." And Sprint gets a chance to have a say in the matter no matter what Palm says.

    But then there's this option to sideload apps from other places. Things get confusing here for me. Will these apps need Palm approval? Can big name developers avoid palm's 30% (assumption) cut in this way? And how will updates be handled if you're getting them from various sources?

    I think apps like Slingbox and Skype are finding out carriers aren't too fond of them. Their success in the past didn't involve carriers being able to weigh in on things. I can't imagine Sprint would feel any different than AT&T.

    Microsoft's own app store is already saying NO to VOIP type apps, apps that replace its media player or browser, etc., and apps over 10mb. But these type apps are everywhere and can be installed easily so i'm not sure what Microsoft is up to.
  2. Zyphlin's Avatar
    Posts
    564 Posts
    Global Posts
    565 Global Posts
    #2  
    I have a feeling it may work like this....

    All apps will need to be signed by palm to be allowed to work on the Pre. How that will work, I'm unsure...perhaps it needs some sort of palm only code to be ran on the Pre (which I imagine would be hacked). I think Palm would like to essentially be able to check over every program to at least verify that it works.

    The other potential for that is that simply unsigned apps are not garaunteed to work and thus any issues or problems they cause are not covered under tech support or warranty?

    I imagine the side loading apps would mean that you could have your app on your own website in which people can download it. On the plus side, this would likely bypass Palm's "share" of the revenue but on the down side you'd likely get FAR less potential traffic than all the people going through Palm's App Store.

    Essentially, the benefit of the App Store and the reason you're letting Palm take some of the profit is for:

    1. Extended base of users
    2. No need to pay for or upkeep a webpage if you wished
    3. Not having to worry about any of the issues of trying to set up a purchasing program
    4. Seeming "endorsement" from Palm that your app is good enough to work well on the Pre.
  3. #3  
    There are a few things that have made Apple's App store so popular:

    - Easy access to free apps. Unlike the BB App store you dont need to drill through by category and look at each price to find the free apps.

    - Seemless background installation while you continue to use the phone. Makes it much less painful and intimidating to install an app.

    - Reviews. People love reviews. Palm just needs to limit them to actual buyers of the app.

    And a few areas where Apple has dropped the ball:

    - Overly draconian policy on rejecting Apps based on their features: as long as it isnt a virus, Palm needs to get out of the way and let the App be judged by the market.

    - Lacking organization: There are just too many apps, if you dont know exactly what to search for it can be hard to find any particular app.

    - Too much garbage: Palm needs to try to filter out the chaff here while still allowing innovation and new exciting apps. A tough job, but important.

    Palm needs to take these lessons to heart.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by bryanharig View Post
    as long as it isnt a virus, Palm needs to get out of the way and let the App be judged by the market.
    Quote Originally Posted by bryanharig View Post
    Palm needs to try to filter out the chaff here while still allowing innovation and new exciting apps. A tough job, but important.
    These seem to be contradictory.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by bryanharig View Post
    - Overly draconian policy on rejecting Apps based on their features: as long as it isnt a virus, Palm needs to get out of the way and let the App be judged by the market.
    Yep, they should allow as many baby shaking apps as possible.
  6. #6  
    Because the app store will be run by Palm and thus will reflect on them as a company, I think they should be rather heavy handed with their approval of apps. However, they should do nothing to prevent side loading any and every app imaginable from other websites. You could even side-load an alternative to the app store that has any and every app imaginable and Palm does not have any reputation at stake.
  7. #7  
    Sprint's software store currently is loaded with subscription based apps, meaning you get to pay like 2 or 3 dollars or more a month to use an application. My friend is the best example, she accidentally downloaded Guitar Hero on to her Sprint Lotus, and she asked me to check her bill online...sure enough, 4 bucks a month!!

    I want to buy an App and be done with it, not having to pay on a monthly basis....that's bull crap! You'd land up spending hundreds of dollars if you keep an App long enough. So I really hope this subscription based crap won't clog up the App catalog we'll be able to access on the Pre!!
  8. mike5's Avatar
    Posts
    762 Posts
    Global Posts
    782 Global Posts
    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
    I think apps like Slingbox and Skype are finding out carriers aren't too fond of them. Their success in the past didn't involve carriers being able to weigh in on things. I can't imagine Sprint would feel any different than AT&T.

    I sure hope you are wrong. I have been running Slingbox on my Palm over Sprint's network for years now. I hope they don't change.

    Talking to my friends, the WiFi only policy for Skype (& probably Slingbox) on the iPhone, simply highlighted the weakness of AT&T's network. I hope they are correct.

    Cheers
  9. klynn's Avatar
    Posts
    116 Posts
    Global Posts
    142 Global Posts
    #9  
    There is speculation that now that iPhone apps will have the ability to bill within themselves that subscription apps will now be the norm. If so I imagine that's the way Pre apps will also go.
  10. dtokarz's Avatar
    Posts
    371 Posts
    Global Posts
    379 Global Posts
    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by klynngullo View Post
    There is speculation that now that iPhone apps will have the ability to bill within themselves that subscription apps will now be the norm. If so I imagine that's the way Pre apps will also go.
    Here is an opportunity now for Palm/Sprint to set themselves above the crowd by NOT doing this.
  11. #11  
    Most of the talk about the internal billing on iPhone apps is about the micro-transaction stuff, extra $1 for the next level, character costume for $0.50, etc...
  12. #12  
    Subscription based would be suicide.... just take like 10 apps at 3 bucks each....who'd want to add 30 bucks to their phone bill every month? Seeing how iPhone owners have more than 10 apps installed on average on their phones, tells you that the pay now and never again model works way better than subscription based.
  13. #13  
    I doubt it will be subscription based since Palm is running the app side of things and needs this to work for all phones on all carriers. Microtransactions as I mentioned above are a definite possibility though. The truth is we all really don't know.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by asforme View Post
    These seem to be contradictory.
    I know. I was trying to find a better way to word it but I just put it out there.

    The distinction I wanted to make was between rejecting apps based on features like VOIP, streaming video or duplicating functions (bad) and rejecting apps based on quality and relevance IE you dont need 20 fart apps and every gutenburg text as a seperate app (good).

    It is a fine line to walk.
  15. phwelo's Avatar
    Posts
    527 Posts
    Global Posts
    554 Global Posts
    #15  
    seems to me that i heard on one of the webcasts it was mentioned that apps will be able to be installed from other locations than just the app store, anyone else remember hearing that?
    http://phwelo.mobi
    for any questions or to send a donation: phwelo@gmail.com
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by mobileman View Post
    Yep, they should allow as many baby shaking apps as possible.
    You know, actually, they _should_ allow as many baby shaking apps as people want to make/sell (not as many "as possible," not sure what that means). It's not anyone's business if you're sick enough to make such an app or sick enough to buy it/download it.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    You know, actually, they _should_ allow as many baby shaking apps as people want to make/sell (not as many "as possible," not sure what that means). It's not anyone's business if you're sick enough to make such an app or sick enough to buy it/download it.
    The problem is that it's Palm's store with Palm's hosting and Palm's logo. Having bad apps reflects badly on Palm. I think they should limit the app store to quality apps, if you want other apps side load them. I know if I provided the hosting for an app repository I'd be pretty strict about what apps are on my server.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by asforme View Post
    The problem is that it's Palm's store with Palm's hosting and Palm's logo. Having bad apps reflects badly on Palm. I think they should limit the app store to quality apps, if you want other apps side load them. I know if I provided the hosting for an app repository I'd be pretty strict about what apps are on my server.
    Valid point. And you're exactly right: by allowing side loading of apps, Palm sidesteps the issue nicely.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by wynand32 View Post
    You know, actually, they _should_ allow as many baby shaking apps as people want to make/sell (not as many "as possible," not sure what that means). It's not anyone's business if you're sick enough to make such an app or sick enough to buy it/download it.
    I thinkt he question is should it be in the official app store or simply be there for side-loading, which is an entirely different question for Palm. Remember the rejection of apps will take on a different dynamic here than what we have seen with Apple. It is not like with Palm rejection necessarily means the App never sees the light of day, it will probably mean you will need to actively search for it online or the app developer will need to advertise.
    Such a calculus makes things challenging for Palm and yet easier, they can accept more liberally and face criticism for what is included or they can reject more liberally and leave it to side-loading to fill the gaps. We don't know what the terms will be yet so we will need to see. Though I think the key is to make clear rules and standards so developers know in advance rather than everything seeming arbitrary. Something along the lines of what Microsoft has proposed for its store (I can hear the complaining and MS bashing already, but their rules actually seem reasonable here), while controversial they make sense and don't stop the ability to load anything you want elsewhere.
    Personally, as long as the device is not incapable of loading any programs designed for it, Palm should be given some leeway in what they place in the official app store. Those who develop apps that are rejected can still sell them elsewhere if they want.

Posting Permissions