[HN Gopher] List of apps people pay for but have low rating ___________________________________________________________________ List of apps people pay for but have low rating Author : visox Score : 378 points Date : 2021-05-01 16:53 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (ideasfilter.com) (TXT) w3m dump (ideasfilter.com) | groaner wrote: | Pretty much every dating app would be on this list if in-app | purchases were taken into account. | visox wrote: | i am actually collecting this info, but not using so far | visox wrote: | So a while ago a i remembered one post from HN, it was some guy | crawling google play store and keeping apps that were paid and | people used them but had a low rating. He was selling this list, | not sure if it was successful but i made something similar and | updated | | So far checking only 3 marketplaces, my crawlers found so far | about 100k apps, the default filters show only the more | interesting once (paid and low rating) | | Its free. | | I will add more and more marketplaces eventually. I will also try | to add some social features, like "working as a team on some | idea" and posting own ideas, but will see how it goes. | | Feedback welcome | | EDIT: i just see it on mobile, it does not look ideal. Will need | to work on that hm. | | EDIT2: just added pagination :), hope it works for you. | akudha wrote: | Do you know if scraping this data violates their ToS? | chuckgreenman wrote: | Even if it is, it doesn't matter. The US Court of Appeals | created precedent that allows for the scraping and | aggregation of publicly published information with that | LinkedIn case. | geuis wrote: | Got a link for this? Could open up some possibilities. | chuckgreenman wrote: | Here's the actual case: | | https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate- | courts/ca9/17... | | There is an attached PDF with the full decision, Pages | 27, 28 on reference some related cases that informed the | decision. | Scoundreller wrote: | Dunno about Atlassian and Shopify, but I can't imagine Google | launching a case against someone for scraping them. | | I guess robots.txt is all that really matters. | | Here's Play Store's: https://play.google.com/robots.txt | minnehaha wrote: | agreed, provided the crawler complies with robots.txt | akudha wrote: | This data is quite valuable and services like this aren't | competing with these app stores. If anything, they are | probably inviting more competition to the app stores | resulting in better apps. | | There is no reason for these companies to go after some | small guy scraping the app store data. But who knows - | Craigslist went after one man shops. These companies might | too. | visox wrote: | hm not sure how/if they will react if this blows up but it | wont stop me for now. | davidgh wrote: | In the US, there was a ruling a couple of years ago that | gives some legal clarity to scraping data made publicly | available (in favor of the scrapers) in the hiQ vs. LinkedIn | case. You can read more about it here | https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/09/victory-ruling-hiq- | v-l... | bahmboo wrote: | Google's entire business is scraping websites | catillac wrote: | Maybe that's a reason to not feel bad if it violates the | TOS but there are real consequences to doing so so perhaps | your response isn't that helpful. | AznHisoka wrote: | If anyone really wanted to stop you, they would put up an | anti scraping mechanism like Imperva and not even bother | with legal action. | reader_mode wrote: | >but there are real consequences to doing so | | What consequences ? Breaking ToS can get your account | suspended if you even need an account for doing this, not | sure what else breaking the TOS really implies. | | I don't know if Google can claim ownership of this data | as it's customer generated and publically available. | intricatedetail wrote: | Shouldn't that be caught by anti-trust laws? Google does | not pay websites for scraping, so anyone should be | entitled to scrap Google to their hearts content. | namdnay wrote: | Websites can choose whether to be scraped or not, and | google respects that choice | hire_charts wrote: | It's nice of google to respect the choice to effectively | become undiscoverable to anyone searching for your | product. | ben_w wrote: | You sound like you have a third opinion, one which would | allow a website to appear on Google in response to user | searches without Google knowing anything about what the | website contains? | k4rli wrote: | To be fair if being scraped were opt-in (Robots Inclusion | Standard?) instead of opt-out, we might have a completely | different technological world. Who knows. | intricatedetail wrote: | By creating an account and using their webmaster tools | giving up even more of your data? | mitchdoogle wrote: | No you just have to put a noindex header on requests to | your website | intricatedetail wrote: | So they still can use up my resources? | Google234 wrote: | How can they know without looking? Again, you could also | use the webmasters tools to block it... | uglygoblin wrote: | Robots.txt can accomplish the same thing which means they | periodically grab a single text file from you. | fooey wrote: | Sure, but they don't scrape anyone who opts out | amelius wrote: | Perhaps also keep a list of people who are currently | implementing improved versions of these apps, to minimize the | possibility of redundant work. | visox wrote: | yeap this is a social feature i will work on, actually | thinking more about collaboration rather than competition but | will see. | ehsankia wrote: | > He was selling this list | | Can someone explain the value of such a list, am I missing | something? Don't get me wrong, your project is neat and I | enjoyed looking through it, but I don't understand how anyone | would try to sell this or pay money for this. | bricemo wrote: | The strategy is to take one of these apps and build a better | version of it. The market demand is there, validated through | purchases. But the market is unsatisfied with the current | solution. So if you can build a better solution then you have | a well defined valuable product | nemomarx wrote: | I guess it could be "here are apps that people need enough to | pay for, but have complaints about" in order to develop | alternatives? | | Maybe these are apps with bad user interfaces or some other | issue and it's a list of low hanging fruit ideas? | jamestimmins wrote: | As an app developer, I spend a lot of time trying to find the | right opportunities for apps to build. I'd happily spend $50 | to cut down research time by a few hours. | visox wrote: | well not sure if there is money in it, like said i cant tell | if that guy with that list managed to sell anything :D | | I dont think i will put on a pay wall, i will rather try to | build a community. | moksly wrote: | The default assumption for many people will be that something | which sells, but has a low rating, is a business opportunity. | | The real business opportunity is the sale of the list of | course. It's sort of like selling shovels to and booze to | gold diggers. | visox wrote: | ha, hope you are not correct because i wont sell my list :) | pegas1 wrote: | Learn marketing from these guys who can sell mediocre | product. | | Also, some might sell because their App resembles something | popular so some users buy by mistake. Then make sure, it does | not parasitise on your app! | lambdasquirrel wrote: | Cool idea. I'm not able to find some well-used apps with the | search, like Headspace. So as we say, it's about the execution. | yoz-y wrote: | Headspace is there, but you need to set the filter to 0usd | min (the app is free) and max rating to 100 (the app is rated | 92%) | visox wrote: | hmm shame, maybe remove some filters, maybe there are no | hated apps like that. | visox wrote: | I just tried to add G2 to my list but they immediately get you | on captcha, so they really dont wish to be crawled :D | shoto_io wrote: | Thanks for sharing this! Great idea! | | Q: How do you evaluate if the apps are still being paid for? | visox wrote: | good question, i cant tell how many people did actually pay | and when was the last time someone did. I guess its up to you | to do the research further. One can at least often see when | the last comment was posted. | visox wrote: | Just added my page to product hunt, i think it may be a good way | to propagate updates on the product since i am so far not | collecting emails from you or anything. | | https://www.producthunt.com/posts/ideas-filter | | The link to PH is also on http://ideasfilter.com/ top right | reader_mode wrote: | Good luck tring to do a better job replacing these on Android | where every device x android version permutation out there = | something breaks for a different user. | | Like the "Automatic Call Recorder Pro" (highest number of ratings | on the list) has "try the free version first to see if this will | work on your phone" ... I feel sorry for Android developers. As | much as I dislike the "Apple way" of designing products (walled | gardens and super opinionated instead of open and providing | choices), every time I need to develop something for Android I'm | flabergasted at how shit the platform is under the hood. Soo many | APIs to do the same thing, depricated system APIs all over the | place, but the only way to do things on devices X, but only from | manufacturer Y, on Z the API functionality isn't even supported, | on W you need to use newer APIs, on Q you need to use a custom | solution - nobody really uses Q but your client got 3 complaints | and can't determine priorities (understandable given the | ecosystem fragmentation) | tjoff wrote: | Very bad example. You are not supposed to be able to record | calls. Some drivers are working against you and depending on | the audio path you might not have access to it. So some use | workarounds such as pretending to be a bluetooth device just to | get access to the audio. | | Now you might have a different opinion, that call recording is | a basic feature that all phones should have. And I would agree. | But if you have any such opinions then IOS is dead on arrival | anyway. | gsich wrote: | Also the reason why there are no SIP gateways for Android. | jeroenhd wrote: | Most of those buggy features are centered around things that | shouldn't be possible anyway. On iOS, these apps would probably | not even be available. | | Call recording used to be easy to implement, until Google took | a look at the obvious security problem with apps recording | calls from the background, and restricted the normal APIs to | system software only. If an app has automatic call recording | that works well, the manufacturer probably put an insecure OS | on the phone, because then any app or game you download | probably has that capability. | | The supported APIs all have excellent backwards compatibility | through AndroidX. You can still many if not most modern APIs | all the way back to Android 5 without much change in the code. | Most system APIs are backported through Google's libraries, and | for many others the standard compat library has shims that | avoid most version checks. This is sort of the opposite of iOS, | where most users are updated within a few months so many years | of backwards compatibility isn't a big priority. | | Cheap, slow, crappy devices and background task killers are | much more of a problem than the problems plaguing a lot of the | APIs. | reader_mode wrote: | >Most system APIs are backported through Google's libraries, | and for many others the standard compat library has shims | that avoid most version checks. | | Just 6 months ago I took a small side project to port a web | app to mobile and add some native functionality. I need to | connect the user to a WiFi hotspot (industrial device | controller) from code - the new APIs were absolutly not | backwards compatible, the old APIs were just killed in Q, | even worse the capabilites present in the old APIs | (controlling WiFi networks) half wroked on older devices, | depending on vendor (eg. not working on Samsung, working on a | Pixel, etc.) | | iOS didn't expose the level of controll straight up and I was | able to explain to client that that's just not possible. We | saw Android was all over the place in this regard, but | because a competitor had a halfassed version that only worked | on some devices the client insisted it was possible to | implement this on Android. It took us a week to figure out | that the whole thing is an unmanageable mess and demo to the | client that the competitor is broken in so many scenarios and | that we should just use the system UI like we do on the iOS. | | >On iOS, these apps would probably not even be available. | | See but I prefer this to Android "it's possible because we | were wrong, now we leave it out there but you can't do it | going forward". Why not just blacklist it in app store and | prevent new apps from using it on review ? Also it's obvious | they don't have any sort of certification testing for these | APIs because they just straight out don't work on various | vendors - they could easily mandate that to qualify for | Google services on your device you need to implement system | APIs and pass the test suite to solve these inconsistencies. | AnthonyMouse wrote: | The problem with this entire mess is that there are things | some trustworthy third party software _needs_ to do, but | are open to abuse by untrustworthy software using them for | nefarious purposes. | | In theory the answer to this is for the app reviewers to | scrutinize any app using those capabilities to make sure | it's not abusing them, but in practice the app approval | process is actually kind of crap and doesn't do a good job | of making those distinctions. | | Your remaining alternatives are to prohibit that thing from | happening whatsoever, which pisses people off, or to make | it possible but a huge miserable ordeal, which pisses | people off. | phendrenad2 wrote: | > If an app has automatic call recording that works well, the | manufacturer probably put an insecure OS on the phone, | because then any app or game you download probably has that | capability. | | I think that's a simplistic way to think of it, and assumes | that there are only "apps" with exactly one privilege level. | There are a multitude of things the OS could do to give a | good user experience AND stay secure from random apps | recording you. | | Off the top of my head, how about: Apps can record you, but | only by registering a special chunk of code that will be run | with a special "tempfile" privilege, where the app doesn't | know where the file is stored to. Then, once the call is | over, if the app tries to access that file again, with normal | privileges, the OS puts up a confirmation screen that says | "Good news! App <Dave's Cool Pachinko Parlor> has recorded | your last call. Do you want to keep or delete that | recording?" | nitrogen wrote: | The screen could/should also display a prominent recording | indicator, with the name of the app, while recording. | criddell wrote: | I don't understand why call recording isn't a built-in | features to all of the phone apps. I know the standard | explanation is that it isn't legal in all locales, but there | are plenty of illegal things you can do with your phone. | Spooky23 wrote: | There's a wide variety of bad behavior people can engage | in, from breaking two party consent to making the phone a | listening device. | | End of the day, 90% of phone recording use cases are bad | ideas, and making it moderately more difficult to do avoids | alot of trouble. | callesgg wrote: | Where do you get that number from? | | I once got a call from a person threatening my life. I | find it hard to justify not being able to record such a | thing because of some strange hypothetical scenario about | bad actors recording calls. | | To be honest I can't think of any scenario where | recording your own calls would be bad. Can you give me a | example? | Spooky23 wrote: | Notification of the parties is key. You always have a | good reason to record a phone call. | | But, have you ever had a conversation on the phone that | was difficult, not your best, or otherwise problematic? | Have you ever said something that you would only say to | one person? | | The lower the barrier, the worse people's behavior will | manifest. | p_l wrote: | There's also the part where it simply wasn't possible on | many older SoCs to record calls[1]. Back then, there were | apps that recorded calls using undocumented APIs available | only on Qualcomm SoCs, and no one else had any call | recording. Combined with legal problems around call | recording, I guess nobody cared. | | [1] My first android phone would get physically | disconnected from microphone input by the modem during a | call | Forge36 wrote: | Call recording is only legal with single party consent in 2 | states. Google voice allows recording incoming calls, but | not outgoing. | | 1) Low demand 2) High impact of getting it wrong (untested | legal consequences?) 3) lack of a good story. IE: why can't | you track what was said in another method? Ie: paper note | Sebguer wrote: | > Call recording is only legal with single party consent | in 2 states. | | What? Federally call recording is legal with single party | consent. 35 states and DC have single party consent. | dataflow wrote: | > Call recording is only legal with single party consent | in 2 states. | | Call recording is legal even in 2 party consent states... | with consent. Also often legal if it's to protect against | a major criminal threat. | | > IE: why can't you track what was said in another | method? Ie: paper note | | Try convicting your attacker with that. | hellbannedguy wrote: | I remember that Trump tape where the governor taped, and | released, the conversation to the public. Something like, | "I need you to find 1300 votes in my favor." | | It turns out that Georgia is one of those states. You can | tape a person without their consent, and broadcast it? | hrktb wrote: | To me it's worse than that, as service providers will | record calls and use these recording only at their benefit. | | In these situations where recording is agreed by both | parties, getting restricted on the individual side is | frustrating. | | Basically it's the proverbial technical solution to a | social problem. | Spooky23 wrote: | Online meeting software pretty elegantly addresses the | need for recording and avoids many of the gotchas. | krick wrote: | Exactly. And call recording app is pretty much like any | other voice recording app, so it's not like the | manufacturer is liable. And it's surely not their fucking | business what I do with my phone. | | Anyway, I used to rely on the call recording quite heavily, | and I was really pissed off, when I discovered that it | doesn't work anymore, so all my recent calls are lost. This | was really awkward, because knowing my calls are recorded I | stopped writing down appointments or ask to repeat | something I didn't hear well, because I can just replay. | | Without all that stuff there's really not much point using | phone at all. Except most messengers and services require | you having a phone number, which is absolutely ridiculous. | imgabe wrote: | If the legal issue were a concern, all the app would have | to do is announce that a recording is being made as soon as | it's turned on. | | That might make it less useful for people in one-party | states who want to record secretly, but it would be better | than nothing. | gsich wrote: | I also think you can workaround this by setting to speaker, | then use your voice note app. | quickthrower2 wrote: | This is a great resource and surprising to see it be free! | | The trick is to of course read a few of the ratings to get behind | the rating number. I also filtered for 1000+ ratings as who'd | want to develop an app based on research for a app no one is | using. | | A theme I saw in my 5 minutes of usage were apps that were once | loved and popular but have been poorly maintained through the | android updates. I get that for small app devs - I had an app and | I got so many "ya gotta do this" emails from Google I just | abandoned it. It was a free app so didn't feel so bad. | visox wrote: | > This is a great resource and surprising to see it be free! | | i think i rather build a community around if i can and find | some other way to monetise this, but will see. | | I think the pattern will be different for different platforms | ChrisMarshallNY wrote: | That's a pretty cool idea! | | I've tended to write free software, designed to meet needs (as | opposed to make money), but this is a good idea, and one that I | think could be useful to folks that need to come up with "that | big idea." | visox wrote: | thank you :) | welder wrote: | Could this also be a list of apps having users with unrealistic | expectations, don't know what they want, or don't know what's | technologically feasible? | throw14082020 wrote: | Theres a lot of issues with abandonment. Do people expect to pay | $1-$6 for lifetime support of an app, otherwise its 1 star? Or | should the developers have warned that the product is EOL'd, | without refunding money to previous buyers. | orf wrote: | No TLS, results come from | "http://192.95.30.65:9002/api/business/search". | | Weird. | visox wrote: | yes this is the place where my backend lives and exposes the | rest api. | | The is no domain alias for that address so far. | iagovar wrote: | A glance at some apps looks like soe low valuation is simply | because changes in the android API and such. | cleorama wrote: | This seems like a good idea OP. | | In case someone's looking for a UX/UI person to tackle one of the | listed problems with, feel free to message me at | dvsmehlik@gmail.com. A somewhat current 'About Me' page can be | found here: https://www.notion.so/David- | Smehlik-1b4db0e80f3c4f21912e86f2.... | | (P.S. Please remove the comment if this is not allowed here.) | ChicagoBoy11 wrote: | This reminded me of a post I read somehwere on the web of a guy | who was looking to make some money early on when the App store | was a thing and basically poked around on it trying to do the | same thing your list suggests -- find an app that has enough | downloads and a decent paid userbase but which seems kinda | terrible. | | Turns out he noticed there was a really popular app for... the | bible, but he noticed it was pretty shitty. IIRC, he then made | his own without too much effort, published in the app store, and | made a decent chunk of change off of it for quite a while. | visox wrote: | ANOTHER UPDATE, i just added a popup on hover so one can see the | app description (at least what i crawled) and the app image/icon. | Hope you like it. | | I also tried to add G2 as an another app market place but boy | they really dont wish to be crawled so i need to pass on them. | digitcatphd wrote: | This is good, but IMO you should also add the number of downloads | because most of these apps seem to be very niche and likely have | very few downloads. | pknerd wrote: | Can you provide it in downloadable/CSV format for each keyword | search/filter? | | It'd be very helpful! | | Good job by the way! | visox wrote: | hmm good idea, i do see some problems and improvements that i | need to do before i can implement this kind of feature but yes, | sure. | | and thx, peoples interest and praise is quite motivating | InvOfSmallC wrote: | If I could suggest a feature, I would put number of downloads to | see what is the market for that problem. | | Cool job though! | visox wrote: | yeah number of ratings is i guess just one side of the coin. | | I can add it but some other improvements come first. | cercatrova wrote: | You should add a lowest ratings count as that determines both | the rating as well as the number of people who bought and | rated it low, showing the biggest opportunities from this | list. | | Or better yet, rather than more in the dropdown, just have | two separate filters, one is rating and rating count, the | other is ascending/descending sort. | [deleted] | harpiaharpyja wrote: | Price is a really poor metric. Would be more interesting to look | for high volume of sales / low rating | throw_839189 wrote: | It seems there's no pagination. It shows total 220, but displays | only 50. Otherwise cool idea, thanks! | visox wrote: | Just added pagination :D ! | visox wrote: | yeah pagination is coming soon. | IgorPartola wrote: | Do ratings actually matter? The only time I look at them is when | it's an Indie game and I want to see people's impressions of it. | Even still, I'll go on Reddit and find the reviews there. | | I say this because I have seen excellent but popular apps have | very low ratings just because they are popular. Also, when | someone gives it a low rating because of a bug that's fixed 2 | days later, is there a mechanism to take that into account? | vuciv1 wrote: | I have a mobile app, on Google Play I have a 3.6 rating, and on | ios I have a 4.6 rating. | | I haven't seen a difference yet, but I read for app store | optimization purposes, higher ratings help. | | Makes sense. | mrtksn wrote: | If the app is not a scam, low ratings often mean the users | failed to find a way to report an issue or get help. They care | enough for your app to go through trouble of finding their way | back to the store page, find the feedback form there and write | an angry letter. | | If you don't receive much written reviews but only low star | ratings, it probably means that your app is asking the wrong | users for a review or asking at a bad time. | | Popular non-scam apps with low ratings probably simply fail at | the feedback collection and communication with their users. | duxup wrote: | Yeah I play some games that have low ratings. The quality of | the games is great but... | | The issue seems to be (based on the negative reviews) that | people don't understand the game. They assume it is like | popular game X, but they're playing a different game. | | The tutorial explains that the game has a view distance and fog | of war.....but the top reviews are negative posts about | opponents in the distance "disappearing".... | airstrike wrote: | Case in point, Civilization VI currently has a 3.3 rating on | the App Store which is criminally low | gpm wrote: | Civilization VI is, in my experience, buggy to the point of | being almost unplayable (in multiplayer, which is all I care | about). I'm not sure 3.3 is criminally low, it probably just | reflects the fact that reliability is a very important | feature. | duxup wrote: | Is that AI opponent still completely incapable of making | decisions / rage quits? | | Like if the AI isn't even playing.. that sucks. | geraltofrivia wrote: | To be honest, I don't much like Civ VI on my iPad. Its not a | matter of performance but the interface, as well as the game | is just conducive to be played with a touchscreen. My opinion | of course is biased since I play a lot of Civ (1000+ hours on | Steam) on my PC, but not at all on the iPad. | | I also imagine that most people who'd buy civ on the app | store are like me: looking for a more convenient way to play | the game, already used to it on PC, and find the ipad | offering quite dissatisfying. | airstrike wrote: | It's a full fledged game with great graphics and tons of | DLC... of course it's not the same as the PC experience, | but it's meant to work even on an iPhone, which makes it | quite the achievement IMHO | BigBalli wrote: | they matter because they tell you how to make the app better. | karlkloss wrote: | There are a lot of very good apps out there that have low | ratings. But when you actually read the ratings, you realize that | the users are just too dumb to read. | | There are users that complain that the app doesn't work, although | the description clearly says that it works only on certain | devices or with certain external hardware, that those idiots | DON'T have. There are others that don't understand at all what | the app ist supposed to do, so their comments are actually | embarrassing themselves. | | It pisses me off that the app developers aren't able to remove | ratings from people that are obviously idiots. | [deleted] | azeirah wrote: | Have some respect, please. | | Idiot or a frustrated 70 year old coming into contact with a | smartphone for the first time? | | Idiot, or a person with ADHD who has trouble focusing on the | instructions and just wants to use the app intuitively? | | Idiot, or person whose first language isn't English? | | Idiot, or person with an IQ of 85. Yes, you might call someone | like that an "idiot", but that's first of all nasty to say, and | is that justified if they're part of your target audience? You | have to design for these people. | | Idiot, or person who's completely stressed the fuck out who | just wants to use your app for what it's meant for and not | spend a single second more? | | Idiot, or drunk person who wants to order food/have fun/order | stuff online because it is incredibly important to order that | right now? | | Idiot, or someone who just isn't very interested in techonology | whatsoever and just uses a phone to keep up-to-date with | friends and does some banking? You'd be surprised at how many | people don't know what a zip file is, who don't know what USB | is, who don't know if a GB is larger than a KB or not? | FalconSensei wrote: | I would love to upvote your comment twice, so I'm replying | instead. | | Amen to all this. People need to stop being elitists, and | assuming that other people love and care about technology as | much as them, or even that everyone is always capable (as you | mentioned, low IQ or mental health can be a real problem for | some users). | | I recently saw a comment on other thread: What people need to | understand about good design: If you need to explain to | people how to use your product the "right" way, it's probably | a badly designed product. | cmeacham98 wrote: | "Idiot" is needlessly offensive and the GP's tone isn't | great, but all of those reasons are usually invalid reviews | (unless the app markets to that demographic). If I'm reading | reviews for an app seeing your review about misreading the | description because english isn't your first language is | unhelpful spam (assuming the app is english-only). | | Unfortunately, these type of reviews where people post | completely irrelevant complaints are quite common (see the | number of people reviewing their local post office in Amazon | reviews), but I do wish platforms would remove them. | wpietri wrote: | I'd say a lot of those are perfectly valid reasons to give | a bad review, as those are all actual human beings with | mobile phones who may find and buy an app on the app store. | | It reminds me of when I did tech support in college. | Everybody who walked in or called was a real person trying | to get real things done. If they knew as much about | computers as me, they wouldn't have been walking in. So I | learned to accept them as they were and do my best to help | them. I didn't get to choose who walked in. | | I think it's the same deal with putting an app in an app | store. Well over 80% of America has a smartphone at this | point. If a dev really wants to restrict their market to | some narrow demographic, it's on them to do the work of | countering the context, which sets the entry criteria | somewhere around "has at least one eye and one finger". | That means very clear marketing, design, and interface | choices to make it clear to people they're in the wrong | place before they've invested enough time that they feel | writing a review is merited. | ziml77 wrote: | I have the same issue with reviews like that. If an app | isn't meant for you, uninstall it, get a refund, and move | on. A review that basically says "I didn't have product X | so this app that controls product X is garbage" are | completely useless (except if the app says nowhere in the | title or or description that it has additional requirements | to function). | | They don't bother me as much as the Amazon ones you bring | up though. I swear the majority of negative reviews I see | on there are people complaining that the product never | shipped or that the shipping service damaged it. There's so | many of them that on Amazon that it can be nearly | impossible to find reviews that actually say negatives | about the product. Tends to end up being better to find a | trusted professional reviewer and if they haven't reviewed | what you're looking at, just skip it in favor of something | they have reviewed. | akudha wrote: | A counter example: | | There are lots of bad reviews on Amazon, because of shipping. | People leave one star reviews _only_ (I know because they say | so, in the review) because their stuff came a day later than | they expected. How is the product creator responsible for | shipping delays by the carrier or by the Amazon warehouse? | | The reality is that online shoppers are impatient, have | unrealistic expectations and do not read the product | description. Not all, but enough to be a concern and enough | to affect a product's ratings. There are lots of bad products | on Amazon. But there are also lots of bad behavior from | shoppers too. I don't know if this is true with other online | stores, but with Amazon I have seen this often | pvg wrote: | Those, at least, are reportable and Amazon removes them. | Interestingly, they'll also remove reviews that say | positive things about shipping, if that's most of the | review. | believeinskills wrote: | Yeah that last one is indeed an idiot. Also, side note, why | do people think that deserve respect? Very curious of this | point of view. | alexalx wrote: | If someone decides to spend time writing a one star review | before reading app description till the end he is an idiot | with personal issues. | raverbashing wrote: | Yes all of these might happen, but you would be also pissed | if you were in a rush and someone in front of you in, let's | say, McD or Subway didn't know what or how to order. (Or you | were their server) | | Yes, UX is important, yes be patient with people who might | not get it at the first time, but I see situations like: | | - Your app is very specific and it shouldn't be used by | people outside a certain domain field. Then some idiot | downloads it and gives 1 star because he can't figure it out. | This is the kind of person that calls traditional | sphygmomanometers "dumb". | | - If you build a more idiot proof system the world comes up | with a better idiot. I've seen reviews on Amazon complaining | that a certain size of item was "small". Conveniently the | review indicated the chosen size and guess which one was it | between multiple sizes? (The smallest one of course) | askonomm wrote: | You're not a very nice person are you? In a world where you | sell products to customers, customers are who you should design | for. Customers are who you should listen to. If your customers | are making it clear as day to you that your app is too complex | to use, make it simpler. Maybe you make apps for power-users | who are extremely witty and can decrypt any level of complexity | with no issue, but most people (including me) can't. | joshgoldman wrote: | Stop defending tyranny | romanhn wrote: | > their comments are actually embarrassing themselves | | Your comment is one of those | [deleted] | nromiun wrote: | What is the point of reviews if the dev can just remove it if | they don't like it? That will quickly give every app a five | star rating. | | And the reason users write "app doesn't work" instead of giving | a complete description of the bug because app stores have a | word limit on reviews. Even your rant here will cross the word | limit of Google Play reviews. | | And it's not like every dev behaves like they are intelligent | either, most devs have a reply bot that tells people with | negative reviews to check their internet. | ascorbic wrote: | I had an app that was free, but was solely a client for a paid | service. Despite putting this in capital latters at the top of | the description, it still got loads of negative reviews saying | that it was misleading and wasn't really free. It was | exasperating as I was never pretending it was anything but | that, but I consoled myself with the fact that the people who | actually needed it would be coming from the site and were | already paying users. | throwaway98797 wrote: | Part of creating something is describing it and communicating | it to the right people. | | Absolute ratings don't matter as much as inter-industry ratings | anyways. | pessimizer wrote: | This is a way to filter for underserved markets. If your UI is | trash and your description is unclear to "idiots," there's a | market available for other people with the talent to do what | you couldn't. Alternately, if people hate your app because they | imagine that it's something that it isn't, that means that | there's a demand for _that_ app available for someone willing | to provide it. | brokenkebab wrote: | Well, we all can be idiots with various things. However, the | problem you mention is real: ratings can be very skewed just | because non-target audience may come and try something they | don't need/understand. You can't solve it by just letting to | delete ratings though - it's too easy to abuse. | happytoexplain wrote: | >too dumb to read | | >idiots | | >embarrassing themselves | | >pisses me off | | >obviously idiots | | This attitude toward users - _regardless_ of whether your | assessment that the source of the problem is intelligence is | correct - is poisonous noise that creates far more problems | than it solves. Also, the hostility reduces the quality of | discourse. | m00dy wrote: | I didnt like his attitude neither | brokenkebab wrote: | I agree that self-restraint in expressing opinions can | prevent unnecessary stirring of emotions, but your comment's | tone contradicts to this noble idea: it stirs emotions by | using meaninglessly overloaded words like "poisonous noise", | and vague warnings ("creates far more problems than it | solves") which being contextually undefined just sounds | patronizing. | thrower123 wrote: | My general policy is to give a 1-star rating to any app that | nags me and prevents me from using it until I dismiss a screen | asking me for a review. Especially if I've already rated it. | noodle wrote: | This is interesting but I also wonder where the effect tapers | off. I'm working on a startup in a particular space, and almost | all competitors have high ratings on marketplaces but behind the | scenes we know their churn is HUGE because people strongly | dislike the products. Are some products just polarizing such that | the highs and lows will be more willing to submit ratings while | the displeased but unmotivated mids won't bother with a rating | but will still churn? | visox wrote: | wish i could filter by Churn Rate, that would be a killer | filter :) | lwansbrough wrote: | You can almost certainly get that information from somewhere, | as virtually every app is sharing data with advertisers, or | is directly showing ads which can track lifetime usage. | rozab wrote: | People don't leave a bad review because they realise they don't | need or aren't very interested in an app. It's because they | need or want to use the app but are prevented from doing so by | bugs or other issues. | tlogan wrote: | > > bugs or other issues > | | Other issues == not free. | | I have some experience running apps with 1M or more users. | | In my experience, I see that 10% of bad reviews are due to | bugs while 90% are because a user really needs the | app/service, but it is not free. | | Which also means this: if the application is useless (and | just steals your data), then it will have good reviews. | avipars wrote: | What's the idea? See that they built an MVP but have angry | customers that want to switch over to your solution? | monkwhocode wrote: | https://www.monkwhocode.com/2021/05/coding-interview-questio... | chevill wrote: | Great idea, I'd just recommend letting people filter out games. | moooshupork wrote: | Play Store would have a useful search engine if Google | implemented this, but hubris cripples advanced search across | Google's properties. Their business is selling ads, and letting | me find exactly what I want on my own instead of being served ads | to _suggest stuff_ that interests me--but almost never does-- | would wrinkle the bottom line. Same logic for supermarkets. Why | tell me where everything is when I 'll probably buy more if I | wander around. | ehsankia wrote: | I'm curious, what problem does a list of apps with low ratings | solve? | dragonwriter wrote: | Paid apps with low ratings might be a way to identify an | unserved market. (Willing to pay, not satisfied.) | moooshupork wrote: | The title suggests one possible use. It's a search interface | with the number of parameters that can be changed*, so there | are many possible uses. I used it to define the highest rated | most expensive apps, because I like and will pay for good | stuff, and I found several I didn't even know existed. | axegon_ wrote: | A few things to factor in: time spent in a supermarket is very | different from time spent online. People are used to typing a | query and the top 5 results that are yielded are the winners | 90% of the time. Very few people will go beyond that. Which is | why ads are crammed into that list. How often do you go to the | second page of your web searches? Pareto 101 - either you're | first or you're everything else and you get nothing if you are | the latter. No matter how well you organize and present | everything, the attention span of people online is absurdly | low. I've fiddled with that concept at my old job and you lose | clients at astonishing rates with every additional second you | take away from their time, regardless of whether you give them | an incentive to make it through to the end. I bet Google has | come to the exact same conclusion over time. I remember they | used to have a very advanced search engine features back in the | late 2000's. These days those functionalities are still very | much alive but you have to know them: +, - inuri, inurl, | intitle, etc. | moooshupork wrote: | We start with complexity and simplify. We never get to simple | if we don't try to wrangle chaos and complexity, so I | disagree with the "It's been tried before and failed" | defeatism. Pareto is one of my pet peeves because, no matter | how you slice it, it can be used to argue against all | advanced scenarios. | | 1. Just because it's failed in the past doesn't mean it's | going to fail in the future. | | 2. Context is utmost. | | 3. We need to stop assuming that people are stupid and start | believing the complexity is okay sometimes. I believe a | tyranny of the majority is no more helpful in software than | it is in democracy, so I don't buy into Pereto. That one | belongs on the trash sheep along with UML, Agile, and other | systems and theories of software development. IMO, of course. | But there's a time and place for complexity. Audience | matters. I think I'm preaching to the choir here. | axegon_ wrote: | I think you're misinterpreting my message. People aren't | inherently stupid, but they are extremely susceptive to go | down the shortest route without thinking twice (even if | it's not the optimal in other regards: distance vs speed vs | complexity). As I said, I've seen this at very large scale | and there's a clear pattern. Make a survey with 3 questions | with no reward and another one with some reward and hand | them out to 20k people. You would get roughly 2000 | responses roughly 1000 for each group. Give them a fourth | question without modifying any of the other values and the | responses drop by half, regardless of whether you offer | them a reward twice as big in return. The hours of mindless | scrolling through social media appears as a one continuous | event but if you think about it, the context switching | takes place several times per scroll. This is what makes | ads so effective. Amazon, Google play or any other | marketplace is the same story(take a closer look at Amazon- | it's just as crammed with ads). There are a few ways to | monetize large user bases: sell them items, which despite | effective, will only convert a tiny amount of your users | into paying users, not to mention high paying users. Sure, | it's a good tactic but all other users are just a water of | traffic at the bare minimum(often storage, cpu time, hell, | even electricity if you host everything on bare metal in | your own data center). As a result, Internet meet ads. I | mean there are other ways which are much uglier to monetize | your users so I'd rather not go there. As I said, I'm | absolutely sure a lot of very intelligent people have | reached similar conclusions and that's precisely why the | Google play store behaves the way it does. And I'm willing | to bet they've tried other tactics as well. | mongolianbeef wrote: | Can you name popular stores that actually intentionally list | the worst rated items? Amazon, iTunes, and supermarkets don't | go around listing the worst vacuum cleaners/songs/bacon. You | might be able to find out by scrolling to the bottom of product | list sorted by "Best Rating", or by the amount of stock, but I | think intentionally pointing out the items by "Worst Rating" is | kind of outside the mission of stores... | [deleted] | herbst wrote: | I love that you list Shopify apps. I was wondering about that | exactly when i evaluated it for my business. A lot of the issues | with the apps listed there are things that are simply not | possible with shopify tho. Still interesting market IMO. | visox wrote: | thx i try also wordpress/wooCommerce eventually. | tyingq wrote: | Selling to e-commerce sellers is a particularly difficult set | of customers though. They typically know just enough about | technology to demand things that aren't possible. And often | skewed towards a type-a attitude where being loud and obnoxious | is their go-to. So, high-margin, but you'll earn your money in | that space. | lucaspanjaard wrote: | Very smart. Reminds me of a meta service i used to scout products | for my e-commerce business. Not sure how you'll be able to | monetize it as it is relatively simple to copy but perhaps the | first movers advantage is enough if you keep it free for | visitors. Good luck in any case! I'm sure this will sprout new | companies. | visox wrote: | Yeah i am not sure either, but its weird that noone had this | idea before it seems obvious especially when there was that one | guy who made the static list, perhaps he it didnt sell well and | that was the end of it. | axiosgunnar wrote: | Interesting indeed, I wonder how one could extend this concept to | web-based products such as SaaS. Probably not really, since there | is no way to get the a rating for websites. | visox wrote: | hmmm interesting idea, perhaps i can crawl some websites where | people rate all sort of solutions/SaaS. Not sure where i could | get a list of SaaS tho, maybe product hunt. | hobofan wrote: | G2[0] or stackshare[1]. | | It should be mentioned though that G2 reviews are usually | pretty heavily positively manipulated via "Review for Amazon | Gift card" schemes. | | [0]: https://www.g2.com/ | | [1]: https://stackshare.io/ | visox wrote: | ah nice nice thx a lot, it will find a way into my list :) | gpas wrote: | see also alternativeto.net | | https://alternativeto.net/platform/online/?feature=softwa | re-... | | love your project | dawnerd wrote: | Recently tried out g2 and found way too much friction in | comparing services. And most of the information was | outright incorrect. | throw_839189 wrote: | Also Capterra[0] and Trustpilot[1] can be used to find | ratings. May be more challenging to find pricing. | | UPDATE: It seems G2[2] has data about pricing. | | [0] capterra.com [1] trustpilot.com [2] g2.com | akudha wrote: | Are these sites really that useful? I checked a couple of | products on stackshare that I have used. Shallow content. | And got prompted immediately with a signup popup, just like | Instagram does. According to similarweb, the site gets 1.4M | pageviews per month. So I guess the demand is there, I just | wish the information was better. | hobofan wrote: | I use them mainly for discovery, and do my own evaluation | on the tools, as the crowdsourced reviews are mostly | crap. | | Stackshare was great in the beginning, but as is the way | with every site with crowdsourced reviews, business | motives (incentivized/fake reviews) or personal motives | (writing shallow reviews for "clout") took hold after 1-2 | years (around the same time the added the signup popup). | akudha wrote: | I tried a semi popular product, it wasn't even listed. | And that giant login popup irritated the hell out of me. | Why do they need me to login? Are they aggregating this | data and selling it or something like that? | | Lets say we build a better version of stackshare. What | would be the things you would look for, as a user (other | than honest reviews)? It is near impossible to do a good | job of comparing features, even having up-to-date pricing | data is hard. So what else can be added to make it | useful? | hobofan wrote: | I've actually spent some time working on a Stackshare | derivate focused on Marketing SaaS product for a friend | of mine (tough that never ended up launching). For a pure | generic SaaS & OSS tools site like Stackshare is, I'm not | sure if there is a good business model that doesn't | compromise the product. | | A few possible improvements over Stackshare: | | - Honest & in-depth long-form reviews. Quality matters so | much more than quantity. Even a single in-depth blog post | every few weeks would provide more value than the | crowdsourced ones you currently find on the site | | - Openly accessible, and no social/gameification features | that nobody needs | | - Better categories and making it possible for a tool to | be in multiple ones (and being able to see it). The | structure of the current ones is a mess. E.g. CMake is in | "Java Build Tools" but the "C/C++ build tools" category | is basically empty with 2 tools. | | - Better searching/filtering. Kind of connected to the | previous point. They have the data (don't know of which | quality) of "Tool1 works with Tool2", so you could | possibly have a more generic "Build tools" category and | then filter by "works with Python". | | - I don't care much for automatic comparison features, as | they often don't yield good results. E.g. Jira often | looks good in such comparisions, but you'll still want to | bang your head against a wall every time you have to wait | for it to load one of it's pages. A good alternative | would be a quick overview of key metrics and category- | dependent badges, which you can use to form your own | opinions. RubyToolbox[0] does a fairly good job of that. | | [0]: https://www.ruby-toolbox.com/categories/pagination | akudha wrote: | Thank you for the detailed comment and for the ruby- | toolbox link. | | All good ideas. Though keeping the reviews up-to-date | might become a full time job in itself, as software | changes often. I use a service called clickup, they add | features constantly and quickly. | | How does ruby toolbox do the categories? All other data | they show can be automated, but I wonder how they do | categorization. They probably use the topics feature from | github, I still think it is hard to automate it fully. | | Edit: Ah, never mind. Found this | https://github.com/rubytoolbox/catalog ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-05-01 23:00 UTC)