Related
I was amazed to read the policies of the next gen windows phone marketplace.
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows_...spx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Especially the line:
"No limit to the number of paid apps submitted 5 free apps per registration, $19.99 each after that" .
And seeing that the only way to officially install apps on your wp7 phone is thru the marketplace, it will actually cost developpers money to provide them for free.
I assume microsoft really wants that 30% they get on paid apps. All i can say that this will discourage developers to create free apps and will encourage hackers to "jail break" wp7.
five apps per reg ... cmon only companies like resco or spb have more apps than that running at the same time ....
whats worse is this one :
Code:
Annual registration fee of $99
ull need to hand the suckers $100 for posting ONE free app
I suppose that'll keep only the serious developers in; hence improving overall apps quality. But seriously, the $99 annual fee is uncalled for.
An inclusion of an incentive of a waiver of this fee for achieving a sales target would be more effective for smaller players, and probably benefit Microsoft at the same time.
Probably to keep a lid on the number of free, junk apps. Makes the stores pretty hard to browse.
I wonder if an application with a 100% unlimited full trial mode counts as a "free" or a "paid" app. That would just be a good way to post donation-based apps...
I don't think that the 5 free app limit includes ad-supported apps.
vangrieg said:
I wonder if an application with a 100% unlimited full trial mode counts as a "free" or a "paid" app. That would just be a good way to post donation-based apps...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All apps will have a trail mode already built in and won't be considered a free app.
you can see the Android App Market. All free apps.
Kloc said:
All apps will have a trail mode already built in and won't be considered a free app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trial mode is optional. But anyway, here you go - if you have a hundred apps you want to distribute for free all you need to do is set up an optional price.
I'd imagine there'll be a (time?) limit to the trails.
It depends on the developer, MS don't dictate how and when the trial should expire or how it would limit functionality. So the point is - you can make an application that is fully functional in trial mode and doesn't have a time limit, yet has a price, which becomes optional. Kind of like a donation.
Good job vangrieg . Of course just to make sure they don't kill your app I would add something stupid that only the paid app gets. And/or you could just say that you'll give premium support to paid users.
Also, the beta program will almost certainly morph into an enterprise delivery program. The beta is timebombed but they haven't said how long that will be or how many users you can give the beta to.
greed
All this says is greed having all the apps only from one marketplace. The quality wont be better because your forced into buying from one store. Windows Phone7 will be hacked the moment it comes out.
zarpy said:
All this says is greed having all the apps only from one marketplace. The quality wont be better because your forced into buying from one store. Windows Phone7 will be hacked the moment it comes out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They $99 a year maybe greed but the centralized app store is not. The average user doesn't want to have to look on the internet at multiple sites to find an app and hell most of them probably don't know you can do that. By having a centralized store you make it easier for the consumer to find what they need and by doing that you make it easier for the developers applications to be found as well. It's a win win without the application fee but for people like me with dreamspark I won't have to worrie about that
The $99 also keeps people from submitting crap apps and clogging up the works. I think it's as much about that as it is about the money. MS will be making most of it's money off their 30% cut and that's why they're only allowing 5 free apps.
enadiz said:
I suppose that'll keep only the serious developers in; hence improving overall apps quality. But seriously, the $99 annual fee is uncalled for.
An inclusion of an incentive of a waiver of this fee for achieving a sales target would be more effective for smaller players, and probably benefit Microsoft at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because the app costs money doesn't mean it will be anything but a quick and easy attempt to take your money. Many of the best apps are free because the developers actually care about what the community wants.
Many websites are free and provide mobile apps for better access. I don't think they will bother if they have to pay.
best games are free
The best games made are free like xtracts and IBCM. Alot of paid games are crappy only a few good ones like assasins creed 3D,prince of persia,marbelz blast,and tetris.
The inability to develop free apps is what will drive me away from Windows Mobile over to Android. And it'll be a move I won't be happy to make.
This isn't really about free or paid, it's about how MS are making money.
The whole Marketplace system is so Microsoft can make money, and with paid applications they take 30%, so make a profit. With free applications, they still have to certify them, process them, and host them, but they make no money on that, so they have to cover costs.
Microsoft have said that advertising etc is fine within free apps, so you can still make money out of free applications should you desire it.
Yes, and also you can still submit five free applications, which is more than an average developer has.
Road sms (free samsung app from app store), is being charged for in android market by "rayman50".
http://www.appbrain.com/app/road-sms/kr.touchsoft.samsung.roadSms
I hate when people do **** like that, charge for apps that are meant to be free. I would like to ask him to stop distributing it, but I can't see any contact details.
Here's an idea: The app was created by rayman50, who reached an agreement with Samsung that allowed them to distribute the app for SGS. He can still sell it if he wants to.
Just like Asphalt 5 - created and sold by Gameloft, but Samsung give it for free to SGS users
Rawat said:
Here's an idea: The app was created by rayman50, who reached an agreement with Samsung that allowed them to distribute the app for SGS. He can still sell it if he wants to.
Just like Asphalt 5 - created and sold by Gameloft, but Samsung give it for free to SGS users
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If he built it let him sell it.
Rawat said:
Here's an idea: The app was created by rayman50, who reached an agreement with Samsung that allowed them to distribute the app for SGS. He can still sell it if he wants to.
Just like Asphalt 5 - created and sold by Gameloft, but Samsung give it for free to SGS users
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, thats a possibility sure, and if true I'd completely apologize.
However, it seems pretty unlikely when you look at all the other apps he's distributing on the market, some of which I am 100% sure are not developed by him.
Gallery3D (made by cooliris iirc)
LG Home (LG)
LG Memo Widget (LG)
LG Calendar (LG)
Call Mum (HTC)
He hasn't even changed the internal name of the package kr.touchsoft.samsung.roadSms. If you consider asphalt, the package has "gameloft" the author in it. This has "touchsoft" in it so I'm inclined to believe it's developed by touchsoft http://www.touchsoft.com.au/TouchSoft/Home.html
So most of the apps he distributes are just dumped from various devices, and he wouldn't have permission to distribute. I think that's pretty shady, but doesn't really bother me as long as they're free (as they're meant to be, and can be acquired on xda/other sites anyway).
But when you charge for a free app made by someone else, that is immoral and against the spirit of the android community
Imagine if you paid for the app, and then realized that you weren't even paying the real author, and that it is freely distributed (and legally) elsewhere.
EDIT: I have emailed him to peacefully ask him to stop charging. I'm not trying to be anal here, I just hate to see this kind of thing happening.
Hmm.. If he is doing something dodgy then I suggest you send a complaint to Google then Samsung. They have lawyers on leshes ready for blood
No I wouldn't go that far, it's not my problem really, I just don't want people in the community to get scammed. So I've asked him to do stop charging in the email.
oswade said:
No I wouldn't go that far, it's not my problem really, I just don't want people in the community to get scammed. So I've asked him to do stop charging in the email.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If he's scamming people then he has no morals and wont care for your email...
He is a cheat. Just report him. After n number of reports, they will ban the guy.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
what i wanna know is he actaully getting paid $1.23 for every one of them sold? it says there are 100-500 downloads... so he made at least $123 doing this???!!!
If so, where do i sign up!
Well it says he originally released it to the market for free, so how many of those downloads are paid i don't know... But it's likely some of them were eh..
If that's the case, flag it in the market. I just did.
Rawat said:
If that's the case, flag it in the market. I just did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did too. Explained that it was available from Samsung for free.
I understand that they don't allow them in ROM's and to be discussed on XDA. My question is in regards to moderators deleting threads but seem to have no issue with people asking about free Wifi tethering.
Technically you're supposed to pay Sprint for that feature but a lot of ROM's include the Wifi Tether app for free. I just don't understand how some things are swept under a rug and other things are accepted.
Who knows what the answer to this is brother. But it for Damn sure seems like you are still stuck on The Ultimate Droid thread being deleted. I read that whole thread and you were basically flaming on XDA for making people adhere to the rules. Take the Ultimate Droid rants elsewhere because we all know when you talk about closing a thread in this post its in regard to that Rom thread being closed. And I would say if people were trying to profit off of posting tethering stuff like the dev of the ultimate Droid was then that would be morally and legally wrong. Stop crying.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I'm just looking for an answer to a question. You didn't even remotely touch on the topic at hand. I just want to know what people think about being able to tether for free and how many ROM's on this website have it included. If you visited this website as much as I do you'd understand why I'm bringing this up.
Actually, I do on a daily basis hence the xda app on my phone . And I did touch on it, no one is trying to profit off of tether, its kind of the same as downloading music.. the people who get sued and stuff by the riaa are those who try to profit from the music they didn't buy. Either way its not morally one hundred percent okay but its not like were killing anyone.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
The wifi tether app is free, so it can be included. Swype ask xda to remove it, even though it was free, so it had to be removed. Fancy widget was removed because it was a direct ripoff of a HTC program. Someones pay wallpaper was removed because it is warez. If sprint decided to go after the author of wifi tether, I'm sure XDA would force its removal.
bwcorvus said:
The wifi tether app is free, so it can be included. Swype ask xda to remove it, even though it was free, so it had to be removed. Fancy widget was removed because it was a direct ripoff of a HTC program. Someones pay wallpaper was removed because it is warez. If sprint decided to go after the author of wifi tether, I'm sure XDA would force its removal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, you know Sprint has employees who check xda for legal stuff. I'm sure if they had a problem with this they would have done something by now. Especially as many updates as we have had by now Sprint could block tether apps besides their own if they really cared. Just as they patch root exploits.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
gqstatus0685 said:
I understand that they don't allow them in ROM's and to be discussed on XDA. My question is in regards to moderators deleting threads but seem to have no issue with people asking about free Wifi tethering.
Technically you're supposed to pay Sprint for that feature but a lot of ROM's include the Wifi Tether app for free. I just don't understand how some things are swept under a rug and other things are accepted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all, I think the main aim of the moderators/site owners is to maintain the popularity and relevance of this site. I am sure Sprint is aware of the Wifi Tether App in all the ROMS given the numerous sprint employees that post here regularly. If it bothered Sprint the site would hear about it and probably make a decision at that point. I doubt Sprint cares given the free publicity their devices get here.
Now if the WiFi tether app itself was being sold for profit and was included for free(warez) then I am sure the developers would mind which several of them probably have when their apps were included in ROMS.
You seem to expect the moderators to spend their time analyzing every single thread and deliver some kind of justice. That is not going to happen, their aim is to keep the site trouble-free, popular and relevant. Even if it means to err on the side of caution and sideline one/two developers who have been known to create issues.
If I felt as strongly as you do about the issue I would put my money where my mouth is and delete my account on this site and join somewhere I felt more comfortable. Would save me a lot of aggravation.
Cheers !
plus wireless tether has been around a little long than sprints evo hotspot has it may not have been for this device but it was around
Yellowcard8992 said:
Who knows what the answer to this is brother. But it for Damn sure seems like you are still stuck on The Ultimate Droid thread being deleted. I read that whole thread and you were basically flaming on XDA for making people adhere to the rules. Take the Ultimate Droid rants elsewhere because we all know when you talk about closing a thread in this post its in regard to that Rom thread being closed. And I would say if people were trying to profit off of posting tethering stuff like the dev of the ultimate Droid was then that would be morally and legally wrong. Stop crying.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, Yellowcard this is the same guy on the other thread. I also was following that thread and I don't think it was cool that he was flaming on xda.
Why can't we all, just get along!?
Arm0 said:
Why can't we all, just get along!?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your signature...is absolutely epic.
Is this a joke.. You guys are actually trying to explain the differences ?? OMG!!!
THERE IS NONE!!
ONE LIES AND THE OTHER SWEARS TO IT!!!
The OP is right... It makes NO sense what so ever and there is no possible way you could argue that.
Lets see if I can make it easier to understand. If I kill someone, I go to jail...this is warez, its illegal no matter how you slice it. Now if I beat my wife (i do not, and do not support it, just an example) and she refuses to press charges, I do not go to jail...this is wifi tether, its only illegal if someone cares. Hope this had made it easier to understand.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
gqstatus0685 said:
I understand that they don't allow them in ROM's and to be discussed on XDA. My question is in regards to moderators deleting threads but seem to have no issue with people asking about free Wifi tethering.
Technically you're supposed to pay Sprint for that feature but a lot of ROM's include the Wifi Tether app for free. I just don't understand how some things are swept under a rug and other things are accepted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
The sprint hotspot free ove a 30 a month charge from sprint?
How big is that compared to a one dollar or two app???
Clueless...
Pretty much that's what it is. The only difference is that one person "steals" and people don't get their props/recognition. I guess it's OK to steal and get out of paying for a feature while racking up bandwidth. People say I'm complaining about this and that but when it comes down to it they look stupid because they are also doing shady **** too.
My 2 cents for what its worth.
WiFi tethering is a functionality built into froyo. In order to get it working, the feature is either hacked to remove Sprint authentication, or you can download another app that allows the same functionality. You'll also note that "sprint WiFi tethering" is not available as a standalone app from the market - again, its already built into the software of the phone. This is no different than the hack that allowed wireless n for WiFi, before it was available, or to set your phone to pick up Verizon towers for better coverage. The phone already supported that functionality, it just took some hacks to get it working.
The other items mentioned as warez are not inherently built into the phones. Devs (most of them ordinary guys like us), have an idea for a great app, work on them for days/weeks/months and may decide to release them for a fee when complete. Xda is a developers forum, with stress on developers. It only stands to reason that they would take a hard line when people give away those paid apps for free.
And to the op, if you were really interested in getting answers to your questions, you could have easily sent a pm to a mod. By starting this thread, you obviously just wanted to stir the pot some more. It's been said before, there are other sites that don't care about the all the work devs put into their apps, where you can get all the free apps you want without paying for them. Xda is simply not that kind of forum.
Sent from my blah blah blah blah
Personally I realize that I am a guest. So not to be imposing I limit my pov.
You are not alone in your POV.
Google > Dear XDA: please do not allow
http://tinyurl.com/237lx5d
gqstatus0685 said:
I understand that they don't allow them in ROM's and to be discussed on XDA. My question is in regards to moderators deleting threads but seem to have no issue with people asking about free Wifi tethering.
Technically you're supposed to pay Sprint for that feature but a lot of ROM's include the Wifi Tether app for free. I just don't understand how some things are swept under a rug and other things are accepted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
technically the wifi tether is built into android naturally, carriers lock that down to add on a cost to unlimited data that your already paying for
This is an issue, do to if Im already paying for unlimited data, what clarifies it to what kind of data it has to be. Is the internet not the internet, these kind of add-on fees are what telco's your trying to push on to wire lines ( unsuccessful so far, i for get the name of the bill). Bt the mobile is a very grey area right now, this is also why ATT for one has a tiered system now
gqstatus0685 said:
I'm just looking for an answer to a question. You didn't even remotely touch on the topic at hand. I just want to know what people think about being able to tether for free and how many ROM's on this website have it included. If you visited this website as much as I do you'd understand why I'm bringing this up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can tether for free???
Someone needs to define software and hardware to the OP, because if we use his definitions, roms and rooting methods are also warez.
http://wmpoweruser.com/chevronwp7-shuts-down-handsets-to-be-re-locked-in-120-days/
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1598050
What the hell man, this is just crazy what is Microsoft thinking? This will only drive more people away from the platform and will keep phone sales at the rate they are now or lower. Who in the world wants to pay $99 a year just to be able to customize a phone? I personally do currently pay the $99 but will stop soon this is just a death sentence for Windows phone, really someone over at MS gets fired over this.
do you realize that most people would not care about these stuff, and we only nerds that like to hack our phones will matter. Maybe microsoft has something better in store? possibly in apollo we will get sideloading capabilities and other power user functions.
lovenokia said:
do you realize that most people would not care about these stuff, and we only nerds that like to hack our phones will matter. Maybe microsoft has something better in store? possibly in apollo we will get sideloading capabilities and other power user functions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I sure hope you are right my friend. Maybe Apollo won't have all this Apple style locked down crap.
what it means, in practice?
In practice, what this means for me?
I've a Samsung WP unlocked by Chevron. So, I've installed Nokia Drive, Nokia Maps... this means that after the 120 days, theses apps won't work in my phone?
So basically MS and the Chevron team just ripped off everyone that went and bought a token? I thought the token was forever, was there ever any metntion that it would expire in the future? if not this sounds like a scam, well for those who paid. I see a law suit.
sinister1 said:
What the hell man, this is just crazy what is Microsoft thinking? This will only drive more people away from the platform and will keep phone sales at the rate they are now or lower. Who in the world wants to pay $99 a year just to be able to customize a phone? I personally do currently pay the $99 but will stop soon this is just a death sentence for Windows phone, really someone over at MS gets fired over this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
seen the latest articles about lumia sales lately? I'll assume not since you insisted on posting this.
Side loaded apps
Like most people, I just want to know if apps already side loaded will continue to work after the tokens are revoked? If they do work, it may be possible to keep it unlocked through a Registry Editor, Root Tools etc.
sinister1 said:
So basically MS and the Chevron team just ripped off everyone that went and bought a token? I thought the token was forever, was there ever any metntion that it would expire in the future? if not this sounds like a scam, well for those who paid. I see a law suit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see any law suits as Microsoft as offered to refund $99 and swap Chevron unlock for App Hub Developer unlock.
However, interesting thing would be how many $9 unlocks are from non-supported countries!?
Surely out of 10,000 there are at least 100 people who paid $9 and don't have access to App Hub - those can go for a law suit unless Microsoft is going to make up for it in any other fashion in a separate announcement.
sinister1 said:
So basically MS and the Chevron team just ripped off everyone that went and bought a token? I thought the token was forever, was there ever any metntion that it would expire in the future? if not this sounds like a scam, well for those who paid. I see a law suit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I'm pissed that I was only renting the unlocker....this was definitely a hose job....these dudes are re-locking already paid for phones.
Side-loaded apps will probably cease to work, just as they do if you were to relock your device now.
quicoli said:
In practice, what this means for me?
I've a Samsung WP unlocked by Chevron. So, I've installed Nokia Drive, Nokia Maps... this means that after the 120 days, theses apps won't work in my phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, probably lol.
Pathetic.
MSFT is giving away free APP HUB accounts for these users. Is no one else reading it?
Sent from my TITAN X310e using Board Express
....the app hub is yearly, so we got a year long account for $9...what was I complaining about
/sarcasm.
quicoli said:
In practice, what this means for me?
I've a Samsung WP unlocked by Chevron. So, I've installed Nokia Drive, Nokia Maps... this means that after the 120 days, theses apps won't work in my phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're one of the people who make me disgusted at this community. Nokia apps (and other OEM apps) are device specific. You need to buy those devices to get those apps, as those apps on other devices is called stealing. Yet, this entire community insists they are entitled to things they have never paid for... Most of you don't want these accounts to "develop" or contribute, you want these accounts to sideload apps you have no way of paying for/getting.
FiyaFleye said:
You're one of the people who make me disgusted at this community. Nokia apps (and other OEM apps) are device specific. You need to buy those devices to get those apps, as those apps on other devices is called stealing. Yet, this entire community insists they are entitled to things they have never paid for... Most of you don't want these accounts to "develop" or contribute, you want these accounts to sideload apps you have no way of paying for/getting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point! Thanks!! Hence $9 for whatever time it was unlocked for + a year of sideloading stuff (not developing anything) - more than enough!
I don't mind the side loading. I mind the people coming in here to ***** about not having any way to load stolen software into their phone... Its just pathetic. I would understand if you're developing your ass off, but you're stealing... C'mon...
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
i did the chevron unlock than used the interlop unlock will i be affected ?
FiyaFleye said:
You're one of the people who make me disgusted at this community. Nokia apps (and other OEM apps) are device specific. You need to buy those devices to get those apps, as those apps on other devices is called stealing. Yet, this entire community insists they are entitled to things they have never paid for... Most of you don't want these accounts to "develop" or contribute, you want these accounts to sideload apps you have no way of paying for/getting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could be wrong, but didn't Nokia release these apps in the earlier versions for other non-Nokia devices? Of course (now) Nokia is claiming that their updated apps will be only for Nokia devices. Not condoning piracy here, but I don't see a problem with side loading device specific apps on other Windows Phones. These apps are free to the the users anyway right? -Well most of them... As we all know, each manufacturer has its own collection of apps for their devices. -And we can all agree there are apps that are better than others in each manufacturer app store. If the apps are free, I find it a little ridiculous to say that Windows Phone users would have to go and buy a certain WP just to be able to use a device for a specific free app on their phone. -Now if each manufacturer released their apps to EVERY WP device with the apps being free for that specific device and had a paid version for non-specific devices, my argument would be irrelevant here. -But we know this is not the case.
Anyway, yes I do agree somewhat that some users want their phones dev unlocked just to sideload apps that they themselves didn't develop or buy, but I have to say that I believe some/most members here on XDA contribute to some form or fashion to the development/modding/hacking phone world. I myself became a Windows Mobile/Phone developer because I was amazed at what I could do with my phone when I first started getting into flashing roms for Windows Mobile. I kept on coming back to this forum to see what I could do next with my phone. I finally realized that I couldn't wait for the next thing to come out for my phone, so I started learning the development side of the phone. As the years kept rolling on, I became very familiar with the development process and even made quite a bit of money on my apps. -So the point is, calling people out on wanting the dev unlocks just to sideload restricted apps on their phones is sort of unfair. You and I do not know the motives of the other users on this forum.
It looks like google have removed adblock plus adaway and such from the market, so backup your APK's if you want to carry on using those apps.
We could always ditch google play...
Can't post links, but anyone who wants site or direct download links, please PM me.
It's understandable that they are doing this. After all they give out Android and the sources for FREE. Everyone knows Google earns most if its revenue from adds and it isn't unreasonable to ask users for support in the form of accepting adds in free apps.
If you want to get rid of adds just show some support to devs and get payed versions of apps you use. If you want to support warez even by pm's you can do that elsewhere.
akselic said:
It's understandable that they are doing this. After all they give out Android and the sources for FREE. Everyone knows Google earns most if its revenue from adds and it isn't unreasonable to ask users for support in the form of accepting adds in free apps.
If you want to get rid of adds just show some support to devs and get payed versions of apps you use. If you want to support warez even by pm's you can do that elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about?! :laugh: What warez?!
Those are free apps, just being kicked out from google play, doesn't make them wares.
If you bother, you could find them yourself, just use google.
BTW, I am unable to donate to devs cause of my country's policies, no matter how willing I am. So, use your brain a little before making offensive comments.
Plus the likes of adaway stops ads on websites as well which is very useful.
Sent from my HTC ONE X
Drefsab said:
It looks like google have removed adblock plus adaway and such from the market, so backup your APK's if you want to carry on using those apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The answer is at https://f-droid.org/
Incidentally they so seem to have pulled all 3rd party store apps.
I see no ethical issues with installing an ad blocking app. On my PCs I have gone even further and installed Ghostery which blocks all sort of tracking activities.
We do need to be aware that adware helps devs provide stuff for free, and the good ones give you the option of paying a little to remove the ads.
do you work for Google or something?
since when is blocking ads considered warez?
Is dvr warez for you too? I don't watch ads on TV either.
I have adblock on my pc, oh my what a hacker I am...
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Another alternative to the ad blocker apps is to change your hosts file in the system/etc folder..
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
http://db.tt/WI1GQXwJ APK for adaway incase you aren't able to get it.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
akselic said:
It's understandable that they are doing this. After all they give out Android and the sources for FREE. Everyone knows Google earns most if its revenue from adds and it isn't unreasonable to ask users for support in the form of accepting adds in free apps.
If you want to get rid of adds just show some support to devs and get payed versions of apps you use. If you want to support warez even by pm's you can do that elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, you have a point.
People work hard, and then they give their work for free, so they give ads, for revenue, and then you find loopholes in that too?
This is just my opinion, don't mean to start an argument.
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
theDroidfanatic said:
Actually, you have a point.
People work hard, and then they give their work for free, so they give ads, for revenue, and then you find loopholes in that too?
This is just my opinion, don't mean to start an argument.
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
playstation network is free, but I paid for the console, if ps3 made adds all over the screen so you couldn't play or view it, I'm sure that they would lose customers. Google makes enough money from sales of their phones, which have the latest android first, and make alot of money with other things that they produce. There is no need for them to mess up an app that a dev put out there for free bc of greed. just sayin
toolhas4degrees said:
playstation network is free, but I paid for the console, if ps3 made adds all over the screen so you couldn't play or view it, I'm sure that they would lose customers. Google makes enough money from sales of their phones, which have the latest android first, and make alot of money with other things that they produce. There is no need for them to mess up an app that a dev put out there for free bc of greed. just sayin
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but this isn't Google we're talking about, it is the Devs.
The Devs add the ads to their apps, for their income, not Google's
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
theDroidfanatic said:
Yes, but this isn't Google we're talking about, it is the Devs.
The Devs add the ads to their apps, for their income, not Google's
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and if a dev needs income they should make it a paid app / adds are the devils work
toolhas4degrees said:
and if a dev needs income they should make it a paid app / adds are the devils work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol, you don't get it do you?
They want to give people, who can't buy apps, access to them.
Anyways, this is their wish, and if you block ads, that is wrong, don't want ads? Don't use their apps, simple as that.
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
let's not pretend here this is a thing about legality or not.
it's in my right to block ads if I want to.
it's also a developer's choice to make his app free and ad supported. By blocking ads I'm not doing anything illegal.
Google removing ad blockers is simply a move to increase profit. it's a choice they are entitled to as a business but not something I have to tolerate as an end user, and i don't.
my point is, if you want to make your app ad supported you are just gonna have to accept the fact that some users just don't like ads.
this does limit profits for the developer's I guess but as an end user I'm not doing anything wrong.
I like to support developers, when it's due. Watching ads, wasting bandwidth and battery is not one of the acceptable means though .
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
drivenby said:
let's not pretend here this is a thing about legality or not.
it's in my right to block ads if I want to.
it's also a developer's choice to make his app free and ad supported. By blocking ads I'm not doing anything illegal.
Google removing ad blockers is simply a move to increase profit. it's a choice they are entitled to as a business but not something I have to tolerate as an end user, and i don't.
my point is, if you want to make your app ad supported you are just gonna have to accept the fact that some users just don't like ads.
this does limit profits for the developer's I guess but as an end user I'm not doing anything wrong.
I like to support developers, when it's due. Watching ads, wasting bandwidth and battery is not one of the acceptable means though .
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is not true.
You want to support developers? You clearly aren't if you do this, also, they give you the app for FREE, and give ads. Don't like the ads? Either: 1) But the Full version 2) Don't use the app
And I really don't get one thing nowadays, there is something known as ethics? General morals? Right and wrong?
It may not be illegal to block ads, but you're stopping the developers' incomes, those developers who give you their work for free, in exchange for tiny ads. And then you block those ads, that is wrong, my friend.
And waste bandwidth? You can't be serious How much bandwidth can a repetitive ad take? Less than half an MB a day? I'm sure that effects no one, especially if we are able to purchase a One X, and a computer.
Bottom line, Devs do hard work, and its wrong, if not illegal, to block ads.
Take this, for example. In many US states, a bit of Marijuana is legal, right?
But, If your hypothetical son, above the age of 18, smoked Marijuana, would you like it? No. Its not illegal, but its wrong, no? I know smoking pot is nothing near blocking ads, but its just to prove, that if something isn't illegal, it can still be wrong, which, I believe, blocking ads is.
And why do I support this? Because I'm a developer too, if not an app developer, a ROM developer. And its frikkin hard work. Working for hours, sitting on your butt with a laptop on your legs, continuously debugging, trying different things, making it perfect, then releasing it, and If people block ads? For me, it would be like if everyone used my ROM, but no one thanked me, or complimented it.
So, just saying, its wrong
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.
@theDroidfanatic
Sooo... I can't pay apps from my country... And I don't want ads on my phone... What should I do, any idea?
there is nothing morally wrong about blocking ads tdf
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
donmarkoni said:
@theDroidfanatic
Sooo... I can't pay apps from my country... And I don't want ads on my phone... What should I do, any idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easiest way is to use google to search for ad blockers. That's all...
donmarkoni said:
@theDroidfanatic
Sooo... I can't pay apps from my country... And I don't want ads on my phone... What should I do, any idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Live with the ads
We can't always get what we want, and you can use the Amazon AppStore, it's easy to make a US account there, many tutorials on Google, I buy must of my apps from there
drivenby said:
there is nothing morally wrong about blocking ads tdf
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to me, there is, cuz it's their income you're blocking, but everyone's entitled to his own opinion
Sent from my One X running Slim Bean.