04
Jul
AmazonAppstoreLogo

You might have heard of the fun physics/Rube Goldberg machine game Apparatus. It's actually pretty popular, and quite well-loved - over 800 reviews on the Android Market putting it at an average score of 4.5. For a game, especially, that's a very difficult feat to accomplish. It goes without saying then, that the developer of Apparatus is very concerned with customer feedback and providing support for his application.

Recently, he decided to distribute Apparatus through the Amazon Appstore. Today, he decided to remove it.

Initially, Apparatus was rejected by the Appstore for an extremely minor (even insignificant) mis-step: it used HTTP rather than HTTPS for a cookie when the app was accessing the community forums. This was after waiting 2 weeks for the review process to complete. Their fix wasn't exactly consequence-free.

So we added literally 1 character (an 's') to the code and resubmitted. This also meant our tired server would from this point and on have to struggle with SSL-encrypted binary data for every single level that was downloaded or published by a user.

Subsequent updates to the app were also slow to be reviewed. It was another week before the app was approved. When the app was finally published in the store, the developer noted Apparatus was nowhere to be found in the "New Releases" section of the Appstore, which basically just listed popular titles.

Filter Fail / Communication Breakdown

The developer of Apparatus really makes a good case for Amazon having hurt, rather than helped, his efforts to popularize his product. The developer was approached by Amazon to participate in the "Free App of the Day" promotion and to appear in the 'hand-picked' "Popular Games" list of the Appstore. He accepted this offer - but little did he know of the repercussions that decision would have.

Unfortunately, Amazon didn't enforce device filters during the Free App of the Day campaign (for whatever reason), resulting in the game being downloaded by large numbers of users whose phones couldn't even run the application. This concern is obviously astronomically higher when it comes to games, which have much stricter device compatibility requirements. This resulted in the game getting scores of 1-star reviews from owners who spent time downloading it only to be thwarted by a force-close due to device incompatibility.  Over 180,000 users downloaded Apparatus during the promotional period.

The developer couldn't even respond to the complaints of customers - because he's from Sweden. No, I'm not talking about a language barrier, I'm talking about the Appstore's requirement that you purchase the app to comment on its page. This, apparently, includes the developer. Not that this makes any sense and is clearly just a poorly thought-out implementation of the commenting system. But, only US consumers can buy apps on the Amazon Appstore - leaving foreign developers without a voice.

There's also the fact that Amazon makes reporting bugs and contacting the developer a non-possibility in the Amazon Appstore, unless the developer explicitly includes that information in the app description. This means fewer bug reports, less feedback, and more angry customers.

To top it all off, the developer wasn't able to refund any purchases of his app. Why? Because the Amazon Appstore has no refund mechanism. But still, even after this, the game was selling.

The Last Straw

Then, the inevitable happened - a crazy commenter. Because the app has a built-in community feature for player discussions, it requires internet access permissions. Someone failed to understand that.

I love physics game and this one looks like it has a lot of potential, but it has a severe coding flaw. For some reason before the game will even start it has to connect to some ad server. When I first tried to play the game it would always just sit at a black screen and do nothing. Then the fact I use Adfree occurred to me so I disabled that and then it worked fine. So, then I tried putting my phone in Airplane mode and once again it would not start. So, basically this game is completely unplayable unless it is able to contact some ad server which requires that you always have an internet connection to play it and there is no way to play it in an area with bad signal or on an airplane. And, not to mention that it is tracking you every time you do play it. Fail.

That comment became the "Most Helpful" comment on the game's page. It's clearly wrong, and written by somebody with nothing better to do than critique app permissions without any legitimate basis for his assertions whatsoever. When the developer contacted Amazon, wanting to respond to this review, he received no help. In fact, after the "Free App Of The Day" campaign, Amazon Appstore support was all but unavailable to Bithack.

Sales of the application, in the words of the developer, were hit hard. Apparatus made a precipitous drop from the peak of its popularity on the Appstore, when it occupied the #3 position on Amazon's top apps, into obscurity.

Oh, and to add insult to injury, Amazon suddenly decided to lower the price of Apparatus without any consent or authorization from Bithack, down to 25% of the original price (it was selling at half price, previously).

So, it's clear the Appstore has some issues to work out, and Amazon has some answering to do in regards to its customer service. We've contacted Amazon and are awaiting comment on all of this. We're as eager to hear what they have to say as the folks over at Bithack.

Bithack

David Ruddock
David's phone is an HTC One. He is an avid writer, and enjoys playing devil's advocate in editorials, imparting a legal perspective on tech news, and reviewing the latest phones and gadgets. He also doesn't usually write such boring sentences.

  • http://twitter.com/Telanis_ Telanis

    Amazon flips capriciously between being awesome and evil. Getting kind of sick of it -- either be awesome all the time so everyone is happy, or stop being awesome some of the time so that I can reject your evil crap without regrets.

  • geoff

    a cluster F of a situation if there ever was one

  • PacoBell

    Wow. This article succinctly encapsulates every frustration I've every felt with the Amazon Appstore, especially the disconnect between the users and the developers. Amazon, I hope you're paying attention right now because your only selling point over Android Market right now is giving paid apps away for free and you can't even seem to get that right!

    • David Ruddock

      I sent them a rather direct e-mail asking for comment on this. I really hope we hear back, because what we're hearing from Bithack is quite discouraging.

      I'd like to see Amazon really tackle these issues, too.

  • ERIFNOMI

    Wow. I feel kinda bad for getting this when it was the free app of the day. I don't really play games on my phone but if I did, or if I ever actually play this game, I'll be sure to buy it from the market to support the dev.

  • Kevin Caridad

    thats why i buy from the market place! f amazon although i do get the free apps if you want updates on the fly buy from the android market! just like i bought this game!

  • Mgamerz

    I have noticed that the Amazon Appstore's only enticing feature is the free app of the day.
    The rest sucks - I hate sideloading (the market is sooo much better... looks professional... this is just a personal thing though), its too easy to buy apps still (accidental double taps aren't too hard to do on a capacitive screen - although its better than they used to have) - and all these one star reviews because the app doesn't work.
    not to mention some of the apps are TERRIBLE.

  • Adam

    They do need to get their shit together with the reviews. It seems like every time there is a free app of the day there are hordes of paranoid morons cluttering it with complaints about permissions or "don't support this developer because blah blah blah". Most of the reviews seem to come from people who didn't even try it out.

  • Kevin Caridad

    Everyone should thumbs down the guys review because just as the article said "It's clearly wrong, and written by some paranoid basement-dweller"

  • M

    I feel for the Apparatus developer on the Free App of the Day debacle. The lack of a device filter truly is a disaster; hopefully this is something that Amazon will rectify. I'm surprised that this hasn't been noticed before, though.

    It is incorrect that developers can't comment on their apps though. All you need is an Amazon.com account from which you have purchased _anything_ (you are not limited to apps), and you are able to comment.

    Generally speaking, I find the Amazon market's comment system superior to the Android Market. Here - at least - the developer can comment on the review. It is unfortunate, though, that it's not easier for users to get in touch with the developer.

    The Amazon Appstore crew do have some things to learn yet - not least that they do not know the market of an app as well as the developer of said app does.

    Hopefully they'll learn eventually. An app store that offered developers the same kind of freedom as the Android Market, combined with the quality control (to weed out spam apps) and the marketing potential of the Amazon app store would have real potential.

  • Álmos

    In the mean time Google is busy developing the next awesome version of the real deal, the Android Market. Judging by the sneak peak we got at IO, it will be really cool. The Market has it's problems no doubt, but they are not nearly as severe as these.

  • David

    While there are clearly some legitimate issues stated in the article above, Amazon's ability to charge what they like for the app is detailed in the developer documents and also received a significant amount of press when their store launched.

    The developer documents at https://developer.amazon.com/settings/docswithdevagreement.html state the following under basic terms in section 2:

    "a. Royalty. For each sale of an App, we will pay you a royalty (“Royalty”) equal to the greater of (i) 70% of the purchase price or (ii) 20% of the List Price (defined in and subject to section 5i) as of the purchase date. No Royalty is payable for Apps with a List Price of $0.00. Such purchase price excludes taxes and any separately stated fees or charges. A Royalty is due only for sales for which we have received final payment from or on behalf of an end user. If an App is purchased using a credit card or bank account deduction mechanism, final payment will be deemed to have occurred when the applicable credit card company or bank has fully settled the payment for the applicable purchase."

    The issue where the 'basement dweller' was unable to launch the game does sound like a problem. Community features are great, but they shouldn't interrupt the game. What if you're playing without an internet connection?

  • Somebody

    Not everyone concerned about permissions is some paranoid basement dweller with a tin foil hat.

    There are malicious apps out there that rely on the ignorance of users to take their information for nefarious purposes. More personally, I don't want to give away my information for some menial game or app plus visual ads annoy me. I do understand the desire to make money off of your hard work. I like apps that have lite (free + ads) and pro (paid without ads) versions.

    Both developers and markets should be more transparent when dealing with apps. No list of permissions is listed on the Amazon Market until you try to install the app, after purchase. I find this to be a major flaw.

    There are plenty of paranoid trolls on the internet but get off your high horse and see some other perspectives, Adam.

    • Anon

      Amazon checks their apps for 'malicious' code like Apple so it's very unlikely anything on there is malicious.

      Lighten up though, you seem to have taken the comment a bit personally.

      • Somebody

        However unlikely it's still possible. A quick sensibility check is a good way to avoid trouble in many situations.

        Preachers on the internet for whatever side can get tiresome. Too often many people fall into false dichotomy positions. Posts with information and no emotion can go overlooked. That said, no real animosity was intended.

        Enjoy the 4th of July (or the Monday if you don't have any holidays to celebrate).

        • Anon

          Very true. And that is fair enough.

          I hope you enjoyed yours as well.

  • Zigmar

    The sooner this Amazon appstore dies, the better. I don't see a point in try to fragment the app market for Android making live for users and developers infinitely more complex.

  • http://www.stealthcopter.com/blog Mat

    Completly agree. Although the android market currently has the exact same issues with regards stupid comments!

    • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

      The Market is indeed even worse with the discussion section, much worse, but the real problem here is that having this full-fledged comment/reply/discussion system, the developer of the app, i.e. the person with the most knowledge and notoriety with the app, can't even respond to his own app's comments.

      • M

        As I mentioned above, this is simply not true.

  • http://www.thatguyoverthere.com chris

    I must first echo sentiments that criticized the writer for the "basement dweller" comment. That was completely unnecessary and cheapens the impact of an otherwise informative article.

    Other than the Popcap games which I accepted for free after having paid for them on several other platforms, I really don't pay attention to the Amazon AppStore. I prefer the Market. It's there, it's easy, it works.

    I guess my main curiosity here is if the developer pulled his app from the AppStore, where do the people who acquired it from there go for support and/or updates?

    I suppose I'm specifically concerned about those who purchased the game (though it'd be nice to include the folks who got it during the promo day as well).

    • David

      I believe they're left high and dry, with the developer picking up the blame. Unfortunately this is a risk with any store.

      • Matt

        You can belive all you want, but it is not that hard to follow the source of this article and look things up.

        From Bithack.se
        "Did you buy the game from Amazon Appstore?
        If so, you must buy it from Android Market again. Email your Amazon receipt along with your new Google transaction ID and your Android Market transaction will be refunded.

        Email this info to amazonfail@bithack.se

        If you downloaded the game during the Free App of the Day campaign, you will unfortunately not be refunded if you purchase it on Android Market. We can not refund 180,000 transactions manually.

        Those of you who downloaded the game during the Free app of the day campaign, we're sorry to announce that we can not provide you with future updates. You'll have to purchase the game from Android Market."

  • GraveUypo

    i don't use amazon store because of this kind of thing. i'd rather pay a few bucks for apps on android market than support this crappy attempt of a store.

  • bobomb

    Screw Amazon. I never liked the idea of their app store (suck it apple), and the execution of it even less. I refuse to use it, I'd rather wait for apps/games to hit the official Market. I dig Amazon in some ways (telling the RIAA to shove it), but they suck in more ways than not.

    I'll stick with the official Market thanks.

  • http://www.reeladvice.net Reel Advice

    Sad to hear about how bad Amazon is when it comes to there appstore. I never had problems buying (well from their non-app store) so this is a surprise.

  • Mark

    Why call the user who came to a wrong conclusion crazy? One could argue that if the developer had properly documented the need for internet access in order to load the game the comment might never have been made or become a top review.

    Internet access permissions and needing internet access to load are two separate things.

    I haven't heard anything positive about the Amazon App Store from devs except for when their apps get selected for app of the day and Amazon pays them for it. Remember this is a beta of sorts for their upcoming phones and Kindle tablets. Hopefully the bugs will be worked out prior to their launch.

    • David Ruddock

      I return to the PC analogy. Is there a law out there requiring programs to tell you what parts of your hardware they're accessing? No, because it's expected that you, the user, have the intelligence to determine if an app is trustworthy or not, and make the call.

      People talk about app permissions like they're constitutional rights. They aren't. Do you honestly think a popular, well-reviewed developer would go harvesting your personal information? That's suicide for an application's revenue, not mention it has potentially penal consequences.

      If you're a permissions guru and have precise documentation indicating something bad is going on in an app, by all means, light 'em up. But if you're just some guy who decides "this app doesn't need this permission," I'm pretty sure 99% of the world would rather you actually take the next step and verify your suspicions instead of knee-jerk theorizing like a JFK conspiracy is going on.

    • D.J.

      ...You don't need to be connected to the Internet to launch the app or play a level. I downloaded the app when it was free and haven't touched it until I read this article (hadn't even launched it once). I put my Samsung Vibrant running Cyanogenmod 7.1 RC into Airplane mode and was able to launch it and play multiple levels without issues.

      Clearly this game does not require Internet access to play. The poster was mistaken, he likely had a device that was incompatible.

      I do agree with you though that every dev should list clearly in the app description what each permission is used for. With reports of malware in the Android market and no good way to defend against them (apps like Lookout are generally only useful once the malicous app has been discovered and the definitions updated) I can't blame people for being paranoid.

  • hams1000

    Normally I have a lot of respect for Android Police. But to instantly label someone concerned with an app connecting to the internet and their privacy is just a shitty thing to do. Shit writers like this are why blogs are just a bunch of ass hats playing journalist.

    • http://www.AndroidPolice.com Artem Russakovskii

      As per the app developer: "Apparatus will connect to the internet if you go into the community section of course, but that is up to you if you wish to do or not. And there are no ads in the community section either. This comment is filled with lies and paranoia."

      Sure, there is a possibility that there was indeed a bug somewhere that caused the game to behave that way, possibly even with Amazon's DRM, but the real point is there was no real way for the dev to respond to the comment and clear the situation up. Any random Joe who downloads the game from the U.S. can comment and spread FUD, but the app's own author can't.

      David may have been harsh with the "basement-dwelling paranoid" part, but combined with the above, such rash panicky reviews, when pushed to the top, can really hurt the dev, which is undoubtedly what happened in this case.

      I'm not saying people shouldn't be concerned with permissions, but I'm sick and tired of seeing 1-star reviews just because of a permission that doesn't immediately make 100% sense in your head (there is usually a very good reason for it, such as an ad server or scoreloop/openfeint/etc). A lot of reviewers are quick to sound the alarm without giving the dev the benefit of the doubt or doing any research (many times permissions are actually explained).

      Anyway, don't fixate on one part with David's wording and consider the real problem at hand here, which is the list of shortcomings of the Amazon Appstore.

    • David Ruddock

      Listen, I've taken plenty of heat for that comment already, and I won't lie - it is harsh. But your statement that I would call anyone concerned with privacy a "basement-dweller" is simply false, and attempts to make a blanket statement where there isn't one. I don't appreciate words being put in my mouth.

      There's a big difference between pointing out an app's permissions maybe not making total sense (eg, "Gee, this app requires an internet access permissions and I can't figure out why. I'd like the developer to explain this, please.") and making a false statement that essentially slanders a developer and unjustly deprives him of revenue, and damages his reputation. Such as the comment in question, where the poster comes to the conclusion that based on his deeply flawed inferential evidence, Apparatus is tracking you every time you open it.

      There's nothing wrong with voicing concerns about privacy. But people who cry "wolf!" at every app permission that is required but not explained in the app description really need to start investigating their concerns (or reporting them to Amazon, Google, or the developer) instead of just assuming something nefarious is going on.

      As previous comments (and developer himself) have pointed out, the permissions criticism was totally off-base, and flat-out wrong in almost every respect. And yet 11 people bumped it to "Most Helpful." Why? Because they just *assumed* he was right - some people seem to have an insatiable desire to see developers go down in flames for unexplained app permissions, and it's not right.

      The guy earned his "basement-dweller" hat, and I have zero issue cracking a joke at his expense.

  • Ben

    Generally I don't think 3rd party app stores is such a great idea - especially when they are exclusive to certain groups of people. When Amazon app store first came out I was kind of bummed that I couldn't access it - but that probably had more to do with the news value than my actual need for another app store.
    Google, of course, is interested in promoting their product (Android) thus improving Google Market over time while other parties are more inclined to jump on the wagon just to squeeze some money out of it and not taking the same interest in Android being a quality product.
    That, in turn, leaves developers with less power to try and influence a positive evolution.

  • http://www.incorporateapps.com Incorporateapps

    This is exactly the same treatment we are getting, but it takes a well known developer so that the message gets noticed on the blogs.

    It takes anywhere from 1-2 weeks for them to review the app and it usually fails for some stupid reason (One time the reason was a FC - without any FC report, stack print or anything we can work on - "The app force closed", period). Another time we received a FC from a package from another developer...
    Then you submit the same exact code and it goes through only to take another 2 weeks for the app to get live and the lengthy description to be replaced by 2 lines of description some intern wrote.

    And then they usually cut the price wherever they feel like it and you can't do anything about it, it's in their terms.
    Even the Free App of the Day is not worthy of mentioning, I hope they paid this developer the 20% share, others are complaining that they do not receive the 20% cut from the list price. Also, people are only interested in the free apps, not the paid ones.

    Once the year is over we are not renewing the submission, this is the only way to get the apps deleted, another Amazon nonsense.

    • M

      The Free App of the Day is a special promotion, and will (for regular developers - I'm sure Rovio et al got special treatment) result in 0% direct revenue. The FAD is certainly a good thing for Amazon; I have my serious doubts that it is actually worth anything for developers, particularly smaller developers.

      Even without the major issues described by the bithack guys, the benefits to your ratings from having 100,000+ people download your app who are not really interested in it is unlikely to be very useful. Not to mention the revenue loss.

      Undercutting the market and the race to the bottom... some developers just don't learn. The only winners in that game are the big portals.

      • http://www.incorporateapps.com Incorporateapps

        Can you confirm this, have you participated in the FAD?

        I agree with you, the problem is people only wait for the FAD and never buy apps from Amazon.

        "Undercutting the market and the race to the bottom... some developers just don't learn."

        True, but they will learn the first year and not renew their submissions which will result in removal of the apps and lost revenue for Amazon.

        • M

          No I have not participated in the FAD, but I have viewed the conditions.

    • CSX321

      "another 2 weeks for the app to get live and the lengthy description to be replaced by 2 lines of description some intern wrote"

      Those are two of my biggest complaints. We android developers often have a fairly quick update cycle. There are times when I might put out two updates in the time it takes Amazon to approve a previous one. I complained to them about it, but didn't really get a response.

      And I don't know why they feel it necessary to complete rewrite my app description! Currently their rewrite isn't even accurate, because I've changed some things in the app!

      My total sales on Amazon over 3 months are equal to 2 DAYS of sales on the Market. There's no way I'll renew for another year with Amazon at $99. I probably wouldn't even renew if it was free.

  • http://berlinblackberrydevelopers.blogspot.com/ Danny

    Sorry I can not understand the frustration except for the filtering issue.

    A state of the art app should use secure connection wherever possible, so that the device can not be tracked or information leak.
    And needing an internet connection is bad for a lot of people. Yes the app was designed that way but users don't have to like this. Why should they care? This is the developers problem not amazons and not of the users!
    Start caring about the users and not complaing about their problems!

    PS: A missing comment function for reviews for the developer is a problem of most app stores out there.

    • M

      "PS: A missing comment function for reviews for the developer is a problem of most app stores out there."

      Though again - one that Amazon actually does have.

  • http://www.droidnytt.no Alex Roeed

    I feel sorry for the developer. Apparatus is currently my favorite game on Android.
    I was trying to support the developer with a review on the Market, but on my Xoom there's no where to post a review.
    Looks like the Xoom market app is missing this feature, that sucks.

  • ecenhua

    I feel sorry for the developer as well. Android needs good developers to support it in order to provide meaningful competition for the big A. Amazon needs to get those relationships right.
    That said, why all the praise for the Android Market? Hasn't anyone noticed, as I have, that when one searches for anything the Market throws up alot of stuff that has nothing to do with what you were searching for? I went searching for Google Books, their own product, and EVERYTHING but Google Books came up -- many apps, as far as I could see, had nothing to do with Google at all? Don't you guys think this is broken?

    BTW this is a problem with YouTube, another Google product, as well for watching multi-part videos. Why doesn't a search pull EVERY part at once?

    • NoNeedForMonkeys

      "Hasn't anyone noticed, as I have, that when one searches for anything the Market throws up alot of stuff that has nothing to do with what you were searching for?"

      Wow, somebody else actually voiced a complaint about this. That is my only complaint with the Android Market. Seems a company so well known for it's search engine technology, can't get Market searches right. I have received many responses from Google stating that the device (me: HTC Aria), by model and by OS version, supersedes the search engine outputs. Essentially they claim "your device is not allowed to see this app, even when you search for apps verbatim". I believe filtering by device when searching is wrong. Show me the app, then tell me it is not qualified for my device (like they do when I log into the Google market from a PC browser).

      Circumventing device filtering is the only reason I even tried the amazon app store.
      I personally would like to have a Google Market option to get "non-device" approved apps, with a "Ill risk it" override checkbox / waiver.

      Oh well, rant rant away... :)

  • h8t

    They should start calling it "Crap of the Day".

  • Slipgate

    I only have the amazon app to get the free app of the day. Apparatus was one of those.

    • http://www.incorporateapps.com Incorporateapps

      Which is one of the reasons (among many others, including fragmentation) why the Amazon Appstore is hurting developers rather than help.

  • Adryan

    The thing i hate the most about the amazon app store is i think what the crazy commenter was talking about. Its soooooooo stupid that i cant play my apps without internet connection because it cant connect the amazon app store. Whats up with that? Why should i buy something if i cant use where there is no internet access. If i buy a game i should be able to play it on a road trip where i wont always have a connection. I mean come on really amazon? That bugs the crap out of me

  • app developer

    From a developer's standpoint, the most disconcerting is that even if all had gone well, Amazon would still have the ability to reduce the price to 25% of list, and then pay the developer 20% of list. They still make money for themselves, but the developer's ability to charge more for the app elsewhere (like the list price) is totally negated. Amazon has no incentive to charge anywhere near the list price.
    This is good for Amazon because there will always be developers who don't realize the trap they are getting themselves into, but bad for consumers and developers because it soon becomes not worth developing new apps.
    I won't list my apps on Amazon's App Store until the terms change to paying developers 70% of list price, or something close to it, rather than the greater of 70% of sales price or 20% of list price. Amazon might as well just say 20% of list price, but that would make the ruse harder.

  • Kenshin07

    so wait...the person who wrote the "helpful comment" wasn't able to play the game offline? ok, so he said its an ad instead of "community forum" or whatever...how is he still wrong? if there was a game that wouldnt let me play without being connect to the net then i would uninstall it and give it a bad review as well...idk y people are bashing on this guy. hes right, you cant play it on the plane or wherever u dont have internet. there should be an option when the game starts up saying, "do you want to participate in this community forum thing". I mean, it makes sense that the dev would put something like this in. anyway, i agree with everything else about the appstore.

  • AverageDev

    @Kenshin07

    I guess you are defending the fellow "user" just because you felt like this is you.

    I am not sure if you aware of that, but this is an Amazon's Appstore limitation (much like Google's LVL which calls in on the server from time to time to see if the app was purchased, after you were offline for some time).
    It is high time you "users" start educating yourselves about those issues before posting dumb reviews on the market, ok?
    Those are called "smart"phones for a reason, if you're not up to the "smart" bit
    then do not buy one (or ask your parents), k?

    And besides, what good is a 1 star review to you, the app was free in the first place, do you get to sleep better?

    Man this Android mentality is starting to piss me off!

  • kenshin07

    Oh shut up and get off your high horse numb nuts. I'm perfectly aware that apps PERIODICALLY need to check for licensing. Please don't lecture me like I'm a noob. Did i say 1* or low rating? dont assume. Last time i checked theres up to 5 stars I could select. I rarely give 1* and FYI I do contact devs quite often. Anyway back to my main point...there's a difference between a PERIODIC check for licensing integrity and a REQUIREMENT of a data connection. I haven't seen the description of the app but if the developer said internet access is required at ALL times then the dude who wrote the comment is an idiot.

  • AverageDev

    On the contrary , you are a noob, and you are unfortunately the typical average noob on android giving bad reviews even though having no clue or understanding of the matter.
    Did you read the article, did you read what I said?
    The AMAZON APPSTORE (should I spell it out for you?) is the one that requires an internet connection, EVERY TIME YOU open the app!
    Here is a link for you, NOOB, read it:
    http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/03/07/amazon-app-stores-drm-to-be-more-restrictive-than-googles/

    Yes, the "dude who wrote the comment" is an idiot nevertheless, because he downloaded a FREE app from a store without reading the store's terms and nevertheless complains on the app page, EVEN though the app was free?

    A good percentage of the android users are idiots, as a matter of fact, and your two comments just proved it!

    • Kenshin07

      omg are you that naive? do you really think that Amazon would require that you connect to the internet EVERY SINGLE TIME you use an app? are u that stupid? i just download abduction 2 and put my thunderbolt in airplane mode...i launched up the game and guess what....IT WORKED! BLASPHEMY!! BUT HOW!? AverageDev said it needs internet to check EVERY SINGLE TIME!! u sir, are a moron. yes im sure in a couple weeks i MAY be asked to connect to the net (if im not already) to validate the license but guess what...YOU DONT NEED INTERNET ALL THE TIME! idk why i am wasting time with you. if anyone is a noob, its gotta be you. i can hardly believe u are a dev. its idiotic devs like you who deserve bad ratings. if the app needed data connection 24/7 then it should state it in the app description (i didnt read the description for Apparatus). so what did we learn in the end?
      1) devs should put in the description if an app needs data 24/7
      2) amazon checks for licensing like google PERIODICALLY!
      3) AverageDev is a noob and has no idea what hes talking about
      done.

  • http://www.cmwmobile.com Casper Wakkers

    I quit me Amazone business a month ago. The approval of apps was taking way too long. For bugfixes this is completely unacceptable. And they declined my twitter based Tweet Widget because it displays an email address/pw (which is as part of the OAuth authorization)!?

  • Sxeptomaniac

    Gah! I missed this. I've been wondering why they were taking so long to update through Amazon.

    I've been getting really fed up with the downright moronic reviews of apps on Amazon. How is it Amazon seems to have attracted a greater share of trolls and idiots?

    Time to go buy the Market version. I must have more levels now!

  • James

    This is one reason I'm not at all looking forward to the upcoming Amazon "tablet" (eReader, whatever... bleh). It looks like a $250 piece of junk. No Android Market? I'd rather buy a Chinese tablet with freakin' Gingerbread on it.

    Also, the "Fail." in that comment would infuriate me too. What's with people? It's as if being as big of a dick as possible is cool now because of Internet culture. Epic fail, cool story bro.

  • easoftwareengineer

    Regarding that user comment who I entirely support btw:
    "...someone failed to understand that"..... it is so true that some one from game team failed to understand that "built-in community feature for player discussions" should be optional for players who need it and certainly should not be a showstopper and be part of game vital workflow. Fail.