Tell HN: You can't add “no ads” in your Play Store app's title
Tell HN: You can't add “no ads” in your Play Store app's title
100 points by TrianguloY 1 hour ago | hide | past | favorite | 36 comments
Due to the recent Play Store changes you can no longer "add text or images that indicate store performance or ranking, or suggest relations to existing Google Play programs in the app title" [1].
You can't, for example, add "#1", "best" or "free". However, you can't also add "no ads".
To be precise: appending "[small, no ads]", "[no ads]" or "[without ads]" to the play store app title causes a rejection. I didn't want to test more in fear of banning, and in the end removed it.
I know you can see if an app contains ads in the app page, but not in the search results... or at least not yet, but I doubt Google will add that indication.
[1] https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
So, let's be clear here. The problem is not that they've prohibited people from putting this information in the app title. The problem comes if they've done so without introducing another way for the user to express their preference for ad-free apps. E.g. it should even work better if, hypothetically, the search function prioritized ad-free apps anyway when the user puts "no ads" in the search box.
I can't tell if this is the case right now because, well, the store is still full of apps with "no ads" in the title. Those are still coming up first.
Well, we can expect the heat death of the universe before google does something that helps promoting apps that have no ads.
Good?
What's the alternative? Have a crappy, paid-for, add filled, bloated app promote itself as "Cauliflower Cooker Lite - the #1 free cauliflower app. 100% ad-free".
Metadata like file size, whether there are in-app ads or purchases, etc, should be part of the store's listing - not the title.
I'm actually glad to see editorializing disallowed in app titles. If everybody did it, the store would be a mess. I mean, it's already a mess, but even more so.
"No ads" isn't editorializing, though. Unlike "best" or "#1", it's a statement of fact, and a fact that is probably useful to shoppers.
Could this be in response to apps indicating that they don't have ads even though they do?
In that case these apps should be banned, not the use of "no ads" in titles.
The presence or omission of a fact is often the result of a conscious editorial choice. It is the intent, not the nature of the words themselves, that underscores the editorial nature of the statement.
Buy Uncle Miller’s Corn Flakes — 100% arsenic free!
But the need does not exists in a void - the store does not allow to filter in searches apps with ads or microtransactions.
Google's curation of the Play Store, while protecting their own economic interests, feels a bit like a dark pattern. The fact that adding " n" to most keywords prompts " no ads" in the suggestions shows how popular this is.
If I search for "tuner", I get two sponsored results first, then five ad-containing results with average 4.4 rating, then an ad-free app with 4.9 stars.
My preference would be searching by rating with a minimum number of installs. Even using the 4.5+ filter seems to be the quickest way to find completely ad-free apps. But, what really works best (but never quickest) for many apps is to find an APK somewhere else, like Github.
Sorry for the offtopic, but can you tell me the name of the ad-less tuner app? I've been searching for one, but the best I found was Fender's. Which is pretty ok, too.
Free Universal Tuner, by Dmitry Pogrebnyak.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ru.aterlux.gui...
I appreciate that you can choose the microphone source, change detection parameters, and easily select off-440 tunings. It's responsive and accurate enough for my playing.
The only issue I ever had was on the Fairphone 3. Starting a few months ago, if I had Google Assistant always listening, the tuner would stop working. I've since disabled Assistant and changed phones.
I do have a Boss TU-2, but I'm sometimes in a situation where I'm too lazy to use a cable but have my phone handy (because I record ideas on my phone)
I use TE Tuner and like it. I don't use all the features, but the tuner and metronome are pretty great.
Would prefer max installs filter instead of min to filter out the bigger apps that have budgets for seo
I'm sure you can't put "Death to Google!" in the title either -- which, given how Google's business model works, is basically the same thing. Ad-free to them is like sunlight to a vampire.
It will definitely improve the readability of Play Store lists to have those titles removed.
That would make sense if, say, any phrase in square brackets was the reason for the rejection. The fact it appears to be only "no ads" means that clearly isn't the reason.
I always wondered why all these stores are so fucking awful to filter. Is it calculated ?
Yes. I often find Play "hides" deep in the results apps that I had previously bought, even typing their exact name, in hopes I choose another (always paid or with ads) above them.
I imagine it would be easy to add a search filter for ads or no ads, but they don't.
Are there any third party search interfaces? Seems like it would be pretty easy to add automatic checking for ads.
Both Google and Apple monetize app discovery by selling advertising spots and such, and both collect revenues from inside apps (be it the mandatory-through-them in-app purchasing systems or advertising). As they are monopolies on their respective platforms, they have no reason to improve your experience, and so they do not care if you find the best app.
They care that you find the app that generates them the most revenue, and that's exactly what they're going to do.
Users are interested in apps that have no ads. Whether or not an app has ads is not part of the standard app info fields, so while publishers could lie in the title, where else can the users find out whether there are ads and why couldn't Google instead just ban apps that lie about having no ads instead of outright banning "no ads" in the title?
I think Google makes no money from free ad-less apps, so it is plausible that allowing free ad-less apps to promote themselves as "no ads" (over apps with ads or paid apps) is not directly financially beneficial to Google and is perhaps even harmful. You can see the disincentives at work here.
Is there an unofficial searchable index of Play Store apps?
I really want a way to search for ad-free apps.
I don't bother very much with the Android store because of this.
If I want my 4 year old to use my phone I don't want her clicking some ad and leaving the app by accident.
As a result, I only have apps by the BBC and a couple of others.
I don't know about 4, but for toddlers, use Screen Pinning if you're going to let your child touch any Android device.
Good. Phrases like that are just spammy and annoying and don't belong in app titles.
Mobile platforms are the 21st century nanny state. You can only do what we allow you to do, because it's for your own good.
With “Aurora Store” you can filter out apps with ads, paid apps, or GSF dependent apps. Updating apps requires manually pressing “install”, but other than that it's pretty neat.
the problem i faced is that aurora store is disliked by google and my account was terminated. would recommend though.
Your google account was terminated because you installed a different app store on your phone?
|
FAQ
|
Lists
|
API
|
Security
|
Legal
|
Apply to YC
|
ContactSearch:
