Analysing app store descriptions

I've been crawling through the store again.

This time I've been looking at the descriptions. More analysis will probably follow but in the mean time here are the m,ost popular words in app descriptions for both free and paid apps.

Here's what get's included in the descriptions of the top 50 free apps in all categories in the GB store.

And here's the same for the paid apps.

A few things there that surprised me but I'll leave you to draw your won conclusions for now.

Both created with Wordle. In case you didn't know.

Why Windows 8[.1] tries to be everything to everyone

You may be aware of some people saying that Windows 8 was a mistake and Microsoft shouldn't have tried to combine a touch based interface and the more traditional desktop experience in one.

Here's my theory.
I think this was done to change people's ideas about what Windows is and where it can be used.

I think there was a danger that Joe Public (not someone with technical knowledge, like I imagine you have) would associate Windows with just the traditional desktop experience and assume it's not relevant as they start to buy other computers for home and personal use that aren't traditional PCs or laptops. (Think tablets, phablets, and phones but also smart TVs and connected devices plus whatever the future brings.)
By making it very obvious that it's the same OS on all devices running Windows 8. This reinforces the idea that Windows CAN run on multiple devices. It would be very dangerous for Microsoft if the public started thinking that Windows was JUST for PCs and when it comes to tablets (or anything else) you should look elsewhere (to Android or iOS).

Of course it's more complicated than that and involves many, many factors but I think this is an important consideration that others haven't been talking about. Yes - I do sometimes see my role here to be to remind developers that there are more than technical reasons behind technical decisions.

9 images that shouldn't appear as part of your screenshots

Recognise these pictures?

They're the sample pictures that come with Windows Phone 8. They're also the images that come with the emulator.
You've no doubt seen them loads of times, probably when working with images on the emulator.
Using them while testing is perfectly fine.
However, there is no excuse or reason for ever using these images within your app when you're taking screenshots for use in the store.

Yes, if you're taking screenshots via the emulator using the images that are on the emulator is easier than adding your own, but the store is about selling. Doing what's easiest for you is hardly ever the best approach to take in the long run. It also doesn't do a good job of selling your app.*

Also, using these images in a context that is completely irrelevant (for instance, I've seen an app that relates to faces including the above footballer picture, and an app that should have had an image relating to a couple but instead showed a pair of legs next to a swimming pool.)

Using these images in your screenshot sends out the following messages:

• You're lazy - if you cut corners here, where else have you cut corners? In testing? Is the app full of bugs? 
• You don't care about how your app is perceived in the store - Oh, you don't care about how it looks in the store. What else don't you care about? Providing support?
• You're not interested in making your app understandable by viewing the screenshots in the store - How about making it easy to understand when trying to use it for the first time? Or subsequent times?

*But, what if you claim to just be a developer, not a salesperson? Well, you're actually performing many roles when you build and release an app. You can't hide behind the excuse of "just being a developer" if you want to be successful. You have to do many tasks and perform many roles when releasing software. Writing code is often the simplest of them.

Where should code live? Do we need lots of smart devices or just one smart device and lots of connected screens?

I don't normally link to other blogs here but this is an interesting variation of the idea I was discussing yesterday.

"This question of where the code lives also of course applies to TVs and to cars as much as to wearables. With AppleTV and Chromecast and Carplay, Apple and Google are saying that though everything is becoming a computer, actually the 'smart' part should be concentrated in the smartphone or tablet - something that's easy to update, that's replaced every couple of years, and that has a rich touch interface, and everything else should be a dumb sensor or dumb glass or both. And so the apps should only be in one place, and whether it should be an 'app' in a strictly technical sense is also up for debate."

Read the whole article from http://ben-evans.com/

This also raises the question of how an app handles display on multiple, varied screens. It's another idea I've been thinking about and should have some ideas to share soon.

What "phone", "watch" and "computer" really mean

Just thinking out loud here...

We use the term "phone" to refer to many more devices than we did a few years ago.

When referring to phones we now, more typically, mean the devices we carry in our pockets and may try to differentiate them by calling them "mobile phones", "cell phones" or maybe even "smart phones"*.
In reality though there's only a very small part of these devices that are to do with making a phone call. The name is more of historical consequence and an aid to differentiation. It's easier to say than "handheld computing device". (Although that's how they describe them on board aircraft.)

We're now starting to hear a lot about "wearables" and "smart watches". Aren't these just small computers that are easily worn on the wrist?

We, typically(?), still think of computers as those devices with a large screen, keyboard and a box on, or under, a desk. And sometimes maybe we think of a laptop when we think of "computer".
I suspect this thinking is limiting our ideas about what certain devices are and what we should be thinking about them as being capable of.

Everything is becoming a computer. More things than you realise probably already are.

What happens when we stop talking about "smart phones" and "smart watches" and instead talk about "computers we carry in our pockets" or "computers we wear on our wrists"?
Yes, it's slightly more wordy but will changing the language we use change the software and experiences we envisage and create?

When we're planning the future where our use of technology is even more integrated with our lives and our experiences with technology crosses over a wider range of devices this will become increasingly important.

Terms like "computer", "laptop", "tablet", "[smart]phone" and "[smart]watch" are helpful, at some level, for differentiation but risk limiting our thinking. Building the technology of a better future means we need to avoid limiting our thinking and push things forward.


* I'm ignoring any smart phone vs feature phone differentiation