Google Play Has Created a No-Win Situation For the Creators of Icon Packs (androidpolice.com) 41
Jules Wang from Android Police reports on the cases of two icon pack artists who had their products taken down from the Play Store for supposedly violating the platform's Repetitive Content policy. Despite both creators' products being reinstated, they revealed that Google's opaque application of its rules has caused frustration and hopelessness among developers. From the report: All this heartache stems from Google Play's Repetitive Content policy. While on its face a well-meaning effort to reduce spammy apps and keep quality up, there's a core problem with compliance when creators find themselves forced to use apps to distribute content: "If these apps are each small in content volume, developers should consider creating a single app that aggregates all the content."
If you've browsed on the Play Store, you'll immediately know this guidance isn't universally followed: many artists like JustNewDesigns will have multiple designs in their portfolio and each of those designs will come in multiple colorways or shapeways -- whether they're changing out an accent in a line design or are implementing some sort of adaptive element.
Not only are there so many apps, but they also look so much alike -- artists, many of whom might not consider coding their strong suit, tend to use open-source templates to create the actual app. You'll likely see them credited to Sarsa Murmu, who runs a GitHub project called CandyBar, or Jahir Fiquitiva, the maintainer of the Blueprint repository. These resources take care of the "packaging" for the assets. They include integration compatibility with various popular launchers, a license scheme to prevent those who sideloaded the app for free from having the icons applied, and all sorts of other functionality. In addition to the icon assets, the apps may also house wallpapers and links to other apps. [...] What is Google's role and what should it be? Wang writes: Artists would have much to gain from a new or revised API. Adding and adapting new icon designs to existing products would be much easier. New designs may be able to take advantage of changes to the Adaptive Icons API as Google lays them out. There would be unease as to how the business model could shift -- should publishers charge by the app, through in-app purchases, or both? But as it stands, the biggest benefit with such a change is that it would presumably get Play's "RoboCops" off their back. Of course, we can't be sure of that with how Google's enforcement apparatus operates, but the notion of unfairness lends credibility to those supporting the status quo unless the company is willing to come to the bargaining table.
At the end of the day, Google is certainly within its right to build regulations around apps to respond to emergent scammers and distressing content. Automation is meant to render manageable the sheer volume of content the Play platform sees published on a daily basis. But so long as icon artists sit under threat from a rulebook that can be arbitrarily thrown at them at any time, if nothing changes, we may be on a road leading to the degradation of a core Android tenet that even the most casual tech consumer associates with the platform -- user customizability.
If you've browsed on the Play Store, you'll immediately know this guidance isn't universally followed: many artists like JustNewDesigns will have multiple designs in their portfolio and each of those designs will come in multiple colorways or shapeways -- whether they're changing out an accent in a line design or are implementing some sort of adaptive element.
Not only are there so many apps, but they also look so much alike -- artists, many of whom might not consider coding their strong suit, tend to use open-source templates to create the actual app. You'll likely see them credited to Sarsa Murmu, who runs a GitHub project called CandyBar, or Jahir Fiquitiva, the maintainer of the Blueprint repository. These resources take care of the "packaging" for the assets. They include integration compatibility with various popular launchers, a license scheme to prevent those who sideloaded the app for free from having the icons applied, and all sorts of other functionality. In addition to the icon assets, the apps may also house wallpapers and links to other apps. [...] What is Google's role and what should it be? Wang writes: Artists would have much to gain from a new or revised API. Adding and adapting new icon designs to existing products would be much easier. New designs may be able to take advantage of changes to the Adaptive Icons API as Google lays them out. There would be unease as to how the business model could shift -- should publishers charge by the app, through in-app purchases, or both? But as it stands, the biggest benefit with such a change is that it would presumably get Play's "RoboCops" off their back. Of course, we can't be sure of that with how Google's enforcement apparatus operates, but the notion of unfairness lends credibility to those supporting the status quo unless the company is willing to come to the bargaining table.
At the end of the day, Google is certainly within its right to build regulations around apps to respond to emergent scammers and distressing content. Automation is meant to render manageable the sheer volume of content the Play platform sees published on a daily basis. But so long as icon artists sit under threat from a rulebook that can be arbitrarily thrown at them at any time, if nothing changes, we may be on a road leading to the degradation of a core Android tenet that even the most casual tech consumer associates with the platform -- user customizability.
tl;dr (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
TFS is not too long to read. It is too poorly written to be clear to anyone who did not already know what was going on. WTF is this even supposed to mean without a decoder ring?
many artists like JustNewDesigns will have multiple designs in their portfolio and each of those designs will come in multiple colorways or shapeways -- whether they're changing out an accent in a line design or are implementing some sort of adaptive element.
This summary uses made-up words to describe the differences between "designs in their portfolio" -- but has absolutely no reference to what these icons are used for, who the target audience is, or what the trade-offs are in bundling more designs into one package or bundle or app or whatever they call it.
Re: (Score:2)
As for the overall quality, I agree that it's lacking.
Re: (Score:2)
in context it makes complete sense.
Ah, the dreaded context. The archenemy of many nerds on this site.
Re: (Score:2)
The context doesn't even make it particularly clear what the writer meant. Are "colorways" and "shapeways" like colors and shapes? Color and shape themes? Color and shape variants?
That is the problem with bad writers using made-up words: they almost never express themselves clearly. Leave made-up language to experts like Lewis Carroll, J.R.R. Tolkien and Dr. Seuss.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never heard of one before and not sure why I'd want one....?
Re: (Score:2)
Which of "colorways" and "shapeways" do you think is not made up? Or are you just bad at both English and counting?
There is not enough context to answer the core questions I raised about what these things are used for, who buys them, or why there should be so many from a single seller.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It was a marketing term for yarn originally, I think that's why it's being called "made up". It's wholly synthetic, and what's more, it's a shit word. This explains why corporations chose to use it, of course.
It's a shitty word because the meaning of way is from a word meaning move or carry. It doesn't move or carry any colors. It's a collection, not transportation. If they had called it a colorset then it would make sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: tl;dr (Score:1)
why the fuck should anyone spend any effort explaining it to you?
Look at the ensuing thread. Look hard because it's a big fuck you you unsociable cunt.
Re:tl;dr (Score:4, Informative)
Apps have icons. You can change those icons. For convenience most people download an icon pack app, which contains icons for various popular applications and automatically applies them. Such apps also allow the artist to collect donations or implement a licencing system.
It's somewhat like a ringtone in that it's mostly to make your desktop look nice, with a few offering accessibility features like high contrast.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, thanks for the explanation of what icons packs are.
I'd never heard of them before...not exactly sure why anyone would want one....?
Are people out there more interested in "decorating" their phones that actually using them to communicate?
Re: (Score:2)
Are people out there more interested in "decorating" their phones that actually using them to communicate?
Some people yes, one such example is my 10 yo daughter. But I am pretty sure she uses "themes", not "icon packs"
Re: (Score:2)
How can they sell them? Assuming they have versions of copyrighted and trademarked app/company logos in the pack?
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose the confusion lies in the fact that only one mobile operating system lets you do that. Since obviously you can't do stuff like on iOS, people are confused.
Granted, the ability to redo icons on Windows and macOS are there, but gener
Re: (Score:2)
I am also left wondering myself: how ate those "icon packs" different from themes?
Classic Google (Score:3)
Because Googlers know best - especially fauxtistic programming nerds who can't imagine people would want to work in ways that aren't what fauxtistic programming nerds are used to.
Ways (Score:2)
Because Googlers know best - especially fauxtistic programming nerds who can't imagine people would want to work in ways that aren't what fauxtistic programming nerds are used to.
You mean the colorways and shapeways?
Re: (Score:3)
Each artist with a single app per category(or even one for all their work), with in app purchases for the different design options, would be my preference. But,
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Artists aren't developers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are developers, since they're creating the apps.
No, they're not. They follow whatever tutorial they find to do the simplest package they can work through.
It's not Google's responsibility to hand hold them.
It is if they want to retain customers.
You haven't dealt with customers in your life, have you? If customers want to be handheld through a process, you fucking provide it.
Re: (Score:2)
You haven't dealt with customers in your life, have you?
Only every day at my job. Literally all I do at work.
If customers want to be handheld through a process, you fucking provide it.
In this context, the people buying the icon packs are the customers.. not the artists. If anything, they're the supplier. How Google treats them is important, sure. But, ultimately, the actual customers are the ones that matter.
Re: (Score:2)
The people who buy the apps get a poor experience if the people making the apps get a poor experience.
Re: (Score:2)
To illustrate this: Google makes money on any sale in the store. Their goal is to maximize the number of sales overall. This is an oversimplification, as price of the app does factor in. But, they'll see more sales from cheaper apps so it's fine for this discussion. Given Google's goal is to increase the number of sales, that
So people might learn about non-Google app stores? (Score:2)
Does that mean there is a higher chance that people will get to know alternative Android app stores like FDroid? Then, good!
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely, as the authors of such "icon packs" are in it for money, they won't distribute them for free, even less under a free license.
Re: (Score:2)
Does that mean there is a higher chance that people will get to know alternative Android app stores like Amazon Appstore? Then, good!
Google doesn't care about you (Score:2)
Because their allmighty AI system has been trained to have no bias towards anyone and it's doing a pretty good job so far.
As long as money keeps on flowing in through bogus and fake apps, the AI is happy.
Google is now evil (Score:2)
Then I have noticed that Google hub has issues. In particular, when I ask it who am I, it thinks I am my wife.
Google TV is nightmare when it comes to Amazon, Disney, Hulu, Freevee, etc
And the wifi updates were STOPPED.
So, I have stopped Google and will slowly replace all their junk. In addition, suggesting to friends to skip over Google garbage.
Only wish that there was a decent other search engine(no the ot
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not saying the google platform is perfect but I amused that you seem to think that the apple eco-system is better with regards to interoperability and open-ness :)
Same tactic on Youtube - Their preferred creators (Score:1)
Shop in a shop? (Score:2)