Facebook Developers

Wow I just noticed that.  You need to pay the full fee at the end of 12 months?!

Damn I seriously do not want to pay upwards of $2,000!

Can we pay $375,000 instead?

The first 3 paragraphs made me believe that facebook just hired a genius, until I got to the numbered lines.  I can see myself paying for the badge, but only after facebook does it's job of letting the users know that apps with the badge are better(ethical wise) than those without it.

Seriously, sometimes I have a conscience check,... are we really such a negative bunch of people, or does FB keep coming up with crap ideas?

*sigh*

wwall wrote:

senatuskienlee wrote:

Seriously, sometimes I have a conscience check,... are we really such a negative bunch of people, or does FB keep coming up with crap ideas?

*sigh*

sometimes good ideas, just implemented craply.

It's the lack of two-way communication that makes developers so angry. The general incompetence is bad but it wouldn't cause the level of sheer rage that a lot of developers feel (even after seeing their livelihoods decimated in weeks by Facebook bugs and design flaws after 18 months of hard work building up businesses) if Facebook staff engaged fully with the forums, posted promptly on every topic (multiple times) and signed their posts with real names.

A little bit of communication, humility, apology, admission of fault, taking feedback on board and showing respect for hard working developers who depend on a reliable platform to feed themselves and their families would go a long way Facebook.

Last edited by chrisclaydon (2008-11-17 21:03:04)

$375 doesn't sound that much, until you consider that the structure of the platform has forced some developers to produce literally hundreds of small apps (eg. theres one for each football team) rather than a single big football app (not so viral that way). For a developer with 100 small apps instead of one big app, thats a bill of $37,500 to verify them, which is probably more than the developer makes in a year!

Last edited by chrisclaydon (2008-11-17 21:25:09)

Wow.. I've been on board for a lot of Facebook's changes. Like.. ALL of them.. Usually I can see through the short term and see the big picture. I thought the new Facebook design was great from day one. I liked the API changes. I even loved the idea behind this verification process when they first announced it.

I'm a small developer. I only have 1 app that doesn't make me any money. It's a labor of love for me. I intend on creating other applications but this isn't my full time job or anything right now. I do it for the love of it and not for the money. That doesn't mean I like my apps to just sit around collecting dust. I want Halo 3 Players to do great! I know it's developed well. It works great. It's much better than any of it's competition. It's a great app but it's demographic and my limited budget for advertising makes it too small to make any real money from. This means that I will not be able to verify my app because $375 is a lot of money to me.

This has been the way it's been since day 1. Large apps that already make money get to keep making money. I'm sure they will weed out some of the stupid apps that have been deceiving people into adding them, but it will hurt small developers who don't have the bank roll to pay to get their apps verified. This is the first time I'm on the side of all the people who complain about all the changes around here.

There should definitely be some sort of program that will help verify apps either for free or for a much smaller rate ($100 maybe?). I understand the flaws in the following idea but it's a start.. What about a user feedback program? Where a user can forward feedback to Facebook telling them that this application SHOULD be verified. After so many forwards for this application, Facebook could take a look at it pro-bono or maybe just offer the developer a discounted rate. Again, this idea needs fleshing out but with the way things are presently, I'm ready to completely drop the Facebook platform and start developing some iPhone apps or something. *shrug*

Users already dis-trust applications on Facebook platform. Now they will dis-trust unverified applications even more.

This seems unfair - my application is already "well designed", "trustworthy" and "meaningful" to thousands of users. And I've spent a lot of time making it that way.

Why should I pay $375 a year just because Facebook allowed so many useless, spammy applications in the first place?

Why should my application suffer just because I don't spam my users with adverts (and don't make any profits)?

I admit that there are many sub-standard applications on Facebook Platform but I've never understood why Facebook allowed them.
Facebook should have been using these new Verification guidelines from the start, and should not have approved so many useless applications. However I still don't think a fee is needed.

This change could mean that the only viable applications to deploy on Facebook Platform are large corporate money-spinners. Personally I think that's a bad thing.

Facebook is running a protection racket on app developers

"...if an application isn’t meaningful, trustworthy and well designed, why is it in the app store at all?"

Last edited by b3n (2008-11-18 03:55:26)

One of two things will happen in my opinion.

a) a large number of apps apply and get in, facebook starts to look the other way on "minor" infractions or apps that get in simply flip the switch to return to spam mode. Users see there is no difference and the program flops. (Around the time FB pushes desperate changes to help the cash continue to flow in.)

b) very few apps get in, users see many good apps outside the program and disregard that in any decision making, developers save the 375 for something real.

I don't even care about the cost, I have no problem spending money when it makes sense but this program doesn't seem to be a wise investment. Unless the benefits are so ridiculous, the 375 will do better advertising. That's like what, 1250 users at 30 cents an install? Is this program going to guarantee me this number of users over night to jump start my app?

Now the part I really don't get, how is giving "benefits" going to encourage ANYTHING this program is supposed to do? Increase buckets and you think apps wont become more spammy to take advantage of what they bought?

Hi all,

I have to say I'm shocked by this, I have apps which have been under review for entry to the apps directory for 2-3 weeks now, and they seem barely able to manage that process let alone this one.

If like me you don't like it, vote with your feet, take every app you have and submit it to their program, wait until the time comes to pay then don't, just walk away. That is certainly what I plan to do, as I know they are struggling enough with app submissions at the moment, and maybe the crap conversation rate may make them think twice about the pricing.

Mat

savageguy123 wrote:

a) a large number of apps apply and get in, facebook starts to look the other way on "minor" infractions or apps that get in simply flip the switch to return to spam mode. Users see there is no difference and the program flops. (Around the time FB pushes desperate changes to help the cash continue to flow in.)

b) very few apps get in, users see many good apps outside the program and disregard that in any decision making, developers save the 375 for something real.

This is exactly right. Facebook doesn't even enforce the rules it already has. They keep announcing new guidelines and programs, and they all turn out to be more empty words and promises. The spam has never gone away, only evolved. Nothing is ever done against the spammy apps everyone knows about. This won't change anything.

Truth to tell, if I *believed* in this thing, I wouldn't mind it so much.  I mean, I'm building a serious app -- $375 is pocket change compared to the salary I'm foregoing in trying to get this thing going.

Problem is, as soon as they start talking about added "benefits", I stop believing it.  These "benefits" are inevitably going to be things that all apps *should* be getting anyway (or worse, are things that apps *shouldn't* get, but they'll look the other way if you've paid your fee).  If these benefits are good for apps, they're good for users, and *should* be universal.  It pretty much reveals that the nominal purpose here, of carefully legitimizing good apps, is just a sham -- they're really just doing some carrot and stick to shake down developers.

I'll be genuinely surprised if we don't see, within the year, mild but noticeable sanctions taken against any app that *doesn't* pay this fee -- lower rankings in the app listings, warnings on the app pages, stuff like that.  This kind of approach almost always leads to measures of that sort.  Of course, they'll paint it as better placement for apps that pay the fee, rather than worse ones for those that don't.  But the effect is the same: paying the fee, rather than app quality, will become the dominant factor.

A poor choice for Facebook strategically.  It'll bring in some cash now, and let them brag about the newly-certified apps, but it'll continue the trend of choking off creativity among app developers.  It's not bad tactics -- for now, Facebook has the upper hand, and can dictate terms.  But in the long run, it drives developers towards the OpenSocial side of the world, which is likely to gradually make that the more interesting and vibrant platform for users.  A dumb move to make when Facebook was starting to really win...