What's in a name... on the App Store?

I very much enjoyed this article. I would like to see more articles like this on TUAW.

The biggest problem is the ignorance of most app-store-buyers. If you trust any of the descriptions as given in the app store, you are in great trouble. If it says "this game is completely new and especially made for the iPhone", most of the time this is simply a lie, because the underlying principle has already been around for a long time.

As for the solution: don't forget that Apple is only the distributor, giving you a limited amount of information. Any more information has to be organized separately. For example, I keep lists of underlyingly identical puzzles on my blog http://puzzlingiphone.wordpress.com with the goal to make the choice more transparent to buyers.

For example, check out my lists of (nearly identical) variants of Rubik's Cube, or of the games originally known as "Rush Hour", or "Set", "Chain Shot!" or "Pennant".

Just to give a quick impression of the situation, this is the list of names used for Rubik's Cube apps in the app store: Cube, Magic Cube, Erno’s Cube, Lee’s Cube, Cubed, Cubix, LCube, xCube, iCube, iCube (cube puzzle), CubePuzzle, and 3D Cube Puzzle (did I miss any?)

The interesting aspect is, that the original names of these puzzles are often protected, because they are registered trademarks. So, the original name cannot be used anymore by others. However, the underlying puzzle principle is mostly not protected (that can only be done by a patent, which is mostly to cumbersome to apply for). This leads to the situation that many identical puzzles are available under all kinds of different names.

A game title featured here on TUAW already conflicts with another previous app in the business app category... "Payback".

While the business app "Payback" should have priority for being there first, the game "Payback" has existed for some number of years as a retail Macintosh game... meaning that there is a vested interest in maintain the title as a means of reaching consumers who previously owned the Mac version of the game.

As this kind of conflict becomes more common, it could eventually come down to Apple charging a fee to reserve a specific title in their database for only one developer. For unregistered names, Apple could simply not bother filtering them out and let the developers and their respective apps fight it out among themselves for recognition.

Shareware and freeware developers have had to deal with such issues for several years now. Yet, that hasn't stopped such developers from doing what they love.

For an developer's (Chilli X - http://chillix.wordpress.com/) point of view the whole name/category thing is confusing. There doesn't seem to be anything to stop you naming your app with the same name as anybody else's - somebody else came out with an app called PhotoFrame after ours was published then we released DeskClock and somebody else did Desk Clock... It just makes it harder to PR your app because you have to hope reviewers say 'PhotoFrame by Chilli X' or somebody else might get your sale.

Surely Apple could refuse an App on the basis that the name was already taken? Adobe wouldn't take too kindly to Apple releasing a photo manipulation program called PhotoShop :)

Then there's the category - we always try to release our apps into the most obvious category but lately I've noticed people are putting their apps into games and entertainment (the most popular categories) when they clearly don't belong there.

When you submit an App to Apple you have to specify a primary and secondary category - does anybody know what the secondary category is used for? We don't...

They should let the developer pick 5 keywords which are searchable so finding an app isn't dependent on the name.

Wow. What an ill informed article. You guys really should try to check some facts before writing about something.
Apple does allow developers to choose the same name for an app. And I count 3 Sudoku apps with the name "Sudoku".

"And who determines which "pro" app really deserves the name?" Short and only answer: The developer. I have not heard of a single case where Apple refused an app based on its title. Of course you can't use offensive words in your title, and they might object if you are actively misleading people (calling your flashlight app "Photo editor pro" or something like that). But please do provide references to cases in which Apple refused a developer the "pro" suffix for the app title. I'd be very interested to learn about that.

How about one app, two names? Check out AirFloppy and WiFi Disk: same app, same developer, slightly different UI (AirFloppy has animated clouds!!). I'm surprised Apple lets developers do that.

What's the advantage of having a shorter app name? I'd argue that having a longer more descriptive name could be better. Then your app is more likely to show up in the search results if someone just searches on title. You'll have more words as possible hits.

it's not dumb. it doesn't really beg any questions or further our knowledge too much, but could there be a market for app names in the future and seo-like tactics for how people find your app amongst all the similar ones out there? maybe...

dumb article