Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, App Store
What's in a name... on the App Store?
As with the Highlander, ultimately you can only have one iFart app in the store. Oh sure, you can have 60+ fart apps total (scientists estimate by 2025 there will be over 2 million fart apps available), but you can't have two apps with the same name. Even tacking on "the" or similar prefixes won't help (suffixes like MK-II may work, but we haven't tried). The question I'm asking is: what's in a name? Would a fart app by any other name sell as well? And should developers worry their app name will be taken by the time they submit their app?
Ultimately I wonder if there will be issues surrounding app names. But wait -- isn't that two apps named Sudoku in the pic above? Way back in August 2008 Macworld noticed several apps named Sudoku, but on a search today I could only find two apps named exactly the same and one was from EA. Of course, that doesn't mean they will appear in your app list as such, and they can appear under yet another name on your iPhone. Every other app I found with Sudoku had some modifier word before or after the name: platinum, color, dojo, expert, etc. But then, there really can be only one iSudoku, or one Sudoku Pro... and who determines which "pro" app really deserves the name? (Short answer: Apple)
This isn't a huge issue, since I doubt some random person could come along and name their app IBM or Kodak or Netflix. Apple would likely nip that in the bud. But as the App Store grows, we may see a bit of a land grab, if we aren't already. The good names, the ones that are easy to search and make logical sense, will probably go first. You probably don't want to be the guy who has to name his to-do list app something really wacky, do you? I'm not sure what a solution would be, as Apple can't arbitrate every IP dispute, not can it police the business practices of every developer. In the end, it's just like domain registration -- first come, first served.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Doolybug said 12:18PM on 1-30-2009
dumb article
Reply
Cheggy Eggplant said 4:30AM on 1-31-2009
And yet you read it. ;-)
Doolybug said 4:46AM on 1-31-2009
well of course I did Cheggy. That's how I came to the conclusion it was dumb.
i don't mean any offense to the writer, but the topic was contrived and the analysis was obvious. anyone who spent a little time in the App Store would consider the same issues and arrive at the same conclusion.
it just seems like tuaw couldn't find anything else to fill it's page today. that's all.
:) cheers
Victor Agreda Jr said 5:08PM on 1-31-2009
Well, the way blogs work is that we often write about our own experiences. This happened, I thought it was something that might affect others as more people submit apps to the store, therefore I posted about it.
The assumption by smart people is that everyone thinks like them -- that the world is able to analyze and conclude as handily as they are. Sadly, this is not the case. Please respect that we all come to the table with different experiences.
Also, the app in question was submitted with "The" at the beginning. I thought this would be enough to make it work. When it wasn't, and having seen duplicate app names already, I thought that was something that bears a mention. If you care about trademarks, marketing, etc. this could be mildly informative, that's all.
jonathan ober said 12:43PM on 1-30-2009
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...
Reply
MostTornBrain said 12:56PM on 1-30-2009
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.
Reply
Maxwell Ash said 1:06PM on 1-30-2009
But, if someone is searching for a Sudoku app, then the app named sudoku will most probably come up first in the list. While the app named "super sudoku japanese number puzzle game flash bang" will come up further down the list. Anyway, I assume the apps have tags.
Brian E said 1:06PM on 1-30-2009
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.
Reply
jonathan ober said 1:59PM on 1-30-2009
apple 'lets' developers do that because it means more revenue for apple. and they get the extra bonus of having that developer pay to have their two apps on the store instead of one.
hkk said 2:41PM on 1-30-2009
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.
Reply
Victor Agreda Jr said 3:57PM on 1-30-2009
Last night we tried to submit an app that had the same name as another app, but we put "The" in front of it. The system kicked it back saying there was already an app named that.
So there's my experience. I'm sorry you think it isn't possible, but it happened.
NumberXII said 3:07PM on 1-30-2009
They should let the developer pick 5 keywords which are searchable so finding an app isn't dependent on the name.
Reply
Dave Hornsby said 3:58PM on 1-30-2009
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...
Reply
Bones3D said 4:23PM on 1-30-2009
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.
Reply
cysouw said 5:54AM on 1-31-2009
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.
Reply
chaser said 10:24PM on 1-31-2009
I very much enjoyed this article. I would like to see more articles like this on TUAW.
Reply