• Replies 18 replies
  • Subscribers 9 subscribers
  • Views 2131 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Connect IQ Store: Separate “New Releases” From Recently Updated Apps

EdgarsLv

Currently, sorting the Connect IQ Store by Recent appears to include both newly released apps/watch faces and older apps that have recently received an update.

This makes it difficult to discover genuinely new releases.

Developers with large catalogs can update many existing apps or watch faces frequently. As a result, those updated products repeatedly appear near the top of the Recent listing and newly published apps can be pushed down very quickly.

I think new releases and updates should be treated separately.

My suggestion would be:

  • Recent / New Releases — only apps and watch faces that have been newly published to the Connect IQ Store, sorted by their original release date.
  • Recently Updated — existing apps and watch faces sorted by their latest update date.

Updating an existing app should not reset its position in the New Releases/Recent listing.

This would make it much easier for users to discover genuinely new Connect IQ content while still giving users a separate way to find apps that are actively being updated.

It would also give new developers and new products a reasonable opportunity to be discovered instead of competing for visibility with every update to existing products.

  • in reply to jim_m_58

    It doesn't seem that way, because if you were, you'd understand that newly released apps should be listed separately from recently updated ones.

    Throughout my entire career as a developer, clients have always wanted new releases and recently updated things to be listed separately, because that's what users expect.

     

  • in reply to jim_m_58

    I'm just suggesting that new releases should be separated from recently updated apps. That doesn't hurt anyone. It helps users discover genuinely new apps and gives new developers a better chance of getting noticed. Yet you're against it? Seriously?

  • in reply to EdgarsLv

    I think most actual CIQ users use categories and ratings and not recent.  Why see WFs if you are looking for a Running DF?

    I think your drive may to make your apps more visible. The long term apps want the same.  Does it matter if an app is brand new or been updated for a new device when a user looks for something?

  • in reply to jim_m_58

    But let users decide what they want to see. If they want to discover genuinely new apps, they can sort by "New Releases." If they want to see recently updated apps, they can sort by "Recently Updated."

    As a user, if I've already seen an app when it was first released and wasn't interested in it, I don't want to see it appearing over and over again under "New Releases" just because the developer keeps updating it.

    On the other hand, if a user was interested in an app but wasn't quite convinced, they can always sort by "Recently Updated" to see whether it has received any improvements that might change their mind.

    That's exactly why these two categories should be separate. It gives users more control over what they want to discover, without taking anything away from anyone.

    Why is that so hard to understand?

  • in reply to EdgarsLv

    There’s really no point in debating this with Jim. As an established developer with a large catalog, he naturally benefits from the status quo. So from his perspective, there's little reason to change a system that works in his favor.

    Objectively, you are completely right. This shouldn’t even be up for debate. Modern platforms like the iOS App Store and Google Play have solved this long ago: they clearly separate genuinely new releases from app updates. More importantly, pushing an update does not grant automatic top-level visibility. Their algorithms rank apps based on actual engagement and downloads, not who bumped their version number most recently.

    Yet on the Connect IQ Store, a developer can change a single line of code, push an update, and immediately claim the top spot in the listings again. It heavily disincentivizes new creators, clutters the store for users, and it’s hard to fathom why Garmin still hasn't addressed this loop.

  • in reply to 6859118

    I'm not sure end users care if they see brand new apps along side older apps when they look for something,  I kind of doubt it

    Doing this split actually will make it more complex for end users, IMHO

  • in reply to jim_m_58

    As a user, I can tell you that we do.

    And sorry, but do you really think people are so stupid that they wouldn't be able to figure out what one additional sorting option does? That they won't understand what "New Releases" and "Recently Updated" mean?

    But I guess you're just trolling me at this point.

  • Here's my take on this, but first a bio - 10+ years as a Garmin watch wearer, 5 years as a watch face 'developer' (I'm not a techie and I've self taught myself monkey c), with a few free ones and about 40 paid ones via a 3rd party. With each face enabled for as many watches as possible, I guess my average is about 200 watch models per watch face.

    As a user I want the option to see just brand new watch faces (so i agree with the OP), this is because previously I spent hours scrolling through the watch faces (including all the slop ones) and I don't want to scroll through them again. I just want to check out new ones to see if there are any I like - and yes I know I'll have to go through the recently added ones that have no functionality and just have different backgrounds. So this is why recently updated and recently added should be separated.

    I'm sure we could all go on forever about how some users game the ratings and their apps take up the top 25 of each section, but this topic has been done to death on here with no response or action from Garmin.

    So as a USER please Garmin split Recently Added and Recently Updated into 2 sections, it will make for a better user experience and probably sell more apps making Garmin extra money.