

Apple Changed Search Algorithm for App Store - clarky07
http://www.entrelife.com/2012/06/apple-changed-search-algorithm-for-app.html

======
siglesias
I've also noticed screwy behavior. My app is called "Tea" and it's a fairly
well regarded app for tea drinkers.

For the search term "tea", the new algorithm places my app at spot 59 (before
it had top billing), and places other irrelevant items, like political tea
party stuff, games, and general purpose timers, ahead. If the purpose of the
new ranking methodology was to place higher weight on downloads and less on
name matching, then there's an unintended consequence of certain niche search
terms getting crowded out by tangentially related popular apps. How many
people searching "tea" are interested in "M.A.S.H" (result 6) or "Proud
Republican"(result 8)? These apps didn't make their bones on tea, but somehow
the new algorithm is acting like they did.

This is not to mention that it makes it extraordinarily difficult for folks to
find my app if I tell them its name [1]. Here's hoping that this system has
more under the hood than meets the eye.

1)
[https://twitter.com/Lady_KatieJane1/statuses/216444225909301...](https://twitter.com/Lady_KatieJane1/statuses/216444225909301248)

~~~
markerdmann
I completely agree, and I rant about this issue on a regular basis to anyone
who will listen. Basic search relevance is an incredibly important feature
(seems obvious, right?) that Apple is failing to provide. And the App Store
has been open for four years! Perhaps it's the weight of the iTunes Music
Store legacy code that I presume the App Store leans on which prevents
progress? As it stands, the App Store today is worse than the web before
Google.

~~~
taligent
AFAIK App Store is still based on a modified WebObjects/Java stack with Lucene
as the search technology. So not exactly a legacy technology.

Unfortunately with Lucene/search in general? it is less of a science and more
of a black art.

------
tseabrooks
OP is my business partner. Building on top of someone elses (Apple's) platform
is getting scarier and scarier. They are constantly making sweeping changes
that effect our bottom line and provide no transparency, or analytics of
almost any kinds, for devs. If I didn't know better I'd say apple hates devs
and thinks of us only as a necessary evil... Just throwing us enough of a bone
to not jump ship. Obviously, we plan to spread onto other platforms in the
meantime we serve at the pleasure of the king, it seems. We are the new
generation of "Serf Devs".

~~~
mahyarm
Reminds me of governments

------
ja27
Yeah I noticed this yesterday and didn't get time to really research it. I
thought I might be crazy, but sure enough, now app name and keywords are
searched independently. You can search for "Instagram camera" and not find
Instagram. That's crazy.

I need to scramble to get some app updates done to change keywords. I wish
Apple would make some sort of statement about this. I also wish they'd let us
update keywords without a binary change, even if it's a one-time "free" update
to deal with this change.

~~~
doktorn
For me Instagram turns up if I actually search for it. It doesn't turn up in
search suggestions as I type though.

~~~
ja27
It shows up for "Instagram" and "camera" but not "Instagram camera". That's a
fundamentally broken search feature.

------
markerdmann
Great post. Another important change: Apple used to give a lot of weight to
titles that exactly matched the search phrase. If you wanted to rank highly
for a certain search term, e.g. "flashlight", you could change your title to
"flashlight" or "flashlight." or "flashlight+" to show up at the top of
results. This trick no longer works... one of our apps went from result #3 to
result #37 for the search that matches its title.

Personally, though, I love sudden upheavals like this. If you're paying
attention and move fast, it gives you an edge against competitors that have
become fat and happy.

~~~
dwc
_> Apple used to give a lot of weight to titles that exactly matched the
search phrase._

This is something I use quite often, purely as a consumer. I read a blog, or a
comment on HN, reddit, et al and go looking for a specific app. Not being able
to find a specific app when you know it's name is not a solution to stuffing,
or whatever this problem is called.

~~~
dpcan
My apps still come up by name with no problem. It's probably going to affect
the apps with very generic names the most.

------
shimfish
The other big problem is that Apple provide zero analytics. I have no idea how
people find my app. Apple don't tell you what searches people used so it's
impossible to optimize or effectively test keywords. Plus you can only change
your keywords with a binary update.

~~~
taligent
Actually this is a good thing. I don't want the world of SEO to be brought to
iOS apps.

They should put the keywords that best reflects what their app is and does and
leave it at that. In fact Apple should make it even harder to change.

~~~
gyardley
Way, way too late for that. SEO can and is conducted, even without analytics
from Apple.

------
andrewljohnson
I've stuffed keywords in app titles, and it works well. It's rampant in the
navigation category.

A couple releases ago, Apple rejected my app on the grounds we were doing it
too much. So, I changed the title and resubmitted.

While I was gearing up for next release, I sent several emails to the review
team complaining it wasn't fair, because my precise competitors were doing it,
and I was getting killed because my app didn't rank for the search "topo maps"
as well as it used to.

I never got an affirmation back that they thought I was in the right, but I
changed my title back to a longer version next release and the reviewer didn't
reject it this time. Hard to tell if it's just luck of the reviewer draw.

~~~
zithtar
There are a number of different review teams and Apple has outright told
different things to different teams.

I'm not an iOS dev and this is why.

------
vizsladriver
From what we can see, the number of downloads is now a more dominant factor in
rank order. Searching for "wedding" a lot of PlayFirst games show up ahead of
actual wedding apps because they cross-promote Wedding Dash. Meanwhile
WeddingHappy, our wedding planning app, is down to number 74 and downloads
have decreased 30%, even though we fare better with more specific search
terms.

This makes it much more difficult for new entrants to get into the market
without established apps to cross-promote them, and for small developers to
stay afloat with a handful of niche apps.

~~~
ricardobeat
Cross-promotion should be banned. I hate wanting to read an app's description
and being shoved quotes, update logs, developer comments, cross-promotion and
other crap.

------
daed
I feel like ranking more popular apps higher in search results hurts app
discovery, which I can't imagine is their goal.

~~~
markerdmann
And it also favors incumbents over higher quality or more relevant results.

~~~
MBCook
To be fair, it also favors higher quality incumbents over the dozens of
knockoff me-too apps like Grumpy Avians, Monsters Eat My Apartments, and
Temple Race+. Or worse yet, the "strategy guide" apps for games that cost
_more than the original game_.

------
clarky07
The other major problem with app search that I didn't mention in the article
is the auto-complete. For some unknown reason rather than having an auto-
complete based on what the user is typing, they have an auto-complete that
puts up full app names. In my little niche, if you start typing "debt..." you
are probably thinking "debt free" or "debt snowball". Instead you are greeted
with "Debt free - pay off your debts with debt snowball method." Yep, that is
what I was planning on typing.

It starts with "debt free" so a lot of people probably click on that. There
are tons of apps that should be coming up for this search, but before this
weekend it was 3. that app and 2 others that have all of those keywords he
stuffed in his title. Now only his app shows up, as the other 2 apps were the
keyword list along with having "Debt Snowball" in the title.

Surely having just 1 app come up in the search isn't the best user experience.

~~~
AznHisoka
Yep, if the algorithm is based on # of downloads, usage, etc.. this means the
rich gets richer! You rank on top, people click to download because you're #1
for auto-complete, so you rank higher.. and appear in auto-complete higher..
rinse, repeat.

------
meric
"The Web is dead. Long live the Web."

I may be wrong but it looks like Google's fear of the mobile ecosystem - that
apps cannot be crawled, indexed and searched for may be an overreaction. It is
precisely because apps cannot be crawled, indexed and searched for, the mobile
application ecosystem's expansion will be limited - mobile app discovery will
continue to rely on the web. Apps are isolated and cannot link to a particular
state of another app. No links, no network effects. The expansion of the app
ecosystem is currently limited by the number of apps in the market; With each
new app in the market users will require more time to search for a suitable
app. More websites, however, actually encourages even more websites, due to
linking and references between all the websites; More websites enable users to
discover faster the website they derive the most value out of (due to
linking). More mobile applications, on the other hand, do not. It's almost
like binary tree search O(log(n)) vs iterative search O(n).

These are just my opinions, however, so take it with a grain of salt.

------
sil3ntmac
The last time I put something on the app store (~1 yr ago), you could enter up
to 100 characters of keywords, which would have prevented the author's initial
problem. Did Apple change keywords in the upload process?

~~~
markerdmann
You can still add up to 100 characters of keywords when you submit a new
binary, but because of the 100 character limit many people would also place
keywords in the title. Going forward, you'll have to ensure that the keywords
for a given search phrase are _either_ in your title or in your keywords.

~~~
clarky07
I think you'll pretty much be forced to include your title in the keywords
section. note that "instagram camera" does not return the instagram app.

Also, previously you were not allowed to put your title in your keywords.

------
hack_edu
I have to admit that I have little sympathy for developers can't speak to
whether or not this specific move makes is a better solution or not, but
search optimization is a silly little game to take advantage of inefficient
systems in the first place. Damn the marketplace provider if they try to
optimize to help users find the right products for their needs, rather than
those who can throw the most resources behind gaming the system.

~~~
clarky07
Did you read the article? My apps that aren't stuffing keywords in the title
got screwed and the competitors that were are now on top?

