Comments
App Analytics Raises Privacy Concerns
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Re: Don't make me laugh
  • 4/21/2014 2:32:35 PM
NO RATINGS

Michael, enhancements that facilitate my online activities is very much welcomed as giving value. They to point out the values of their services to the consumer. The source and means need to operate in clear view. Anyone collecting my personal information need to not be and/or appear in the shadows for my comfort. in such sensitive arena, you should take control of your Brand or you will be branded.

Re: Whoopee
  • 4/21/2014 9:19:07 AM
NO RATINGS

The shift in mobile app usage has been swift, that's for sure. But I still don't see great news in his touting the growth now -- especially in that it does raise privacy concerns that I'm guessing he'd rather than draw attention to!

Re: Don't make me laugh
  • 4/21/2014 9:16:11 AM
NO RATINGS

Ah, my presumption was that, should an app use take time to read the terms of use agreement prior to clicking "Download," the usage information would be evident -- isn't that one of the ways the company gets around privacy issues? Or would you like something more obvious -- putting the onus on the app developer and Flurry rather than on the app user?

Re: Gaming, eh?
  • 4/20/2014 7:26:03 PM
NO RATINGS

There is portability and social integration found in today's professional a handheld gaming market as well, but I assume that owning a games-centric electronic is not on everyone's wish list. The fact that our daily devices come with economic, simple games broadens the market.

Re: Don't make me laugh
  • 4/20/2014 6:23:52 PM
NO RATINGS

That's exactly right, rbaz. What kinds of perceived value would make a difference to you?

Re: Don't make me laugh
  • 4/20/2014 6:22:38 PM
NO RATINGS

Compensation can take many forms, Beth, and it can even be something as meaningless as in-app levels or currency. I guess my point is that I'd like Flurry to disclose itself to end-users, because, like you, I had no idea it existed.

Re: Whoopee
  • 4/20/2014 6:20:57 PM
NO RATINGS

I think you're right, Beth, but only from the perspective of hindsight. When 'apps' started becoming a thing 4-5 years ago for the iPod, I thought it was just a kids thing. And so, apparently, did many industry watchers.

Re: Gaming, eh?
  • 4/20/2014 6:19:21 PM
NO RATINGS

Do you mean the more immersive, graphics-heavy games, CandidoNick? I think the cheaper-download games bring portability and social integration, which everyone seems to love. The fancier games can't do that, can they?

Gaming, eh?
  • 4/16/2014 7:55:17 PM
NO RATINGS

I was pretty blown away by what a large percentage Gameing takes up on mo9bile devices. I get the small amount of web browsing versus the appropriate app, but I guess people really are playing these 99 cent games all day, every day.

It's a shame because these penny-grabbing developers hardly hold a candle to the complexity of more professional game makers.

Re: Don't make me laugh
  • 4/15/2014 3:02:57 PM
NO RATINGS

I guess that begs the question of how? How does Flurry get its name known and the value of its services out there? I'd say including such in a user terms of agreement would be the most logical from a business perspective but the most ineffectual from a user perspective. How many people downloading mobile apps truly read through those agreements before clicking "OK?" Is it fair to make Flurry carry more of an onus? I'm not suggesting yes or no, just tossing some ideas out there....

Page 1 / 2   >   >>


INFORMATION RESOURCES
ANALYTICS IN ACTION
CARTERTOONS
VIEW ALL +
QUICK POLL
VIEW ALL +