The Facebook "Verified" Apps Program...Should I Do It?

I know Facebook wants me to. But do I? Hmm...

If you don't know what this is all about, Facebook told developers with applications in their Apps directory months ago that they were implementing a "Verification" program that would enable us to differentiate our apps by having them in a paid tier of the Application store. These applications would represent the cream of the FB app crop, and so on. 

Initially I said, "oh yeah gotta do that, anything for more credibility". I love FB development, have a couple of apps out there, and was excited about the differentiation. But I hesitated, then stopped...what exactly do I get, by paying $375 to get my app listed as "Verified"? 

I know they're overhauling the overall Apps directory: all apps get a new profile page with their own news feeds, there's a new Applications You May Like section, an auto-generated list that combines the most popular apps on the site, apps your friends are using (oh great, "Flair"), and apps Facebook thinks you might like, based on what you're currently using...ok, that's all good stuff, it creates buzz, makes it all more visible, etc.

But as far as "verified", aside from saying "I have a verified app" to the world, here's the checklist of "what you get", as far as I know:

- A green check mark next to the rating stars under your app name/icon. 

- A Facebook "Verified App" icon on your about page.

- A "two-bucket boost" in requests and notification allocations, which "continue to be subject to the application reputation system which adjusts allocations based on various user response metrics".

- A $100 Facebook advertising credit. 

- Discounted registration fees to FB-type events. 

Here's a photo of the new overall app listing showing apps with the green check mark, and a photo of the verified logo from an about page:

Yeah, it's a good little kudo. But overall, I'm not going to rush to shell out $375 bucks for this, and I have a feeling many shops that crank out FB apps aren't going to tell their clients, "Oh yeah you GOTTA submit for verification". There's a lot of other ways to get the word out about an app: Twitter, FB fan pages, all the other social network mechanisms, you name it. 

This sort of reminds me of that "Windows Compatible" app signing program that Microsoft ran (or whatever the actual verbiage was); after a while, nobody cared anymore. Install instructions for apps that aren't branded this way warn you that it didn't have this accolade, and just told you to "Proceed Anyway", which is exactly what we all do. I never made an app choice because it had the OS manufacturers "compatible" logo on it.

Facebook also says this:

 "Facebook's Application Verification Program is an optional program designed to provide applications with a way to stand out and reassure users that they will provide a good experience. Users of verified applications can feel confident that these applications strive to be transparent about how they work and respect social expectations between friends."

What about the rating system, the discussion boards you can place around the app, the overall reputation system? If I look at this and see a lot of slag, I'm not going to touch that app. If my friends, or just a lot of people in general, say it's great, I might check it out. It's true, I may be somewhat more initially inclined to give an app a chance if it's verified, if there's no other data available. But I'll always consider what people say more heavily than I will consider any green checkmark. 

Another thing: many, many popular Facebook apps are here-today-gone-tomorrow. Would you spend $375, and wait, to get such an app verified? Probably not. Is that a good thing? Again, a lot of these apps run well and are popular, they're just not built for a long shelf life. I'm not sure that shuffling such apps to the "ordinary" category is the right thing to do. 

I'm surprised to find myself cynical about this, because I think Facebook does a great deal for the indie application developer. You can get an app, with robust social graph integration, into the FB world, for the price of learning their API and building something halfway decent. That's a great deal, both for the developer (exposure) and Facebook (content). 

But I think I'm going to hold onto my $375 and see how this plays out before I submit Planet Sudoku for verification. Even that might be a mistake though, because it's possible that the only time "Verified" will really matter is when it launches, and a little while after. When the novelty wears off, yeah you can still submit, but it might be just to get a verified app on your resume. 

Facebook will undoubtedly shuffle this one around a bit as they get feedback and so forth though...or, if it's just pointless and/or more trouble than it's worth, dumb it down or even abandon it. Unlikely, even very unlikely, but not, imho, in the realm of impossibility. 

The New Sunday Morning: Kindle and iPhone

It used to be, you got the NYTimes and Daily News--I mean c'mon, you gotta have the comics--sat down to your breakfast, brunch or early lunch, chatted with whomever is at the table, and/or just wrapped yourself up in a cocoon of news and thought. 

How things have changed, or maybe they've just evolved...or devolved. Hmm.

It struck me this morning that while the ritual is similar, the tools have changed. Today I found myself sitting with my tea and girlfriend--and thinking of a mimosa, ahem--but no newspapers. Instead, I was flipping around some unread sections of blogs and looking over the news on my Kindle 2, and when I found something of interest, quietly pushed it out to my friends on Facebook, or tweeted it, on my iPhone. 

Interesting; has this civilized Sunday self enrichment ritual, involving newspapers, discussion, and reflection, devolved into looking for anything to FB update or tweet because I hadn't said anything in a while? Am I actually getting as much quality time and info as I used to?

Many might say, "I've been reading news online for years, I get it free, and I get more of what I want, because I can search and yada." Well ok, but do you and your wife/girlfriend/friends bring your laptops to Frank's Waterfront in Edgewater, break them out on the table, and engage in discussion while typing/searching and all that? I think not. A working lunch, or a solo nosh, sure, but with people or in any kind of upscale place...no.

This isn't to say that this sort of thing is universally unacceptable; there's places that cater to it. I hang out at some excellent spots in Brooklyn along Atlantic and down Clinton and Smith streets, get great food, and bring my laptop, and I'm sure every neighborhood has such a place, or at least, one close by.

Anyway...

...as I changed from the Sunday Times for a minute to scan some news via the integrated web browser on the Kindle, I actually found that Thomson Reuters had blogged a first disclosure of the Reuters Insider, an online news product that is an industrial strength example of "narrowcasting". I found it interesting, particularly because I'm managing a team of UI developers on the project, and am under strict NDA not to discuss the project other than saying "I'm working on it". I handed the Kindle to my girlfriend and showed her the article, and we discussed it (paranoid assurance: I only discussed the content of the article). 

Note: If you're interested, google Reuters Insider, and look for the "Full Disclosure" blog link, it should be the first one. 

This specific interaction prompted me to blog today. It was exactly as if I had handed over a newspaper and pointed out an article. Sure I could have done it on my iPhone, but there was something much more appealing about handing over the Kindle, and while she looked it over, I could discreetly refresh my tweets. We discussed a little, then she handed back the Kindle, and the cycle resumed.

As far as information and retention, I scanned my NYTimes, and CNN, and blogs, bookmarked and annotated some things on the Kindle for later review, and so on; I believe I got my fill of news updates and such, and additionally, saw some interesting comments and interactions from the threads I follow on Twitter and Facebook. Not to mention that a day without Sockington would be a tough one, and possibly KingPoo (who I'm giving a chance). 

Regarding social appropriateness, nobody seems bothered by me using the paperback-sized, slim, subdued device (note, I have pre-ordered a Kindle DX, but probably won't bring it to a setting like this, it's a lot bigger). There have been curious looks and even a couple of "what's thats", but because the device emits no light or noise, lies slim and flat (unlike a laptop) on the table and holds like a book, and frankly looks quite nice in its leather cover, it seems that it passes social muster. Also, the iPhone, with all volume turned off (buzz enabled of course), is very subtle, since you can nav with one hand very quickly and discreetly, unlike many hold-in-front-of-your-face thumb typing phones with their audible thumb typing clicks. Naturally, excessive texting would compromise this, but that's getting back to the aforementioned Irish Pub thing. 

End result; it was fun, interesting, integrating the social graph enhanced the experience, and the combination of Kindle and iPhone, used with restraint, didn't appear to irk anybody. A laptop wouldn't have enabled the  same environment or interaction; the e-book reader, with the hyper-enhanced ability to scan, search, and mark up blogs and news, all of which will sync to my iPhone Kindle reader, and the discreet use of FB and Twitter when I felt like looking over popular topics, adds up to my new Sunday brunch gigbag. 

Oh right, I still got the comics, both with the Kindle 2 and iPhone's Safari. I mean c'mon...you've gotta have the comics.