[VWWHFSfQ]

There's a weird nuance to this just because algorithmically PageRank itself was even somewhat anti-competitive.

"This page has fewer links to it than others, therefore it will be buried in search results"

I think most people appreciated Google's early search algos that prioritized "well-traffic'd" sites and sources over others. Obviously that was a long time ago before SEO (and Google themselves) destroyed everything. Back then there were actually still competitors in the search market so it didn't matter. Not the case now.

[kedean]

I always thought the idea there was that a website needed to grow organically before google would rank it highly, which makes sense to me. Prove yourself first by building a network, they aren't obligated to help out.

The difference here is that the play store is the one and only way to get apps for a regular user. By putting that banner up, they're discouraging anyone from trying it even if they found out about it through other channels.

The analog in 2000 or so would be if Microsoft added a warning banner to any website you visited in Internet Explorer with a low link count.

[crazygringo]

I don't really see the difference.

The entire point is that you can find the app through other channels -- articles, posts, social media.

They just link to the Play store, but that's how you find them. The banner shouldn't be discouraging if you've come from a post that explains it's brand-new!

[luckylion]

Freshbot was a well-known effect back then (arguably still is, at least I see effects that look very similar where some new content section will rank quickly and amazingly well for a week or two and then slowly sink to the level you'd expect from such new content).

But in the end, it's network effects, only that this banner seems to enforce it manually and explicitly. The old way would've been to not show apps with few users in the top spots.