Ranking based on a number of factors, not just a string match is generally a good idea.

When someone searches on the term "maps" do you want the "best" (highest rated, most popular, whatever) app to be the top hit (give it a week and that'll likely be Google Maps), or the one from the person who had done a bit of SEO and thought to call his app "maps" to hit the exact string match?

I contest that what's happening is actually a good thing and what you propose would be a field day for those who look to game the system.

Does that hold true when the exact string match is already #1 on the Free Apps list? Because to me, if it's an exact string match, AND it's wildly popular...

The shorter the period of time you use to measure popularity, the more volatile the order will be.

I think it's clear that this is a transient issue, that the apps popularity will kick in shortly so I'm not sure it's a big deal regardless.

UK App Store at least it's up to fourth now so it's moving.

Okay, how about, it's an exact string match, it's wildly popular, and it's from a well known and long time developer whose apps have always been wildly popular? Is that enough yet, to make search not suck?

PS, Google Maps is now the third search result instead of the fifth. After how many days should search not suck?

Given that that app is going to be there for years, how about what percentage of the time? At the moment it's likely that it will be a small fraction of 1%.

And search doesn't suck - it's still easy to find, you just need to look a little bit more. Given that it's the number one free download discovery really doesn't seem to be an issue here.

This happens with every new app release, it takes a while for it to show up in the search results.

But it was in the search results. This isn't a case of "not there yet."