Wert aus Rezensionen: 74 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 514 Bewertungen
74von 100
A simple, free, and reliable watering scheduler that genuinely helps people with ADHD and forgetfulness keep their plants alive. It does not identify plants or offer care advice, but it does its one job well.
Gelobt
Clean interface with no clutter and accurate watering notifications that have saved more than a few plant collections.
Kritik
No way to pick a specific watering day, and you cannot snooze a notification when the plant does not actually need water yet.
Für wen: The forgetful plant owner who needs an honest reminder tool with no extras
Wert aus Rezensionen: 72 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 9.214 Bewertungen
72von 100
A real vegetable garden planning tool with educational videos from the team and concrete advice on sowing and care. The main limitations are product-level: no watering reminders, poor support for large beds and containers.
Gelobt
Users grew their first harvest from scratch and learned gardening through the built-in guides and the team's YouTube support.
Kritik
No watering or fertilizing reminders, bed size is limited, and container growing is not supported.
Für wen: The beginner gardener planning traditional in-ground rows
Wert aus Rezensionen: 72 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 304 Bewertungen
72von 100
The best of the niche watering trackers: clean interface, personalized schedules, cross-device sync, and pleasant notifications. The main pain point is data loss when iCloud runs into trouble.
Gelobt
Users say this is the app that finally helped them stop killing their houseplants.
Kritik
No fertilizing or feeding reminders, only watering.
Für wen: Houseplant lovers who need a simple and reliable watering planner
Platz 4. Wert aus Rezensionen: 65 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 7.005 Bewertungen
65von 100
The strongest app in this set for species accuracy in the field, with organ selection and geotagging. The core product gap: no care advice, watering, or diagnosis, and some users get IP-blocked.
Gelobt: Accurately identifies species from a leaf, flower, or fruit with high precision, including rare plants.
Kritik: Zero care information: after identification the user has to go elsewhere for any advice.
Für wen: Naturalist, botanist, or gardener who needs precise species identification
Platz 5. Wert aus Rezensionen: 62 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 105.427 Bewertungen
62von 100
Plant Nanny is a human water intake tracker, not a plant care app: a virtual seedling dies if the user does not drink enough. The core feature is executed well and genuinely changes hydration habits for a wide audience, including diabetics and people recovering from illness.
Gelobt: The gamification works. Users report actually drinking more water after weeks of use.
Kritik: You cannot manually set a custom daily water goal in the free version, even though that is the only setting that matters.
Für wen: People who forget to drink water and want a light, game-like nudge
Platz 6. Wert aus Rezensionen: 62 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,9★ · 2.210 Bewertungen
62von 100
This is a shop app for ordering plants, not a care tool. Most users are happy with the quality of plants and packaging on arrival, though occasional damaged leaves and shipping delays come up.
Gelobt: Plants arrive healthy and well-packaged even to Alaska.
Kritik: No filter for in-stock items, so you have to scroll through hundreds of listings to find what is actually available.
Für wen: Tropical plant enthusiast looking for rare species with delivery
Platz 7. Wert aus Rezensionen: 62 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 420 Bewertungen
62von 100
A strong seasonal garden planner that auto-generates tasks by crop and reschedules when dates shift. The main weakness is that planting dates sometimes miss the mark for local conditions, and the mobile interface scales poorly on iPad.
Gelobt: Automatic task rescheduling when a planting date changes saves gardeners a lot of manual work.
Kritik: Hard to use if you have already planted something: the app is designed for starting from scratch.
Für wen: Gardeners who plan their season in advance and want a structured task calendar
Platz 8. Wert aus Rezensionen: 58 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 1.088.124 Bewertungen
58von 100
The market leader in plant identification with genuinely decent accuracy on common species, but unstable on cultivars and hybrids. The key weakness is that disease diagnosis sits behind a paywall, making the free tool nearly useless for treating sick plants.
Gelobt: Accurately recognizes common flowers and trees across different climate zones, works in the field without fuss.
Kritik: The same photo of the same plant returns different species on repeated attempts, and accuracy on cultivars is unreliable.
Für wen: Casual gardeners who need quick identification without in-depth diagnosis
Platz 9. Wert aus Rezensionen: 58 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 14.521 Bewertungen
58von 100
This is a live-streaming marketplace for buying and selling rare plants, not a care app. For its actual purpose it works, giving access to niche sellers you will not find at garden centers. Moderation and buyer protection are inconsistent.
Gelobt: Access to collectible and rare species from small growers without traveling to a plant fair.
Kritik: An algorithmic feed replaced the chronological subscription feed and now hides sellers you actually follow.
Für wen: Rare plant collector looking for niche sellers
Platz 10. Wert aus Rezensionen: 58 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 3.508 Bewertungen
58von 100
A good app with plant-based recipes: attractive design and convenient sorting by diet type. Completely unrelated to plant care. No nutritional data, and some recipes are locked.
Gelobt: Sorting by gluten content and diet type works well for vegans and vegetarians.
Kritik: No calorie or nutritional information for any dish.
Für wen: Vegans and vegetarians looking for recipe ideas
Platz 11. Wert aus Rezensionen: 55 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 30.827 Bewertungen
55von 100
A free wildlife identifier with a solid database and an educational approach, but after the latest update the camera stops focusing up close and 50% of attempts fall into the "dicots" catch-all. Not designed for houseplant care.
Gelobt: Gamification through challenges and badges draws both kids and adults into learning about nature.
Kritik: Gives no care advice whatsoever, only species identification with no watering, disease, or lighting guidance.
Platz 12. Wert aus Rezensionen: 55 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 8.726 Bewertungen
55von 100
The app controls the Gardyn hydroponic system and helps grow fresh greens when everything runs smoothly. The problem is that the AI assistant Kelby cannot scan its own capsule QR codes, tasks and reminders moved behind a paywall, and periodic crashes can kill a harvest.
Gelobt: When stable, the system lets you harvest fresh lettuce weekly with minimal effort.
Kritik: The Kelby AI cannot recognize its own capsules by QR code and requires manual entry for every plant.
Für wen: Gardyn device owner who needs basic system control
Platz 13. Wert aus Rezensionen: 55 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,3★ · 3.873 Bewertungen
55von 100
A niche garden planner with companion planting logic and sowing schedules. Real fans use it for years to manage crop rotation. Weak spots: no automatic zone detection and an incomplete crop database.
Gelobt: Companion planting and crop rotation logic works and helps plan bed layouts for the season.
Kritik: No automatic planting zone detection, and many basic vegetables are missing from the database.
Für wen: Gardeners with raised beds or a greenhouse
Platz 14. Wert aus Rezensionen: 54 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 2.533 Bewertungen
54von 100
The watering schedule works and genuinely helps people with dozens of plants keep up with care. But after updates data disappears, notifications break, and toxicity information for pets sometimes contradicts itself between sections.
Gelobt: A clear watering calendar that keeps even a large houseplant collection organized.
Kritik: The plant database is incomplete, and toxicity information gives different answers in search results versus the plant card.
Für wen: Owner of 20 or more pots who needs a reliable watering planner
Platz 15. Wert aus Rezensionen: 52 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 111.411 Bewertungen
52von 100
The best care planner in the category: watering, fertilizing, and repotting schedules work and keep collections alive for users who treat it as an organizer. The weak spot is performance instability and excessive notifications asking for health updates.
Gelobt: Adapts the watering schedule to the specific species and season, with dozens of plants in a single daily task list.
Kritik: The watering schedule cannot adapt to drip irrigation or non-standard routines, sending daily reminders where once a week would be right.
Für wen: Owners of large home collections who need an organizer, not an identifier
Platz 16. Wert aus Rezensionen: 52 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 20.039 Bewertungen
52von 100
The most thoughtfully designed watering tracker in this set: tracks pot size, sends reminders, manages a collection. But the identifier mixes up orchids, hoya, and mint with alfalfa, and app reliability has dropped lately.
Gelobt: The watering reminder system accounts for plant species and pot size, which genuinely helps avoid overwatering.
Kritik: The identifier struggles with atypical specimens, and there is no way to correct a wrong identification.
Für wen: Owner of 5 to 20 houseplants who needs a watering tracker
Platz 17. Wert aus Rezensionen: 52 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,2★ · 6.792 Bewertungen
52von 100
A decent 3D yard planning tool, but completely unrelated to plant care. The object library is thin, garden shrubs and plants are sparse, and data sometimes vanishes after a crash.
Gelobt: Convenient for sketching a rough backyard or pool layout before meeting with a contractor.
Kritik: Very few actual garden plants and shrubs in the catalog.
Für wen: People planning a yard or landscape layout
Platz 18. Wert aus Rezensionen: 49 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 86.719 Bewertungen
49von 100
An app with a pleasant interface for organizing a collection and its schedule, but the plant database is narrow: dozens of philodendron, anthurium, and alocasia varieties are missing. Diagnosis is weak: it reported a dying hydrangea as fine, and fertilizing information contradicts itself across sections.
Gelobt: Clean plant card interface with a growth photo log and task schedule on one screen.
Kritik: The species database is outdated and incomplete for tropical plant collectors, and adding a species manually is not possible.
Für wen: Beginners with a small collection of popular species
Platz 19. Wert aus Rezensionen: 48 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,4★ · 6.534 Bewertungen
48von 100
Recognition works in roughly 80% of cases for common species, and there is a useful light check and overwatering diagnosis. Disease and pest identification is weaker, especially on blurry photos or uncommon species.
Gelobt: The light sensor helped one user realize a fern was getting too much direct sun.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis is unreliable: fungal infection on lilac was not recognized at all.
Platz 20. Wert aus Rezensionen: 48 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 398 Bewertungen
48von 100
The concept is right: a planting calendar localized by climate zone with a task list. But recommended dates are sometimes off by a month from reality, and the app regularly loses data after updates.
Gelobt: Users appreciate that the app adapts the planting schedule to their specific region.
Kritik: The crop list is limited, has no search, and adding a non-standard plant is impossible.
Für wen: Beginning gardeners in US climate zones who can tolerate occasional data loss
Platz 21. Wert aus Rezensionen: 46 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 68.050 Bewertungen
46von 100
One of the oldest identifiers with a large database, working well on trees and wildflowers, but it consistently flags three-leaf plants as poison ivy and offers almost no care tools. Disease diagnosis is generic and unreliable.
Gelobt: Quickly identifies wild species from a photo with no preparation needed, large flora database across many regions.
Kritik: No dedicated care or watering module, and identification in ambiguous cases is unreliable with no alternative suggestions.
Für wen: Naturalists and hikers who need to quickly identify a wild plant on the trail
Platz 22. Wert aus Rezensionen: 44 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 224.846 Bewertungen
44von 100
An app with a built-in botanical chat and watering schedule, but identification accuracy is low: it confuses watermelon seedlings with cucumber and fails to recognize basic cultivated plants. Real harm is confirmed by users who lost their collections following its advice.
Gelobt: The ability to chat with a bot about a specific plant is handy when you need step-by-step guidance.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis comes down to five template answers (overwatering, underwatering, light) without looking at the actual symptoms.
Für wen: Beginners willing to cross-check advice from other sources
Platz 23. Wert aus Rezensionen: 44 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 8.777 Bewertungen
44von 100
Has a working AI chat and basic identification, but the light meter gives incorrect readings even under grow lights, and disease diagnosis consistently falls short of expectations.
Gelobt: Older users appreciate the simple interface and the AI chat for basic care questions.
Kritik: Light meter is inaccurate, disease diagnosis lacks specific treatment steps, and watering advice does not account for soil moisture.
Für wen: Beginning home gardener with a small collection
Platz 24. Wert aus Rezensionen: 42 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 10.330 Bewertungen
42von 100
Identification generally works and has helped some users save plants, but problem diagnosis is fundamentally unreliable: it returns succulents instead of legumes and gives no concrete treatment advice.
Gelobt: Can be accurate on clean shots and gives specific care tips for the identified plant.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis confuses species and does not explain what to do with a specific problem.
Für wen: Beginning gardener who needs basic species identification
Platz 25. Wert aus Rezensionen: 40 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 13.269 Bewertungen
40von 100
A garden planner with a visual bed layout and watering schedule, but weather data is regularly wrong: after 100mm of rain it still tells you to water. The crop variety database is thin, and agronomic advice is sometimes incorrect, such as squash family sowing recommendations.
Gelobt: Visual garden layout with companion planting helps plan bed arrangements.
Kritik: Weather integration is unreliable, making the watering schedule more harmful than helpful.
Für wen: Gardener who needs a visual bed layout tool
Platz 26. Wert aus Rezensionen: 38 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 68.670 Bewertungen
38von 100
An app with a good idea for personalized care scheduling that degraded after a tripled price hike and sync failures: collections reset to zero, schedules shift on their own, and care advice does not work for non-standard climates like Arizona. AI diagnostics are superficial.
Gelobt: When the app runs stably, managing a large collection's care schedule is convenient and clear.
Kritik: Watering schedule does not adapt to climate or pot size and shifts for no apparent reason after updates.
Für wen: Users in temperate climates with basic houseplant species
Platz 27. Wert aus Rezensionen: 38 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 12.211 Bewertungen
38von 100
Identification works fast but accuracy is inconsistent: only 5 out of 23 plants identified correctly according to one review. Disease diagnosis consistently does not work.
Gelobt: Instant photo recognition delights beginners and kids.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis is non-functional, care tips are too generic, and the feature for handling sick plants is essentially absent.
Für wen: Curious beginners who just want to know a plant's name
Platz 28. Wert aus Rezensionen: 38 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,1★ · 622 Bewertungen
38von 100
When login works, the app usefully manages the lighting schedule and reminds you about nutrients. But account login breaks regularly, schedules reset after power outages, and physical controls were removed from the device, so without a working app the plants go unattended.
Gelobt: A working lighting schedule and water and nutrient notifications make herb growing genuinely hands-off.
Kritik: Login breaks every few months, after which controlling the device is physically impossible.
Für wen: AeroGarden hydroponic device owner willing to deal with periodic login failures
Platz 29. Wert aus Rezensionen: 35 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 118.082 Bewertungen
35von 100
An identifier that once worked has degraded to near-total paywall lockdown: free identification is gone, experts take weeks to respond if at all, and the orchid and rare species database is extremely thin. Value as a care tool is close to zero.
Gelobt: The plant journal interface is convenient for keeping a photo diary of a collection, and reminders fire accurately.
Kritik: Identification is unreliable on cultivars and hybrids, and manually correcting a result is not possible.
Für wen: Users who only need a journal and reminders without identification
Platz 30. Wert aus Rezensionen: 35 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 1.168 Bewertungen
35von 100
This is a companion app for the Roblox game Grow a Garden, not a real gardening tool: it notifies you when seeds and items appear in the in-game shop. Servers are often unavailable, and the game database lags behind updates.
Gelobt: Working notifications about rare items in the in-game shop genuinely help players not miss what they need.
Kritik: Server is frequently unavailable, and the catalog does not keep up with game updates.
Für wen: Roblox player who does not want to miss event seeds
Platz 31. Wert aus Rezensionen: 33 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 4.316 Bewertungen
33von 100
Basic recognition works and care cards and a plant collection are included. But sync is poor: data does not transfer to a new phone, and the sync process drains the battery.
Gelobt: Recognition of most common species works quickly.
Kritik: The plant collection does not sync between devices and is lost when switching phones.
Für wen: People willing to keep their collection on a single device
Platz 32. Wert aus Rezensionen: 32 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 31.299 Bewertungen
32von 100
Identifies common plants tolerably but regularly misses trees and lesser-known species, and offers almost no disease diagnosis. After a major update, photo saving and social features broke.
Gelobt: Long-term users appreciate the broad database of garden and field plants.
Kritik: Instead of explaining how to treat a disease, redirects to an external site with no specifics.
Für wen: Casual gardener who just needs a plant name
Platz 33. Wert aus Rezensionen: 32 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 8.197 Bewertungen
32von 100
Identification is superficial, disease diagnosis is broken according to widespread reports, and a photo limit on the collection makes the core feature inconvenient even for paying users.
Gelobt: Quickly identifies a species from a photo and sometimes helps you confirm something is not a weed.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis does not work reliably, and the photo limit in the collection gets in the way of tracking plants.
Für wen: Someone who needs to look up an unfamiliar plant's name once
Platz 34. Wert aus Rezensionen: 31 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,4★ · 3.599 Bewertungen
31von 100
Identification is unreliable for common cultivated plants, and diagnosis gives generic advice instead of concrete steps. Users who need help with a sick plant leave disappointed.
Gelobt: Works better for wild plants and garden perennials than for vegetable crops.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis is limited to general recommendations with no concrete actions.
Für wen: People who enjoy walking and identifying wild plants
Platz 35. Wert aus Rezensionen: 30 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 54.516 Bewertungen
30von 100
A basic identifier with unstable accuracy: the same object gets different names on repeated shots, and coarse errors like mushroom identified as a palm have been documented by users. Disease diagnosis and care tools are nearly absent.
Gelobt: Sometimes correctly identifies common species like nasturtium on the second try.
Kritik: Identification is unstable to the point where trusting the result without a second check is risky.
Für wen: Casual users who need identification once a year without accuracy expectations
Platz 36. Wert aus Rezensionen: 30 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 19.242 Bewertungen
30von 100
Three free attempts per day, then a subscription, and accuracy on common vegetables is below expectations. Disease diagnosis costs extra. Fine for casual curiosity, not for serious plant care.
Gelobt: Care tip cards (watering, fertilizing, light) shown after a successful identification are written clearly.
Kritik: Three daily attempts are not enough to judge how accurate the identifier is before paying.
Für wen: Casual user who needs to identify an unfamiliar plant
Platz 37. Wert aus Rezensionen: 30 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,3★ · 9.663 Bewertungen
30von 100
The app's core flaw is well-documented in reviews: diagnosis almost always returns healthy even for plants that are visibly dying or already dead. Identification only handles broad families, not specific species.
Gelobt: Quickly names a plant family from a good photo.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis is functionally broken: returns healthy regardless of the plant's actual condition.
Für wen: Someone who already knows their plant and just wants to confirm the name
Platz 38. Wert aus Rezensionen: 29 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,4★ · 5.815 Bewertungen
29von 100
Identification accuracy is low: the same plant gets different answers, and a bromeliad was identified as snake plant. Intrusive ads after every scan make the experience unbearable.
Gelobt: The app is free and requires no subscription for basic recognition.
Kritik: Ads after every photo scan and weak species recognition.
Für wen: People who want to try plant identification at no cost
Platz 39. Wert aus Rezensionen: 29 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,3★ · 362 Bewertungen
29von 100
The idea of an AI visual garden planner is interesting, but in practice the generation outputs images of a cake or a crying girl instead of a garden layout. The app frequently fails to launch, and toxic plants show up in recommendations even after explicit exclusions.
Gelobt: The drag-and-drop editor for arranging plants on a site plan is called more convenient than alternatives by a handful of users.
Kritik: AI generation is unreliable and produces random results instead of garden layouts.
Für wen: Landscape enthusiasts willing to tolerate instability for a visual planner
Platz 40. Wert aus Rezensionen: 28 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 37.776 Bewertungen
28von 100
The identifier confuses Thanksgiving cactus with Christmas cactus, consistently diagnoses any problem as needing less water, and the water all button does not actually log watering. For a beginner who loses a plant, this app is more likely to make things worse.
Gelobt: The growth journal and watering reminders are appreciated by those with one healthy houseplant.
Kritik: Diagnosis works from a template and gives the same answer regardless of the symptoms.
Platz 42. Wert aus Rezensionen: 28 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 2.534 Bewertungen
28von 100
Identification is inaccurate according to multiple users who report wrong IDs and diagnoses. The real value as a plant care tool is not supported by substantive reviews.
Gelobt: Convenient to photograph an unfamiliar plant and get at least some care hint right away.
Kritik: Recognition is unreliable: the app confuses species and gives incorrect disease diagnoses.
Für wen: Beginner who is fine with an approximate watering suggestion
Platz 43. Wert aus Rezensionen: 28 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 453 Bewertungen
28von 100
Plant identification works intermittently: cucumber identified as squash, rhododendron as strawberry tree. Disease diagnosis follows template questions without actually analyzing the photo, and the result is predictably vague.
Gelobt: Some users appreciate that the app is genuinely free without a forced subscription.
Kritik: Recognition accuracy is too low for practical use.
Für wen: People who want to try a plant identifier for free with no high expectations
Platz 44. Wert aus Rezensionen: 25 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 15.203 Bewertungen
25von 100
Mistook a birkin philodendron for a calla lily, could not find a money tree, and told a user with yellow, pest-ridden leaves that their plant was healthy. The 7,000-plant database claim sounds good, but accuracy is at chance level.
Gelobt: The watering tracker with reminders is appreciated by users with many plants who cannot track manually.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis does not work and returns healthy regardless of the plant's actual state.
Platz 45. Wert aus Rezensionen: 25 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 10.083 Bewertungen
25von 100
Actual app functionality is barely traceable in reviews: ads promised specific home remedies, but the app only gives standard watering and light tips. Diagnosis takes up to two days and often does not complete.
Gelobt: A few users like the idea of teaching their family about plants together.
Kritik: Disease diagnosis is slow and non-functional, with minimal real help for saving a plant.
Platz 46. Wert aus Rezensionen: 22 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 26.253 Bewertungen
22von 100
Did not recognize a sunflower, confused zucchini with a pumpkin, and got 5 out of 5 known plants wrong according to a review from an experienced gardener. No real value for plant care, and the pricing model is hidden until the last moment.
Gelobt: Occasional users like the identification interface during walks.
Kritik: Accuracy is insufficient even for the most common garden plants.
Platz 47. Wert aus Rezensionen: 22 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 4.488 Bewertungen
22von 100
Real users report that the same photo returns a different wrong answer every time, and disease diagnosis ignores visible symptoms. Boosted five-star ratings create a false picture of quality.
Gelobt: The chat interface looks modern and is comfortable for talking about plants.
Kritik: Recognition is unstable: the same photo gives a different wrong result each time.
Platz 48. Wert aus Rezensionen: 22 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 1.843 Bewertungen
22von 100
AI yard redesign looks attractive but ignores lighting, terrain, and actual dimensions: proportions are off and elements appear where they should not. Does not work as a real garden planning tool.
Gelobt: Helps quickly show a partner a visual concept for the yard without hand sketches.
Platz 49. Wert aus Rezensionen: 20 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,4★ · 26.483 Bewertungen
20von 100
Identifies cucumbers as zucchini or oregano, does not work with photos from the gallery, and continues charging weekly after the app is forgotten. No real value for plant care.
Gelobt: Watering reminders and diagnosis are appreciated by the few for whom the app actually worked.
Kritik: Identification accuracy is extremely low, confusing basic vegetable crops with each other.
Platz 50. Wert aus Rezensionen: 20 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 7.916 Bewertungen
20von 100
This is a landscape visualization generator, not a plant care tool: no identification, no care advice, no disease diagnosis. Generated images do not include plant names, so there is no way to turn a picture into a shopping list.
Gelobt: Helps visualize the general look of a yard before work begins.
Kritik: Does not name the plants in generated images and gives no care information about them.
Für wen: Someone visualizing a landscape, not caring for plants
Platz 51. Wert aus Rezensionen: 18 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,3★ · 332 Bewertungen
18von 100
Plant recognition fails in most cases: rose, petunia, and bamboo all went unrecognized, and the app returns an error on ordinary garden photos. The free database is effectively inaccessible.
Gelobt: Users note the variety of reference information about plants in the catalog.
Kritik: The core photo identification feature regularly fails even on common plants.
Platz 52. Wert aus Rezensionen: 12 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,0★ · 6.693 Bewertungen
12von 100
The product has virtually no real users: nearly all reviews are about misleading free advertising. The quality of recognition and care advice cannot be evaluated because the features are inaccessible.
Gelobt: One user noted useful diagnosis of overwatering tendency.
Kritik: Plants cannot be added manually, and the identifier lets them through incorrectly.
Platz 53. Wert aus Rezensionen: 10 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,5★ · 1.359 Bewertungen
10von 100
By users' own admission, plants are identified correctly only about 3 times out of 10. The diagnosis feature hangs, the support chat fails to send, and the app gives no care tips even after a successful identification.
Gelobt: The interface looks clean and promises useful functionality.
Kritik: Identification accuracy is too low to trust any care recommendations that follow.
Für wen: Not suitable for anyone in the current state
Platz 54. Wert aus Rezensionen: 6 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,6★ · 1.422 Bewertungen
6von 100
The app fails at basic tasks: identification does not work or takes forever, and diagnosis hangs and never returns a result. Users call it useless even for common garden plants.
Gelobt: The idea of photo-based disease diagnosis is in demand, but the implementation does not let you use it.
Kritik: Recognition cannot identify even ordinary plants, and the diagnosis feature just spins a loader with no answer.
Für wen: Not suitable for anyone at the current quality level
Platz 55. Wert aus Rezensionen: 5 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 3,9★ · 645 Bewertungen
5von 100
Nearly all reviews are about deceptive pricing, and of the few users who tried the features, one got a wrong identification and another hit network errors. As an identification tool the app does not work.
Gelobt: Visually the app looks clean.
Kritik: Recognition does not work due to persistent network errors and the feature set is effectively inaccessible.
Platz 56. Wert aus Rezensionen: 0 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,9★ · 57.893 Bewertungen
0von 100
This is the official app for the Busch Gardens theme park: park map, ride wait times, and tickets. It has nothing to do with plant identification or care and cannot be evaluated in this category.
Gelobt: The interactive park map with geolocation works on the spot.
Kritik: Ride wait times update infrequently and do not match reality, and account login occasionally fails.
Platz 57. Wert aus Rezensionen: 0 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,8★ · 411 Bewertungen
0von 100
This is not a plant care app but a gamified ad aggregator with a watch-ads-for-rewards mechanic. Its rating in the plant care category is entirely irrelevant.
Gelobt: A reminder to drink water is the only connection to a living organism that a few users mention.
Kritik: The app has no relation to plant care or identification.
Platz 58. Wert aus Rezensionen: 0 von 100. App-Store-Bewertung: 4,7★ · 332 Bewertungen
0von 100
This is not a plant care app but a digital version of Better Homes and Gardens magazine. Evaluating it in the plant care category is irrelevant.
Gelobt: Magazine fans appreciate the convenient format for reading on a tablet.
Kritik: The app periodically loses downloaded issues and does not work offline reliably.
Für wen: Not for gardeners
Zu den Bewertungen
Zwei Bewertungen — zwei Quellen
Sie helfen beim Vergleich von Apps, ersetzen aber nicht die Prüfung der eigenen Aufgabe.
Rezensionsbewertung · bis 100
Die gespeicherte Bewertung aus der inApp-Recherche zu den Rezensionstexten. Sie beurteilt die App im Archiv insgesamt, nicht die Zuverlässigkeit einer einzelnen Funktion.
Store-Bewertung · bis 5
Die Bewertung von der App-Seite zum Zeitpunkt der Datenerhebung. Aktuelle Bewertung und Version können abweichen.
In der archivierten Stichprobe dieses Themas: 58 Apps und 13.625 gelesene Rezensionen. Das ist der Gesamtumfang der Recherche, nicht die Zahl der Rezensionen pro App.
Ein Abstand zwischen den Bewertungen beweist keine Manipulation. Das Datum der Berechnung und die vollständige Methodik der Bewertung sind nicht im mobilen Archiv. Vergleich die Aufgabenbeschreibungen und die Originalzitate und prüf die Bedingungen in der aktuellen Version.
