Some Claim Android App Store Worse Than iPhone's 289
eldavojohn writes "If you think the iPhone app store is the only mobile game store suffering an exodus, some game publishers claim Android's app store isn't much better, for a different reason — it doesn't generate much revenue. In fact, French game developer Gameloft (which owes 13% of its profits to iPhone game sales), said, 'We have significantly cut our investment in Android platform, just like... many others. It is not as neatly done as on the iPhone. Google has not been very good to entice customers to actually buy products. On Android nobody is making significant revenue. We are selling 400 times more games on iPhone than on Android.' So the trade-off seems to be more sales but an annoying approval process, versus a lack of sales promotions and no annoyance around approval. It seems that those in it for money will opt for iPhone, and those in it for distribution will opt for Android. Or maybe someone will get it right one of these days?"
Who'd have thunk it? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems that those in it for money and distribution will opt for iPhone, and those in it for neither will opt for Android.
FTFY. But seriously, did these developers make ANY effort to size the market on each platform before making their decision?
I can totally understand why some developers have problems the iphone approval requirements. But its positively daft to make a business decision on only that basis and then be surprised later to discover that your prospective customers simply do not care. Surprise! They prefer a unified, tightly controlled, non-sucky smartphone experience even at the expense of some interesting apps.
Personally I'd go a step further. I would give up EVERY SINGLE THIRD PARTY APP not to have to go back to the Treo that my iPhone replaced. Maybe Android has come a long way since then but for the first time I am actually happy with my phone and not motivated enough to find out.
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the bigger reality isn't that "the iphone app store sucks because they're so restrictive", but "the iphone app store sucks because they won't give us an unfair advantage by allowing us to break rules so we sell more apps than our competitors". I think the Android app store doesn't sell as many units simply because it's newer and simply doesn't have the same installed base as the iPhone/ipod touch. Politicizing things by bringing the apple "standards board" into things only muddies the issue.
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Android app store sells less because it is dominated by a culture of "free" (as in beer) and the Apple app store is not. I run Android and wish it would do well, but if I were designing games, I would not target the Android if my model was to make money by selling games. If I were Zynga, Playfish, or Playdom, however, using the "Freemium" model, I'd be all over the Android. Look at Ian Bogost's article describing the ridiculousness of people asking for refunds for 99 cent games [gamasutra.com] as an indication of how hard it is to make money selling games on mobile platforms.
(Gamers, look at the future of gaming: it is Farmville, and you created it through your cheapness, greed, and immaturity.)
Re: (Score:2)
If this is not true, then why are so many fart apps on iphone, and some of them so popular?
Don't have any young relatives, do you? I have a nephew in 7th grade. Him and all his friends have iPod Touches. What do you think they are more likely to buy, the $15 mobile office suite or the $1 fart app?
Re: (Score:2)
"If this is not true, then why are so many fart apps on iphone..."
Because, like making a "flashlight" app, making a app that does little more than play a sound is dead simple. In fact, the developer site even has demo code for it.
And it's not "sheeple" as much as it is that the iPhone is extremely popular among kids, students, and college types. Not exactly a high-brow audience, if you know what I mean.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Indeed - a classic example was this is someone who made a program that does nothing more than display an animated icon. And got nationwide advertising in the media ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8152338.stm [bbc.co.uk] , http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jul/14/iphone-purity-pledge-apple [guardian.co.uk] ).
I mean, it's ridiculous. I guess this is taking advantage of the hype bandwagon where anything "On The Iphone" gets instant media coverage. God knows why the licence-funded BBC is giving free advertising though, especially to a
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Android, on the other hand, is an open platform designed to work on a wide variety of devices. This means that developers have to design their apps for the lowest common denominator of all these devices, or create different versions for each device depending on its capabilities. This means they can't effectively take advantage of advanced features or greater available resources in the high end phones, because they'll lose out on all of the potential customers with the lower end models. This is much more akin to developing for PCs rather than consoles.
If people saw their phones as personal computers, Android's model would be more successful. However, it doesn't seem to fit in with how most people use their phones. It will find purchase among the small segment of the market that enjoys endlessly tinkering with their gadgets, or philosophically oppose closed designs enough to forgo the iPhone, but the majority of the population will continue to flock to the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Android, on the other hand, is an open platform designed to work on a wide variety of devices. This means that developers have to design their apps for the lowest common denominator of all these devices, or create different versions for each device depending on its capabilities. This means they can't effectively take advantage of advanced features or greater available resources in the high end phones, because they'll lose out on all of the potential customers with the lower end models. This is much more akin to developing for PCs rather than consoles.
Wow. I don't know where to begin with that because most of it is not true.
Android is an open platform and can work on a variety of devices, but the framework (known as Android) which sits between the device and the application is abstracted. This means if you use the provided SDK, you don't care what the nature of the device is. Its not a problem, its a big, big plus. It is, however, a serious problem for Apple and their iPhone/iPod. Interestingly, what you deem to be a negative for Android is factually a h
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is exactly what Android is trying to change.
You may not be old enough to remember but I am. About 20 years ago the PC market was the same as the mobile market is today, Hardware, Software and service were tightly integrated and came from a single provider (this is called Vertical Integration), then along came this upstart company founded by a Harvard drop-out called Microsoft who had developed this product called Windows 3.1 and then had the audacity to sell the software separate from the hardware, the software also ran on generic hardware so multiple vendors could produce hardware and the OS provided a consistent framework for applications. Win 3.1 opened up the hardware market, killed the vertical integrators and created competition. Even Linux owe's its success to the market created by Win 3.1. Apple may have made the first popular PC but it was Windows 3.1 that put the PC on every desk in the world.
I'm sure the Apple II fanboys said the same thing about Win 3.1 as the iphone fanboys are saying about Android, that different hardware would make the platform too inconsistent. It didn't turn out that way with Win 3.1. An OS can sit on a variety of hardware and maintain consistency, Linux and Windows are living proof of this. Android is attempting to separate the vertical integration monopolies of the mobile phone market and frankly, its about damn time as this needs to happen to the mobile phone/service industries.
We are already seeing the phone HW market start to open up as non-phone technology companies like Acer, Asus and Nvidia are producing mobile phones running Android, not to mention non phone products like the Barnes and Noble "Nook" ebook reader.
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing most hurting the Android store is piracy. Period. Even worse, many users, for the cost of $0.99, of which .60 went to the developer, demand $20k/year level support and if they don't get it, bad mouth the hell out of the developer and the application. Hell, most of the time users just leave shitty comments on the market and refuse to even report a bug. Any developer or user who has spent much time on the market will verify this fact.
Simple fact - pirates are killing the android market. Period. Entitled users are number two. Number three is Google's complete indifference.
Also, to the masses, please stop with the idiocy of, "get rich", comments and, "size the market". The FACTS are, the market is already plenty big for many developers to make a living - if only that. This isn't about getting rich. The market size is plenty big - and growing very fast. Period. The problem is, everyone is stealing the applications and its making it impossible for developers to make any money what so ever. This is why more and more (vast majority now) are ONLY developing adware based applications because even with extreme piracy they are able to make buck. This in turn is creating backlash for developers - but pirates have left absolutely no other options for developers. Because of pirates, the only options are, abandon the platform or try with adware applications.
If you like the Android platform, kick the holy shit out of any pirates you know because THEY are destroying the entire platform. Without professional developers, with the ability to make a living, or hell, even work for greater than third world wages, by in large the platform is going to remain mired in third rate applications and will likely cause the platform to die before it can ever reach "developer critical mass."
Piracy is so extreme on Android because of all the platforms, its by far the easiest to pirate apps on. Made worse is Google's lie that would provide copy protection. To date, they have not. Google's current "copy protection" is the same concept as the infamous "evil bit" for IP. Bluntly, its all but useless and Google seems more than content to be flipped with developers.
This means the only rescue for Android is to lock down the platform - not likely - or for people the kick, every pirate they know, in the nuts for destroying what was to be the an excellent mobile platform. I already know two developers how have been forced to leave the platform. A third isn't far away. Simply put - pirates suck.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so that's why it's possible to make money on Windows, OSX, Linux, consoles, the iPhone, Palm, Series60: they have no piracy.
"Everyone" is not stealing the applications. I don't know a single Android phone user that's stolen applications. (I don't know any that have downloaded any commercially sold apps without paying for them either.)
Speaking personally, while I haven't paid for a single downloaded app on my Android phone, I've also only installed applications released for free.
Incidentally I do know an
Re:Who'd have thunk it? (Score:4, Interesting)
"Everyone" is not stealing the applications. I don't know a single Android phone user that's stolen applications. (I don't know any that have downloaded any commercially sold apps without paying for them either.)
That's called anecdotal. It doesn't prove anything. I've spoken with several developers (those that have left and are leaving) who have "phone home" in their apps. Thousands of installs and less than twenty sales. Its repeated time and time again. The FACTS are, piracy is killing Android. Period. Granted, what I'm saying is also anecdotal, but at least it has facts to support the position - unlike yours.
There are over a dozen web sites which specialize in ONLY pirating android applications. Some of those sites track download stats for the illegal files. Contrasting those downloads against sales typically leaves the developer both furious and sick. The simple FACT is, piracy is killing android.
Why do you think so many adware applications are being developed?!? Its the only fucking way to make money on the platform. Your refusal to accept fact doesn't change the facts.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
My anecdote is sufficient to disprove your "everyone", and casts doubts on the credibility of your other statements.
I think adware applications are being developed because there are so few 'for pay' apps that do something you can't download a 'free' app (from the market) for that most users seek the free app first and don't expect to pay.
It may indeed be the only fucking way to make money on the platform, but your inability to accurately state the facts doesn't mean that piracy is the only (or even the main
How this tripe get modded up is beyond me. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is cancelled out by this.
You seem to throw around the word FACT a lot but you don't actually provide a single fact, link or corroborating evidence. Nothing, no link, not even a dubious link, all you've done is capitalise the word "fact" in the hopes of making your anecdotal tripe sound authoritative and frankly it doesn't work.
Allow me to explain why a US$0.99 app is not successful on the Android marketplace, because the functionality provided by the vast majority of $0.99 applications is barely worth the price tag. This isn't the killer though, the killer is that there is for every 1 US$0.99 application there are 3 free applications that provide the same functionality. If you want to look at success in the Android marketplace look at things like the exchange client "Touchdown" by Nitrodesk. This application is US$25 to buy but they are targeting business users (who are more likely to pay as its easier an they have more disposable currency) and they provide a product that is vastly superior to anything else on the market.
Here this thing, I'm going to say it again "and they provide a product that is vastly superior to anything else on the market". This is the best way to get ahead in any market, be better, be worth the price you're asking as the majority of paid applications are not worth the price they are asking. But it seems easier to blame the bogeyman called piracy then admit that your program is not worth what you're asking for it. The simple fact is that Android users don't really need to pirate anything as there is almost always a free app that provides the same level of functionality.
Just because you call your opinions fact doesn't make them facts.
Perhaps .. (Score:4, Insightful)
.. at the moment the difference in sales is due to market segmentation based on who is buying each type of phone?
If you are a trendy game player you are buying the iPhone and games for it, but if you are an Android user you care less for games and more about being "free" ??
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. Despite having far less total apps in the Android Marketplace than in the iTunes store, and despite the fact that the Android Marketplace layout kinda sucks (seriously guys, having limited categorization, limited filtering, and basic search in a collection of 10,000+ that can only be browsed on a phone is a pretty dick move), I have had no problem with finding free apps that do exactly what I want. I've paid for extra functionality in a couple of apps that go above and beyond (both pro versions of ap
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Perhaps .. (Score:5, Informative)
.. at the moment the difference in sales is due to market segmentation based on who is buying each type of phone?
If you are a trendy game player you are buying the iPhone and games for it, but if you are an Android user you care less for games and more about being "free" ??
Actually, there are two big differences between the Android market and the iPhone app store, business wise: there are less Android phones out there than iPhones and iPod Touches and the Android Market does not have paid apps available in every country [google.com], including Canada, Sweden, Finland, Mexico, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, South Korea, China, Brazil, India and Russia.
You missed the real reason (Score:2)
there are less Android phones out there than iPhones and iPod Touches
That is the case and is a factor, probably 30x more iPhone devices (20-30 million? Probably many more by now). So then how to account for 400x greater sales?
and the Android Market does not have paid apps available in every country, including Canada, Sweden, Finland, Mexico, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, South Korea, China, Brazil, India and Russia.
Look at sales figures for any application and I assure you the lot of those countries combine
I think it's games in general... (Score:2)
It would seem to me that games in general just aren't profitable on these phones. What people seem to want are other type apps, such as location-based, be it a restaurant finder, people finder, or some other type.
And come to think of it, riding the train, I RARELY see anyone playing any type of game. They're usually involved in some facebook/myspace/twitter goings on or jut listen
Android without a phone plan? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are a trendy game player you are buying the iPhone and games for it, but if you are an Android user you care less for games and more about being "free" ??
Another thing to consider: iPhone is to Android phone as iPod Touch is to what?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nokia n800?
Archos PMP?
How about an Android netbook, an Android tablet device, the other 87 Android phones currently in development or already released?
Some claim chocolate ice cream better then vanilla (Score:5, Insightful)
Market share (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Market share (Score:5, Insightful)
There are a lot fewer Android phones than iPhones, plus there is one thing people forget:
If you distribute code for Apple's platform, you have to go through the App Store. If you want to distribute code for Windows Mobile and Android, you can just send the user a file. The Android and WM app stores are more of clearinghouses (similar to Handango), as opposed to a central choke point.
So, factoring out pirated apps, Apple's Store shows essentially all the apps that go from developers to customers. Other platforms, the app stores might be used for commercial distribution, but other apps don't need to be. So, even if Android had the same marketshare as Apple's ther app store would always show fewer apps because people are free to use other ways to get from them to their users.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to distribute code for Windows Mobile and Android, you can just send the user a file.
Precisely! This is a huge win, and although I'm sure that iPhone apps outsell Android simply because of the difference in user base sizes, to compare sales from the two stores is comparing apples and oranges.
Re: (Score:2)
So, even if Android had the same marketshare as Apple's ther app store would always show fewer apps because people are free to use other ways to get from them to their users.
Even beyond that, Apple has the advantage of having iTunes, and not just an app store. I know, I know, some people really hate iTunes, but that's not my point here.
My point is that iTunes provides a single access point that lets you do several things. It lets you organize your music, movies, podcasts, etc., and sync them to your phone in a configurable manner. It's also the program that's used to manage some aspects of your phone and install software updates. So because of those things, if you have an
Re: (Score:2)
I think other cell phone manufacturers could learn from this. Give your customers a very easy integrated experience for buying, installing, and syncing applications, music and video, and keeping all of it up to date.
Umm...every crappy verizon phone I have seen in the last 6 years has had this functionality. They replace the manufacturer interface with their own, disable all of the features, and then sell you back functions along with ringtones and games. You just click on them in some interface and the price gets tacked onto your bill, much to the chagrin of many parents (at least the app store doesn't regularly charge $5.99 for a game).
Other providers have had similar functions for quite a while (although usuall
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
well. good theory, but i don't know of any 3rd party dist mechanism that has more than a handful of apps. and almost everything is allowed on android market, even apps that required rooted (aka jail-broken) phones. there are a few notable exceptions, but they account for a very, very small number of the total.
Re: (Score:2)
OUTRAGEOUS!
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if Apple's 'late' release of a public SDK and the app store (compared to the initial release of the iPhone) actually significantly helped the app store. Instead of opening it up when there's only a tiny bit of market share (with anyone who starts early being driven away by the lack of customers), they opened it up when there was demand (quite literally) for apps and enough of a market share to support it. And it seems to have worked out very, very well for them and the developers.
Maybe Apple's orig
Re:Market share (Score:4, Interesting)
I have to say, I don't get Android. What's the appeal?
Well, personally, I'm not terribly thrilled by Android. However, I do want a handheld computer both for my personal use and to develop commerical apps for.
The appeal of Android (such as it is) to me is simple. It has nothing to do with OSS. It's that it's not the iPhone. This means I don't have to deal with the app store either as a customer or developer, and that I don't have to have AT&T as my carrier. Those two wins are great enough to overcome the weak bits of Android.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's free (as in cost), an established standard, and backed by a company that's very likely still going to be around in a few years. These are all reasons to use it if you're producing mobile phones.
The market isn't overcrowded. iPhone has something like a 2.5% market share. At least some of those remaining 97.5% are going to be upgrading to a smartphone. That's quite a hefty chunk of the market to carve up and Apple doesn't offer a lot of ch
Re: (Score:2)
It's free (as in cost), an established standard, and backed by a company that's very likely still going to be around in a few years. These are all reasons to use it if you're producing mobile phones.
That argument was used in favor of desktop Linux too. It's one factor in favor, there are many other factors against.
The market isn't overcrowded. iPhone has something like a 2.5% market share. At least some of those remaining 97.5% are going to be upgrading to a smartphone.
What, you think iPhone OS is the only established smartphone OS? Not true. In fact, it's something of a newcomer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system#Operating_systems [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a Windows Mobile phone. My previous phone was Palm Garnet. Neither of these presumed to tell me which apps I could install. Android is probably a more advanced OS than either of these, but I don't see how anybody's managed to leverage that into a superior user experience. Hence my question.
You're the third response to my post that has the unstated assumption that Android is the only real alternative to iPhone. Not true: besides the two I mentioned, there's Symbian, Blackberry, Linux, and some others.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's basically the appeal. An appeal that only applies to geeks and like minded people, but that's basically the appeal. It's not "mainstream". It's not sleek, not trendy, not fancy or stylish, that's not the angle. If you want to make it stylish and trendy, market it under the aspect of ever increasing vendor lock-in and telcos that want to fetter you with endless contracts, and that this is the last bastion of freedom in telcoland. The amount of people who feel more and more under surveillance is i
Re: (Score:2)
An appeal that only applies to geeks and like minded people
That's probably what Apple would like people to think. I'm not so sure it's true. Android==Google, and Google is a very popular brand.
It's not "mainstream"
Google's not mainstream? What planet is that true on? I'm sure there are people who go for Android because it's not mainstream (especially here on Slashdot), but there are people who go for Apple for much the same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
that period about 8 years ago when there was so much excitement about Linux displacing Windows, completely ignoring Windows' insurmountable lock-in factor.
Ha ha, that's funny because in the corporate world not even Microsoft has been able to overcome Windows' insurmountable lock-in factor. The past two big companies I've worked for are /still/ stuck with WinXP and IE6, because... well... Vista. But also because all of their on-line training and a lot of the timecard and expense report crap they've paid for only works "properly" under IE6.
As someone who likes computers, I'm just glad there really haven't been any complete losers (well, maybe except SCO). T
400 times the sales (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that developers feel like they are not making as much money on Android and that it is not worth investing in.
I would say that it does not necessarily has to be a bad thing.
Basically those who are using it to make money by selling useless apps (I mean how many fart apps do you need? I argue the number is less than one!) would fare much better in Apple land. Android is, at least so far, not being bought by the same audience that buys iPhones - the Android audience is not going to be excited by a
Lets see where this stands in 2 quarters (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I will bet you the numbers don't change significantly. If anything, this is the 2nd start of Google's serious entry into the smartphone market and the first serious push for Andriod devices cross-marketing. Apple is surely taking them seriously.
That said, I predict nothing much will happen market-share-wise in 2,3 even 6 months... other than perhaps more nail
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They will come back (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's basically what I wanted to write. The first to mark his turf will have it quite a bit easier to prevail when everyone starts to scramble when the sales pick up. But hey, if they want to leave the field, more power to them. The more established studios leave the 'droid as uninteresting, the higher the chance that a new studio can settle in and increase the competition fold. And that in turn can only be good for the customer.
Droid Owner (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Droid Owner (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Droid Owner (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, it's worse for the Pre, because it actually has the same CPU and Graphics hardware as the 3GS, yet the hardware currently does nothing. There's currently no way for a game dev to access it. Lame.
The approval process drives the store (Score:2)
What the developers do not get is that apple's approval process drives the store. Exclusivity adds value, and makes customers like the store more.
Re: (Score:2)
What the developers do not get is that apple's approval process drives the store. Exclusivity adds value, and makes customers like the store more.
As if the masses have the slightest idea of the store's restrictions.
Is your app really even worth $1? (Score:2, Insightful)
Isn't much better than the iPhone AppStore (Score:2)
Fact: It's worse. It's not as neatly done != It isn't much better.
Good grief. It's too early to say anything. (Score:3, Interesting)
Practically speaking, the public has only become aware of the Android-based phones with the introduction of the Motorola Droid phone. And haven't they only been advertising that for a month or so?
Android has only *barely* entered the market. Nobody has the phones, so nobody can buy apps.
CNN on Android developer fears (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait, what? (Score:2)
First:
We are selling 400 times more games on iPhone than on Android.
Then:
It seems that those in it for money will opt for iPhone, and those in it for distribution will opt for Android.
I'm not sure this is the best example. Gameloft is both selling more games *and* earning more profit on the itunes store, right? I haven't seen any ads for the android app store, either.
I understand the walled-garden that is the itunes app store, but I don't understand what advantages come from developing solely for android. Less consumer exposure vs open structure?
If the typical slashdot comment is to be believed, the average joe demands ssh, skype, google voice, and voice-to-text. From that per
Hopefully Palm will get this right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, and kind of sadly, I think Palm is already "dead company walking".
They haven't managed to get their SDK out yet. They haven't launched in all of Europe yet. I'm sure that they'll be able to get a small market but they'll have a really hard time growing beyond the fringe. Consider that Palm is already a pretty small company and they have to take on all the other phone manufacturers together (since they run Android, besides Nokia and Apple).
Palm's problem is that while Nokia and Apple are hugely suc
It would be nice if I could buy something (Score:2)
I'm not surprised: on the Canadian app store you can't actually buy anything. At all. As in "there's no way for them to take your money, so all you can pick a free apps." I wonder how many other countries are in this state.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Many. These are the countries that currently accept paid apps: http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=143779 [google.com]
Mod article troll (Score:2)
The android market is a lot newer and there are many fewer devices sold. Complaining about not having as much revenue through that stream is asinine. Article author is a whiner and has nothing to contribute but bile. Either that or this is just a thinly veiled bit of Apple propaganda. Either way: BBBBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
What a shocker. (Score:2)
You mean an app market whose sole audience is made up of people who have already resigned themselves to shelling out more money than other people will generate more revenue? Mind. Blown.
Very interesting (Score:2)
There are multiple different approaches to solving a problem and the choice to do one, the other or both is left up to individual entities in the marketplace and can be based on ease of use and revenue.
This is a pretty awesome concept.
I hope both continue so we can evolve the best of both.
As a consumer... (Score:2)
Actually, I think the approval process is decent - at least as a consumer. I get age-appropriate ratings (sort of), cheap apps, and generally don't have many issues with lockup and the like.
Phone apps are the fail anyway (Score:2)
I would really like to develop an Android app but I feel I might as well do it for free than think I will get money. I'd be better off developing a decent internet app that can be used via a PC or phone.
Some? (Score:2)
Weasel words. 1 would be some.
i hate the iPhone interface, the way it dials a number when i touch it, instead of just selecting it. Therefore: Some IT professionals hate the iPhone interface.... WHAT IS APPLE DOING WRONG??? OH TEH NOES!
Maybe we can be forgiving of early generation products. How long has Android selling vs. iPhone? What is an appropriate grace period?
Can we get some numbers? Maybe constrain/express them in a meaningful way.
Earlier this week there was headline saying Bing gained 10% mark
Why I don't buy much from the Android Market (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://andappstore.com/ [andappstore.com]
1st Iteration Android store is rubbish (Score:3, Interesting)
The original app store for the Android is pretty poor. Apparently it's improved with Android 2.0, but the one that came on my HTC hero doesn't feature screenshots, for example. The search is extremely limited and all you get to see of the app is the icon and a small paragraph of text. Sometimes you can find out a little more from the user comments, but it's not much to make a decision from.
Having said that, if you don't like an app you can uninstall it and get a refund with 24 hours.
My guess is that with a better featured store (screenshots, a better search etc) the android store will start to become profitable as more and more handsets appear. Next year I imagine you'll get Android handsets for less than £100 on Pay-As-You-Go contracts. Once handsets at that kind of price start appearing, the user base will *explode*. Also, I imagine sometime next year you'll be able to make payments directly through your phone bill rather than needing a google checkout account. Even though the average user won't spend as much on the store as the average iPhone user would (as they won't have as much money) the sheer volume of purchases will start to make a difference.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Those prices are the subsidised, monthly contract prices though, aren't they? I expect when they release the droid over here in the UK you'll be able to get it free if you go for something like a 2-year £45/month contract.
My point is that most android phones at the moment are still 'premium' phones but I think that's about to change. There'll still be high-end Android phones, but it's also a cheap way for handset manufacturers (and telecom companies) to provide smartphone-y aimed at the lower end.
It's not their core business (Score:3, Insightful)
This guy [paulgraham.com] says it best : "So programmers continue to develop iPhone apps, even though Apple continues to maltreat them. [...] Can anything break this cycle? No device I've seen so far could. Palm and RIM haven't a hope. The only credible contender is Android. But Android is an orphan; Google doesn't really care about it, not the way Apple cares about the iPhone. Apple cares about the iPhone the way Google cares about search."
Re:Why not both? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why not both? (Score:5, Interesting)
And now we know the real reason Apple fears, hates and will continue to block Java on the iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it can't be that bad, or Android couldn't call it Java.
Microsoft got its wang in a wringer doing less [wikipedia.org].
Re:Why not both? (Score:4, Informative)
It's real Java. You can use most existing Java libraries. What's different is:
* It uses its own bytecode and its own virtual machine instead of the JVM.
* It uses its own GUI libraries rather than AWT or Swing.
So, you basically need to write your UI from scratch - but otherwise you can reuse any existing Java libraries and source code.
Re: (Score:2)
The question is more like "put devs on Android and make Y money" or "put devs on Iphone and have X chance of making 400*Y and (1-X) of making $0 and losing their investment"
As long as X is bigger than .0025, they should make a bunch of Iphone games and take their chances.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Truth is, neither platform has enough revenue potential to make much sense for developers. If your $2 game is very successful, and sells 10,000, you've made 1/3 of a good senior software engineer's yearly salary. You'd have to make 3 of those a year! I prefer the model where the app is free. Generally, the free app leader has 10X the user base of the paid app leader. Make money on being a community leader, but give the software away for free (as in beer). What counts in this case is the user base. iP
Re: (Score:2)
Erh... no. You can't just go and put team A to do the job of team B, thus creating two teams B and expect to double your revenue. Aside from the obvious what the people of team A don't necessary develop for platform B as well as for platform A (which can be resolved, fire them and hire people who do), your customers will neither buy an iPhone if they have an Android to play your game (most certainly not, in this case not only because of the cost but also because of religi... I mean, different philosophies),
Re: (Score:2)
First off, the NDK on Android allows you to run C code on Android.devices. You'll still have to add some Java to wrap the C code, but that's mainly for input handling and such.
And yes, the Android market is more complex than iPhone. But OTOH you can target specific sizes as well. (Eg most new and upcoming high performance Android devices have large screens. So if your game targets performance then you might just target that form factor.)
What would make good sense if you are currently making games is to keep
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. You spent a significant amount of money developing the other 399 that didn't get approved.
Re: (Score:2)
Good idea! Hmm, for some reason javac keeps giving errors when I try feeding it the Objective C code from my iPhone game engine. Boy that's weird...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which Nokia is that? Symbian 40? Symbian 60? Symbian 90? Maemo? Java Micro Edition? Which profile? Ovi? Which channel will you use to distribute it? The average download site which lets you keep 20% after they and the carrier have taken their cuts? The Ovi store which is the only channel for the latter (with a beta SDK)?
iPhone or Android development it is, then.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing is, most people with a Nokia phone never install a 3rd-party app.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The only person who I have ever met who seemed to like Windows Mobile is my line manager - and I'm 95% certain that's because of the association with Microsoft. (He's a sucker for a name he knows - even if it later transpires the product is a load of rubbish).
Interestingly, his current phone is a blackberry and I don't recall being called upon to set up email on that.... yet we don't have BES.
What is true value? (Score:3, Insightful)
Could it just be that Apple is extorting the masses for something that is of little or no true value?
What is "true value"? I don't think such a thing exists---the closest thing is, essentially, a very popular value.
We all value human life (our own the most, then our relatives, then our friends, acquaintances, compatriots etc., then any human being). Does that make it a true value? Lions don't value human life, and we're probably nutritious to them. The universe doesn't have a mind (AFAIK), so it doesn't think anything about "us pathetic humans" ;-) Hostile aliens coming to our world wouldn't value hum
Re: (Score:2)
2 bucks for half an hour of entertainment? The average movie costs more to see, and the value of the entertainment is highly debatable.
Re: (Score:2)
A "Bunch" of money is a relative term.
But anyways, one of those little inconvenient realities of the world is that most people cannot afford to spend much time making things unless they get paid for it. If Google is trying to create an app marketplace where developers can't make a living, then that's their choice, but then they shouldn't expect many people to expend time and resources making apps.
Don't be mad at Apple. They're not extorting anybody. They're offering lots of apps, a huge percentage of which
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I am hoping that w/the recent advertising push by Verizon (et al) that Android will be less of a geek fashion accessory and more of a viable market.
However, for now... I am converting my Android apps to support AdMob advertising. Soon they will be "free" - hope the android community enjoys it.
I started w/the idea that I would port all my iPhone apps to Android. Now that I have seen the response... well... it isn't quite the priority it used to be.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Maybe you missed it but it's been a while since developers were allowed to build their own apps without requiring Apple's approval. Yeah there is a cap, but I'm sure 100 copies will fill your need.
Ad Hoc Distribution [apple.com]
The Standard and Enterprise Programs allow you to share your application with up to 100 other iPhone or iPod touch users with Ad Hoc distribution. Share your application through email or by posting it to a web site or server..
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Yeah, and I only have to pay $99 for the privilege of being in the "Standard Program" so that I'm allowed to do Ad Hoc distribution.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, $99, what a fortune. I mean it's a whopping 15% of the cost of Photoshop CS4! For that you get code signing certificates, which for a Windows Mobile developer only cost $250 from Verisign!
If you cannot afford the $99/year to develop iPhone apps, do something else like searching trashcans for food scraps...
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much of this is due to lack of app discoverability? The Android Marketplace website is pretty much useless, and who wants to use their phone for shopping? I know the techies might love that you can download Android apps off the web and install them on memory cards, but the rest of society doesn't think this way. They want an Android version of iTunes to sync their phone with music, video, photos and apps. That's why the App Store for the iPhone works. That's also why Napster was so popular, despite the availability of free MP3s elsewhere like IRC and newsgroups.
Apple's App Store is better than the competitions' but it still has a ways to go. The biggest problem, I think, is that the App Store is really a distribution mechanism, not a marketing tool, but everyone believes it to be one. The App Store was a marketing tool when it was shiny and new and there were few applications. The tiny tools Apple provided the customer (Top 25 Free and Paid categories, limited searching, etc.) actually worked, and developers used them to garner more downloads. But now, with 10
Re: (Score:2)
If a game is enough fun that someone would pay $3 instead of deleting the free version and saying the hell with it, then the game is probably worth the money.