Chinese CEO Says "Free" Is the Right Price For Mobile Software 133
hackingbear writes Sheng Fu, CEO of Cheetah Mobile, a public Chinese mobile software company you probably haven't heard of, but whose products are among the top downloaded products in Android markets around the world, said that the intense competition of the Chinese market leads to products that can compete globally. Many recent university graduates are working in tech, all with their startups looking to find their place in the market, he said. Chinese companies saw the impact that piracy played in the PC software era, and China's mobile companies grew up knowing they would need to make money without getting consumers to open their wallets. "Chinese companies are so good at making free but high-quality products," he said. Sounds like we have a good race to the bottom.
Nutshell (Score:4, Funny)
You must defeat Sheng Fu to stand a chance!
Re: (Score:1)
Sir, no disrespect or nothing, but can I defeat him using Ti Kwan Leap [youtube.com]? I got the pajamas.
Profit? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Profit? (Score:5, Insightful)
How are they earning a profit? If the apps are free, where do they get the money? If it's from ads, then that doesn't count as free.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How does it not count as free? You can have ads that dont target you, or get any of your information. It could also be micro transactions. Both allow the app to be free while making money on the other side.
Re: (Score:3)
If they have micro transactions (in-app purchases), then it's definitely not free. What kind of in-app purchases would products called, Clean Master, Battery Doctor [cmcm.com], and Photo Grid have, anyways?
Re:Profit? (Score:4, Insightful)
how does transactions for extras make the base app not free?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I merely want a free app to be, well, free. If it has paid-for content, then it's not free, duh. Let's not devalue the word.
Re: (Score:2)
let me play! (Score:2)
Why exactly should grandparent owe you an answer?
Re: (Score:2)
Because usually the app is crippled without those "extras", requiring you to continuously buy more "extras" just to keep enjoying the experience. Compare it to giving someone a "free" car that can only run on massively overpriced gas sold by the manufacturer. That's nice and all, I guess, but means that actually using the car is anything but free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Profit? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually if this is as you stated, Google taking the lions share, free apps with advertise is the best way to get money without Google in the middle.
Re: (Score:2)
The realist definition (if I can say that) is "free to download and use". That allows for ads.
In-app purchases are certainly not free, but are add-ons or unlock functionality not in the free version.
However I do sort of agree, when I hear or see that an app is free I always check to see if it has in-app purchases before I bother to download it. Because I don't have an unlimited data plan I also check screenshots for ads, because data isn'
Re: (Score:2)
I only browse things when I'm near a WiFi hotspot, or doing things offline. For most apps, I've disabled the cellular connection, only a few very essential services get to use my cellular data. Since I pay my ISP a flat rate, the data is very much 'free' in the sense that I'd be paying no less if I didn't access it.
Otherwise, if I'm at a place where I don't have a WiFi connection, I either use apps offline, or don't use it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The way it seems to work is this: The executable is free. The content is billed in $0.99 increments :)
Re: (Score:1)
1) Write app
2) ?
3) PROFIT!
Duh,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How are they earning a profit? If the apps are free, where do they get the money?
Volume!
$0.0000000000 x 8,000,000,000 (inflated population of the world) = 0
Whoosh!
Re:Profit? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm the CTO in a Chinese technology company. The government has never paid us to install spyware or anything else for that matter. In fact, the government just cares about 1) blood not being too red, 2) gambling not being too overt 3) users not being able to use words equivalent to "fuck" or "cunt" in English, names of prominent politicians or particular terms in reference to disagreements with neighboring countries, 4) characters being in simplified and not traditional script. 5) under 18 not playing video games for more than 4 hours per day.
Beyond that, they don't give a shit.
Westerners often revere the Chinese government as being some all knowing all powerful being with a profound understanding of technology and deeply nuanced plans that span decades, roughly in the same way they view their own government. Fact is, the Chinese government is interested in keeping its people more-or-less satisfied with the status quo, just like your own government is. Chinese old people with too much free time to cause trouble get their panties in a knot about sex drugs and violence and "young people these days", so that's what the Chinese authorities crack down on. They simply do not have the time or inclination to be bothered with who you are and what you are doing.
Think about the last time you interacted with your own government. Did they know who you are? Did they know what your life circumstances were? I'll wager they didn't know shit about who you are and why you were there, nor did they care, they just wanted you to either shut up and go away or pay your tax and go away. Now imagine that level of caring, divide that by 1000, that's how much foreign governments gives a shit about you. Your own government couldn't even be bothered installing spyware on your computer, why would the Chinese government?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm the CTO in a Chinese technology company. The government has never paid us to install spyware or anything else for that matter. ... Your own government couldn't even be bothered installing spyware on your computer, why would the Chinese government?
While you make some good points, I've repeatedly had to clean the same state-sponsored spyware off of laptops coming out of China. Now this is probably just done to computers that go through customs "screening" as they could be transporting "something" in and out of the country, but I've also had to deal with situations where foreign companies operating inside China have been required to install state-sponsored spyware on their computer systems.
You're right -- they don't care about individuals, just like t
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the Chinese government pay for something western governments get for free?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And - if it's free then YOU are the currency in which they're paid.
Re:"free" but.... (Score:4, Informative)
The app is still free, it does not mean you cannot do other things with the app that may come at a cost.
ECO 101 (Score:3)
Paid? Then it's not free.
The add-ins are not. The app itself is.
And won't people crack it or get around measures in the same way people do for everything?
Most people do not. Do you really think the average smartphone user is going to be invest hours away to thinker and bypass such measures just to avoid paying $0.99 (the average price of an upgrade/add-in)? Most people, even tech savvy ones do not.
The sheer scale of the market makes it a number game. It doesn't matter if some people bypass the measures. There are potentially millions who do not, and of which a small fraction might pay for the upgrade. A small fraction
Re: (Score:3)
Child labor laws (Score:2)
Do you really think the average smartphone user is going to be invest hours away to thinker and bypass such measures just to avoid paying $0.99 (the average price of an upgrade/add-in)? Most people, even tech savvy ones do not.
Unless they're middle or high school students who are forbidden to work on account of age. Or unless they live in a country whose currency has an unfavorable exchange rate with the USD [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
The same as today - free apps with paid down-loadable add-ins, paid bonus levels, paid advanced features, etc.
Shareware is back.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. People will try one game/app/whatever after another, and spend so much time exploring the available free options that they'll never be motivated to actually shell out money for their favorite - because who knows, maybe the next free one will be even better.
And with digital downloads, it's not like you can even offer cover art, liner notes, a secret decoder ring or a t-shirt in the same box.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you're right, you're right. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been saying that the gold rush for mobile development is ended, but that's been met with derision and unbelief. Cost is always an important factor.
Beta tapes cost more than VHS: VHS, though inferior, won.
Early Apple computers cost more than early PCs. PCs won.
There are plenty more examples where people will settle for cheap over expensive. Apps are just another one - once people are in the habit of not paying for an app, you'd better be in the top 0.1% of apps to justify getting paid.
Re: (Score:2)
Locked or unlocked?
The Amazon Fire was available unlocked for $200 this past weekend. That's the wife's Christmas present sorted.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean carrier locked. Though it sounds like rooting should not be a big issue. Not sure if I will need to. The main reason I root is for tethering (if not enabled which it is on the fire) and Adaway.
Re: (Score:2)
Oops. Sorry, misremembered the thread there.
I did see a carrier unlocked samsung Android when I was in the UK for £60. Was tempted to get that.
Re:When you're right, you're right. (Score:4, Interesting)
You missed my point - the gold rush was anyone with a mobile development kit and a few weeks/months could make a profit. Now, most mobile developers either make nothing or - for those who actually make money - an average of $34 a month. They'd be better off devoting that time to collecting refundable bottles.
Look at this ask slashdot [slashdot.org]
I'm a recent grad from a master's program in a potentially worthless social science field, and I've considered getting into iOS development. Several of my friends who were in similar situations after grad school have done so and are making a healthy living getting contract work. Although they had CS and Physics degrees going into iOS, neither had worked in objective C and both essentially went through a crash courses (either self-taught or through intensive classes) in order to get their first gigs. I have two questions. First, am I an idiot for thinking I can teach myself either objective C or Swift on my own without any academic CS background (I've tinkered in HTML, CSS, and C classes online with some success)? Second, if I'm not an idiot for attempting to learn either language, which should I concentrate on?
People still see mobile as a "fall-back" option that will probably provide them with enough income to pay the bills, when stats say this is already false, and will only get worse.
We're looking at a future where you need to be able to produce quality product for free and hang in long enough to actually get some users to pay for the add-ins, bonus levels, and unlocked features. Large developers backed by lots of capital and marketing budgets will continue to eat into the mobile app space. With a couple of million apps out there, new players need to have the money to be seen in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
You couldn't just go out and buy a personal computer at your local big box store in those days.
Now, the market has matured. I don't see new pc manufacturers pop into existence every week, but I still see tons of new app makers trying to claw their way into the market because they heard that someone else made money in it. The reason is that the barriers to entry in the app market are low, so everyone and their dog is flocking to it, putting severe downward pressure on prices, while at the same time increas
Re: (Score:3)
I thought VHS won because of recording time [wikipedia.org]?
Re:When you're right, you're right. (Score:4, Insightful)
It won because of p0rn
Re: (Score:2)
[VHS] won because of p0rn
This is oft-quoted as fact, but I've seen it disputed often enough that I wouldn't take it at face value. From as early as 1996, this thread [google.com] commented that:-
Um, my family was the first on the block, getting a Sony Betamax in September, 1977, and porn films were readily available as quickly in Beta as in VHS (faster actually, because at the start of sales/rental of pre-recorded video, there were far more Beta titles available than VHS). Trust me. I was a horny little 12 year old at just about the time they became available. I know.
Even if Sony prohibited porn from being copied in their own commercial duplications facilities (which, I assume, would have had much- if not most- of the capacity in the early days), this doesn't mean the lack of commercial porn would have been the reason for Beta's failure.
Maybe Betamax *did* fail because of a lack of porn. But I suspect the shorter
Re: (Score:1)
Beta tapes cost more than VHS: VHS, though inferior, won.
Early Apple computers cost more than early PCs. PCs won.
Now your claim is only that price is important.
But one point one could make is that:
* IBM sold it's desktop and server business.
* Apple has grown a lot.
It's also visible in the smartphone market where Apple is successful in actually making money from it.
Also there's examples there the statement isn't true.
For instance HD-DVD was cheaper than Blu-ray. It didn't win.
And price is like you say important but doesn't tell what will win in the end.
For instance TN displays have been waaay more popular than IPS but
Re: (Score:2)
I am going to nitpick a bit, but the IBM is off point. IBM did not sell off its server line. It sold off it low end commodity server line. It kept the high end line. It about a high end company being in the commodity busses, not about if that line is economically viable – which was the main point.
Re: (Score:2)
Context. When a VHS recorder originally cost $1,500, there was no way people, given a choice, would pay more than $2,000 for a Betamax.
Back in those days, a blank tape was ~$35. But as the tape prices came down, people started buying more blank tapes and squirreling them away "to watch later."
The PS3 came able to play blu-ray included, for less than a stand-alone HD-DVD player; again, price won the war there.
And todays flatscreen tvs are cheaper than equivalent tube tvs ever were. Again, price wins.
Re: (Score:2)
It is more complex then that.
Beta had a shorter recording time and a tight control on what can and cannot be recorded on it.
PC (At the time they were the IBM and the IBM Compatibles) Offered a larger choice of vendors to choose from, IBM, Compaq, Amstrad, Packard Bell, HP, Gateway. You you could make your own white box. A lot of people actually spent more to make their PC to match the specs of the Apple Products.
Usually the issue is that the High-Quality product comes with extra bells and whistles that pe
Re: (Score:2)
I think the market will end up bifurcated.
For my part, I try to avoid products that are priced free. I've looked at a lot of mobile software, and so much of it that's free is low quality or has a punitive pricing model. Free games with pay-to-play mechanics, for instance, tend to be designed so heavily around monetizing the fun parts of the game that the game isn't fun no matter what you do. These fundamental decisions corrupt the process. By trying to keep fun behind a wall, even the fun parts aren't as go
Re: (Score:1)
There are plenty more examples where people will settle for cheap over expensive. Apps are just another one - once people are in the habit of not paying for an app, you'd better be in the top 0.1% of apps to justify getting paid.
And yet I bring to your attention http://apple.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org] -- it seems that there are still enough people willing to pay that an app that does nothing but pretends to be a popular *free* app will still convince people to pay for it.
Re:Do You Even Revenue, Bro? (Score:4, Insightful)
You know all those links you clicked? All those pages you saw? There was ads on them. That's the business model.
Re: (Score:3)
Okay I give up. I clicked through all the links, all the links from the links and read all those articles. Nowhere does it explain or even allude to a business model. Is this that 'mindshare' bullshit again? I don't know, this Re/code site is apparently affiliated with CNBC and from clicking on a few other articles feels just as mindless and worthless as CNBC. How do they monetize Battery Doctor, Clean Master and Photo Grid? Do they have ads?
Yes....just installed it for shits & grins and every other link or button points you back to the Play store to download more of their software. Got the Battery Doctor app. Will see how well it works as my battery has been crapping out lately.
Can somebody direct me to some examples? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Chinese companies are so good at making free but high-quality products," ...
If these companies are so good, where are some of their "high-quality" products?
Re:Can somebody direct me to some examples? (Score:4, Insightful)
In my town, the "high-quality" Chinese products are at the dollar store...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Think Twice about using We Chat [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In my language, I say "prove it". Of course, people hate. I care not though.
Let's get this out of the way... (Score:2, Interesting)
Android is really NOT free.
Plain vanilla (and useless) Android is free.
If you have the Google Play services including the Store and Music, then you are charged to use those.
In comparison and somewhat ironically, Windows is completely free for devices under 8", including all the services and store. And with new OEMs now pushing that as well (since they made it so Windows can run on exact same Android hardware), perhaps we will see some competition to Android on the OEM side. Or not. Either way, the point is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Of course not -- but access to the MS services (like their "store") is included. It is not with Android.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Simple fact is that now, it costs less for an OEM to use Windows than it does Android.
The big allure of Android was how cheap it was compared to Windows, and it's why it took off so well. I don't know that it will last if Microsoft can give the entire thing away for free. But this is how they won the console wars during the era of the 360, by undercutting the cost and also developing the software at a greatly increased rate.
If Windows 10 is any indication, I think Microsoft is actually doing a good job for
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't use a stock OS on my Android devices in years, so if I could save a couple dollars that way, I'd be more than happy to do so.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not ironic. Windows has always been very good at giving away copies of Windows in markets it did not think people would pay for them. It just used to be accomplished by simply not caring about, say a billion units of piracy in China.
Heck, startups still get free copies of most Microsoft software.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't paid a cent for Google Play services. I have downloaded dozens of apps, but all were free and I've never given Google any credit card information.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, most of the games that I've picked up have been from the Humble Bundle, which has it's own app for downloading your purchases.
Riiight. (Score:2)
Because businesses don't need to make money and development teams don't need to be paid.
I can't see how his logic works.
Free Chinese stuff? (Score:5, Funny)
Chinese Security (Score:1)
Free, like broadcast TV, with ads (Score:1)
TANSTAAFL (Score:1)
Chinese CEO? (Score:2)
Chinese CEO?
How'd you like it if a headline said: "American CEO says ..." rather than state which CEO and of which company?
It's like a headline that says "African man says ..."
(Yes, yes, I know the summary has the information).
Re: (Score:3)
If the article started off about an African man, and went on to talk about his experience as it relates to being from Africa, then the headline is correct.
free Chinese apps (Score:2)
Or as the rest of us like to say, stolen apps.
There probably are some paid services here (Score:2)
1) They may offer reduced functionality apps for free and you can pay to get more features. Nothing unusual there.
2) They have a business product line and I'm guessing that none of that is free, so it may be that individuals use their stuff for free and businesses pay.
It could also be that they are insanely managed and they're giving the store away to just get customers using them, but they
Re: (Score:2)