T-Mobile To Open App Store For All of Their Phones

tsa brings news that T-Mobile will be developing their own application store to compete with Apple's popular distribution scheme. Their aim is to be capable of bringing new services to all of their customers. Excerpting: "Developers will submit their applications online; the revenue-share agreement will be based on how much the application uses the network; and the applications will be presented to the user in order of popularity, not according to T-Mobile's preferences. It's all pretty straightforward, but the more interesting aspect is that this will apply to all the carrier's platforms from upcoming Android to Java to Sidekick and Windows Mobile."

Comments

Need a standardized platform!

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Developing for the iPhone is easy. There is only one platform.

But Windows Mobile, Android, and Java are three completely different platforms. That's not to mention platforms based on Brew or Symbian, even. Developing for an individual phone is easy, but to reach the entire market, it's very difficult.

I suppose if you aren't interested in reaching many users, that developing for a single platform like the iPhone is a decent choice. However, if you want to remain viable both in terms of independence and also monetarily, you need to have a broad base of users, not just a small group of fanatics.

Unfortunately, because of the disparity among the various platforms, the difficulty is high to develop a broadly applicable application. So the answer is to target either the least common denominator (there is none in the current phone market) or to target a generic platform that is relatively widely installed.

Welcome to MIDP. Yes, you'll hate every minute of it, but at least it exists.

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[Llywelyn]

I suppose if you aren't interested in reaching many users, that developing for a single platform like the iPhone is a decent choice. However, if you want to remain viable both in terms of independence and also monetarily, you need to have a broad base of users, not just a small group of fanatics.

You seem to have a different definition of "many" than I do. iPhone adoption has been huge so far, and not just "a small group of fanatics."

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Not only is there a lot of different platforms but also a lot of different hardware. CPUs, CPU speeds, RAM, storage capacity, screen resolutions/color depth, sound/music capabilities, controls/inputs, etc.

Conveniently, the word "platform" takes all of that (and more) into account.

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[Bentov]

I suppose if you aren't interested in reaching many users, that developing for a single platform like the iPhone is a decent choice. However, if you want to remain viable both in terms of independence and also monetarily, you need to have a broad base of users, not just a small group of fanatics.

You seem to have a different definition of "many" than I do. iPhone adoption has been huge so far, and not just "a small group of fanatics."

It's funny you know, if you replace "the iPhone" with "Linux" I think the sentence makes a little more sense. I think we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black here...

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[FLAGGR]

iPhone owners have a proven track record of paying for things. Just sayin'.

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[Aetuneo]

But if Apple chooses to cut you off (which it can whenever it wants, by removing your app from its store or by pushing an update which deletes it from all iPhones), you've just lost all access to the market. On the other hand, if you have an application which is being sold for many platforms, you are not as dependent upon the whims of one company which controls both the platform and the store.

Re:Need a standardized platform!

[forgoil]

Java/MIDP is far from "one" platform as well. Just the hassle of figuring out what freakin' device an app might work on, and if there is a special version for it, is hell on earth.

Can't stress it enough, the iPhone/iPod Touch platform is golden for developers. Good tools, heterogeneous platform, strong hardware, lots of screen, quite a lot of devices, a huge interest in adding applications, actual performance (most mobile devices have horrid performance, java and native).

I call manager on the whole T-Mobile thing. It really sounds like "they have it, now I wanna have it too" cries from a bunch of babies. I hardly think they know what the heck they are talking about, nor what it takes to bring that to market.

Android could really help here, if they would set the basic specs in a smart way. If they did, they could create a market for apps. An actual market. Not the equivalent of downloading music from Yahoo vs iTunes music store...

Operator run "App Stores" already exist

[@madeus]

Cruder (mostly web based) implementations of the iPhones "App Store" already exist with other operators.

I know that Vodafone, for example, distribute an application on their branded S60 Nokia phones that links to a small portal site, where you can read news and buy access to premium content, including TV shows and games.

The application is a small web based one and doesn't have feature the "App Store" has such as the ability to track updates for applications nor does it recognize if you've already made a purchase. I don't recall seeing any significant free applications on their either, almost all the applications were games from major publishers (e.g. branded as EA or Sega titles) and most were consistently priced.

For me, a major strength of the App Store is that it has a wide range of applications at a range of price points and from a range of developers - I think that's what attracts so many people to it.

I think mobile operators will struggle to understand the importance of having a wide range of applications (including free ones) and they will continue to take a short sighted view of focusing on doing business with major publishers like EA at the expense of independent developers - pushing to the market what they mistakenly think people want - ultimately to their own detriment.

So far, I've spent about 25 GBP on the App Store since July I've bought a couple of apps at about 5 GBP, one at about 10 GBP and a few at between 50p to 1.50 GBP. I'm sure I will buy more. I've been with Vodafone for about 8 years, and in that time only bought two applications from them (both games, at around 2.50-4.50 each I think).

I don't think mobile operators understand the importance of good software enough to replicate the success of the App Store on other devices. If good software was important to them there wouldn't have been a gap big enough for Apple to exploit in the first place.

Re:Android

[RetroRichie]

Google has really executed one thing successfully: search. You and I both know that Gmail is fantastic, but it's not "one with the masses" as another poster alludes to. I can't believe Android is going to be successful. Even if you take out their inability to execute on new products, they are way late to the party.

If their actions up to now are an indication...

[Junta]

Android is in trouble wrt to fulfilling the hope of an 'open' platform. So far:

-We still know next to nothing about the current state of their development situation. The M5 SDK released all the way back in March is the latest hard technical resource people have without an NDA. Meanwhile, Google is refreshing the SDK for the cherry-picked few (http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/thread/f031c33fe9e5b992).
For a platform trying to leverage a large development community, they sure are making it hard for those people.
-The bits we do have come without platform source. There seems to be a good chance Google might keep their middleware closed-source. Otherwise, why be so secretive about it even today?

So far we've seen promise of being open falling through to date, we've seen the supposed source of strength of android (the community), hamstringed by Google's own actions. I've seen promises of 'once the phone is on the market, we'll make good!', but I fail to see why they can't allow the SDK to be in public hands because of that excuse.

Then we have LiMo, which so far looks not to be user-centered, and more cell-phone manufacturer centered, so I'd not expect that to change the world significantly.

The *only* platform that so far in spirit lives up to those promises is OpenMoko. Unfortunately, the 'best' platform for it (FreeRunner) is a tad underpowered technically.

Re:If their actions up to now are an indication...

[mmurphy000]

For a platform trying to leverage a large development community, they sure are making it hard for those people.

Undoubtedly a bizarre move, though I have issues with who you probably have as the "they" in that sentence — see below.

The bits we do have come without platform source.

You mean, like this?

http://code.google.com/p/android/source/checkout

I'm under the impression not all bits are there, but it's enough to get Android running (sometimes poorly) on various HTC handsets, Nokia N8xx devices, etc.

So far we've seen promise of being open falling through to date, we've seen the supposed source of strength of android (the community), hamstringed by Google's own actions.

You keep blaming Google, yet you have supplied no evidence that they're really the ones at fault.

Remember that Android is a product of the Open Handset Alliance. There's a whole lotta firms in that group, including some fairly big names. While it is eminently possible the problem starts and stops with Google, it could be some coalition within Open Handset Alliance that has put the screws to the process, for whatever reason.

That doesn't mean it's not bad. But, if you're going to cast blame at specific firms, it'd be nifty if you had more evidence that the firm is the one truly deserving of the blame.

I've seen promises of 'once the phone is on the market, we'll make good!', but I fail to see why they can't allow the SDK to be in public hands because of that excuse.

Maybe they're worried about the support burden and the subsequent pressure on deadlines — ask any decent-sized open source project about what happens when a highly-publicized update is released. Maybe somebody in the Alliance demanded that updates be curtailed so Alliance developers could get a leg up on getting their own applications built — bad, mind you, but not necessarily Google's idea.

Again, the silence is bad, but it's an annoying sort of bad, not a "the sky is falling! the sky is falling!" sort of bad. Yet. Now, if they miss their 2008 Q4 target, or if they make it and the platform isn't as open as originally proclaimed, then people have a right to get royally pissed, just as they're getting pissed at Apple for throwing its weight around in the App Store more than might seem warranted. Right now is a fine time to be skeptical of whether Android will be as open as we want, but too soon to say it is not going to happen.

already full of fail

[Aggrav8d]

"the revenue-share agreement will be based on how much the application uses the network" So... the more popular my app, the more $ t-mobile keeps? how the hell is that fair when t-mobile customers are (probably) paying per byte already?

Jobs has a different definition of "many" too

[MacDork]

You seem to have a different definition of "many" than I do. iPhone adoption has been huge so far, and not just "a small group of fanatics."

As the Washington Post article mentions, Steve Jobs' stated goal for Apple is 10 million iPhones in 2008. A rather modest goal for an industry that pushes more than a billion units a year. For the first half of the year, Apple has only sold 2.4 million iPhones.

Of course, the spin in this article doesn't stop with iPhone "popularity"... The article is also spinning this as a competition between T-Mobile and Apple. There is no competition. You cannot choose T-mobile's app store over Apple's on your iPhone. Likewise, you cannot shop at Apple's store on a T-Mobile phone. Apple's store is irrelevant to T-Mobile's ambitions. Apple exists in its own little walled garden.

Furthermore, it sounds as if T-Mobile is competing with Nokia's Download Store which, BTW, predates Apple's app store... and iPhone for that matter. Why wasn't the actual competition mentioned? That's where the meat is in this news... Will Nokia be blocked by T-Mobile on their locked handsets? Will the T-Mobile store offer a better deal to S60 developers? Will Nokia withhold signed apps from T-Mobile or fast track the signing process for Nokia Download Store developers?

Nope, no real news in this article. It's just fanboy infotisement. How did it even make front page? News for nerds indeed...

Re:T-mobile blocks java apps

[Anonymous Coward]

No! It depends on your rate plan. If you have a suitable data plan/addon then you can acess the internet from any application (otherwise, access is limited to whitelisted t-zones IP's) AFAIK, the $5/mo mobile web addon used to allow full access to the web. Now you need the $20/mo addon.