Some Claim Android App Store Worse Than iPhone's

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?"

Comments

Who'd have thunk it?

[seanadams.com]

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?

[Hadlock]

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?

[eln]

Exactly. A mobile phone, even a smart phone, is far more of an appliance (or a game console) than a standard computer is, and you will lose if you try to treat it like a computer. Apple understands this and offers a uniform experience with a tightly controlled OS and tightly controlled applications available through a simple and easy to use app store interface. Developers only have to develop for one set of hardware requirements, and can fully take advantage of that piece of hardware.

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:Who'd have thunk it?

[GooberToo]

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:Who'd have thunk it?

[GooberToo]

"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:Who'd have thunk it?

[bobcat7677]

Yes, well said. Based on the sketchy news reports I have seen, there are at least 30 million Iphones out there now while there are only about 1 million android devices so far. I think that gap will start to narrow with the introduction of the Droid phone and Verizon's accompanying ad campaigns. But dev for android should be considered investment in the future at this point, not a source of instant riches.

Re:Who'd have thunk it?

[kostmo]

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.

The fact that lower-end models exist in no way prevents devs from taking advantage of the advanced features of high end phones. If high-end phones are their target market, so be it, and they can make money from sales to those customers. The API specifies a tag that can be used to restrict installation to devices that contain the features your app requires.

Re:Who'd have thunk it?

[Lemmy Caution]

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 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:Who'd have thunk it?

[kikito]

Let me get this straight.

His personal experience is anecdotal.

Your personal experience is FACTS.

Fascinating.

Re:Who'd have thunk it?

[mjwx]

Exactly. A mobile phone, even a smart phone, is far more of an appliance (or a game console) than a standard computer is

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.

Perhaps ..

[OzPeter]

.. 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:Perhaps ..

[TooMuchToDo]

Or you care more about functionality and apps that actually do something, not games. Locale, which takes action based on your location, is free. Weather apps are mostly free. The only apps I've looked at I might consider paying for? And RDP app and an app that lets me use the camera as a scanner to make PDFs. You don't need to buy apps when there are tons of solid apps that are free.

Re:Perhaps ..

[mjihad]

.. 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, including Canada, Sweden, Finland, Mexico, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, South Korea, China, Brazil, India and Russia.

Some claim chocolate ice cream better then vanilla

[Kenja]

But I still say eat which ever you personally like.

Market share

[Gudeldar]

Perhaps Android apps don't sell as well as iPhone apps is because there are a LOT less Android phones than iPhones?

Re:Market share

[mlts]

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:Market share

[JohnFen]

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:Market share

[91degrees]

I have to say, I don't get Android. What's the appeal?

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 choice. Nor will there be a lot of choice for an upgrade should you want to keep the existing apps.

Re:Market share

[GIL_Dude]

I can only speak for myself, but I just got a Motorola Droid and it was specifically because it was Android and did not presume to tell me what software I can run on it. I am a Google Voice user and wanted the GV app, but also just plain don't care to have a hand held computer sold to me that I can't install whatever I want on it (and yes, I know about jailbreaking and cydia but don't feel I should NEED to do that). If it wasn't for that, I probably would have gotten an iPhone 3GS or whatever they are when they came out. (BTW, I really like the Motorola Droid. I've only had it for 11 days now but so far it is very solid and works very well with Google Voice).

Re:Market share

[fm6]

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. Most of them have been around a lot longer than iPhone. It seems that even people who don't buy Apple products are sucked in by their mystique.

Re:Why not both?

[maccodemonkey]

Sure, if porting over was free... But the reality is that porting an iPhone app to Android requires moving all your iPhone C code to Java, targeting non multitouch devices, targeting devices with different screen sizes and resolutions, and another round of testing... You'd have to hire a second engineering team. What Gameloft seems to be saying is they can hire a dozen engineers to make X number of dollars on Android, or they can take those same engineers and make 400 times X on the iPhone. Economically, it makes no sense for them to keep engineers on Android when those same engineers could be put to work to make 400 times as much money on the iPhone.

400 times the sales

[Nerdfest]

I would think the vastly greater sales would be related to the larger number of iPhones on the street, and the length of time the app store has been around, but that's just me. I would also guess that Apple users would buy more games than Android users, just based on my generalized, uninformed perceptions of the user base.

Lets see where this stands in 2 quarters

[system1111]

With the Droid out and the recent marketing push in terms of Verizon dollars behind it I think this might look a little different down the road a bit.

Re:Lets see where this stands in 2 quarters

[WiiVault]

Considering the tact Apple has shown becoming the most important player in mobiles in 2 years I would be willing to take the bet that they will be fine even without Verizon. Android will thrive, but the iPhone is gonna be just fine.

They will come back

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Right now the install base of iPhone is much bigger than Droid's. So the initial sales will be slower. But it will pick up eventually if the platform is a hit. When they come back they might find that their niche has been already filled by their competitor.

Re:Why not both?

[MightyMartian]

And now we know the real reason Apple fears, hates and will continue to block Java on the iPhone.

Droid Owner

[explosivejared]

I just recently converted to android. Maybe I'm just late to the game, and we're on the tail end of this exodus now. My first impression, having been on the platform for a week, is that there has been almost no development, especially in making games, for android that is anywhere comparable to the iphone. I would posit that this "exodus" is made up. The market is still nowhere near as developed as the app store. Any discussion about a comparison of the two models is premature at best.

Re:Droid Owner

[dagamer34]

Ditto. Even the crappier looking iPhone apps are FAR more pleasing to the eye than some of the best Android apps because there's a standardized UI that just about every iPhone app must use (creating your own UI for iPhone apps is often discouraged in the iPhone developer docs unless it's a game).

Re:Droid Owner

[blackmonday]

Also, Android phones don't (yet) have dedicated graphics chips, AFAIK. I just got the Samsung Moment, and winced when I ran the included Bejeweled demo. It's one of my favorite games on iPhone, but it's a total joke on Android. You won't find AAA titles on Android, because they can't be run. Don't expect Trench Run or Tiger Woods on the Android or Palm Pre, because it's not a possibility at this moment.

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.

Is your app really even worth $1?

[DrHappyAngry]

Maybe if I actually saw an app worth paying for, in the android market, I'd buy it. Most apps are pretty dumb. How many fart, soundboard, and girly apps are there? There's a handful that I probably should make a donation to, like connectbot, gmote, andftp, and cyanogen, but other than I've not seen much that even looks worth $1. A huge amount of us jumped to android since it's a relatively open platform. Those of us that are used to open platforms are not used to paying for much. They do specifically mention gaming, though, and my G1 has a terrible interface for trying to play games on. Great for what I use it for, but not so good for games. The hardware on most is kind of slow compared to the iphone, as well.

Re:windows marketplace

[Darkness404]

Lets see here, who (willingly) uses Windows Mobile? You have some Windows fanbois, businessmen who need some strange proprietary syncing with some obscure Windows application, people who want a cheap smartphone (yeah, now Android is becoming pretty cheap, but there still isn't any AT&T Android phone, and a year ago there really weren't many good Android handsets), and people who don't want to upgrade their phones. None of them are in the market for applications. The people who will pay money for the applications are teenagers who want "the latest thing", geeks who want to use their phone in different ways, etc. Most people who have Windows Mobile won't be huge customers of applications, especially now when Android, iPhone OS and even BlackBerry are advancing faster than stagnant, unstable Windows Mobile.

Good grief. It's too early to say anything.

[realmolo]

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.

What is true value?

[jonaskoelker]

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 human life. Who are we to say they are wrong? We're free to disagree, but that doesn't by itself make them wrong.

Maybe $2 for a funny little game that lasts for half an hour isn't something that many people value greatly, but some people value it at more than $2 (or they wouldn't buy it, according to economic theory and a rationality assumption). Who are you to say they're wrong?

(I probably share your views on the worth of most phone applications. I don't recall purchasing any myself. But if they make other silly people happy...)

CNN on Android developer fears

[maiken2051]

CNN Tech article on developing for Android: http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/17/android.wired/index.html Will developers get stuck building for the "least common denominator" of 'droid phones? Or develop for specific models / versions / capabilities? Throw in phone vendor and carrier OS customizations and the Android app marketplace could get hard to live with...

Re:CNN on Android developer fears

[Delwin]

Sounds like the PC market...

Re:It would be nice if I could buy something

[loconet]

Many. These are the countries that currently accept paid apps: http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=143779

Android without a phone plan?

[tepples]

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:Android without a phone plan?

[Cederic]

Nokia n800?
Archos PMP?
How about an Android netbook, an Android tablet device, the other 87 Android phones currently in development or already released?

Re:It's obvious why if you know an iPhone user

[tomhuxley]

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

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..

Why I don't buy much from the Android Market

[GrantRobertson]

It is because the only way to find apps is to browse them on the darned phone. Don't get me wrong, I love my Droid. But a 3.5" diagonal screen is not the place I want to be sorting through thousands of almost identical task list apps and trying to find the best one. I hesitate to buy any apps because I never know if I have actually looked through the entire list. We need a real web site with better access to reviews and an easier way to down-rank all those apps that essentially spam. I have run into at least 20 apps with identical descriptions but different names and icons. When Google cleans up that mess, then maybe I will be willing to spend some money in there.

Re:Why I don't buy much from the Android Market

[hax4bux]

http://andappstore.com/

Re:It's obvious why if you know an iPhone user

[AgentGibbled]

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.

1st Iteration Android store is rubbish

[EnglishTim]

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:1st Iteration Android store is rubbish

[EnglishTim]

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.

Re:It's the psychology..!

[mdwh2]

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 , http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jul/14/iphone-purity-pledge-apple ).

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 phone that's a minority player. I rarely see such stories about Nokia, who dominate the market.

Who cares about 100,000 "apps" if they're involve paying money for trivial things that on any other platform would be available for free.

Re:Why not neither?

[toriver]

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:Why not both?

[WaywardGeek]

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. iPhone has the lead for now, but at the moment, I think Android has a higher growth rate.

I think long-term Google will be proven right: a universal operating system running on phones from all but a couple of the major cell phone manufacturers will create a far larger user base than proprietary offerings from any single vendor. It's Windows vs Mac all over again.

Re:Why not both?

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

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:Why not neither?

[Dominic_Mazzoni]

The thing is, most people with a Nokia phone never install a 3rd-party app.

It's not their core business

[CharlyFoxtrot]

This guy 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:It's not their core business

[Zero__Kelvin]

Google doesn't care about Android the way Apple cares about the iPhone, because the iPhone is a hardware platform owned by Apple which runs proprietary code and Apple makes money when it sells, while Android is NOT a Google platform and Google doesn't sell any handsets. Google shouldn't care about Android as much as Apple, but I assure you that they don't need to since they are but one member of The Open Handset Alliance. The OHA member companies care very much about the software platform Android, which again, is not a Google platform despite overwhelming misinformation suggesting it is here on Slashdot.

The iPod runs a closed source OS that doesn't even support multitasking , while Android is Open Source, multi-tasking, and exposes a much richer API to the developer with access to much more under the hood, including ways to extend and replace core functionality. My guess is that people with Androids are getting real use from their devices, while iPhone users are getting less real use. In either case, when trying to impress their peers and people around them in the nightclub, iPhone users have to do it with a single application rather than showcasing the way 7 different apps work together, so iPhone users want games and Android owners see games as a much less impressive way of impressing people than real world use, and that games merely squander their platforms true capabilities. I doubt iPhone users buy games to make much real use of them, since anyone who can afford an iPhone and really wants to play games on such a limited form factor could surely buy a handheld gaming platform.

Re:It's obvious why if you know an iPhone user

[toriver]

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...

How this tripe get modded up is beyond me.

[mjwx]

Granted, what I'm saying is also anecdotal

This is cancelled out by this.

That's called anecdotal. It doesn't prove anything

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.

Your refusal to accept fact doesn't change the facts.

Just because you call your opinions fact doesn't make them facts.