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?

[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?

[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 ..

[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: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.

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: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.

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...

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?

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 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.

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.