Android Market Hits 10 Billion Downloads, Games Dominate

New submitter sandeepabhat tips news that Android Market recently saw its 10 billionth app download, reaching the milestone less than a year after the App Store accomplished the same feat. New downloads through Android Market are proceeding at a rate of roughly 1 billion per month. Google has now created an infographic to break down the information further. Games outpace any other type of app, accounting for more than a quarter of all downloads. The top five countries in downloads-per-capita are South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the U.S., and Singapore.

Comments

Paid Vs. Free?

[stating_the_obvious]

How about a breakout of paid versus free and some idea of who's making money developing for the Andriod platform?

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Google. Period.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[InsightIn140Bytes]

Android apps and games are mostly free, and ad-supported. Mobile developers quickly learned that piracy on Android is much larger problem than on iPhone and that they couldn't just sell their software. That was the reason they started offering games for free and getting the revenue from advertisements. It goes well along the lines with Google too, who also recently bought the largest mobile advertising house AdMob.

This also means that people of course download way more apps too.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[PriyanPhoenix]

As others have mentioned, being free doesn't mean not monetised. For example, I remember Rovio a while back announcing that it was making more money through ad revenue from the free versions of its games on Android than the paid versions on iPhone.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, you make much more money on ads. Instead of getting a one-time payment of 99, they get continuous flow of money for much longer.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[salesgeek]

Um... you were doing great until you hit the piracy part. That isn't why apps are less expensive on Android. The issue is that Android's market (small m market) are competitive because there are multiple ways consumers can buy (Google, Amazon, etc)

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobile developers quickly learned that piracy on Android is much larger problem than on iPhone and that they couldn't just sell their software.

This certainly isn't true for me. I used to pirate all kinds of apps for Windows Mobile and for PC, but with Android it's easier to pay 99 cents for an app and get perpetual updates than to bother trying to pirate an app and keep it updated. Kind of like STEAM. I've bought a lot of apps already and I plan to buy almost all of the apps that are going on sale for 10 cents this week.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobile developers quickly learned that piracy on Android is much larger problem than on iPhone

Yup, as usual, people who use and love Apple products are simply better people in general. Apple users have a higher level of moral behavior and are better able to think critically about technology and its place in the world. This may have to do with the fact that Apple users are more well educated and tend to have extremely creative minds.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

With this fact and the fragmentation issue on Android making app writing far harder due to having so many different, incompatible phones to choose from, with one mistake resulting in one star, "forces closes on open" reviews, I'm amazed why anyone writes for this platform, when iOS writing is far more lucrative. Between Android's security issues mentioned often on /., the fact that the Dalvik VM requires overhead (which is why Android devices have to have far faster CPUs than Apple's products), and fragmentation, there does not seem to be much reason to write for Android.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[InsightIn140Bytes]

Where did I say Apple users are better people in general? It's just observation I've made, and I've studied the issue too. I don't even use iPhone or Android myself, I use old Windows Mobile.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[varmittang]

Huh? The price for a app doesn't vary from market to market for a single app. Its not like Google or Amazon sets the price the dev does. Its more like people on Android phones don't want to buy, they want free. They are buying a cheaper phone compared to others, they are not looking to pay much for apps either. Piracy is easier on the Android since you can load your own apps not in the market.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Joce640k]

that's why they bought a cheap Android in the first place.

If they were richer they would have bought The Real Thing...?

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

As others have mentioned, being free doesn't mean not monetised. For example, I remember Rovio a while back announcing that it was making more money through ad revenue from the free versions of its games on Android than the paid versions on iPhone.

Yes, they were making about as much money from new sales on iOS as they did from people playing their already downloaded ad supported apps on Android.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[ByOhTek]

Umm. My android tablet cost more than the iPad with the same amount of disk. It was not 'a cheap Android'. I got it because it had features few others had.

Mind you, at the time I thought the iPads were still more expensive, but even had I known I could have gotten an iPad for $50 less, I'd still stick with the Android I have for the features it has, that the iPad lacks.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called common sense. You get apps for a large price that you find on the iphone as well, then you find some apps that do the exact same thing cheaper, and you can find again other apps that do the very same thing but for free, sponsored by ads or something else. Why would I buy some app when I can get it for free, or so cheap I can buy dozens more instead of just a very expensive one.
The fact that there are so many price ranges, business models and markets, speaks in Android's favour. That's competition for you, the user wins.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

O.o

How do you back this up? I know plenty iPhone users who haven't installed a single paid app on their phone. I know some android users who haven't either. Myself, I've spent around ~$75 in the market going back to July 2010, I've probably spent more than the average user, of either iOS or Android, but I don't know that the idea that android users are more resistant to paying for things is accurate at this point, or ever has been.

Most users of Android phones today wouldn't know what OSS even means, just like most iOS users don't. Both are consumer devices, and when you remove the fanatics on both sides you have very similar demographics.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[gl4ss]

why would you pay for something that you know is available for free and took some guy couple of weeks of spare time to create? a _LOT_ of apps fall into this category. for example the "enable/disable wifi-hotspot"-widget that i'm using. it's such a basic thing, really, it should come with the os itself. even if you made a paid version of it, how are you going to differentiate to justify anyone paying for it?

you should rephrase it that piracy is easier on android since you don't have to pay the os provider to enable sideloading, as is with other some other platforms(ios, wp7, bb..).

"cheaper" implies there's something more expensive out there though. wp7's are in the same price brackets, you don't really pay much for the os there either. apple sells iphones that are not of the latest generation too if you want "cheap" and high end androids cost about the same as the most fresh iphone at any given day anyhow(about 750-800 bucks).

and a lot of the cool stuff that's worth warezing is based on stolen gpl code anyways!

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[BasilBrush]

I didn't say all Androids were cheaper. Just that there are many people on a budget, and those people can more easily afford a cheap Android than an iOS device. And when they've done so, they are less likely to be prepared to pay for apps.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

If one doesn't mind dealing with a two year contract, AT&T has an 8 GB 3GS for one penny. That is as cheap as it gets unless one hits eBay.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't the iPhone 3GS less than a dollar?

Wasn't that one of the complaints about the 4G? That it looked a lot like the 3GS from a distance, so bystanders wouldn't know the buyer just paid a lot of money for a new iThing instead of less than a dollar?

Either way, you're clearly off base with your claim.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[nschubach]

It still sounds like broad speculation (ie: flame bait) to me... unless, of course, you can provide a link to a study.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

sure, and it's only, what, two years out of date? You can get a Galaxy S for "free* with contract" too, and it's a significantly better phone.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft hasn't given you a new Windows Phone for all your shilling/trolling InsightIn140Bytes (aka: CmdrPony, ...)?

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Hotweed Music]

If you want some idea, you could go look at "Top Grossing" in the market. Or you can keep asking rhetorical questions ;D

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry you got ripped off :(

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[stating_the_obvious]

Snarky...I like snarky... Hopefully there will be a new comment modifier so we can distinguish humor from snark...

I found it funny that of all the available data Google has on the Android Market, they chose to ignore the one that a lot of people track. Voting with dollars is a good way to see which apps/developers are producing quality; and it tends to signal whether the market is sustainable since developers, like everyone else, have rent to pay and at least one mouth to feed.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Nadaka]

Um... My epic 4g is still better than the latest iphone in everything that matters except battery life.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[EvilBudMan]

Nobody mentions Amazon's AppStore? If you can sideload it works just like Google's Market except they have more stuff that you can pay for to get rid of the adds so a developer is not tied down completely to the Android Market.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[dzfoo]

OK, how about this, or this this.

From that last one,

iPhone users continue to download more paid applications, however, with 50% of users buying at least one paid application a month, compared to 21% of Android users. The survey also included consumers on webOS devices, and found that while they were active, they downloaded fewer paid and free applications.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Alter_3d]

Nobody mentions Amazon's AppStore? If you can sideload it works just like Google's Market except they have more stuff that you can pay for to get rid of the adds so a developer is not tied down completely to the Android Market.

Only useful for US Residents. The Amazon Appstore doesnt work outside the States.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Zebra1024]

The good thing about AD supported applications is the developer makes money if people actually use the application (not buy it). This should encourage better applications and improvements over time to encourage users to keep using the application.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to think Android is a platform for cheapscates. The truth is that Android is the platform for people who don't give a fuck. Its target market is the same as MS Windows on the desktop -- those who take whatever is preloaded on the hardware instead of thinking about what they want from their software.

Just in case you weren't alive in the MS-DOS days, this turns out to be the far most dominating factor in the size of the markets, and determines the fate of the industry. It overwhelms all other considerations combined. Technical merit, developer tools, average user attitudes about pricing, freeness of market -- you can blow every single one of those off simultaneously and still be the leader.

Android is currently set up for that major advantage, except with some of those other minor factors also in their favor or at least competitive. Beating Microsoft 20 years ago was a problem of child's play proportions compared to beating Android in the coming decade, but fortunately the stakes are lower and losing won't hurt as bad. Unfortunately that means most people won't try as hard.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you define the "Android ecosystem" and why is it second? What gauge are you using to determine if the system is working or not? I would say 1 billion downloads from the official Android app place a month shows it is working quite well.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[WilCompute]

Amazon can and does set prices for the Apps on its app store. It is in their agreement.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[IANAAC]

I have a Chinese knock-off tablet and don't have direct access to Android Market, but I use Amazon's app market all the time.

They offer a free app every day and most of the free offerings are games. There have been some really good non-game apps offered for free too, though - Quick Office and Printer Share are two that come to mind that have recently been offered for free. I'm not surprised that games come out on top (although I suspect Apple's market also is dominated by game downloads).

With a free app a day, why wouldn't someone download it? It's free and once it's been downloaded, Amazon keeps track of what you've downloaded and you can re-download those same free apps at any time. I do it almost every day, whether I use the app or not. I'm actually surprised that developers haven't complained to Amazon about it enough for them to stop allowing re-downloading.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[tlhIngan]

you should rephrase it that piracy is easier on android since you don't have to pay the os provider to enable sideloading, as is with other some other platforms(ios, wp7, bb..).

Incorrect. Piracy is easier on Android because it's trivial to get APKs off the platform, and APKs are not DRM-encumbered (unlike say, Amazon APKs). Other platforms like this include WebOS.

iOS, WP7 DRM the files - that's why you can download apps via iTunes or Zune Market and install them on your phone from your PC (really useful for those big apps). Distributing the files does nothing unless you distribute the AppleID or Live ID used with that account.

Now, iOS makes it harder to pirate because to pirate reqiures jailbreaking (not all devices have the option yet), and installing a modified installer daemon (trivial) to allow unsigned binaries. In addition, a special flag inside Info.plist has to be set (something apps can actually check for) to tell the kernel that the app is unencrypted.

Of course, another reason for the piracy is Paid Android apps are not available everywhere. If you're not in a country where Google Wallet/Checkout is supported, then you're SOL. So if you are a dev, the only way to get your app "out there" is to make it free.

Apple has the same issue with the App Store, but they allow use of iTunes cards and such so it's possible to buy apps.

Of course, I made my first Android app purchase the other day. And given how terrible the experience was (I used the web interface but it probably won't make a difference) I can see why people pirate. I purchase apps on sale, then 24 hours later, when the apps weren't on sale, half the apps I bought were cancelled. The reason was "the transaction could not be completed in a timely manner". Bullcrap - I've never see this issue anywhere else.

I think the devs cancelled it on purpose so they won't have to give me cheap apps. because my only remedy is to "try the purchase again". Well, I can't, because it was cancelled after the sale is over, and I'm not paying full price.

In the end, I'll just pirate the damn apps I "bought". Try to do the right thing...

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

The fact this post was moderated up wonderfully shoes how this is one giant, unspoken, lie. The fact is, pirates have repeatedly proven price largely doesn't matter. Several studies proved its largely a sense of entitlement and spite which leads pirates to steal. They then rationalize it anyway they want but it does change they are part of the Entitled Generation.

So while YOU may be the exception, you are by far not the rule. Period. So whoever dumbly moderated your post up, repeat after me. Anecdote is not data. The fact this must be repeated in almost every thread wonderfully shoes how subpar the /. population is these days.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[thetoadwarrior]

True but that is also why Android apps are generally shittier than iPhone apps because actually ad revenue isn't that awesome for anyone but Google.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[thetoadwarrior]

I think you'll find you're wrong. Most people aren't going to be loading in other markets or rooting their phone. They're doing to use it how they've learned to use it from the guy at the shop or from the manual and that's it. Younger and more tech savy people will have less money which means they won't go to amazon, they'll steal it.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Algae_94]

You're trying really hard to twist that fact to a pro iOS slant, but it's not working. More money on Android (ads or from wherever) is better than less money off iOS. Unless there is another piece of data that hasn't been said that the total of iOS is higher because of the purchase plus ads, but I see no mention of that.

Let's not forget ad revenue will continue as long as people use the aps, but people only buy the aps once.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[AmbushBug]

Relax Coward, you seem to have skipped over the first sentence: "This certainly isn't true for me". He/she wasn't trying to claim that it was true for everyone.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[madmark1]

So the categories on Android Market labeled "Top Grossing", "Top Paid" and "Top New Paid" are not somehow indicating who is voting with their dollars?

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Meh. I've been developing an android app for customers that visit my workplace. It's not one that we'd charge for, it's a courtesy... a fun thing.

But in the process I wondered if an idea I had could make me a few dollars on the side, so I did quite a bit of research. The short version is, the googles market nets developers far, far less than the itunes market. There are various theories and anecdotes about piracy, android users being super-cheap, testing the ad-supported route instead... but I wasn't much interested in the "why" or "how to get around it".

Ultimately, I'm not sinking any real time into an app that I'd have to charge for. I'm not interested in $0.23 a month from ad revenue. The only way I'm writing anything for android is if it's a complement to a web service I can charge for. I'm just glad I did the research first.

For nearly everyone, as a way to earn, the android platform is dead. Amazon, Google, Zynga, etc. may be able to make money, but everyone else is chasing unicorns.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[dzfoo]

Your point is valid. However, you are missing one thing: cause and effect.

The reason there are so many free apps in the Android market nowadays is because developers have moved to "freemium" and ad-supported model on that platform. The evidence suggests that this is precisely because people were not willing to pay the price of apps in the Android Market, so developers adapted.

This appears to be mostly an Android phenomenon, since even the same developers tend to offer the same apps on the iOS App Store for a non-zero price.

Most business, developer, and customer surveys, and even some studies, support this notion that iOS users are willing to pay for stuff, while Android users feel more comfortable with ad-supported software.

Horses for courses, as they say.

This of course says nothing about why games are the top downloads. I was just responding to someone claiming that suggestions of this phenomenon were mere speculation, so I offered some references.

By the way, you are right in that the Apple App Store reflects the same trend of games being the top downloads. Android and iOS users do have some things in common.

          -dZ.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[vinayg18]

She? This is Slashdot!

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

> The reason there are so many free apps in the Android market nowadays is
> because developers have moved to "freemium" and ad-supported model on that platform.

That's fascinating, but the Amazon "free app days" feature the paid-for app for free, not some ad-laden version

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[dzfoo]

Those are promotions, not sustained prices. Or are you suggesting that Android users will just forgo the use of an application with the hopes of one day it appearing in the "free app days" listing?

If that's the case, it just reinforces the assertion that Android users will not pay for software (though I don't necessarily think it's to that extreme), and that this is an Android-specific phenomenon. There are plenty of free apps in the Apple App Store, yet people still buy the pricey ones.

          -dZ.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

You're trying really hard to twist that fact to a pro iOS slant, but it's not working. More money on Android (ads or from wherever) is better than less money off iOS.

That was a good one - accusing me of "twisting a fact" while pretending that "making about the same" means more money on Android.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[IANAAC]

...Or are you suggesting that Android users will just forgo the use of an application with the hopes of one day it appearing in the "free app days" listing?

If that's the case, it just reinforces the assertion that Android users will not pay for software (though I don't necessarily think it's to that extreme), and that this is an Android-specific phenomenon. There are plenty of free apps in the Apple App Store, yet people still buy the pricey ones.

-dZ.

Well, as I said in my original post, the majority of what's offered as the free app of the day on Amazon is games. I'm not a gamer and don't use my tablet for games (not to mention that's it's just not powerful enough top run most of the newer games), so I'm not willing to pay for them. I'm willing to download them for free and try them, though. I'm doubly interested when I see a productivity/utility app offered for free.

I suspect I'm not alone, but who knows. Do most Android users use their tablets/phones primarily for games?

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not as much as you'd think. They made deals where the carriers are getting the 30% from the app sales. Google pretty much only makes search/ad revenue from Android.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[Algae_94]

Unless you provide a citation, I'm going with the "prior art" of the post you replied to:

For example, I remember Rovio a while back announcing that it was making more money through ad revenue from the free versions of its games on Android than the paid versions on iPhone.

emphasis mine.

"making more money" would imply more money on Android.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[gl4ss]

it doesn't matter how hard the initial crack is, self checks don't matter when we have warez cracking groups.

what matters is how easy you can load that cracked install package to your own device.

it doesn't matter what the apps check for, as that can be cracked. and will be cracked.

though the last time I saw as elaborate releases as some pc and c64's had on mobiles was on the ngage, most of the games had to be cracked to get off the mmc cards, but some warez groups did that on the day of releases - but the elaborate thing was that they added their own loading splashscreens to the games too, as a showoff(symbian had very bad reputation for just doing legit development..).

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[salesgeek]

It is dangerous to assume facts not in evidence. First, Android devices exist at all levels of the smartphone marketplace. Some are cheap (either inexpensive or poorly constructed). Some are very expensive. The best part is that inexpensive phones are critical in unlocking the global mass market. Second, Android users run the gamut from the prepaid phone user to people on unlimited everthing on every carrier available. Even the prepaid market is surprising when you study it. There are a lot of wealthy people who think paying $150 for a phone and $50 for unlimited everything with no possibility of the monthly bill going over $50 is smart business... mainly because it is. Since you clearly aren't an Android user (you said they were cheap and piracy was rampant without knowing how difficult it actually is to pirate software), then you probably have never had the pleasure of getting an app for $.10 because one app store had a sale and the other had a price match policy.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[salesgeek]

Apparently, you are not aware how easy it is to get started with Amazon's app store. It's easy enough that everyone I know with an Android device has done it.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[EvilBudMan]

I heard they were supposed to be working on that.

Re:Paid Vs. Free?

[EvilBudMan]

Typo Nazi.

10 cent downloads for 10 days

[Rik Sweeney]

Just in case anyone hasn't noticed, Google are celebrating by making selected apps are available for 10 cents for the next few days (it started a few days ago so there's something like 7 days to go).

The selection changes each day so it's worth having a look. I picked up Toki Tori today.

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[Jaxim]

Although not on the 10cent list, I like the boggle app called "Word ZigZag". Check it out. It's REALLY addicting! http://goo.gl/VLc1N

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[gl4ss]

is google paying the difference to the devs, or is this similar to amazon's daily free app thing? (in which the store just gives stuff free, devs get nothing)

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[gblfxt]

boa charged me $1 per 10c app, to bad google doesnt have a basket of some sort instead of charging individually

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[CaptainOblivion]

I would assume it's like the steam sales, where the dev agrees to sell their app for crazy cheap (because a download doesn't cost them any money) and the number of sales explodes so they end up making more money.

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[jkcity]

now this may be different to usa but I live in uk and had this issue alot instead I'd get charged £1 and it got charged on most apps since most don't charge in my local currency so often would end up paying more to the bank than to the actual game developer, this is soemthing i truely believe google needs to fix as ios does not do this but anyway what i did was get myself a pre paid master card and that does not charge the £1 fee I think only a 2% transaction charge or something which is hardly anything certainly alot better than £1 an app. It also has the added beenfit of being limited so worst case scenario you lose your phone/tablet no one can just go buy crazy loads of apps on you, I know on soem phoens the app store can be password protected but its not on android 3.0 tablets and it also stops you accidently clicking one fo them stupid in app purchases for £50.

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[nahdude812]

I don't get it, how does your bank charge you more for a transaction than the price of the transaction? Do you have one of those setups where every purchase is rounded up to the next dollar and the difference is put in a savings account / donated to charity / etc.?

If not, why on earth do you still have an account with a bank that would just steal from you like this?

Re:10 cent downloads for 10 days

[Anonymous Coward]

The question is, how much are the hard-working developers getting paid while Google holds a ten-cent promotion?

iPhone vs Android

[mcgrew]

The other day in another thread someone touted the "obvious" superiority of iPhone over Android. I called him on it, asking what would make the iPhone wrth its higher asking price. The only answer he could come up with was "app availability." (note, I was in a Sprint store yesterday triying to get my phone fixes, and it appeared some Androids cost more than iPhones, but that may have been part of the cantract, with the iPhone subsidized)

It looks like he was trolling. But I am curious, guys, wht with this thread and all, which one has more apps? More important, which one has more apps that are actually useful? If iPhone has 2 million apps and Android has 1.5 million apps, but 1.5 million iPhone apps are all Angry Birds clones, the "iPhone has more apps" would be a red herring; they're not all useful.

Note that these numbers aren't real, they're only illustrations. I'd really like to know which platform is better, iPhone or Android? How well are each built (and I realize that Android's quality is probably all over the board, since there are many different manufacturers).

And does the difference between phone company crippling make the question of Apple vs Android moot?

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Toe, The]

At some point, app count becomes irrelevant.

First, most good apps are on both platforms, right? But more importantly, how many thousand apps can you run on your phone? And specifically, how many thousand barcode readers do you need, for example? Quantity of apps seems quite irrelevant, especially when there is so much redundancy.

From my experience, the distinction between the iPhone and Android is about interface. Maybe it is just because I am more used to the iPhone, but when using an Android, I find the experience to be downright hostile. It is as if I have to fight the interface to get it to do what I want.

With the iPhone, I feel like it is working with me. There is no doubt that sometimes the iPhone tries to be "too smart" and do stuff for me that I'd rather it not do. But on the balance, I find everything about its interface to be smoother, more elegant, and a much more pleasant/productive experience.

Given that both systems have basically the same feature set and basically the same apps, interface and industrial design are the major distinguishing factors.

Price seems like a rather minor factor. At least in the US, price of the phone is nothing compared to the price of the service.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[jo_ham]

If "app availability" was all he could come up with then he wasn't thinking hard enough, although ultimately the choice between iOS and Android is largely one of personal preference assuming you get a decent Android phone, although Apple closed the gap a little on the cheap Android handsets by keeping the 3GS around and discounting it.

I personally prefer the iOS app market, but it suits my needs just fine. YMMV.

One platform is no better than the other - I think iOS is slightly more polished, but it's mainly down to the vertical integration.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[krouic]

Remembering a few years ago, in the PC vs Mac debate, that PC fans argued that their platform was superior because there was much more software available. To what Mac fans replied that it was quality, not quantity that mattered, and that it was better, for a given application type, to have one good program rather than ten mediocre ones. Funny how the same arguments are reused when the tables have turned.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

Remember when the Apple haters claimed that the Mac had too little software and the iPhone too much? And that quality doesn't matter, only numbers?

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

Remembering a few years ago, in the PC vs Mac debate, that PC fans argued that their platform was superior because there was much more software available.

And they were right. That is the primary selling point of Windows, and in that regard, Windows is superior.

To what Mac fans replied that it was quality, not quantity that mattered, and that it was better, for a given application type, to have one good program rather than ten mediocre ones.

And they were right too. Provided the particular app category was served by a Mac app developer, then the app on Mac was probably better than any of the apps on Windows. In that way Mac was superior.

The difference here is that iOS has both the app quantity AND quality. It's superior in both ways.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Nanosphere]

The other day in another thread someone touted the "obvious" superiority of iPhone over Android. I called him on it, asking what would make the iPhone wrth its higher asking price. The only answer he could come up with was "app availability." (note, I was in a Sprint store yesterday triying to get my phone fixes, and it appeared some Androids cost more than iPhones, but that may have been part of the cantract, with the iPhone subsidized)

No, many of the latest Android phones cost the same as the latest iPhone. As for older models they may be cheaper, but they don't receive OS upgrades as often if at all.

It looks like he was trolling. But I am curious, guys, wht with this thread and all, which one has more apps? More important, which one has more apps that are actually useful? If iPhone has 2 million apps and Android has 1.5 million apps, but 1.5 million iPhone apps are all Angry Birds clones, the "iPhone has more apps" would be a red herring; they're not all useful.

Note that these numbers aren't real, they're only illustrations. I'd really like to know which platform is better, iPhone or Android? How well are each built (and I realize that Android's quality is probably all over the board, since there are many different manufacturers).

And does the difference between phone company crippling make the question of Apple vs Android moot?

I would say Apple probably has more higher quality apps but that's also because Apple has more pay-for apps. Android has more free apps that are ad supported or games that are free to play but try to sell you in game upgrades. I have noticed recently some of the bigger name mobile developers that were previously iOS only have started porting some of their products over to Android, probably as market share of Android slowly catches up.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[danbob999]

Android has slightly more free apps. iPhone has more paid apps.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[mcgrew]

But more importantly, how many thousand apps can you run on your phone?

That's an excellent question; how many apps can fit on each phone? And I also wondered why both platforms need apps when a computer can just use the web site for most things (radio stations are the first to come to mind). Why do you need (for instance) a Google Maps app when all you should have to do is surf to Google?

Maybe it is just because I am more used to the iPhone, but when using an Android, I find the experience to be downright hostile.

I have friends with one or the other platform, and only played with the Android interface for a few minutes, but I, too found it frustrating. It was almost like using Windows; nothing was anywhere I would have expected it in either Linux or Windows... and these ARE computers. I'm not buying a tablet until I can get one with wifi, no phone company, several USB ports, and touch-enabled KDE ofr that exact reason.

It's almost like they were purposely designing the interface to frustrate. Somehow I expect the iPhone interface to be just as bad, especially since you said "sometimes the iPhone tries to be "too smart" and do stuff for me that I'd rather it not do", that's one of my biggest gripes about Microsoft software.

At least in the US, price of the phone is nothing compared to the price of the service.

So true. I broke my phone earlier in the week, and am trying to repair/replace it. I was surprised to find Android at the Boost store, and probably would have bought one (interface sucks, but it sucks less than my Motorola) but they won't let you use one on the pay as you go plan.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[pjr.cc]

Personal opinion, but i believe the difference is moot. I find that (as a hacker type) apps I want on my phone (android) are available on the android market. For example an SSH daemon (which i dont think there is one on the apple market) that can access the root of my phone's filesystem. Some may think me crazy for running such a thing, but I am a little crazy. But it is apps like that you'll find quite a few of (apps designed to support rooted phones) that you'll never see on the apple market and they do appeal very much to me in alot of cases.

The problem with that particular example is that im the 1-2% of the android market who are looking for those type of things.

The general populace want games, some lifestyle apps, some social apps and maybe some business apps. In general, i believe there are more then enough of these available on both platforms and markets. On the whole, i'd say its a line-ball call. You'll find what you need for all those in both markets and in some cases they'll even be the same app ported from one platform to the other (angry birds is a good example). You'll also get alot of pure entertainment from both that'll fill just about any taste. These days i've yet to find something I wanted to do I cant find on the android market (which wasn't always the case).

One thing I do believe is true, if you sat down and decided "i want to do this, this and this with my phone that it doesnt do right now", the cost of adding that functionality tends to be lower on the android platform them the iphone side however, you'll probably have to live with advertising on the android device to do so. What I also mean with this is that you'll find what you want is probably available on both platforms these days.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're just living in the moment, it's possibly an interesting question, but as soon as you start thinking about the future, whichever one happens to have leapfrogged most recently becomes irrelevant. Both of these platforms seem to still be very primitive and immature compared to what you take for granted every day on your desktop, but both are also still developing and getting better, and it's happening quickly.

Once you see it that way, and try to project what's going to happen, a few things leap out at you. One is that IOS is disadvantaged by lack of development tool diversity. Xcode has a decent rep (I'll admit I've never tried it, but everyone I've talked to speaks of it pleasantly, and most seem to like it more than say, Eclipse) but it's just One Thing, and can only be used on one type of workstation, which most developers don't have and aren't interested in getting. That is necessarily going to limit the number of developers that exist. IOS is again disadvantaged by The One Store, which anyone would have to admit, is just plain infamous for its limitations, whether you think they're arbitrary, malicious, or benevolently justified. That further limits the number of developers, and also (regardless of developers) what users are able to easily get.

To put into perspective how overwhelming that is, look at the hardware capabilities of a typical game console (Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo -- it doesn't matter) and look at the incredibly narrow selection of things an end user can actually do with it, compared to a desktop PC. Almost all the software for these boxes is limited to games, and even if you put on elephant-sized blinders and just look at them in terms of games, what you can actually get is just plain insignificant compared to what you've got on the desktop. I'm not saying this means it's no fun to play games on a console, just that your favorite games probably aren't on consoles, because the fraction of games developers who target consoles is tiny. Most of the good ideas will tend to show up somewhere else.

Android's nudging people toward a particular store is similarly threatening, but the lack of lock-in is a huge deal. Unlike IOS, it has the capacity to eventually boom. Whether it'll ever achieve anything great, I've no idea, but IOS just can't ever become more than a niche toy, ever. If Android ever progresses beyond niche toy, then IOS' limitations will cause it's best-case scenario upper limit to marketshare, to be less than desktop MacOS ever achieved. And MacOS is a very capable and uncrippled platform.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[CaptainOblivion]

My experience with interface is the reverse; I struggle to get iOS to do what I want, while Android makes perfect sense to me and operates smooth as a whistle (smoother, since whistles have little holes in them to make the sounds). This leads me to believe that as far as the interface of the two goes, it really is just personal preference and what you're used to, rather than a clear-cut "one is definitively better than the other" situation.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

Who cares which one has more apps? This is the same argument as the mid-90s "Windows is better than Mac because there's more software" argument. Exactly how many word processors do we need again?

Re:iPhone vs Android

[danbob999]

Price seems like a rather minor factor. At least in the US, price of the phone is nothing compared to the price of the service.

I don't like this argument.
It's like saying that your $500 laptop is nothing compared to the price of your internet connection over its 5 year lifetime.

Just because the phone and the service are bundled together and sold from the same company doesn't make it any more acceptable.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference here is that iOS has both the app quantity AND quality. It's superior in both ways.

Ah, but superior to what? Today's Android.

To see how silly it is to think that way, compare iOS to the Mac itself. The Mac utterly crushes iOS. Windows crushes iOS. Even Ubuntu crushes iOS.

Android has no bounds to its growth, so it will grow to, and exceed, the Mac. iOS never will.

By the time "superior quality" applications on mobile devices reaches the same level as "embarrassingly low quality garbage" on desktops, iOS' marketshare will be the single digits, lower than the Mac's share was in the Scully years. It's not hard to guess where most of the users, the money, and the developers will be.

BTW, Windows didn't have a "primary selling point." It had a "primary reality point" which was that it came preloaded on most computers, so that it was what everyone had, who didn't make deliberate choices. That is what iOS is up against, with Android. It's the 1990s all over again, except this time further extremified by Apple's app store. So if you want application X, iOS might be unserved not because developers didn't see a demand for X, but because Apple doesn't want its users to have X.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

Why do you need (for instance) a Google Maps app when all you should have to do is surf to Google?

I find most embedded apps to be better than their web counterpart on any smartphone/tablet device.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you need (for instance) a Google Maps app when all you should have to do is surf to Google?

This is actually one of the big sources of 'apps,' bad web development. Go to a web site, try changing the resolution. Far too many pages have massive banner images or other awkward formatting constraints. Next, try turning off some of your scripting, many pages will be unusable. The auto-forwarding to mobile variants of pages is rarely impemented, and even less often implemented well. The mobile pages rarely have the information of the real page (even if all the information fits in one thin column between ads on the real page).
So when companies came to Apple saying "we can't use our page on your phone," instead of responding, "clean up your page a bit or write a coherent mobile page," Apple said, "here's our SDK, make an app that displays your page and sell it for $2."

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

But price is a minor factor because most of the phones are about the same price, and all of the service providers charge about the same price for the service. $200 for a phone (regardless if it's an iPhone or and Android phone), is completely irrelevant to comparison shoppers because, a) all new smarthphones are roughly the same price, and b) they less than 10% of the total cost over the two year period. So if somebody is bickering between a $199 iPhone and a $99 Android phone, both with a Sprint/Verizon/AT&T 2-year required contract, you are talking about a cost difference of $50 out of a total cost of roughly $2500.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

Remembering a few years ago, in the PC vs Mac debate, that PC fans argued that their platform was superior because there was much more software available.

And they were right. That is the primary selling point of Windows, and in that regard, Windows is superior.

And it's an even more stupid argument today than it was in 1995.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Erikderzweite]

Whatever you value more. I value compliance with open standards and customizability. As far as markets go, android market is better for me because I need only a browser to automagically install an app to my phone. App store requires iTunes for that for which I need to set up Windows somewhere (or buy a mac).

Having compared both platforms, there are other points favouring android in my eyes:
- network management in iphone is horrible compared to andorids
- It is more convenient for me to charge with external charger and simply switch battery if empty than having to wire the phone once in a while.
- Linux on android works fine with Linux on pc (I use sshmote, wakeonlan, vnc, ssh a lot).
- no custom software needed (important for Linux user). For sync I simply use Google services.
- Customization. Do I need to say more?

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

It's stupid with categories where there are many alternative apps on every OS. It's not stupid when you hit a niche where there is no software except for WIndows. These niches are very small and specialised, but they do exist even now. And there were lots more of them back in 1995.

It's not an issue for the vast majority, but it is for some. And thus Windows is superior, in that way.

Heck, I hate Windows and don't give it credit fr much. But this one's undeniable.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

I don't buy that claim. Even back in 1995 it was pretty rare to not be able to get an alternative application for something that was "Windows Only". It's such a non-issue now days, that using the word "superior" in this context is laughable.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[mcgrew]

You should be in sales, you just sold me on Android. Of course, I was leaning that way anyway, but what you listed is what I'm looking for. I'm running Linux on my main computer, and I have no desire to install iTunes after seeing it on other people's computers (shudder).

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

Think specialist business and technical apps. e.g. Optometry. Rechargable battery management. Tiny niches, but theres an awful lot of tiny niches.

Yes, it's rare, and for most people it's not an issue - now more than in 1995. But yet it was and is one of the few points of superiority for Windows.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Algae_94]

I agree with you that most apps are better than their web counterparts currently, but this doesn't have to be the case.

It's trivial to check the user agent and redirect a user to a mobile friendly version of the website with a much better layout for phones. Or in the case of some sites, IMDB comes to mind, when I browse to the site with an Android device, it prompts me that there is a native app and gives me a link to go get it, or I can go to the mobile friendly version of the website.

For more complex and javascript heavy things like Google maps, a native app probably is the best choice, but we definitely don't need apps for every popular website. Why is everyone trying to replace the browser bookmark menu with an insanely long list of apps that are in effect just the website launched directly from your phones OS?

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Algae_94]

Your talking about a 2% difference over two years. Lets cheat a little on the compounding of money and say that's a 1% per year difference. That's not a bad improvement. If there was a guaranteed way to increase the return on any retirement savings you have by 1% per year would you still think that's a minor factor?

Imagine how different two peoples lives would be, if they started out identically, but one took the lower cost route like this on everything and the other said it was a non factor and spent the extra money.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

I think you need a new adjective. "Benefit" of Windows is much more plausible than "superiority" of Windows.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Algae_94]

You're not reading between the lines of the post you are referring too. I don't think he's really referring to consumer software or even office work software. If you happen to have some computer controlled manufacturing equipment in 1995, there was a good chance it had windows only software. Perhaps you bought a CNC machine that worked with Windows, it's not like you can just go find a different CNC controller app for another OS. Perhaps you have some medical equipment that works with windows, or work in a research lab and your scanning electron microscope has windows software.

For consumer uses, any OS will work. You can find whatever software you need. If you have specialized hardware that has software that works with windows, you may be out of luck.

Of course that specialized hardware usually costs far more than the workstation that connects to it so it's not a huge issue.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[stewbacca]

Your talking about a 2% difference over two years. Lets cheat a little on the compounding of money and say that's a 1% per year difference. That's not a bad improvement.
 

1% on $50 over the two year service period? Yes, I consider that a mind-numblingly-insane minor factor. It would be a minor factor even on the full cost of a phone + service contract for two years. If one service provider approached me and said, "but our service is 1% cheaper than our competitor", it wouldn't sway me one bit. If there service was BETTER, and just happened to be 1% cheaper, that would be great.

If there was a guaranteed way to increase the return on any retirement savings you have by 1% per year would you still think that's a minor factor?

My retirement savings have been averaging around 5-10% return a year over the past 15 years, so again, yes, I consider 1% to be a minor factor.

Imagine how different two peoples lives would be, if they started out identically, but one took the lower cost route like this on everything and the other said it was a non factor and spent the extra money.

Sorry, I can't imagine my life fretting over 1-2% price differences. I imagine I'd be an unhappy tightwad with no friends.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

I'll go with that. "Superior" was inherited from the post I originally replied to.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[nahdude812]

It's interesting that you feel iOS interface is easier to use. I suspect this is more about habituation and accustomisation to your current platform's UI tendencies than it is about one UI paradigm being markedly better than the other.

By way of support, I'll say that I first had an iPhone (3G), and got a Nexus One after that. I felt lost for a little bit using the Android UI, but after a few days, I had the hang of it. Now when I go back and use iOS, it's like every app puts the Back button in a different place, and the Settings button in a different place (if it's in the app at all, it might be off in System Settings). Getting around in apps is a constant scavenger hunt. How many freaking taps does it take to enable airplane mode? Or lock orientation. And always having to drag around home screen icons to keep them organized, what a pain. Why do all the home screen icons have to be fitted in the upper left, why can't I lay them out however I choose? Why can't I have an empty homescreen between two other homescreens? Why can't I have homescreens to the left of the default homescreen? What's with the limit on number of apps in a folder? And so on. These things all frustrated me sufficiently that when I had gone back to my iPhone for a few days while working on a particular development effort, I was glad to get out of that mish mash of a UI (iOS) and back to something that makes more sense to me (Android, which I'm accustomed to).

My point is that what you use the most is what is the easiest to use. Some people are power users and like to customize every aspect of their phone. Some people just want to read Twitter and check their email, and don't care about any of that stuff. Or in other words, different strokes for different folks.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[RotsiserMho]

Since iOS 5 iTunes is no longer needed at all. You can activate the device, back it up to iCloud, and install apps all on the device itself. I can see how it might be a pain to access everything through iCloud but there's iPhoneExplorer in that case.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[scot4875]

Maybe it is just because I am more used to the iPhone

Nailed it. Should have just stopped after this sentence.

--Jeremy

Re:iPhone vs Android

[scot4875]

Unless, of course, you've already budgeted for the $70-$100/month (or whatever it is) for your phone subscription and don't have the additional $200 to shell out for a phone. There are plenty of people in exactly this situation.

--Jeremy

Re:iPhone vs Android

[scot4875]

Remember when the Apple fanbois claimed that talking to your phone looked stupid, then when Siri comes out it's suddenly the most awesome thing ever?

Oh wait, those weren't the same people; it was two different subsets of morons.

Also, it's irrelevant. When the debate was Mac vs. Windows (they are both PCs, despite Apple's insistence otherwise), it came down to what types of software were available, and Windows won that hands down. Now that the debate is the iOS app store vs. Android's marketplace, both have pretty much the same sort of software available, so there's no clear winner, again despite Apple and its fanbois' insistence otherwise.

--Jeremy

Re:iPhone vs Android

[scot4875]

The difference here is that iOS has both the app quantity AND quality. It's superior in both ways.

How's your Google Navigation treating you on your iOS device? What was that? Sorry, I couldn't hear you over my phone telling me I needed to turn right just now.

--Jeremy

Re:iPhone vs Android

[shutdown -p now]

I have personally jumped back and forth (Android -> iOS -> Android), using bleeding edge devices for both, so I think I can meaningfully comment on that.

It looks like he was trolling. But I am curious, guys, wht with this thread and all, which one has more apps? More important, which one has more apps that are actually useful? If iPhone has 2 million apps and Android has 1.5 million apps, but 1.5 million iPhone apps are all Angry Birds clones, the "iPhone has more apps" would be a red herring; they're not all useful.

At this point, there's no meaningful difference in general. iOS used to be superior when it had Skype working over 3G (Android was restricted to WiFi-only because they had an exclusive deal with Verizon) and video chat. This is now available on both platforms. Other than that, I can't really think of anything. All the "productivity" apps are available on both.

There is a difference if you're already tied into the "cloud platform" offered by either company, and it is more likely to be Google. For example, if you use GMail, it works better on Android because Google has a special client for it there that supports all its non-standard features (like labels) that don't translate too well to IMAP. There is a dedicated GMail app for iOS now, but it has only been there for a month or so, and is worse in quality. Similarly, if you use GTalk - there's no good GTalk client on iOS. There are some generic Jabber clients, but they don't sync logs with server the way GTalk can do on Android.

Android also has more "power tools" - like a torrent client or FTP and SSH daemons - but these are mostly geek toys, and I find that I don't really use them in practice.

I'd really like to know which platform is better, iPhone or Android? How well are each built (and I realize that Android's quality is probably all over the board, since there are many different manufacturers).

Yes, this is a meaningless comparison - you have to compare specific phones, like say Galaxy S2 vs iPhone 4, in that case. Generally speaking, I'd say that high-end Android phones match iPhone on quality, and usually exceed it in terms of hardware. Galaxy S2 and Nexus certainly do.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[shutdown -p now]

One thing that iOS doesn't have, however, is app diversity. There are some kinds of software that simply can't be done with the restrictions that Apple places on apps, and some that don't work so well.

For a very simple example, the home screen of my Android phone has a weather widget that shows up-to-date weather (it syncs whenever I unlock it). The closest that iPhone has to it is "Celcius" and "Fahrenheit" apps, that use app icon counter to show weather, and even that is limited because they can't show numbers below zero.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Algae_94]

There really is no fretting involved. You could save $50 on a phone every two years (assuming you keep cell coverage) compounded at 5-10%, or not. Depending on your time frame and the actual return in that 5-10% range, you could easily have an extra $5,000 to $10,000 at retirement age. Not gonna change too much, but that is solely from choosing a cheaper phone. I wouldn't want your phone savvy friends to shun you though, so keep picking the pricier device.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

Oh, another Fandroid who has conveniently forgotten that the iPhone had voice commands before Android, and probably was one of the people making fun f it back then, and now pretend it were the "Apple fanbois" who did it. You've proven how many times to be a complete moron in this discussion already, Fandroid? Why don't you stop before you get further ahead? But I fully expect another brainfart from your general direction.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[swv3752]

Widgets. I really like being able to unlock my phone and see the weather and not have to go searching for the app to display the weather.

Freedom. I can make Android do what I want rather than the iOS model were I change my behavior to suit the Phone.

Back when I got my iPhone 3g, it was the only good smart phone available. It was the first phone that had a decent interface (even blackberries suck compared to an iPhone). Now, Android phones can behave like an iPhone, but you can change it so that it behaves the way you want.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

Problem is, that right your Android just directed you down was the wrong road.

My friend has a Galaxy II with Google Navigation. It's awful. Gives poor routing around town. Sends you down roads that are buses only. Is very inaccurate, such that you're often not sure if it's the turning you're right next to or the next one that's to be taken. It sucks battery like mad, so always needs to be plugged into power in the car, and is of limited use on foot. Sometimes it freezes and the phone needs to be reset (maybe just killing the app would do it but my friend doesn't know about that.) Apparently it has to download tiles on the fly, so it always needs an internet connection, and maybe that explains some of it's crapularity.

Now personally I haven't researched smartphone navigation, because I have a proper Garmin Nuvi GPS. Has the entire continent as built in maps. Has never yet routed me badly. Has a far clearer UI than Google Navigation. Is accurate such that there's a high confidence about exactly which road to take. Always works, never freezes. All in all I can't fault it. Garmin have been in the business for a long time and it shows in the evolution of their product. Cost about £100.

Now the interesting thing about GPS is that it pays for itself. Every time you get to where you are going in a more efficient way, or don't get lost, you save money on fuel. And a better GPS will save more money than a poor GPS.

Now, if my Garmin breaks or is stolen, I'd probably buy another. But if I was forced to use a smartphone, I see that Garmin do "StreetPilot", which appears to be pretty much the same as the standalone GPSs. So I'd be happy with that.

But Garmin don't do StreetPilot for Android, even though they do other non-road navigation apps for Android. The reason is obvious. By including Google's rudimentary navigator on Android phones, they've meant it isn't worth Garmin doing a version for Android.

Google Navigation is a selling point for Android, but it's not a point of quality. It'll sell phones with the promise of navigation, and then be a disappointment to anyone who's experienced a real navigation product. Buying a decent navigation product (hardware or app) from a specialist will be far more pleasant, and will save money in the long run.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[mcgrew]

Thank you for that, it should have been modded up.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[BasilBrush]

Well for sure there are limitations on what apps you can do the iOS. Not that I want an app launcher to be a general purpose desktop like a PC. But I can see that's a matter of taste.

On the flip side of the coin, there are a lot of developers who are only developing for iOS, or iOS first. So the app diversity win isn't necessarily the way you think it is.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[shutdown -p now]

On the flip side of the coin, there are a lot of developers who are only developing for iOS, or iOS first. So the app diversity win isn't necessarily the way you think it is.

I have used both, and, generally speaking, I can't remember a case where I couldn't find what I wanted on Android compared to iOS. The last time when that happened, it was Skype, until Android version got calls over 3G and video calls earlier this year. I guess both platforms are sufficiently widespread now that any worthwhile idea is explored on both.

One area where I find iOS to be way ahead is games, especially the more advanced 3D kind. iOS has several big titles and a few smaller ones. Android mainly has indie games right now. Android had Majesty first, a few months before iOS, but it is a rare exception. But I'm not big into mobile gaming - I mainly stick to roguelikes to pass time - and, for a geek, Android has DOSBox, which opens up a wealth of great old games that no-one bothered to port so far.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Anonymous Coward]

I was using both platforms for some times. And it really depends on what you're looking for i guess. I was on iOS first and changed over to android, and there wasnt one single app for which i wouldnt find a suitable replacement. Some were a little better some were a little worse (of course many apps gain alot by widgets - weather for example).

Overall i enjoy the Android experience much more though. I want to get everything out of my device so I jailbreak (ios) / root (android) and use those apps. So its like this from my experience: If you jailbreak an ios device you get nonrooted android, like you get emulator apps that emulate older gaming consoles, the ability to theme your device etc.

But if you root an Android device you get a whole new level. You get access to the best Backup system in the whole IT world (Recovery backups) or backup all you apps and app data. I wish Windows backup would work that well. You can overclock, undervolt, change autobrightness lvls, and if you're up for it make your own Android version and start a company out of it (MIUI!).

In the end I have to say, i dont see myself getting another iOS device anytime soon. Apple had their honeysugar sweetspot for some years (both smartphone and tabletworld) where they had what shouldnt exist in our economy: a monopoly. Now there are competitors and consumers are able to choose the better/cheaper product again.

Re:iPhone vs Android

[Anonymous Coward]

exactly. With ios you get what you get. Live with it or shut the f*** up.

Android takes a day or two until you realize what you can do and you set it up YOUR way and how it makes sense to you. After that there's nothing better than your way. I wouldnt give those dedicated back/menu buttons away for anything.

Btw I have to say my phone (DesireHD/Inspire4g) has a similar layout like the iphone so when i give it to other people they know how to use it... (switzerland is EXTREMLY iphone heavy). :D

Top 5 countries

[Anonymous Coward]

"The top five countries in downloads-per-capita are South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the U.S., and Singapore."

Is Hong Kong a country?

Re:Top 5 countries

[nschubach]

I'm not sure how true it is, but I was told that Hong Kong is fairly independent even though it's part of China. It's considered by some to be a separate entity under different laws/rules.

Re:Top 5 countries

[stewbacca]

Is Hong Kong a country?

Depends on whether you are Chinese or the rest of the world.

Knew it

[ArchieBunker]

People ask me why I don't have a smart phone. Its because the majority of people just use them to play games or pass the time. Its more toy than a useful appliance. I make an occasional call or text with my old flip phone. Maybe a camera would be nice on occasion but I can count that number of times on one hand.

One comedian whose name escapes me had a great comment about the way people observe things now. They don't see things for themselves. They see things through the miniature screen on the phone instead of their own eyes.

Will I upgrade to a smart phone? Maybe eventually, but I'd rather have $200 in my pocket than a game system with poor phone capabilities.

Re:Knew it

[beowolfschaefer]

Just because people buy more games doesn't mean that they spend more time playing games. I may want a trivia game and a sports game and a card game but I only need one camera program to take a photo. That doesn't mean that I spend more time playing games than taking photos. Personally I think the photo, web and multimedia capabilities are the real killer app for smart phones, not games. I use the camera all the time for work just to record details or show damage of a product to a client. It's insanely fast and easy to just click share and have those photos ready in a web album on picasa. I also listen to podcasts, streaming music and talk radio all day from my phone. I think you'll also find that even for those people who spend a lot of time gaming on their phones they probably buy a lot more games than they actually play. With so many free and discount offers on Android markets it's really easy to fall into a habit of collecting all these games even if you don't often play them. I know I do this even though I hardly ever game on my phone.

Re:Knew it

[Anonymous Coward]

Breakdown of my iPhone usage (I was a holdout until 18 months ago):

25% Googling for things I'm wondering about when chatting with friends / to resolve a disagreement / to make sure I'm not telling my daughter untruths
25% Facebook/Sickipedia when I've got 5 minutes to kill; general surfing
15% Calculator/Wolfram Alpha when reading, accounting, doing bills, etc.
15% Dilbert, xkcd, news with the morning smoke
10% Texting, emails
5% Taking photos/vidoes when out and about
4% Miscellanous (Shazam, DSL diagnostics, route calculation, local "what's on")
1% Games

My computer is now exclusively for doing long emails and coding, and possibly a bit of Amazon or reading a long online piece. My games console is for gaming. My "phone" is for everything else, because I always have it with me and it can "always" connect to the internet.

Get one. You won't miss your flip phone.

Re:Knew it

[Calos]

I used to say that. Then I got a smartphone.

They're extremely useful in all kinds of situations; for example, I needed to buy an odd-sized battery recently, and couldn't find anything that matched the markings at the store. Pulled out the phone, Googled it quick, found out exactly what the lettering and numbering means, and could choose a battery. I don't game on mine, other than cards occasionally. And it functions better as a phone than any dumbphone I've had.

Back when the first iPhones came out, I really didn't like the idea of an all-touchscreen phone, and while the phone was impressive, in many ways I didn't think it was good enough at anything to make it worth it. I ended up getting an original Droid, the slide-out keyboard helped ease me into smartphone land, and I've never looked back.

In short - spend some time seriously using one, and your view might change.

Re:Knew it

[bryan1945]

The only reason I have yet to upgrade is that I don't want an additional charge for data. I haven't looked around recently, but can you get a smartphone that does not require a data package? Or, I guess the more appropriate question would be a carrier that does not require a data package with a smartphone.

Re:Knew it

[davidbrit2]

Different strokes. I use mine on a fairly regular basis to perform administrative tasks using VPN, ssh, Remote Desktop, etc. It's not a laptop replacement, but when you're in the middle of nowhere, and suddenly have a database or web server spitting out errors, it can be a life-saver.

Granted, I've got plenty of games on there as well.

Re:Knew it

[tepples]

25% Facebook/Sickipedia when I've got 5 minutes to kill

Some smartphone owners put gaming into this 25%.

My games console is for gaming. My "phone" is for everything else

Let me guess: no games from indie developers too small for Nintendo's developer program interest you.

Re:Knew it

[Nanosphere]

People ask me why I don't have a smart phone. Its because the majority of people just use them to play games or pass the time. Its more toy than a useful appliance. I make an occasional call or text with my old flip phone. Maybe a camera would be nice on occasion but I can count that number of times on one hand.

One comedian whose name escapes me had a great comment about the way people observe things now. They don't see things for themselves. They see things through the miniature screen on the phone instead of their own eyes.

Will I upgrade to a smart phone? Maybe eventually, but I'd rather have $200 in my pocket than a game system with poor phone capabilities.

Believe me I was the same way, up until a couple years ago all I used for a disposable phone that I loaded with prepay cards. Then I upgraded to a more expensive "semi-smart" phone that had a camera, web browser and google maps. It could only run java based apps so it was very limited in "apps". It was still extremely useful when my girlfriend and I went on vacation. It replaced our normal gps for navigation, It replaced my digital camera and took equally good photos. The web browser was useful for finding cheaper gas on gasbuddy,com and I could check my webmail.

I have an android phone now which has the same high usefulness and yes I loaded it with more games even though I hardly spend time on them. The only thing I would warn about is the 2 year contract, go over it very carefully, they can get you with an expensive plan and useless extra fees.

So I would say before going all out with an Android or iPhone try one of the $50-$75 prepaid phones that has a camera, web browser and maps application and see how much use you get out of it.

Re:Knew it

[nschubach]

On-The-Go web searches are awesome. Especially when you are in Best Buy and you want to see if you can get that item cheaper from Amazon or you want to find the closest Italian restaurant.

Navigation is a huge bonus. You don't need a dedicated navigation unit or have to pay the extra $2000 for the "option" in most cars as well.

Weather information at your fingertips...

I use mine as a streaming audio player/mp3 player while docked on my desk at work. (granted, I am grandfathered into Verizon's unlimited data)

Even though I intended to use mine for gaming as well, I only have two games installed and I haven't opened either in weeks.

Re:Knew it

[Anonymous Coward]

someone needs to make you an app so that you can actually make phone calls.

Re:Knew it

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me guess: no games from indie developers too small for Nintendo's developer program interest you.

Tepples, if you'd ever given any indication that you were a real game developer rather than just a whiny wanna-be, it would be a lot easier to sympathize with your (generally offtopic) "omg Nintendo doesn't listen to indies" rants.

Re:Knew it

[Anonymous Coward]

People ask me why I don't have a smart phone.

No one ever asks you, you just like to talk about why you don't have one and in the process, try to put anyone else down who does have one. Because you made that decision and it seems logical to you, you believe that same logic and same decision should apply to everyone else as well. Yo dude, people are different.

10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[bogaboga]

...if it were not for the fragmentation that has reared its head in Android land.

After dismissing this issue, Google, I thought, appeared to be creating a solution with ICS 4.0. It seems I am under some kind of delusion. How can Google expect to be a force of change if Android devices are as numerous as OEMs in both hardware and software? It defeats my understanding.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[VortexCortex]

Perhaps it would be easier to keep all the phones up to date if the Microsoft Patent Licensing deal didn't involve renegotiation for each new Android version that you want to install on the phone...

Oh hey, guess what? MS charges LESS for a full install of WP7 than their bogus Android license fees. This is the same sort of behavior that got them in anti-competitive trouble LAST TIME. Funny how immediately after their DOJ anti-trust oversight expires, the ramp up the anti-competitive practices.

I hope B & N tears them a new one.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[Anonymous Coward]

The fragmentation argument is so tired. According to very recent market share surveys, Android 2.2 (Froyo) and 2.3 (Gingerbread) account for 95% of the Android user base.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[schnikies79]

It wouldn't be easier or harder because the fees are not the reason. The reason is the manufactures don't want you to upgrade the OS, they want you to upgrade the phone. It's planned obsolescence.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[gl4ss]

what fragmentation?

just make your app for 2.2 - test that it works with high dpi tablets, maybe make a different layout for them if you feel like it. and bam, you're there. less fragmentation than on ios by now. if your app is targeted at doing some device specific shenigans by running things in the linux-side, I guess there's more fragmentation. for most kind of apps there's not really that much fragmentation to talk about, unless you count varying resolution as fragmentation.

(granted, you can make things speedier with less coding if you do 3.1-> only but that can wait for a year or two in your plans)

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[tepples]

Paid apps tend to be games, and for those, varying OpenGL capability is fragmentation.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[nschubach]

Do you also complain about PC fragmentation?

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[tepples]

Major video game developers have in fact complained about PC fragmentation. A retail game is expected to run acceptably on an Intel GMA yet take advantage of the latest and greatest AMD or NVIDIA card.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[Anonymous Coward]

He presented a formal accusation of B&N in a court of law and you are presenting hypothesis. I think his explanation has way more ground than "those old greedy manufacturers are depriving the people of their updates". I think manufacturers know that too. That's why they prefer pushing android devices over wp7. Besides wp7 being shittier than android, they don't have to deal with "I can't compete without lawyers" microsoft.

Seriously, Microsoft's management has to step down if they want to rival Google.

Re:10 Billion would be 100 Billion...

[thetoadwarrior]

There may be some truth to that but the real reason is if you phone will do all the new stuff you won't buy a new phone as soon so even before this whole MS thing reared its head Android phones weren't updated for long or if at all.

Version options?

[AdamJS]

Have they given a way to use an old version of the Marketplace yet? Trying to do so normally just results in the app auto-updating itself.
The current application is so slow and unresponsive that it is virtually unusable on an N1 with more than, say, 8 apps installed.
It's been like this for the past two or three revisions.

Re:Version options?

[thetoadwarrior]

The Android market is awful imo. When Angry Birds came out I tried finding out if it would run on my G1. There is no definitive answer and certainly not in the market where you would expect it. So I decided to try downloading anyway. Nothing said I couldn't run it in fact it just didn't download and gave an error implying it's a network issue and to try again. That happened on wifi too and if I tried to download apps I knew I could run there was zero problems.

Google sucks at customer support so naturally their error messages are abysmal.

Re:Android Mkt Hits 10 Billion DLs, Spyware Domina

[Calos]

I guess for certain, atypical definitions of "spyware," and vague definitions of "dominates." I mean, you could define most free Android apps as spyware if you take the broad view that anything that calls home or displays targeted ads is "spyware." I personally have trouble buying that definition when using the app is strictly opt-in and you're told what the app can do when you opt in.

What exactly do you mean and have you the evidence to support it? Sorry, my impression is that you're just trolling/flamebaiting here.

Pretty old news for being Slashdot

[qrwe]

This campaign has been ongoing for days. Slashdot used to be quicker than this.

Re:Pretty old news for being Slashdot

[VortexCortex]

Pretty old news for being Slahdot

Heh, you must be new here...

Slashdot used to be quicker than this.

Oh, never mind, you must be really old here.

Preffered App Metric

[ZombieBraintrust]

I like this metric better than the old "number of apps" metric. I'm sure all the wallpapers, quizes, and sound boards don't add up to many downloads.

Re:Preffered App Metric

[Anonymous Coward]

Seeing as Apple count individual things like books and comics as complete "apps", all bets are off on what's really going on with these totals. Add in the number of utterly pointless updated items being included in download counts, the truth is probably significantly lower than the figures suggest.

and Cydia?

[sociocapitalist]

Is comparing android market vs. the apple store applicable for an idea of how popular the phone OS is without taking cydia downloads into account?

Re:and Cydia?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Cydia is on, what, 0.5% of iPhones, at most? Amazon Appstore for Android has a bigger marketshare than that, and Amazon Appstore is a pile of shit.

Re:and Cydia?

[gl4ss]

cydia is just a drop in the bucket.

you would need to start counting ziio-store etc downloads to android then too.

Re:and Cydia?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cydia would be an excellent ecosystem if Apple didn't focus on stomping it out. The problem is that because JB apps are not able to use standard APIs and use a different install mechanism as apps from the store, it doesn't take much from Apple to completely break things. For example, the addition of ASLR in a recent 4.x version of iOS broke the Mobile Substrate for a while. The Cydia marketplace is still trying to get in gear for iOS 5.0.1, with a number of apps just not working.

Google, on the other hand, doesn't care. Some of the best selling apps like DroidWall, ROM Manager, or Titanium Backup require root. Since there is nothing illegal about a rooted phone, and unlike iOS, root provides zero loss of security [1][2] on the device.

[1]: Well, unless the user decides to be a dummy-head, but if a user is smart enough to pull up ADB and root a phone, or at least type in "fastboot oem unlock", they will know enough not to hand any unknown app that asks for it the "#" prompt. But, I could be wrong.

[2]: Once an iPhone is jailbroken, apps can write outside their memory space. This in theory would allow an app that behaves well normally to scrozzle up a jailbroken phone easily, and it would be difficult to impossible to find the app if its corruption was subtle enough. Contrast that to Android's security mechanism where if an app is denied access to su by the user, it will operate as its UID exactly as an app on a non-rooted device.

And only 5 months

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

after Apple announced 50% more downloads. And likely a few days before Apple hits 20M.

Re:And only 5 months

[BasilBrush]

In a few days, or maybe already. They were on 18 billion in October, and increasing at about a billion a month.

i.e. iIn the last year there have been as many iOS app downloads as in the entire life of Android.

Re:And only 5 months

[Anonymous Coward]

True. At the way they are both accelerating, comparisons between them are quickly becoming a waste of time.

Re:And only 5 months

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

PS: the Android Market started 3 months after the App Store.

Some apps are system sellers

[tepples]

But more importantly, how many thousand apps can you run on your phone?

Some apps are system sellers. To take an example from another market, if you want Super Smash Bros. Brawl, it doesn't matter how many games the Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION 3, and PC can run; you need a Wii. I don't own an iPhone and am therefore not familiar with the apps considered system sellers on that platform, but I imagine that they exist.

And specifically, how many thousand barcode readers do you need, for example?

If the device that you already own or can afford has a fixed focus lens, then barcode readers that require an autofocus lens won't work. For example, Google's barcode scanner needs autofocus for UPC, Code 128, and other 1D barcodes. If a given app is the only one that can image 1D barcodes even with fixed focus, then you need that app.

At least in the US, price of the phone is nothing compared to the price of the service.

This has a lot to do with the fact that the Samsung Galaxy Player took so damn long to get here, and Google was unwilling to license the Android Market app to Archos, giving the iPod touch a huge head start.

Re:Some apps are system sellers

[stewbacca]

Some apps are system sellers. To take an example from another market, if you want Super Smash Bros. Brawl, it doesn't matter how many games the Xbox 360, PLAYSTATION 3, and PC can run; you need a Wii. I don't own an iPhone and am therefore not familiar with the apps considered system sellers on that platform, but I imagine that they exist.

I don't think the platform killer-game analogy works with iOS versus Android. Nearly everything is developed for both platforms, and in the rare case that one is not available on the other, there are hundreds of alternatives.

Re:Some apps are system sellers

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

Nearly everything is developed for both platforms

That certainly wasn't the case last year: http://mashable.com/2010/07/02/ios-android-developer-stats/

Six months out of date much?

[tepples]

And does the difference between phone company crippling make the question of Apple vs Android moot?

For one thing, all phones with Android Market have Android Debug Bridge, letting the user sideload over USB. For another, half a year ago, AT&T relented and reenabled "Unknown sources" due to overwhelming customer demand for Amazon Appstore.

Re:Six months out of date much?

[mcgrew]

For one thing, all phones with Android Market have Android Debug Bridge, letting the user sideload over USB.

Interesting, can you sideload over bluetooth or wifi as well? That would be a big selling point for me, I bought bluetooth dongles for both my computers (the cat lost the dongle for the notebook, it was on a table and when I got home the stuff was on the floor, dongle missing, damned cat must have used it for a toy) to transfer photos, recorded sound, movies, etc from my dumb qwerty phone.

Re:Six months out of date much?

[tepples]

Android Debug Bridge over Bluetooth was not supported as of July. But if you have "Unknown sources", and pretty much all carriers' phones do by now, you can copy APKs to your phone over Bluetooth and install them from a file manager.

Re:Six months out of date much?

[dave420]

Yes, Bluetooth and Wifi are supported. I have a widget on my phone which lets me enable/disable the ADB-over-wireless with a touch. Developing and debugging using it is actually very enjoyable.

Market(s)

[bobstreo]

I hardly bother looking for stuff on the android market anymore, the splash page when you hit it is a giant
"OMG DON'T CLICK AND BUY ACCIDENTLY"

I just try to menu to updates and (after checking comments) update.

Amazon's app of the day has been actually pretty cool.

I like having choices for which market(s) I use.

If you add in amazon, and other markets, I think probably more downloads than apple...

Re:Market(s)

[Anonymous Coward]

You, uh, do realize that clicking one of the splash images does not, in fact, instantly buy the app, right?

Hundreds of dollars a year

[tepples]

[A smartphone is] extremely useful in all kinds of situations

But is it useful enough to be worth hundreds of dollars a year? I pay 7 USD per month for dumbphone service because any call that isn't about arranging a ride can wait for an unmetered land line. The same carrier's smartphone plans go for 35 USD per month, in part because they include more minutes in a month than I use in a year. Let me know when there are smartphone plans for less than that per month.

Re:Hundreds of dollars a year

[Erikderzweite]

Well, I bought an HTC Wildfire for 100 Euros, granted it was a used one (my neighbour bought a new one and I thought I give android a try). Worth every cent, I must say. And I don't pay monthly fee with my cell phone operator, only for usage. Now with the added bonus of having a navigation (great deal for me, especially to find points of interest around myself in a new city), flashlight, e-mail, jabber/facebook chat, remote control for pc, weather forecast, voip-capable phone with apps to locate mail boxes, train stations and bus stops in the vicinity (with navigation, too, yeah!). That alone pays off.
There are, of course, less useful but still cool things like star map, barcode scanner, dropbox, sms over web for free, watermelon prober, games etc.

The situation might be different in the US though.

Forward this link to Steve Ballmer

[Anonymous Coward]

Forward this link to Steve Ballmer

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2011/12/closer-look-at-10-billion-downloads.html

He sure must be made aware of this success for Microsoft.

*countries*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did Hong Kong and Taiwan become "countries"?

Re:*countries*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did Hong Kong and Taiwan become "countries"?

Hong Kong, arguably, isn't. However, the only people that think Taiwan isn't a country are the Chinese, but they mostly just whine about that at the UN. For all practical purposes, Taiwan is a country.

Google, please take my money. Pretty please...

[bornagainpenguin]

I have an android phone, so I've been enjoying this since I first heard about it. Was sad that I missed the first day, but what can you do? The biggest gripe I'm having now though is that Google will not even let me buy some of the apps on sale here today or yesterday. Keeps on saying my current phone is not compatible with the app.

So? Does Google think that I will never upgrade my phone? Or that just because I do not currently have an Android tablet I will never get one?

Please just let me buy the app already! Just take my money Google, don't taunt me with great apps and great games but refuse to let me install them!

--bornagainpenguin

Re:Android Mkt Hits 10 Billion DLs, Spyware Domina

[wzinc]

No no, the spyware is already on the phones; you don't have to get it from the store.

Re:Google, please take my money. Pretty please...

[Anonymous Coward]

So? Does Google think that I will never upgrade my phone? Or that just because I do not currently have an Android tablet I will never get one?

Yes, they do.

No, seriously. Just imagine the complaints they'd have to put up with if the marketplace simply allowed users (the "in general" sort of users) to waste money on something that won't run at all on their phone without so much as a second glance. Most people still using old smartphones WON'T be upgrading their phones/tablets right away, and they would be enraged if they learned they couldn't run the app on which they just spent their hard-earned money* wouldn't work on their already-expensive smartphone from a couple years back.

And besides, what're you doing trying to limp along a pre-Gingerbread phone and complaining that you can't install new apps? Owing to the fiasco where they didn't release the Honeycomb source and thus it was never ported to phones before ICS was completed, there's effectively no popular apps in the marketplace (certainly none that would fall under the 10c sale) for Honeycomb only. So the only real reason popular apps wouldn't be installable is if you've still got, say, a stock firmware G1 you insist on using forever.

*: They might throw in a couple instances of "American" or "patriotic" too, as well as a "freedom" or "independence" just to make sure they make the news when they complain about it.

Re:Google, please take my money. Pretty please...

[Anonymous Coward]

You must have a really old phone. Many (most?) apps work on Android 1.7+
And I agree with the other comment... its good that Android Market won't let you download an app that doesn't work on your phone's version.

Re:Google, please take my money. Pretty please...

[bornagainpenguin]

what're you doing trying to limp along a pre-Gingerbread phone and complaining that you can't install new apps?

I'm on Froyo. That is Android 2.2, which is really not that old yet. There are builds of CM7 available and I know that people are busy working away at porting over ICS as soon as it can be accomplished. I stick with Froyo though, because it seems to be the best built for my phone. I don't think the issue was so much operating system related as much as it is hardware related, my phone is an LG Optimus V so certainly not the latest and greatest.

Most people still using old smartphones WON'T be upgrading their phones/tablets right away, and they would be enraged if they learned they couldn't run the app on which they just spent their hard-earned money* wouldn't work on their already-expensive smartphone from a couple years back.

I see your point, but why should this apply even in the web store? Or failing that why cant Google just make a popup with a checkbox that warns the app does not run on any devices currently linked to my account, by checking the box I submit I would like to purchase the app any way. At the very least they should have anticipated people buying apps on speculation when they're $0.10! At that price I have a hard time not buying the apps with an eye towards the future...

So why won't Google take my money?

--bornagainpenguin

Apple- hoisted by it's own petard

[Anonymous Coward]

SteveJob thought he was really slick by competing with Amazon, by including books with iTunes. Well Amazon will be having the last laugh now that it's low priced tablet will be eating the iPad's lunch... nom nom nom nom. Even funnier is how a successful Amazon tablet is also a threat to Teh Googel, since Amazon doesn't necessarily HAVE to stay tied down to Android. People will be beholden to Amazon and it's content delivery systems, not to Android.

interesting

[santhosh12689]

Great post I must say. Simple but yet interesting. Wonderful work!