As your link is an outlier, with no primary source available, most probably it's a mis-quote of the survey. Or the survey wasn't a real one in the first place.
You don't have to buy that many Android test devices before you're in the thousands. And remember you have to pay full unlocked prices for them - you don't want a new carrier contract on every test device.
BTW, you seem to have a habit of spinning way off topic into some random link when you're stuck for an argument. Hate is obviously making you very confused.
You're kidding yourself if you think Android is write once run anywhere on anything moderately advanced. And yes, you do need an army of test devices. You don't buy them all at once, but when someone reports a bug that you don't have on a device that you don't have, you have to purchase that device.
Same goes for iOS, but there is only one iPhone and one iPad per year that you might have to purchase.
Believe what you like, that's the reality. I know there are a lot of people here who would rather stick with their beliefs rather then reality.
Not at all, I used the number from the article, or didn't you read it?
You used some percentages from the article, and pulled some numbers from your ass. It was the latter I referred to.
Giving the benefit of the doubt of course, because in truth I believe the whole little drama to be pretty much the sort of fiction we have come to expect from Apple
Funny isn't it. When iOS development is in question, $99 to join the developer programme is too much money. But when it's Android, spending $thousands on test hardware is neither here nor there. It's even waved away with fantasies of free test hardware for developers.
Android cheerleaders just don't live in the real world.
Same reason the last version for iPhone was that long ago. One man, multiple games. Clearly he's experiencing the issue across all his games. But the line he's drawn in the sand is on the question of updating that particular game to be compatible with the latest Android devices.
It's just as easy to make software for Android as it is IOS
It probably is just as easy to produce a game for a single Android model as it is to produce it for iPhone. It clearly is not as easy to produce it for the vast fragmented platform that is the reality of Android.
1) You're basing a conclusion on numbers you're pulling out of your ass. Pull different numbers out of your ass and the conclusion would be different. The developer himself who made the decision does know.
2) Even then, you conclusion would only make sense if he could just find 20% more time. But he's an indie and his time is limited. If he spends it on Android support, he isn't spending it on creating a new iPhone game, for which the rewards are bigger.
Yeah, but if it's on an open platform and easy to copy without paying anything to anyone, that's better for everybody right? After all developers who make enough money to make a living are just greedy.
Fact: These folks will not make more than minimum wage.... How do I know? I know because some other major technology company in the same state does exactly the same, and I visited their facility late last year.
This is clearly not the usual definition of the word "fact". The word you were looking for was "assumption".
Apple does good things and Apple does bad things. But what it doesn't do is exactly the same thing as "some other major technology company".
Development isn't a test of machismo or stoicism. The Android version wasn't making any profit for them. Time is money, and when you're having to do more more work than the sales you are making, it's a business decision to stop doing it.
By that logic the iDevices are just more choice. What would you suggest we do? Take them off the market?
I'm not suggesting anything. I just like to correct the blanket statement that consumers like choice, or choice is good.
Believe whatever you need to feel better about your own choice. Its your delusion. Normal people will continue getting what they want and ignoring the platform zealots like yourself.
Well, a revolution in one place can inspire a revolution in another, as we saw in the Arab Spring.
You make a good point. But Apple's planning in this is even stronger than you state. In fact Apple had the iPad in development before they even started on the development of the iPhone. It appears Jobs realised that they stood a far bigger chance of success with a new touch based device in the established mobile phone category, than starting in the up to then unsuccessful tablet category. So they ended up doing the phone first, knowing full well that the long game was the tablet.
In a way the two are all part of the same revolution. A revolution against the PC monopoly of computing.
Consumers like small choices and dislike big choices. Give them a choice of five they'll be happy, give them a choice of 50 they'll be unhappy.
consumers have spoke and continue to speak to the tune of 850,000 activations a day.
The current success of Android is largely down two groups:
1) Want's a cheap phone. There are cheap Androids available. They are not getting a phone that is as good as an iPhone or a top of the range Android. But they are getting a cheap one.
2) Doesn't know what they want. Walks into a mobile phone store and asks for advice, or may have some idea but allows the salesman to steer them to a final choice. Carriers like Androids because they need a lower subsidy on average, and allow them to customise with branding and shovelware. Android manufacturers also pay commissions to the sales team. Between them salesmen are incentivised to push Android phones.
It's rarely about preferring Android phones. And even where it is, it's mostly an uneducated preference. When Android owners are asked whether they will buy another Android in future, most say no. Amongst iPhone owners, most say they will buy another iPhone.
There's obviously a preference for Android amongst the OSS faithful on Slashdot. But they are not at all representative.
Of course they're fashionable - for guys of your type. Frock coats, breeches, codpieces, they're no longer fashionable, but once were.
My fashion choice, as you style it, is to be different from people who want the latest shiny thing because it is shiny
And what you reveal with that statement is that YOU are the one that cares what devices look like ad YOU are the one who's choice is overwhelmingly about what other people think of you. You can only think that other people are like you and are buying those devices by their looks (shiny) and because of what other people will think of them.
In reality most people are far less influenced by fashion than you are. And i* devices are being bought because people see that they can do a lot with them, and yet they are easy and pleasant to use.
Slashdot Mirror
You must have dug deep for that one. iPhones consistently top the customer satisfaction ratings by a huge margin.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iphone+android+customer+satisfaction
As your link is an outlier, with no primary source available, most probably it's a mis-quote of the survey. Or the survey wasn't a real one in the first place.
You don't have to buy that many Android test devices before you're in the thousands. And remember you have to pay full unlocked prices for them - you don't want a new carrier contract on every test device.
BTW, you seem to have a habit of spinning way off topic into some random link when you're stuck for an argument. Hate is obviously making you very confused.
You're kidding yourself if you think Android is write once run anywhere on anything moderately advanced. And yes, you do need an army of test devices. You don't buy them all at once, but when someone reports a bug that you don't have on a device that you don't have, you have to purchase that device.
Same goes for iOS, but there is only one iPhone and one iPad per year that you might have to purchase.
Believe what you like, that's the reality. I know there are a lot of people here who would rather stick with their beliefs rather then reality.
As a full time turd, you don't recognise reality.
Not at all, I used the number from the article, or didn't you read it?
You used some percentages from the article, and pulled some numbers from your ass. It was the latter I referred to.
Giving the benefit of the doubt of course, because in truth I believe the whole little drama to be pretty much the sort of fiction we have come to expect from Apple
WTF?
Hold on a minute, testing is necessary no matter what you want to develop.
Funny isn't it. When iOS development is in question, $99 to join the developer programme is too much money. But when it's Android, spending $thousands on test hardware is neither here nor there. It's even waved away with fantasies of free test hardware for developers.
Android cheerleaders just don't live in the real world.
You don't actually have the first clue of what you're talking about do you. You've never developed so much as a Hello World app in your life.
Especially on Android.
Same reason the last version for iPhone was that long ago. One man, multiple games. Clearly he's experiencing the issue across all his games. But the line he's drawn in the sand is on the question of updating that particular game to be compatible with the latest Android devices.
It's just as easy to make software for Android as it is IOS
It probably is just as easy to produce a game for a single Android model as it is to produce it for iPhone. It clearly is not as easy to produce it for the vast fragmented platform that is the reality of Android.
Clearly he can put his time to better use. He can spend it on developing new iPhone games where the returns are better.
1) You're basing a conclusion on numbers you're pulling out of your ass. Pull different numbers out of your ass and the conclusion would be different. The developer himself who made the decision does know.
2) Even then, you conclusion would only make sense if he could just find 20% more time. But he's an indie and his time is limited. If he spends it on Android support, he isn't spending it on creating a new iPhone game, for which the rewards are bigger.
Maybe they are just shit programmers.
Or maybe it's a horribly fragmented platform.
Lots of other developers seem to be able to write complex games for Android without these kinds of issues.
That's not at all what it seems like. See the comment elsewhere about the Game Developer's Conference.
Yeah, but if it's on an open platform and easy to copy without paying anything to anyone, that's better for everybody right? After all developers who make enough money to make a living are just greedy.
Fact: These folks will not make more than minimum wage....
How do I know? I know because some other major technology company in the same state does exactly the same, and I visited their facility late last year.
This is clearly not the usual definition of the word "fact". The word you were looking for was "assumption".
Apple does good things and Apple does bad things. But what it doesn't do is exactly the same thing as "some other major technology company".
If only your lack of knowledge meant the problem didn't exist.
Development isn't a test of machismo or stoicism. The Android version wasn't making any profit for them. Time is money, and when you're having to do more more work than the sales you are making, it's a business decision to stop doing it.
iPhone is less work for much bigger sales.
LOL! How childish are you? What next? "You're rubber, I'm glue"? Stick your tongue out at me?
By that logic the iDevices are just more choice. What would you suggest we do? Take them off the market?
I'm not suggesting anything. I just like to correct the blanket statement that consumers like choice, or choice is good.
Believe whatever you need to feel better about your own choice. Its your delusion. Normal people will continue getting what they want and ignoring the platform zealots like yourself.
i.e. you have no counter argument. If there's any delusion, it's yours. The point about most Android owners not wanting to buy another in future is fact. Thus "continue to get what they want" will be bad news for Android.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-08-01/tech/29974966_1_android-iphone-owners-gene-munster
What are you on about?
Satire, my friend. Satire.
Well, a revolution in one place can inspire a revolution in another, as we saw in the Arab Spring.
You make a good point. But Apple's planning in this is even stronger than you state. In fact Apple had the iPad in development before they even started on the development of the iPhone. It appears Jobs realised that they stood a far bigger chance of success with a new touch based device in the established mobile phone category, than starting in the up to then unsuccessful tablet category. So they ended up doing the phone first, knowing full well that the long game was the tablet.
In a way the two are all part of the same revolution. A revolution against the PC monopoly of computing.
consumers like choice
Consumers like small choices and dislike big choices. Give them a choice of five they'll be happy, give them a choice of 50 they'll be unhappy.
consumers have spoke and continue to speak to the tune of 850,000 activations a day.
The current success of Android is largely down two groups:
1) Want's a cheap phone. There are cheap Androids available. They are not getting a phone that is as good as an iPhone or a top of the range Android. But they are getting a cheap one.
2) Doesn't know what they want. Walks into a mobile phone store and asks for advice, or may have some idea but allows the salesman to steer them to a final choice. Carriers like Androids because they need a lower subsidy on average, and allow them to customise with branding and shovelware. Android manufacturers also pay commissions to the sales team. Between them salesmen are incentivised to push Android phones.
It's rarely about preferring Android phones. And even where it is, it's mostly an uneducated preference. When Android owners are asked whether they will buy another Android in future, most say no. Amongst iPhone owners, most say they will buy another iPhone.
There's obviously a preference for Android amongst the OSS faithful on Slashdot. But they are not at all representative.
In a nutshell, yes. Thanks.
None of them are "fashionable" though.
Of course they're fashionable - for guys of your type. Frock coats, breeches, codpieces, they're no longer fashionable, but once were.
My fashion choice, as you style it, is to be different from people who want the latest shiny thing because it is shiny
And what you reveal with that statement is that YOU are the one that cares what devices look like ad YOU are the one who's choice is overwhelmingly about what other people think of you. You can only think that other people are like you and are buying those devices by their looks (shiny) and because of what other people will think of them.
In reality most people are far less influenced by fashion than you are. And i* devices are being bought because people see that they can do a lot with them, and yet they are easy and pleasant to use.