Read the first sentence again. "It's certainly a fraction of the amount they earn on selling hardware products." I'm saying that they earn more on iPhones than media. When I say "there must be more in it" I mean more than before, not more than the iPhone.
I have no idea what a "midi-over-wifi based 24 track mixing control surface" is. But if it has a market, then you'll probably sell 4 times as many on iPhone than you would on Android, and the $99 developer program subscription will be neither here nor there.
If you don't sell it - a waste of time or a hobby - you could call it either way depending on whether it's you or someone else describing it.
It's certainly a fraction of the amount they earn on selling hardware products. But it all contributes to the bottom line. I think as media sales have scaled ever bigger, there must be more profit in it.
Is Flurry Analytics not a thing that competes with Google Analytics?
No it's not. Flurry analytics is built into apps - both iPhone and Android. Google Analytics is for web-sites. It's possible to do some analytics of apps with Google analytics because you can always get an app to generate a HTML request. And Google will tell you how to do that. But it's a hack. Flurry is the proper tool for the job of app analytics. And it's just as good on both iOS and Android.
Speaking of Android's $25 fee, Admob just sent its first check to my Paypal account today for $22.95. So once they send me another $2.95 I'll be in the black.
Wow! It's really obvious why you prefer Android. You've made a whole $22.95 and when you next get a check you'll be in the black (not accounting for any time you've taken to do programming, nor any of the design work you didn't bother to have done.)
This is one of the first things I noticed when my sister got an iPhone and wanted to know how to monitor her 3G data usage. I figured we'll download an app for that, they are all free right? Took me 20 min to find a damn free one in the Apple app store.
So your time is worth something less than 99c for 20 minutes = $2.98 per hour.
This is one of the major reasons most mobile developers stick to iOS. Android users think "they are all free right", and value "free" over quality and their own time.
Which imaginary developers are these that thing the hassle and expense of XCode and iOS programming is better than the free one-file setup of Eclipse and Android programming?
Huh? Xcode is a free download from the Mac App store. The "fiction" is all yours.
Seriously, you have to pay to develop with iOS? Has to be on a Mac? Do I have all this right?
Yes. Although you can develop iOS apps on the Mac without paying anything more using the simulator, until that point that you need to test on a real device - then you need to pay $99 to play. But if you're a real app developer rather than a time-waster, $99 is neither here nor there in the profit/loss story of your app development and sales.
Do they make you pay for the IDE as well?
No, it's free. And it's way better than the Eclipse you're used to.
It also took significantly (over a month) longer to get setup with an Apple developer account and the requirements in terms of legal documents are significant, to the point that my company had to go to the office of our Secretary of State to get some documents filed that we hadn't needed in more than 20 years of existence.
One of the many reasons iPhone doesn't have a malware problem whilst Android does.
Hobbyist developers will rsh out a bug fix version sometimes within hours of the last version. Professional developers will tend to take weeks. At first blush that might sound like the hobbyist is better. But not at all. The reason the hobbyist NEEDS to rush out a fix is he missed some obvious defect that most of his users are going to hit. He didn't properly test before releasing because he has no QA standards. The professional app has bugs too, but they are ones that didn't come up in testing. Ones that most users are not going to hit.
It;s a similar situation wit Andoid and iPhone development. As a developer you know the update cycle takes a long time on iPhone, so you rigorously test before submitting. There is no such moderating influence for Android.
The Galaxy S II was the best selling device last round - even outselling the iPhone 4S.
The iPhone 4S has only been out 2 months. Too early for stats. The Galaxy S II certainly didn't outsell the iPhone (4). You're confused with the sales of the entire range of Samsung, which did outsell the iPhone. But that includes around 50 different Samsung phones, including many free with a contract ones.
I'm afraid your appraisal of Android as being a generation ahead of iPhone is as deluded as your misunderstanding of sales figures.
Don't forget Apple also make money from 30% of all the apps, plus music, movies and TV too.
For Google it's not just the money they get from phone manufacturers. Their primary objective is to get more money from mobile search. Unfortunately, not ll Android devices use Google search, whereas all iPhones use Google search. As such Google are losing money on average for Android phones that are sold instead of iPhones. Oops.
It's beyond me too. I remember when I went to classes to learn AutoCAD. Back in those days, much of the editing was with a keyboard. Of course things got better as more things were editable with mouse, stylus or trackball.
Some people of course would like to pretend some machismo superiority from editing 3D models with a keyboard. But the truth is that direct manipulation using other devices is far better.
Is that it? Does editing XML files for user interfaces make you feel like a grown up? Even though the resulting UI is worse and takes longer to create.
Flurry tells the developer how people use the app. Are you saying that such information is of no interest to free app developers? Is that why free apps are in general of such low quality?
Oh, I see. What you meant to say is: Why Publishers Still Prefer iOS To Android
Publishers? With shrink wrapped software a developer needed a publisher to secure the business with the distribution channels. With app stores, who the hell needs publishers? In general mobile apps are direct from the developers. For the minority of cases where the vendor is a publisher, it's because they have had the idea and hired developers to implement it. But that's by far the minority of cases.
"Why Revenue Seekers Still Prefer iOS To Android" Not everyone developing apps depends on that as their revenue stream.
No indeed. There's no lack of amateur apps on Android. It's the professional stuff that tends to be iPhone first or only.
Flurry analytics are free. Flurry make their money from advertisers. Android is more of a platform for ad-supported software than iPhone. So what's your theory for the bias towards iPhone in Flurry's stats? All things being equal the bias ought to be the other way.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the first sentence again.
"It's certainly a fraction of the amount they earn on selling hardware products."
I'm saying that they earn more on iPhones than media. When I say "there must be more in it" I mean more than before, not more than the iPhone.
Yes, if you're foolish enough to still have a PC, then there will be a cost to switching.
Again, not a problem for a serious developer. Though if you're an amateur hack, you could no doubt cobble together a hackintosh.
http://mobile.dzone.com/news/comparing-iphone-and-android
I have no idea what a "midi-over-wifi based 24 track mixing control surface" is. But if it has a market, then you'll probably sell 4 times as many on iPhone than you would on Android, and the $99 developer program subscription will be neither here nor there.
If you don't sell it - a waste of time or a hobby - you could call it either way depending on whether it's you or someone else describing it.
How is that a fact? What's your citation?
It's certainly a fraction of the amount they earn on selling hardware products. But it all contributes to the bottom line. I think as media sales have scaled ever bigger, there must be more profit in it.
UI is not where performance of native code actually matters.
Maybe that attitude is one of the reasons Android has a reputation for being laggy.
Is Flurry Analytics not a thing that competes with Google Analytics?
No it's not. Flurry analytics is built into apps - both iPhone and Android. Google Analytics is for web-sites. It's possible to do some analytics of apps with Google analytics because you can always get an app to generate a HTML request. And Google will tell you how to do that. But it's a hack. Flurry is the proper tool for the job of app analytics. And it's just as good on both iOS and Android.
Speaking of Android's $25 fee, Admob just sent its first check to my Paypal account today for $22.95. So once they send me another $2.95 I'll be in the black.
Wow! It's really obvious why you prefer Android. You've made a whole $22.95 and when you next get a check you'll be in the black (not accounting for any time you've taken to do programming, nor any of the design work you didn't bother to have done.)
How could anyone resist such a prospect!
This is one of the first things I noticed when my sister got an iPhone and wanted to know how to monitor her 3G data usage. I figured we'll download an app for that, they are all free right? Took me 20 min to find a damn free one in the Apple app store.
So your time is worth something less than 99c for 20 minutes = $2.98 per hour.
This is one of the major reasons most mobile developers stick to iOS. Android users think "they are all free right", and value "free" over quality and their own time.
Which imaginary developers are these that thing the hassle and expense of XCode and iOS programming is better than the free one-file setup of Eclipse and Android programming?
Huh? Xcode is a free download from the Mac App store. The "fiction" is all yours.
Seriously, you have to pay to develop with iOS? Has to be on a Mac? Do I have all this right?
Yes. Although you can develop iOS apps on the Mac without paying anything more using the simulator, until that point that you need to test on a real device - then you need to pay $99 to play. But if you're a real app developer rather than a time-waster, $99 is neither here nor there in the profit/loss story of your app development and sales.
Do they make you pay for the IDE as well?
No, it's free. And it's way better than the Eclipse you're used to.
It also took significantly (over a month) longer to get setup with an Apple developer account and the requirements in terms of legal documents are significant, to the point that my company had to go to the office of our Secretary of State to get some documents filed that we hadn't needed in more than 20 years of existence.
One of the many reasons iPhone doesn't have a malware problem whilst Android does.
Hobbyist developers will rsh out a bug fix version sometimes within hours of the last version. Professional developers will tend to take weeks. At first blush that might sound like the hobbyist is better. But not at all. The reason the hobbyist NEEDS to rush out a fix is he missed some obvious defect that most of his users are going to hit. He didn't properly test before releasing because he has no QA standards. The professional app has bugs too, but they are ones that didn't come up in testing. Ones that most users are not going to hit.
It;s a similar situation wit Andoid and iPhone development. As a developer you know the update cycle takes a long time on iPhone, so you rigorously test before submitting. There is no such moderating influence for Android.
This article doesn't discuss developers earning revenue from placing ads inside their applications.
So what you're saying is if you like adware you should go for Android.
I don't know. I see people paying money to buy apps to wipe adware off their PCs. Why would they want it on their phones?
You'd have thought so. However he has been modded up as insightful. Surprising how suggestible moderators are.
The Galaxy S II was the best selling device last round - even outselling the iPhone 4S.
The iPhone 4S has only been out 2 months. Too early for stats. The Galaxy S II certainly didn't outsell the iPhone (4). You're confused with the sales of the entire range of Samsung, which did outsell the iPhone. But that includes around 50 different Samsung phones, including many free with a contract ones.
I'm afraid your appraisal of Android as being a generation ahead of iPhone is as deluded as your misunderstanding of sales figures.
Don't forget Apple also make money from 30% of all the apps, plus music, movies and TV too.
For Google it's not just the money they get from phone manufacturers. Their primary objective is to get more money from mobile search. Unfortunately, not ll Android devices use Google search, whereas all iPhones use Google search. As such Google are losing money on average for Android phones that are sold instead of iPhones. Oops.
How's that working out for Amazon? I hear the Amazon Kindle Fire is a flop.
you'll lean toward Android - more users, more support from Google, no interference from Apple.
More users of Android phones. Less users of Android apps. And as it's app distribution you want to maximise, iOS is better.
It's beyond me too. I remember when I went to classes to learn AutoCAD. Back in those days, much of the editing was with a keyboard. Of course things got better as more things were editable with mouse, stylus or trackball.
Some people of course would like to pretend some machismo superiority from editing 3D models with a keyboard. But the truth is that direct manipulation using other devices is far better.
Is that it? Does editing XML files for user interfaces make you feel like a grown up? Even though the resulting UI is worse and takes longer to create.
Flurry tells the developer how people use the app. Are you saying that such information is of no interest to free app developers? Is that why free apps are in general of such low quality?
Can you do everything with the native UI, or is much of the standard UI in the Dalvik API?
Android just got WYSIWYG UI editing about 6 moths ago. You can see it from about 7 minutes in on this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oq05KqjXTvs&feature=player_embedded
It's like comparing a neanderthal flint tool to a modern power tool to compare that to what you get in XCode Interface Builder.
Oh, I see. What you meant to say is:
Why Publishers Still Prefer iOS To Android
Publishers? With shrink wrapped software a developer needed a publisher to secure the business with the distribution channels. With app stores, who the hell needs publishers? In general mobile apps are direct from the developers. For the minority of cases where the vendor is a publisher, it's because they have had the idea and hired developers to implement it. But that's by far the minority of cases.
"Why Revenue Seekers Still Prefer iOS To Android"
Not everyone developing apps depends on that as their revenue stream.
No indeed. There's no lack of amateur apps on Android. It's the professional stuff that tends to be iPhone first or only.
Flurry analytics are free. Flurry make their money from advertisers. Android is more of a platform for ad-supported software than iPhone. So what's your theory for the bias towards iPhone in Flurry's stats? All things being equal the bias ought to be the other way.