The problem is with the Market application. It's horrible.
That being said, I don't have a top 5 app, not even a top 100 app for that matter, but I do make between 50 and 20 dollars a day from it. Better than nothing, and the trend is upward.
What prevents a startup from creating an alternative marketplace that accepts all sorts of mainstream payments methods, works within and outside of the US, and doesn't suck? It was my understanding that Android, unlike the iPhone, could install applications from elsewhere.
You, however, do not address either what makes you think that or where would Apple be in you scenario.
As thing are today, there is nothing to suggest that Apple are losing steam or that Android is gaining such at a higher rate. It is true in probably every respect of the two platforms, but it is especially true when it comes to the respective app stores. So in that case my prognosmification would be that, even if you're right and Android is where the iPhone is today in a few years, Apple's platform would have grown too by then, maybe even proportionally to Android.
Which does not mean one should not develop applications for Android or that they shouldn't "plan for it". But expecting that there is explosive growth just around the corner is absolutely unrealistic.
If they would bring the HTC Hero in to multiple providers they would see a pretty significant jump in users I would imagine.
Although, that new Nokia looks pretty great, I might be switching to it if T-Mobile doesn't end up getting the Hero, bad choice ignoring the Hero for the one they used for the mytouch.
I absolutely think your correct. I fully expect Android to eclipse the iPhone in market share within the next 3 years. I say that with a couple of caveats, however:
1. Google has to get serious about competing with Apple. They need to adopt multi-touch, and they need to do it NOW. I get there is a legal question around it, but that didn't stop them from aggressively pursuing YouTube.
2. Google needs to show that they're serious. The app-store for Android is a mess (as the article clearly articulates). There is a lot of money to be made there, but Google needs to step up to the plate and make that a vibrant eco-system. They need to be Microsoft to Apples..well.. Apple. Be more developer friendly, more marketing friendly, and let the openness of their system eclipse the closed off world of the iPhone.
If they do that, Android should be a huge win. They've built the technology. Just as S60 dominates the smart phone market today, Android is similarly positioned. It can support a lot of price points and a lot of different form factors. That variety allows for a huge number of devices to collectively drive that share through the roof.
Since the device is more open, it creates an environment for developers to build truly killer apps that utilize the full system in a much more advanced way. Again, that is predicated on Googles ability to bring a truly robust store to their phones. If they do, that further increases Android's viability and gives them a marked advantage over the iPhone.
Google is REALLY close with this.. they just need to take the next step.
I don't think supporting a lot of form factors and "price points" (i.e. hardware capability) is necessarily a recipe for success. The baseline hardware has to be pretty capable, e.g. including a 3D graphics chip, generous memory, ample storage, etc. The phone can't be too cheap, or apps will run on some Android installations and not on others, leading to platform fragmentation.
If anything, something like Vista's machine performance score could be implemented, with the lowest-scoring element being the total score.
Most people, until very recently, did not care in the slightest about 'apps' on cell phones. You guys are thinking way too much like silicon valley geeks about this.
It did. Does it still? Maybe not, but is the problem really having lots of phones, or is that they're not good at competing in the high end where Apple is doing so well? Are the two mutually incompatible?
If Nokia had just stuck to the high end, they would have lost billions of Euros of sales. There are tons of people over here in Europe, at least, that are perfectly ok with their cheap and reliable Nokia phone.
I don't actually know, thus the question mark at the end. I just get the impression that the market is moving to smart phones and that Nokia has very little presence there.
But, you're quite right...Nokia has sold a lot of phones (probably an order of magnitude more than Apple), in Europe, in particular. But I'm not sure a shotgun approach to product lineup creation is a good answer (I don't know that it isn't, it just seems like it hurts more than it helps, in terms of brand awareness, loyalty, etc.).
I do tend to think that a lot of manufacturers making Android phones will have an impact...but, I think that impact will come from competition amongst manufacturers and service providers, and the openness of the platform. The openness means I can already do things with an Android phone that can't be done with an iPhone, and that gap will probably continue to grow. That said, the Apple market size means that it gets more apps than Android...so there are also things one can't do with Android that you can on iPhone (though for non-technical reasons).
What I'm saying is, I have no idea. I'm just wild-ass guessing, like everybody else.
> But I'm not sure a shotgun approach to product lineup creation is a good answer (I don't know that it isn't, it just seems like it hurts more than it helps, in terms of brand awareness, loyalty, etc.
I think Nokia probably has a few too many phones, but on the other hand, I think it's not a bad idea to cover everything from the 25 euro super-basic units to some of the really fancy smart phones they have. And have them they do.
In terms of branding, I think that Nokia has a great reputation for building good, solid products amongst most people I know. Part of having a lot of different kinds of phones is letting people pick one that "reflects their lifestyle" (or some such marketing BS:-) rather than the one-size-fits-all iPhone.
Yeah, it worked for Nokia, who over the last year made less in profits from all there phones, to Apple and its 3 phones. Yeah, they sell many more phones, but make a lot less profit.
> but that didn't stop them from aggressively pursuing YouTube.
That's true, but Hurley and Chen + VCs were not going to put up much of a fight against one of the few parties on the planet that could have bought them out.
When it comes to legal stamina and clout Apple on the other hand is a different kettle of fish, if Google and Apple ever go head to head on something like this there will be two winners (the lawyers and Microsoft).
Android Market has been out since October 2008, and Android G1 has been out since then as well. By month 10, App Store was doing better than this--hell, by day 1, App Store was doing better than this.
It's true if you want to make money, develop for the iPhone and not the Android.
But if you want to build neat, useful things I'd say in the long run the Android platform will be better.
I think Android versus iPhone is kind of an Apples to Oranges comparison. It's like comparing the PC with the Xbox. Sure, you can make a ton of money developing games for the Xbox, but that also means you have to develop games.
From what I've read(with some exceptions), the real money made on the iPhone is in developing games.
I wouldn't develop for the Android to make money. I would do it to make cool apps that I would use myself and could distribute myself without going through the App store & review process. I think the Android will be the cooler platform to develop for eventually, unless all you care about is making money. In which case make games.
It's all in the number of devices out there. As the number of devices goes up so should the sales.
Using google checkout is just plain silly though, buying an application for a phone for the most part would be 'impulse' buys, in which case you want to remove any possible barrier. That's good business sense anyway but for this kind of product it is an absolute must.
> It's all in the number of devices out there. As the number of devices goes up so should the sales.
Actually I disagree. The Android marketplace isn't compulsory so many people would be getting their apps from other sources. It's kind of like comparing the the approval rating of the leaders of North Korea with that of the US. Before the iPhone came along nobody would have thought of using a centralised 'app store' as the measure of a platform's strength.
I don't have an Apple account, but I do have a Google Checkout account. That means it's much easier for me to buy an Android app than an iPhone app; and indeed... I have bought a few Android apps.
Sales are probably low because only the very very early adopters are using Android right now. When the iPhone was at this level of market penetration, there was no such thing as the App Store.
It is abysmal but isn't it a bit early in the game to call Android out?
Multiple companies are involved in getting these things out and it takes longer to set up than having one company control everything.
There's a lot of marketing dollars at work with android and the network effects of the users will ramp up. The first generation of androids were ugly and inelegant compared to the iphone but the next gen looks better thought out and prettier inside and out.
Like Wayne Gretsky said, "Skate to where the puck will be"
With 65k apps in the apple app store, it's going to be pretty hard to get any attention for your iphone app.
Launching a cool app on Android first will get you a lot of press. There's just less competition there. There are tons of well read bloggers and journalists who would be very interested in your Android App and the people marketing the phones would probably feature it in their ads like apple did with the "There's an app for that" ads. That's how marketers think. "It worked for Apple, so we'll do it too."
Going to the iphone first will probably take two weeks to a month to get approved while the Android version can update faster with less hassle. You get to iterate faster and get feedback on the latest results. A faster feedback loop is essential to iteration and improvement.
After you get some attention, then you can make an iphone version and if you're a top 5 Android app, that's a good reason for people to take a look.
In the history of software, I'd say look at Microsoft Excel. It launched on Mac which had some crazy new features like a GUI. It quickly became the top spreadsheet on the mac (there was little competition). Launched on Windows a couple years later and went on to dominate the category.
Like Wayne Gretsky said, "Skate to where the puck will be"
Of course, the flip side (as a lifelong Cubs fan) is that Android developers may be eternally chanting "wait 'til next year". It seems like the big moment for Android is always just around the corner, but never actually arrives.
Wait for Android to appear on phones on something besides the US's fourth-place provider. They're coming this fall, and it will likely make a big difference in Android's adoption (and, in turn, its viability as a commercial development platform).
It's not quite so black-and-white. I think the main point is here:
Hard to find paid apps (We suspect Google would rather just have everything be free since they default most views in the catalog to free apps, or top downloaded apps which means free apps. The option to show paid apps is buried in a submenu.)
How many users do you think ever saw that sub-menu, much less clicked on it? Yes, Google would rather have apps be free. So would Apple. Why? Because smart companies try to commoditize their products' complements [1].
This really really sucks for people whose business model is "make money selling an Android app", but personally, I think that's a really crappy model to begin with, be it on Android, on the iPhone, or on desktops. Just make your app free and find another way to make money.
If Google is serious about their App Store, and with Google that's always a concern, they should be promoting the platform. Apple is actively highlighting third party apps as a major selling point of the iPhone platform with constant TV commercials showing off some of the best apps. Google's approach to multiple handset vendors already makes the situation confusing to consumers so it's even more important they advertise. A Google commercial showing off 2 or 3 different Android handsets running some third party apps would be a massive boost for the platform and handset makers.
Someone pointed out that the Android platform is really starting to feel like "Linux on the desktop" where it's always the next handset, the next OS revision, etc that's going to change everything. The same basic rule applies: If you fall too far behind commercial alternatives you will lose no matter how good your platform is. Personally I think Google's window of opportunity is very small here. If they can't start making some headway the game is over when the iPhone hits Verizon.
I don't think Google has even tried to market Android yet. Letting the technical users get all the bugs out is a good strategy. Once that is taken care of, Google can open the floodgates. They're an advertising company, remember, so when they want to get the message out, they will do it.
But anyway, this is not critically important right now. Andorid and iPhone both satisfy the "I wonder if there's an app for..." for any reasonable value of ... right now. If you have an Android phone, it will do anything you want a phone to do. If you have an iPhone, it will also do anything you want a phone to do (minus being location aware, or having third-party caller ID data loaded when someone calls, or writing your own programs for it, etc.).
I got an HTC Magic recently for development, and the first thing I did was check the App Store (sorry, the Market) - I can't find ANY paid apps, even if I mess around with the buried menu setting mentioned by the article.
Google checkout only way to buy
And that could be why - last I checked, Google checkout wasn't available in Canada.
I have 2 apps on AMarket right now, making far to less money to live from them. Only solution is to work as a consultant for bigger players.
But still the same model is on App Store, my friend who is independent do the same.
Nice thing about Android is that casual users won't even know they are using Android, when smartphones will become standard. And slowly they are becoming.
From my perspective, AMarket when GOOG will finally make it usable (2.0 in month) may become really profitable. 3 mln users right now.
Also new handhelds look really promising, and if Motorola treats Android as their last resort, well I, as a small fish need to follow bigger players behaviour.
I haven't seen any adverts for Android phones pushing that they have 'Android' as a feature, nor have I seen any adverts for the Android app store. Whereas the iPhone was heavily marketed at normal consumers. It is not surprising that very few people are using the Android store, given that few people know of it's existence.
Google and the phone makers are playing the game very differently to Apple. I think it's going to be a long time before I could claim Android is a failure, it's still very early days for the project.
Give Android Market some time. Recall iTunes was hugely successful before the iPhone came out. Also purchasing music for an iPod is almost identical to purchasing an app for the iPhone (relatively small price for a relatively small item). So App Store just has a huge lead. Doesn't imply Android won't catch up. After all compare Apple vs MS today to Apple vs MS 10-15 years ago.
That's not true. You can create an iTunes account without any payment information (or with a gift card), and you can also use Paypal, which itself doesn't need a credit card (and of course, they try every trick in the book to avoid using your credit card and use your bank account instead, where you have no recourse).
Nor do you with Android. It goes entirely through Google Checkout -- Unless you've never set up Checkout (which is admittedly a lot more likely than not having set up Paypal, or a competitor) then you just need your CO credentials.
The Android market uses Google checkout, and all android phones are tied to a Google account. There's certainly no requirement that you physically have a credit card on you, though before you can use the market you do need to set up payments on checkout either via the phone or on your laptop, etc...
I think comparing 'Android Marketplace' with Apple's 'App Store' is somewhat comparing 'apples with oranges'. Android doesn't require all apps to go through their marketplace so you would expect less downloads per user. Android could flourish without any centralised marketplace. Desktop OS's certainly have.
The compulsory centralised app store model of the iPhone makes it an entirely new beast (apart from consoles). The difference is big enough to invalidate the comparison with Windows. Also the fact that their market share is still below below 10% world wide also puts a dint in your metaphor.
Yes, Android is obscure, but the iPhone almost certainly is not the equivalent of Windows. By most estimates, the iPhone has half of RIM's share in the US, while Apple is a bit closer worldwide (figures vary). According to Information Week, the hardware breaks down as:
US: RIM 52%, iPhone 23.3% (up 365% vs 2Q08) HTC 5.6%
Global: Nokia 44%, RIM 21%, Apple 13.7% (up 627% vs 2Q08)
1. Poor availability of app store in many countries in the world compared to iPhone
2. Ability to purchase apps outside the appstore - I bought an app from an author's website directly, paying by Paypal.
3. Fewer actual handsets in use worldwide.