Related
Has anyone noticed how ridiculously expensive and overpriced applications are in the Windows Mobile Marketplace?
For one, their selection of applications are terrible. So far they're just a bunch of badly designed generic apps that don't feed any real purpose. The games are horrible too.
The only decent application I wanted to buy was Pac Man, but that's like £5 !!! for a measly game that probably only has 5 levels and I'm only going to play when I'm bored.
. I just want a decent Twitter application that has kinetic scrolling and doesn't show that horrid side-bar control.
. A decent media player with visualisations and coverflow.
. A few nicely designed touchscreen games including ones like Tweeter that makes use of the G-sensor.
It makes no sense for Windows to release all these devices and advertise that WM is a social device when their marketplace is a bunch of bollocks.
ilabstudios said:
. I just want a decent Twitter application that has kinetic scrolling and doesn't show that horrid side-bar control.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://code.google.com/p/pocketwit/
I agree. I am very disapointed with the marketplace myself. I was expecting thousands of high quality cheap and free apps but that's not what we have yet. I am hoping that this is only due to the fact that it's been 10 days since its release and must be hard to get thousands of apps ready to go in the first few months. I am confident though that microsoft is ready to compete with android and iphone so must surely have something more in mind than they currently have.
Unfortunately it has nothing to do with Microsoft. The WinMo software companies haven't adjusted yet to that fact that there is a central place for the average user to hit and find their competition. Something like SPB could be as pricey as it wanted, because it could take the average user forever to find any quality alternatives. They have the advertising dollars, placement on carrier websites, etc. Now there's a spot for a smaller competitor to get the same exposure. But it'll take time for them to pop up.
$30 for any mobile app is retarded. I'm really disappointed that since release day, I'm only seeing 10 new apps in the store. Maybe the "what's new" button is broken, but there's a couple on the results page I installed day 1 of Marketplace being open
The lack of apps is probably not helped by the fact that, as I understand it, Microsoft charge an extra $10 or so for each country to list the app in (and require that the app be localized for that country) so I'd assume that a good chunk of people developing apps in the US aren't going to push their apps beyond the US (I'm no developer so haven't read the full pricing details but that's the gist of what I've seen in some MS developer forums with people questioning why their apps aren't available)
It'll especially be true for free or cheap apps - if you've made a free app, would you pay out to make it available to other countries?
The only reason I can see for restricting apps to a country is if they are purely regional - TV schedules for a particular country, or train schedules or something.
Steve.
Well, I'm in the US, so not really an issue. Trust me, not missing much if they are actually holding out on pushing to other countries.
I'd also guess the word is out to developers that Marketplace is a good spot for their software to turn freeware and end up on a torrent so perhaps they are holding off until Microsoft fixes the security.
Jesus shoe tapping finger clicking Christ, give it a chance its only just started. I have already seen a lot on there for free and under 70p... just wait and be a bit patient.
give it a chance its only just started
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would if that were the case. Unfortunately, Marketplace has been exposed to developers months before it was officially released, which is why I am confused as to why there are so many cheap applications. I'm sure that there will be more applications coming soon, but I'm more concerned about the pricing and quality of applications. When I watched the first keynote last year on the coming of Marketplace I had higher hopes than his.
I realise that some iPhone developers have investment from other companies and some of them even have a development team working on the apps, but still.. look at the type of stuff Android have compared with Windows, it's ridiculous. It's as if no real developer wants to develop on the WM platform.
I feel that their advertising campaigns are misleading. They're trying to get across the fact that WM is now social and more application orientated when so far all I can find on the marketplace are overpriced applications that seem like it was developed for WM5.
Personally I don't think 6.5 is going to be a huge success, TechCrunch has already given it a bad review. WM7 better be different.
Btw. In the world of technology, there's no room for 'Oh give it a chance' type attitude. Technology companies usually have once chance of pulling something off. Hence the reason why companies like Google or Apple spend millions of dollars on market resource, trial testing and development research.
Marketplace? Pah!
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/
I've been relying on the RSS feed from this fine site for the past couple of years or so, since my original TyTN, TyTN II and now my Touch Pro 2. It's a great site, has introduced me to great programs like NoniGPSPlot, has new applications all the time and finally - it's all free (and not warez free, but genuine software).
Great stuff - Microsoft saw what Apple were doing too late and have done too little me thinks to succeed.
I love my Windows Mobile phone; but Apple's iPhone taught Microsoft and other mobile developers how important eye candy in a phone OS was. Google's Android OS will be taking the lions share of future mobile phone sales and I see Android phones surpassing the iPhone.
Unless Microsoft do something right, not many peeps will want a Windows Mobile device in a few years time...
So far the only good to come out of the app store is Zenonia...badass rpg... 10 bucks though But well worth it in my opinion! If you like old school snes hack and slash rpg's, this game is for you. Full sound, decent story, just great overall. For me, there's point in playing my old favorite snes games on my phone because with sound, to me its pointless. and not using sound is the only way to get an snes emulator to run smooth; regardless of which one it is ( morphgear, smart-whatever its called, or pocketsnes
Paulplex said:
...
Great stuff - Microsoft saw what Apple were doing too late and have done too little me thinks to succeed.
I love my Windows Mobile phone; but Apple's iPhone taught Microsoft and other mobile developers how important eye candy in a phone OS was. Google's Android OS will be taking the lions share of future mobile phone sales and I see Android phones surpassing the iPhone.
Unless Microsoft do something right, not many peeps will want a Windows Mobile device in a few years time...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see plenty of commercials for iPhones and Google phones on TV but absolutely none for WinMo phones. MS really needs to start promoting itself in this market.
S
How about the annoying fact that I don't get a chance to choose where to intstall the app. They all go directly to device memory. That sucks balls!
Paulplex said:
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/
I've been relying on the RSS feed from this fine site for the past couple of years or so, since my original TyTN, TyTN II and now my Touch Pro 2. It's a great site, has introduced me to great programs like NoniGPSPlot, has new applications all the time and finally - it's all free (and not warez free, but genuine software).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nice one !
Theres a cab floating around here to fix that...
moSess said:
How about the annoying fact that I don't get a chance to choose where to intstall the app. They all go directly to device memory. That sucks balls!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mpicart said:
Theres a cab floating around here to fix that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=568806
@Paulplex - Thanks for the link. I know I can get free applications quite easily, that's what I've done so far. However most of them aren't to 6.5 standards, the majority of them are still coded for use on old WM5 phones.
When you spend hundreds on a phone you expect to install applications on it that are intended for such a high-end device. The only application which is worth installing is the Myspace and Facebook app, and even those aren't great.
I regard my phone as my house in a way. When we buy a house, we intend to fill it up with furniture, usually the more expensive the house, the higher quality the furniture. The same should apply to phones, in that instead of furniture we require high quality applications. But where are they? SPB is the only one I can think of.
do you people think that bill gates and the people at microsoft are just gonna sit around and allow apple to dominate the app frenzy in the market for pdas and devices? dont u think that most people at microsoft all have winmo devices? do u really think any employee would have an apple iphone?...so of coursse thousands of new gsensor apps are on their way of being placed on the marketplace or in development...obvious with android showing that they have developers also who are pumpin out apps for them..microsoft is doin the same thing..give them time the winmo app store just came out..and a gsensor phone for a winmo device first showed up only a yr ago..so they have a bit of software catching up to do with these new devices. HTC thank god...droped 6 new phones for the north american market just this month alone..with the tp2 being the first in september..(htc pure,htc hero,htc tilt 2,htc imagio,htc mytouch) so basically with 6.5 also droped...htc has done their part by stacking microsoft with a heavy set and multy array of phones to crush the competition i.e iphone 3gs or whatever version its at now. microsoft is not gonna sit around and allow apple to dominate the app market..and they sure as hell arent gonna let android..a new OS that has no business gettin their OS on htc devices, surpass them either...remembr bill tried to buy out google but they rejected a couple yrs ago. And u all know bill gates has a winmo devices,prolly a htc touch hd or the new imagio...dont u think he wants a huge selection of apps himselve? trust..were not the only ones on the heals of microsoft to get these developers in line..and get these apps rolled out...plus half the apps apple has for the iphone are useless and they are just puttin them in commercials to show that they have a **** load of apps...half the apps they have could be bunddled up with other apps like how a spb traveler or mobile shell app is but they are just tryin to show off how many apps they have..plus most of all the developers for apple just have the change a couple scripts around in their apps and all the same apple apps could be made into cabs and become winmo apps...so the **** isnt hard..the microsoft winmo team execut8ves or w/e u wanna call them need to get their marketing department working full throttle and start shipping new apps with these new phones...i repeat HTC has done their part..now its time for the software to catch up...
"Windows" isn't a device, "Windows" doesn't release devices, and "Windows" doesn't sell devices. "Microsoft" isn't any of those things, either. Microsoft is a company that produces an OS that runs on LOTS of devices (some phones, some PDAs, and a whole lot of things that are neither).
Plenty of time for this thing to get up to snuff.
But that said, the real problem is that while there aren't that many WM OS out there, (5, 6, 6.1, 6.5) and most apps will pretty much install in either, the different hardware config makes it a different ballgame, especially with games, no pun intended. Some phones have buttons, some don't. Some games will work only in landscape, some will not, some will work on both. And not all phones are exactly finger friendly. They're meant to be used with a stylus for the most part, the finger's a secondary thing.
So yea, these developers will have their hands full, unless of course they want to limit their market to particular devices only.
So that being said, my gripe is that none of these apps are telling me they're to be used in a particular hardware platform.
@moegdaog, I'm a developer myself, so I realise the number of new applications that will come soon, however that's not what I was specifically talking about.
I'm more concerned about the level of development on applications and games. Why so many developers opt to develop for iPhone isn't because of a bias view-point, it's because the tools they provide mean that they can develop a high-end application and start earning money as soon as it's in the marketplace.
However the type of developers are not the same. iPhone developers are usually younger, multimedia orientated so they probably have skills in web, graphics and illustration, where as Microsoft developers are usually a lot older and more prone to developing utility (function) based apps and have very limited skills in anything else. Most developers aren't able to outsource and so they are left with a rubbish application.
My worry is that yes there will be many applications within marketplace but will they actually be worth all that money and will any investors support the development of these apps. Also how will these applications differ from what we have seen on Android and iPhone.
I'm not just ranting or trying to make a point, I'm legitimately interested in Google's strategy.
Obviously, google cant argue with the fact that htc has widgets that blow googles widgets out of the water. Google cant say theyve worked hard on their widgets and they cant honestly suggest that they are satisfied with them.
Are there any articles or official satements by google/android regarding their refusal to develop Widgets that are more attractive and elaborate? I'm google faithful and wont switch on principle but I can't imagine more than 10% of those people who've tried HTC's subsequently preferring Googles. Its a very strange angle that google has taken.....or maybe its not I'd like to know their view/opinion...does anyone know it? thanks
Incidentally, its not that Google's Widgets are horrible its just that they could be infinitely better at what I would assume to be relatively little effort... off the top of my head if the power widget was broken into single widgets and more options were included that would great and presumably pretty damn simple, and google emphasizes the customizable desktop which I'm all for yet they neglect wiidgets which could really be a draw for potential customers. thank you
Have to agree with you there. They need to add more stock/easy ways to change the look. It would go a long way in selling more phones. People simply think nicer looking things are "cooler" devices. Some of the metamorph's prove the changes aren't exactly difficult. I'm sure they could code a minimal program that had the ability to change the status bar to black, white, gray... A few nice widgets.. Small changes that the XDA community already offers the rooted phones.
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
i do agree with you, but those not wanting to void warranty are alittle more limited, i very much want to root but don't want to void warranty to find a month from now something is wrong and theres still no bootloader relock option. i think theres a lot more customization for rooted vs nonrooted and that's where people feel limited and have the "this should have been added" attitude
You have to keep in mind, Google is just providing a basic operating system. They leave it up the the developers to customize it. You can kinda compair it to what microsoft does, loosly. You can build your own computer, buy windows and customise it to your liking. Or you can buy one from Dell that comes pre-loaded with windows and various other applications. Google just really provides the base level OS.
@psylink you dont need root for most widgets. With exception to like the overclock widget and such, or if you are trying to run a widget that was part of a different rom.
JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
There are a few home screen redesigns on the market that (AFAIK since I've never tried any of them) don't require rooting and significantly change the "look" of the standard phone. Most of them are heavily theme-able as well. On the Behold II forums a lot of people were touting these apps as ways to get rid of the Touchwiz interface that they didn't like (Samsung pouts).
Also, Google created this OS as a platform both for developers to fill with apps, but also for manufacturers to customize to differentiate themselves. If they didn't leave room for manufacturers to customize then the platform would be far less attractive to them and they'd have more adoption problems. If they create too strong of a core UI then they might either be in the position of competing against the manufacturers on that "differentiation" ground, or they might remove any need/desire to customize and the manufacturers would have to consider producing another "me too" phone which they may not like as much, or Google might spend a lot of time on work that will be discarded by the manufacturers during their differentiation. Most of these manufacturers are members of the "alliance" that collaborated on the platform so I'm sure these points were hashed out during that planning phase.
If they don't promote adoption then they lose the win for developers in having a widely adopted platform. Note that even though HTC heavily customizes with Sense and Motorola heavily customizes with Blur and Samsung with Touchwiz, a developer can still write an app that runs on all of those and so everyone is happy.
muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, they could do that, but I don't think they are putting the Nexus One out so much to enter the brand market heavily as they are to put out the canonical reference version of the phone, at least initially. In my mind, the N1 was never to compete with the manufacturers head to head, it was more to have a phone out there that was as open and pluggable as their vision has always been so that if all the manufacturers/carriers decide they are going to take the base OS, lock it down, make people buy ringtones through a carrier market and cripple the browsing so you can't download anything - customers would have an alternative open solution to turn to. In the past there have been classic examples of a given model/brand of phone available from some carriers where you could download any customization file to it that you wanted and then on other carriers it was crippled and locked you in. In those cases you had to buy the crippled versions because there was no independently available canonical "open" version. The N1 fights that tendency not by force or contract, but by simply being. It doesn't have to be the coolest, hippest incarnation, it just has to be pretty and usable and so open that everyone will start to get a distaste for anything closed.
What we are seeing so far with Android isn't so much of this "carrier locking" as it is "carriers customizing so heavily that they threaten the upgrade paths for their customers". I don't think they are doing it intentionally, they just aren't familiar with working on a platform that evolves so quickly. Without the N1 being a bare bones example of the platform they would only be competing with other manufacturers that are similarly locked in by their own lack of upgrade foresight and so the drive to release upgrades wouldn't be so compelling. But, if there are alternatives available that will be keeping up on a much more aggressive pace, like the N1, then they are more likely to fix their differentiating software so that it can move to newer OS versions in a more timely manner. Imagine in a year or two when we can all own Blur or Sense phones and get our OS updates within a month or two of a new OS release.
It's the "reference fully open Android example" and, as such, is less in need of customization as it is to simply stand as an option to keep the others honest. It's meant to be as "close to the raw OS source" as it can be.
muncheese said:
That's a fantastic stance to take when you're providing just an OS.
However, when you release a branded phone under your own name, you need to provide substantial content to that brand.
As it stands the only thing setting the nexus apart from other phones is hardware. In a few months when numerous phones have the same hardware whats putting the nexus ahead of the pact? They same way motorola has motoblur, htc has sense, etc., Google needs their own "style" for their own handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect
MonkySlap said:
When have widgets been the only way to add content to the phone? I mean there are plenty of replacement widgets already on the market if you dont like the stock ones. Me I would rather they provide more features then pretty widgets. They have provided plenty of content for the phone. Live wallpapers, google goggles, factory bootloader unlock, sim unlocked, mutible exchange account management, updated gallery, multi touch maps, ect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but its still content non the less, correct? Doesnt need to be exclusive to be considered content. Me personally I really didnt buy it for stock os or content. I bought mine to tweak, mod, and play with, and it is more then fulfiling that for me . Love the desire rom running so smooth so early in the port.
muncheese said:
Those are all implementations for the OS, something that would happen regardless of a "Google's phone", and things that get rolled out to other devices.
They have to walk a fine line because they are Google, and having exclusivity for one thing almost goes against their entire paradigm.
Maybe the "advantage" is getting stuff first? If so, that's kinda meh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or maybe their philosophy is that any and all "enhancements" should be optional add-ons available to all phones of the breed. As it stands you can only get Sense or Blur if you buy a phone from those manufacturers (or if you root and someone scavenges a semi-compatible ROM from one of them for you). I don't think they want to be in the game of "you have to get your phone from us to get XYZ" and so they provide a reasonably attractive basic package, they set it up so that others can come in and provide openly available enhancements (see the various replacement "home screens" on the market for example) and then the customer gets the benefit of both choice and of an open environment.
I think they view branding as more of an obstacle than as a sales/owner satisfaction tactic.
JoshHart said:
If you watch Googles initial press release for the Android launch youll get your answer, they made Android for developers. Instead of going Apples route where you have to use their stuff and if they have something similar no one else can, they went the other way. They said they would provide the function necessary for a smart phone and leave the rest to the developers and provided the open source operating system and api's necassary for that to happen. And honestly id say its worked. I dont use their messenger, I use Handcent. I dont use their browser, I use Dolphin Browser. I dont use their clock I use Weather Widget donate or Beautiful Widgets. I often see reviews on apps that say, "this should have been included" blah blah but thats not what Androids all about, its about the devs. I think Android blows everyone away in that category, we may not have the amount of apps that other phones have but we do have more options for the things we use everyday and thats something I can appreciate, its only going to get better as Android grows and its definitely getting there. I'd rather have open development any day than, "Here, this is what you need."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All good points. Now that I think about it I bought this phone for stock google stuff, which in hindsight may have been a mistake. With the g1 and mytouch 3g the google software was often the closest thing to stable available and I've grown to trust mainly them and reputable companies. Its kind of embarrassing to look thru the market and have to sift through countless apps that serve virtually no purpose, have terrible icons, and aren't even close to stable, but perhaps this is a product of androids relative immaturity, though I'm unfamiliar with winmo, palm, and apple. I just haven't been impressed with many third party apps or Widgets, save a select few very impressive ones. 90% of the apps look and feel very amateur. I stick to apps and Widgets produced by real companies because those have the best chance of being usuable. That was quite a gamble by google to go largely hands off and let all software be driven by development. Xda has spotlighted many excellent devs as far as rooting goes but for the average user the options are unimpressive. Maybe google will give in and start developing more usuable/stable/useful apps/widgets
I think that there are two schools of thought on this, yet we are all agreeing on the same concept.
While Google did create Android to be a stock type OS that they could distribute to multiple handset makers (in order to increase their ability to produce smartphones with only minor increases in developmental costs aside from those related to hardware - ultimately getting more people using the mobile web resulting in more ad revenue -whew! ), they also have in a sense slightly abandoned those of us who took the direct to consumers path. This is why they didn't put much into the release of the phone (look up the launch stats - or lack of accessories). While they don't have the responsibility to create widgets, programs, animations, etc. for us (the D2C crowd). I believe that they should have worked out a deal with HTC where we are allowed to unlock the bootloader and tinker/mod/play with/customize, etc as much as we want to without penalty or breaking the warranty. We don't have the funding to purchase a few hundred phones in case we brick them testing out various configs., nor do most of us have the expertise to repair the device if it gets bricked. The only other possibility is that a contract clause is created whereby we are allowed to download ROMs from Android manufacturers (or at least just HTC) and put them on our phones - doesn't that give us the MOST number of options to customize our phones? And isn't the ability to customize an Android phone the original intent of the OS?
By giving us either an allowance to unlock the bootloader or the allowance to download (and maybe play with other manufacturer customized ROMs) or preferably both I think that it would be a win-win situation.
I know that when Android began development their focus was on apple and they wanted to compete with the iPhone. Which is a commmendable goal because the iphone ineluctably changed the mobile device world for the better. This makes me think Android has a lot they want to do with the stock ui and not just fixes to further stabilize the software but to give the UI a seeker look and add functionality.
On the other hand I've read here that Google just wants to make a stable UI available for companies like MOTO and HTC to skin and for developers to customize and improve.
Id like to think that Android has big plans for my new nexus one.
So do you guys think Google looks at HTC's sense and says " its all going according to plan, companies are taking our software and vastly improving it so we do the leg work and get our software on mass amounts of phones and manufacturers can customize it to their liking and their customer preferences" or do you think they say " wow HTC has really made phenomenal improvements on our software so we need to step up our game and make 2.2 and on more competitive"
I do understand its open source implying the intention for third party customization. but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way, i just hope android isnt stopping short on purpose to let developers put the finishing touches, thats a great option to have but id rather not be compelled to root.
I'm not saying android stock isn't very solid. Other than sense its the best ui available. I'm just trying to clarify whether android wants stable software by them at the heart of every mobile device and customized by those manufacturers or if they want android stock to be competitive in and of its self. Personally I'm hoping for the latter.
Your thoughts?
I don't know if their focus is so much of pushing people to make their own but more of focusing on the availability. They seem to want to always have the availability of customization and freedom. I think they see Sense UI as "Hey people actually love our work and are willing to spend days/months on working to make something of our product."
Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"
Unlike with Apple, they're like "WTF? You're not allowed to do this! No you can't see the specs of our phones you have to guess!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
touche.....
i can't see google having any problems with sense UI, any improvement is great. Anything that will make more people use android and use google's services, im sure they will be happy with. Somehow i don't think they are happy with the deals the other companies have made with bing and yahoo though.
DMaverick50 said:
but if android didnt want their own ui to be the preferred ui i don't think theyd even offer phones that way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.
O
Paul22000 said:
You're completely missing the point about why Google wants Android.
They don't care if the stock UI isn't the best or most popular.
They don't care about Blur.
They don't care about Sense UI.
You're missing the big picture here.
Every time you search...
Every time you use maps...
Every time you use voice input, Google Goggles, Gesture Search, Listen, etc.
Every time, they're collecting that data, selling it, using it to improve their services even more and thereby making even more profit on their improvement in services..
Mobile ads within apps, and elsewhere within the UI...
Not to mention taking a cut out of sold apps.
Nothing is free, especially not data, and you can bet your ass Google is cashing in on it since that's what they do best.
Stop thinking about the UI, and start thinking behind-the-scenes. Look at the big picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely understand what you're saying, that they want their software on as many devices as possible. That was actually the first of the two possibilities I offered. Officially google initially indicated they wanted to compete with apple (the second possibility I offered) and as a nexus owner I hoped for the second but it makes a lot more business sense to make their software/applications ubiquitous. And at the end of the day, google has a bottom line to worry about. So I guess in the end the manufacturers using android but customizing it probably offers a more thoughtful interface (though many, many prefer stock) but having stock android is more likely to receive updates fastest while some customized skins may not receive them period. Seems like a win-win for consumers regardless of android and Google's strategy.
I never saw Android as a competition to iPhone. There are huge differences between them. To start with, iPhone is a hardware and Android is an OS.
Android is not just targetted towards phone.. but also a more lucrative platform buisness. Android is targeted towards Windows and Linux and not iPhone.
Windows CE and Linux are pretty much the only choice for platforms. Many GPS units, car control systems, Controllers for many equipment etc.. are all Windows CE or custom linux. Android is targeting this market share. Therefore it is not surprising that Android has similiar policies like Win CE and linux to keep the core seperate from UI. Customers can choose their UI to adapt their implimentation. e.g. many of us don't even relaize that our car GPS has windows in it or our routers has linux in it.
Of course there are other advantages of controling a platform. They have been nicely sumarized by paul.
I am not a developer, but I was reading up on experiences that developers have with the Android Market.
Then I also came across a website that showed some statistics about paid apps and they were shocking. I can't remember the source right now, but it said that the Apple AppStore is a $200 million business per month, where the Android Market is only $5 millions per month. This is very discouraging for developers who are in it for money (usually companies who have the resources to create Games and more Complex Apps and have the ability to Partner with Services).
One developers said that he only got 23 downloads, in the first month. He mentioned then that over half of them used the 24 hour refund (could that be that those were leachers who downloaded the app and threw it on a P2P channel?), eventually he ended up with 11 sales. One guy sent him an email and said that $4.99 is too much to ask for, which I think is not unreasonable considering that there are many apps in the Apple AppStore that cost much more than that. Whether or not his app is useful or not to most users is sadly unknown by me. But looking at his perspective I think I would start developing apps for the iOS, who wouldn't that wants to make money?
The problem with these figures is that developers will eventually stop developing paid apps and the quality of the Android Market (from now on referred to Market) apps vs Apple AppStore (from now on referred to AppStore) apps will extremely decline. And there will be either many low rating apps in the Market or there will be an increase in the amount of Apps submitted the the Market.
We all want good Apps, Apple found out Apps are the number 1 reason a Plattform has success. Android has Google behind it which makes up for a good amount of Great apps and there are very good developers here that are not in it for the money, but eventually it all comes down to making money when it comes to professional businesses offering a product. Look at the games that are offered on the iOS platform vs Android, you can't tell me that an iPhone 3G or a 2nd Gen iPod has better graphics performance than some of the higher-end Android devices.
Also, are there too many free alternatives in the Android Market that the AppStore doesn't have? There are also many free apps in the AppStore.
What can be done about this? - Please post your ideas, since I am not a developer I am not the pro here when it comes to this issue I am asking for your opinion.
However, I am a business student so I have some insights of how companies will react to this as mentioned above.
The few ideas I have would be:
1. Google could increase the quality of design of the API and give different APIs to paid vs free Apps.
2. Sadly I have to mention it because of all the Leachers and then P2P distributors, remove the 24 hour refund policy.
3. Google to hire more developers in house who are paid and create free apps that can compete with the AppStore (which would cost Google a fortune). Maybe then charge a small amount for Google Voice to do some financial damage report.
4. Change the Markets way how people pay for apps? I noticed that in the past on my iPhone the decision to actually PAY for an app was much easier and faster for me, I didn't even bother to look for a free alternative.
5. Try to Market Android more towards people who are less geeks (who know where and how to find a free solution to the app they need), as in change the look of Android and make it much more simple for the average Joe day to day user (which I would hate because that means remove or hide many of the great features that make Android what I like so much about it and go back to a more primitive system like the iOS4). And tell hardware manufacturers to create more shiny phones.
--> Since most people who don't know how to get free alternatives, or who don't know and don't have the time to learn how to find free alternatives are people that are buying a product for the lifestyle and to show off (iPhone).
What are YOUR ideas to fix this issue? - Thank you for everyone posting solutions.
I don't think this is something we should worry about.
First, Android is open-source and many enthusiasts give their applications free of charge, which is not the case with Apple's closed OS. That is why about 65% of all apps in Market are free, and only 35% paid. In Appstore, about 70% are paid, only 30% free. Statistics: http://androidheadlines.com/2010/09/app-store-vs-android-market-how-much-is-paid-for.html.
Secondly, you'll find that Market currently supports purchases in only 13 markets while the App Store does so in 90. These numbers will change as time passes by and more markets will be included, but I'm sure that Android will always be a platform with much more free apps than iOS, and that's the beauty of Android.
As far as I'm aware the developers have a say regarding that 24 hour refund policy. An application can be made to be non-refundable if they choose to.
In comparing developers for iOS and Android, you have to also look at who they are individually. Sure, there are many apps developed across the board for all mobile devices, but I think the core of the Android Market are individuals who develop apps just for the sake of developing apps. They enjoy what they do and they would do it regardless of profit.
Of course you have a few that try to make money, but I believe they are the exception rather than the rule.
I mean no offense when I say this, but I believe that the iPhone attracts a very different type of user than Android does. Most people I personally know that use the iPhone do so more out of status and pretentiousness than its own usefulness. Many do not even know the majority of things they could do with the iPhone. Those I know who use Android use it because they root it and do their own modifications, overclocking, etc.
With this in mind, I believe that Android apps are generally created by a different kind of developer for a different kind of user.
shinji257 said:
As far as I'm aware the developers have a say regarding that 24 hour refund policy. An application can be made to be non-refundable if they choose to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We have absolutely no say in whether or not out apps are refunded. If I showed you the numbers of instant refunds you'd puke. And the OP states $200 million to $5 million which is ridiculously off. I believe Google just reported that they passed $1 billion in sales (profit) from the Android Market. Either way, it's way more than $5 million a month.
All that said I personally am happy with what I have been able to do with the Market. I expected a little better on my most recent app but it takes time for people to get word of a new app. That's pretty much the problem I've found. It's hard to get noticed. But I still think it's pretty good. There is a lot I absolutely hate about the Market and a bunch of things I like about it. I'd still rather develop for Android and ironically, none of the apps I have created would even work on iPhone. Two are root apps and one requires a modification of the browser which is not allowed on iPhone (for no apparent good reason, I might add).
I am glad to hear that this isn't as big of an issue as I read online, it would be sad to see a great plattform to be hurten, as you can see with the WebOS.
As for not getting recognized, a few tips I have about that is not to rely too much on people finding your app in the market, but rather advertise it yourself, use your facebook and twitter and even this forum (if the forum policy allow that, I am not sure on that again since I am not a developer). I love the QR codes, I actually see many of them in bathroom stalls and other places, and I always check on them since it's in my curiosity to find out where they get me.
I'm making an extra living off paid apps on the Marketplace.
Oh, and an extra living off free apps with Admob.
So now I'm making 3 livings worth. It's wonderful. I have no complaints.
I mean no offense when I say this, but I believe that the iPhone attracts a very different type of user than Android does. Most people I personally know that use the iPhone do so more out of status and pretentiousness than its own usefulness. Many do not even know the majority of things they could do with the iPhone. Those I know who use Android use it because they root it and do their own modifications, overclocking, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're forgetting about Droid users. You'd be surprised how many people own an Android just for status and pretentiousness. It goes both ways. I even know a few people with Androids that don't even know that they have an Android.
1. Google could increase the quality of design of the API and give different APIs to paid vs free Apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wouldn't that mean closing the source? Or you think people will use opensource platform that only runs free apps over opensource platform that runs both?
I don't think I want closed source OS on my phone, if I did I'd probably use iPhone.
2. Sadly I have to mention it because of all the Leachers and then P2P distributors, remove the 24 hour refund policy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pirates do buy software sometimes, how do you think it gets to P2P networks in the first place? One of them buys it, his friend cracks it and everyone else gets it 4free.
So it wouldn't solve anything, removing the refund would only make legit customers angry if the app doesn't work.
3. Google to hire more developers in house who are paid and create free apps that can compete with the AppStore (which would cost Google a fortune). Maybe then charge a small amount for Google Voice to do some financial damage report.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought google did hire developers and they do create free apps. I don't think competing with appstore is their ultimate goal though, since appstore and iphoneos are completely closed.
Charging for services is something I agree with completely.
They should indeed make certain (not all) services cost money. But they should also keep the software free and open to ensure the quality.
4. Change the Markets way how people pay for apps? I noticed that in the past on my iPhone the decision to actually PAY for an app was much easier and faster for me, I didn't even bother to look for a free alternative.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was much easier and faster because apple paid someone to make it easier and faster.
I'm not so sure google is willing to invest money into closed source software, especially when you consider these 3 facts.
1. Closed source software has a limited amount of developers who are working to make it better, faster and more efficient.
2. More developers on a single project means more features, more bugfixes and faster development.
3. Opensource software in general is more secure because everyone can see the source code.
5. Try to Market Android more towards people who are less geeks (who know where and how to find a free solution to the app they need), as in change the look of Android and make it much more simple for the average Joe day to day user (which I would hate because that means remove or hide many of the great features that make Android what I like so much about it and go back to a more primitive system like the iOS4). And tell hardware manufacturers to create more shiny phones.
--> Since most people who don't know how to get free alternatives, or who don't know and don't have the time to learn how to find free alternatives are people that are buying a product for the lifestyle and to show off (iPhone).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I don't like being labeled, I think marketing should be focused on pushing Android for everyone, not just specific groups of people.
User knows what works best for him so let him decide what to buy. Wide selection of devices that share the base operating system is great, but user should decide what type of software he wants to use, not google nor apple.
User should also decide what type of service he wants to use and whether that service is free or paid.
Changing the look of Android to make it more simple is something I'd personally hate, but we should always have options.
It would be great to flash an extremely simple android OS for my grandmother's phone for example, while keeping my VNC and SSH on my own device.
Also, don't think there's much difference between android users and iphone users, they're just people anyway. And there's an equal amount of pirated iphone apps and android apps.
Only real difference is about the OS, where one offers you a choice and another forces you to pay and develops restrictions instead of new features.
What are YOUR ideas to fix this issue? - Thank you for everyone posting solutions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think there is an issue, devs get paid from pushing ads, users are happy with a wide selection of apps. Some services are free some services cost money. Just my 2c
Hey Xoomers!! We all know this, but its worth repeating...some developers are now showing interest in Android/honeycomb tablets...but in order to keep that support, and to get Ipad quality games and developers on board, we must SUPPORT these developers by actually buying their games and apps and stop the bootlegging!! I know it can be tempting, but why would developers want to Support Android if we are not paying..they would just continue to support Apple..and we will be left with powerful devices with no great games or apps to show for it...Lets show Apple that Android is the new king of the block!!!
Agree with you lets unleash the beast off this tegra
sent from my Motorola XOOM
I want Square Enix on board. I've gotta play Chaos Rings, Final Fantasy 1,2 and 3 on my iPhone... Chaos Rings was a pretty neat mobile RPG.
i just purchased The History great battles medieval, which i have to say looks pretty ugly lol!! But still I dont mind spending the $6.00 bucks, i might like it later But the more support we actually show, the more developers will jump on board, and create better looking games for Tegra. I would love to play resident evil Zombies, need for Speed hot pursuit on our amazing Xoom devices, but its up to us to show that its worth making games for Android. So if we can spend $5.00 on things we don't need, surely we can spend the money to help benefit us as Xoom owners in the long run!!
MRCANNADY said:
Hey Xoomers!! We all know this, but its worth repeating...some developers are now showing interest in Android/honeycomb tablets...but in order to keep that support, and to get Ipad quality games and developers on board, we must SUPPORT these developers by actually buying their games and apps and stop the bootlegging!! I know it can be tempting, but why would developers want to Support Android if we are not paying..they would just continue to support Apple..and we will be left with powerful devices with no great games or apps to show for it...Lets show Apple that Android is the new king of the block!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've always paid for my apps. Any lack of developer interest because of bootlegging isn't in any way because of me. Its worth noting that even having to post this speaks volumes of the mindset of "general android users" and gives ios devs that much more fuel.
cwizardtx said:
I've always paid for my apps. Any lack of developer interest because of bootlegging isn't in any way because of me. Its worth noting that even having to post this speaks volumes of the mindset of "general android users" and gives ios devs that much more fuel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i disagree with your statement..regardless if i posted this or not, developers have already mentioned the fact that bootlegging is a problem with Android owners in general. We have to show developers that we are serious about supporting them. So it's good to show that we are committed to buying apps/games, and that developers will be rewarded for taking the time to develop for us. if we acknowledge the problem and speak about about it, hopefully that will get people on board if they want the better-quality games for Android!
Apple has alot of bootlegging. its just as easy to get a paid app for free on ios devices, as it is on android. I think apple devices have more apps because their is more people to use the product. And devs only have to make it for th Device iPhone Ipad ect. But with anroid you have a little harder time because everything has the android os on it samsung HTC motorola ect.
Ask an ios developer who also produces a like android app which generates more revenue and which gets stolen more.
This is the same argument software developers have had literally for decades. I used to be a producer at a major gaming company and we always claimed that pirating cost us millions of dollars a year. The fact is that it is completely unprovable that there is any loss of revenue at all. If you make an absolutely awesome state-of-the-art game with absolutely unbreakable copy protection you will sell x number of units. If you sell the same game with no copy protection you will still sell x number of units but a bunch of people who didn't pay for it will get it as well because its easy to copy. So regardless, you still make the same amount of money, but you spent a lot more on the DRM licenses so you actually made less profit in the end.
With Android, the number of people who root their device and install pirated apk's is a hugely insignificant number to the overall Android user base, most estimates put it so low that it isnt even trackable. If you choose to not develop for a platform because of pirating, you are throwing money away.
I second the notion of supporting devs, but priacy isn't the primary problem. The biggest problem is market share and time on market. As both of those increase, they will no longer be an issue. This said, it wouldn't hurt to try and cut down priacy and maybe for a free app with a donation option somewhere, use it if its a good app. (Not always obviously, but sometimes is a great start.)
Sent from my Xoom the way it should be, rooted and with SD card.
Appealing to people's better nature is about the same as asking for donations. You aren't gonna get too far.
I think the best anti-piracy approach isn't DRM, but to convert it to a service. You can't pirate a MMOG. Not all software can be tailored to this, but most can, especially in this age of 24x7 connectivity. Software is heading in this direction already, with SaS and of course Da Klowd.
The tough cookie is how to extend the SaS model to media, viz movies and music, given their fundamentally "offline" nature of consumption.
Perhaps the way forward for the movie/music industry is to wrap them in software, eg make them interactive. Say, a piece of music can be played at varying tempo of your choosing, or it can be auto-remixed using templates, or it can be sweetened depending on your mood, etc.
Interactive movie is a tougher row to hoe, since movie watching is mainly a linear experience. But once animation gets to the point of achieving photo-realism, then a movie can conceivably be constructed like a game.
A major weakness of games thus far is lack of pathos. It's hard to be scared, or feel sad or joy, when playing a computer game, as opposed to watching a good movie. Perhaps a movie-game hybrid, with real human actors in intermixed sequences, will achieve this.
I disagree with you. The post by the OP is something like "encouragement" to give MORE SUPPORT to Android developer.
1. To talk more about Android apps to friends and family
2. To contact particular apps developer to create Honeycomb version of their Android apps
3. To contact iOS developers to port their product to Android Honeycomb
4. To create great detailed reviews of Android Honeycomb apps / games and spread the word
cwizardtx said:
I've always paid for my apps. Any lack of developer interest because of bootlegging isn't in any way because of me. Its worth noting that even having to post this speaks volumes of the mindset of "general android users" and gives ios devs that much more fuel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree ...
The thing is for people who do not want to buy, they will not buy anyway.
This kind of thing is mentality. No matter what, they will always find away to pirate.
What I always do here at my work is to promote and specifically tell all my friends about Android apps and why they should not pirate them (some of them do pirating).
Come on, the price is not expensive! Really not expensive! I cannot believe people risking their phone by installing illegal version for something worth like $1 or $2.
However, I would love to have options to PERMANENTLY REMOVE / DELETE certain apps from my Google Checkout account!
Yes, not all apps are good ... Sometimes, I regret that I bought "that" app. And now, it is listed in my Google Checkout account
I could do some kind of "donation" by buying "any" good apps or ported apps from iOS, once a month for example I will do this to give support to Android devs. But yeah, I don't do this now because I hate to have long list in my Android Market purchased apps list.
KerryG said:
This is the same argument software developers have had literally for decades. I used to be a producer at a major gaming company and we always claimed that pirating cost us millions of dollars a year. The fact is that it is completely unprovable that there is any loss of revenue at all. If you make an absolutely awesome state-of-the-art game with absolutely unbreakable copy protection you will sell x number of units. If you sell the same game with no copy protection you will still sell x number of units but a bunch of people who didn't pay for it will get it as well because its easy to copy. So regardless, you still make the same amount of money, but you spent a lot more on the DRM licenses so you actually made less profit in the end.
With Android, the number of people who root their device and install pirated apk's is a hugely insignificant number to the overall Android user base, most estimates put it so low that it isnt even trackable. If you choose to not develop for a platform because of pirating, you are throwing money away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you guys for understanding my post. I think Android wants Honeycomb to be more *centralized* like Apple..meaning that developers won't have to worry about making different versions of apps n games since most tabs running honeycomb will have the same base specs. We need let devs know that we are serious about supporting them...The Android family will or has already outgrown Apples fan base..so developers can make money from us but they need to know that most of us will buy their products. You never know who's reading these forums.
I have no idea whether there is a lot or a little piracy on android phones. Unfortunately there will always be a segment of any group willing to justify stealing products or information. Some groups worse than others. My guess that at least on this forum people understand what goes into making an app and respect that. Now being in the video game industry I can attest to piracy especially on the pc. It gets to the point where its almost pointless to produce a variant of a console game on pc. If the drm is too restrictive you get blasted all over th internet. If you don't put a really restrictive drm on them every pc owner wil have bit torrented your game. Very frustrating.
In any case, that does not seem to be the case with android. I think the best formula is to provide a free version to test with limited functionality and sell a full version so the people who want all of the features can get them and support the app devs. Such as docs to go. So long as the programs stay relatively cheaper there not be much incentive pirate.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
>My guess that at least on this forum people understand what goes into making an app and respect that.
In that most here have bought a $600-800 gadget, we can say that the demog for this forum have higher disposable income than the norm. Another thing we can say is that some number here are content producers or business owners, so there is more empathy for app devs. In short, those here aren't mainstream people.
I don't think the economics of software pricing will suddenly be lowered to the <$10 variety (as dominated by current phone apps) for the simple reason that software devs haven't decided to work for less money. IOW, TCO will be the same, because cost of production is still the same. The different thing is that the distribution channel now is more democratized, and there'll be more software as services than as packaged e-goods.
The issues of piracy are well-known; no need to rehash them here. Suffice it to say that it will be the same for tabs as it is for PCs.
Part of the problem with our Open Ecosystem is the crowd that it has attracted.
These people who love and kill for 'Open' have had access and use of FOSS(Free Open Source Software) for years - everything just about has been about FOSS.
It's difficult to retrain the mindset of these guys to pay for any software. I am not saying anyone is stealing, I am saying they don't see the current sets of software worthy of $0.99 - the cost is not the factor here, the mind set of FOSS is.
That being said the 'Free' in 'Free Open Source Software' does not mean free from $$$ - it just usually happens to be that way with most software used on an open Linux platform.
That being said, I have purchased every app that I have tried, liked, and a pay version has been available for - there are 10 or so that I don't even have installed any more because I just don't use them (programs designed for 1.5, 1.6, or 2.1 - that don't need to be used any more because features exist).
I get the 'Support Future Development' theory, and would gather to say that most of who do Pirate software really don't understand how a development cycle works, or how you make it profitable. I'd almost bet that 40% of the windows copies that hit this web page a day aren't legit. I'd also say that number is safe and low.
If you want a Free OS - take a bit of time and learn linux (Mint is as easy and Windows) - don't steal from that mean multi billion dollar corporation. Theft causes prices to rise, denying them the sale causes prices to fall and force them to become competitive.
On a side note...
Amazon seems to be actively pushing the Android market with their "Free paid app a day" promotion. My question is now, do the developers still get the money for each download or are they the ones to say "hey, promote my app by making it free for 24 hours"?
I think the Android market will always be the step child but on the other hand it is filled with enthusiasts and real people that are approachable. It's more like a team (see this forum). I am very proud to be a member of this community and I am very tempted to switch to an Android phone when I next have the option for a new phone. I currently have a jailbroken iPhone 3GS and probably paid more on Cydia than on iTunes Also, I have paid for way more apps on the Xoom (and way more money was spent) than all my iPhone apps together!
funnycreature said:
Amazon seems to be actively pushing the Android market with their "Free paid app a day" promotion. My question is now, do the developers still get the money for each download or are they the ones to say "hey, promote my app by making it free for 24 hours"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, they do get a % of the price of the App, I think they receive 20% when the app is listed for the free app of the day - There are some other stipulations to that though. They get 70%? I believe when the app is purchased normally and Amazon keeps 30% finders fee so to speak, covers CC Processing and Amazon over head.
I would gladly buy the apps if i only could. Like someone already posted, apps are not exactly expensive when you consider the price we have paid for our Xooms.
Only problem is that for some reason Google doesn't offer paid apps in my country
I understand that Market Enabler also doesn't work for wifi only Xoom?
Does anyone know a way how i could buy apps?