> Here's a good reason Netwalk was doomed almost from > the start:http://www.cyrket.com/package/org.hermit.netscramble
Nope. Netwalk clones exist for all other mobile platforms. It still sells WAY better there. > Plus, as to the game that free app was based on: > "KNetwalk is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License > (GPL), " > (http://games.kde.org/game.php?game=knetwalk) That is, actually, quite untrue. The first Netwalk mobile port was created in 1999. I dare say that the open source project was based on either our or the very original Russian port. Not that it matters, of course, but it illustrates how fast judgement can be so misleading. > The user-base of the G1 is highly likely to be aware of or involved in > open-source development, so trying to make money on a game largely similar > to one released under GPL would be difficult.(It's also a bit much of a > price for an Android game, at least currently.) When I saw this happen on > the Market, I did feel sympathy for the developer, but really it just made > me shrug and think "C'est la vie".....Reminds me of Linspire, and also their > attempt to charge for access to their Click 'N Run APT service. Decent > logic, just not the right kind of market with which it would ever be > popular. Now that's an interesting claim. If I am convinced that the G1 user base is aware or involved in open-source development then I'd totally stop doing anything for it. In fact, I am QUITE sure this is yet another incorrect assumption on your end, no offense meant. One doesn't need to look further than the app comments to realize that the wide G1 user base is, in fact, quite computer illiterate. > Bottom line is that development for paid apps on Android is a largely > different animal than developing for markets like the iPhone, and I think > the Return Policy exhibits this. Perhaps there a quiet wisdom here - how > many Fart apps are there on the market currently? Likely playing off of the > iPhone's success with such apps, these are obviously not innovative > development, but gimmicks; and gimmicks rarely have lasting value, and have > little long term use. Actually do believe the same type of applications would work well among the G1 user base too, at least the one that Google and / or TM are aiming at. In a marketing sense they are truly innovative development; they are just pure crap as far as productivity and usefulness go. > If a dev comes out with something useful (as in "serving a beneficial > purpose") on the Android market, it should meet with much more success than > if they were to release something simply amusing. I see that as the logic > behind the Return Policy. We'll see about that really soon. But from what I see I wouldn't hold my fingers crossed. A BlackBerry owner is a serious business person who knows what they want and can afford it. A G1 owner is a typical teen and/or Microsoft/Apple hater (often confusing himself with open source supporter) with high ego, high demands, unclear needs and not much financial responsibilities. Disclaimer: no offense to anyone, those are just personal observations. YMMV. BEIKS will continue exploring the platform albiet at a slower pace. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to android-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
