"But maybe I am all wrong and the platform doesn't need this. Linux works too, without little ISVs." That depends on your definition of "works". It hovers around 2% on http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php which would indicate that it's non very popular with the consumers market that mobile 'phones are aimed at. If Android ends up with only 2% of the smart phone* market I think we'll all see it as a bit of a disaster because it would put it 6th in the OS charts at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone#Operating_systems Al. * I use the term smart phone because many mobile 'phones aren't used for the kind of net access w3counter is measuring.
--- * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * ====== Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries. _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mariano Kamp Sent: 13 April 2009 07:36 To: [email protected] Subject: [android-discuss] Re: Google competing with devs... Jesse, the name Google is much more valuable then some of your better implemented features. While in the short run you're right, in the long run the end user looses when the platform doesn't attract developers who are willing to bet their livelihood on their work. I really like the Mac culture where it is considered good style to pay for apps from little ISVs. The apps are roughly 50 USD and are polished, documented, not half-assed and relatively bug free. I would gladly pay for apps like that on my Android phone. And I bought lots of apps for my iPhone, but haven't found anything yet for Android. It might be me not looking good enough or the apps not up to the task. But one thing is for sure, if the atmosphere stays what it is (everything for free) this platform will not attract/keep serious developers and there won't be many great, polished apps. But maybe I am all wrong and the platform doesn't need this. Linux works too, without little ISVs. On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Jesse McGrew <[email protected]> wrote: On Apr 10, 3:20 pm, Amir Alagic <[email protected]> wrote: > I agre with Al. It will be hard to compete with Google. This is just > one app. I am affraid that more apps are on the way... Ok, app is open > soruce. So what? It also mean that it is free. How to compete with > free apps? Create another free app that is better than Google's free > app. > > Who wants to buy "John Doe" app when there is free app from Google? > Microsoft, Yahoo and other find it hard to compete with Google and I > don't think that an average developer can win... You could just as easily ask: who wants to buy *any* app when there's a free app from *anyone* that does the same thing? Why should anyone, Google or otherwise, restrain themselves from making a free app just so that other developers can sell the same functionality? If there's a free alternative, that puts pressure on paid developers to improve their products to justify the price. And if those developers can't make their paid applications more valuable to the end user than the free alternative, they have no business in that market anyway; their presence is not helping anyone. Jesse --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
