Where are all the Android apps?
Join gaming leaders, alongside GamesBeat and Facebook Gaming, for their 2nd Annual GamesBeat & Facebook Gaming Summit | GamesBeat: Into the Metaverse 2 this upcoming January 25-27, 2022. Learn more about the event.
[Editor’s note: With the iPhone and Google’s Android dominating media attention in the mobile space, it’s only natural to start drawing comparisons. Applications represent a prime arena for such a competition, except for one thing — Android doesn’t even come close to rivaling the iPhone when it comes to app offerings. Below, ad network executive Rana Sobhany, explains why Google seems to be dragging its feet.]
At this point, it’s safe to say that no one anticipated how large the download numbers would be for Apple’s App Store 150 days post-launch. But VentureBeat’s post on Friday about Apple hitting the 300,000,000 application download mark, quickly transitioned to an entirely different conversation in the comment section, shifting the focus away from iPhone metrics and onto the side-by-side comparison of applications built for the Android platform during the same time period. The App Store launched with over 500 applications; Android with 62. Now, over one month into Android Market, we have yet to see even 500 Android applications available for download, with the most recent analysis placing total count at just 472.
The promise of Google’s Android Market was that it would be dramatically different than Apple’s approach to distributing mobile software. Google created a transparent “Market” rather than a “Store” so as to convey a sense of seamless exchanges without clandestine qualifications for entry into the ecosystem—as some developers reportedly feel about Apple’s approval process. Additionally, there are far more developers who are capable of applying their existing Java skill sets to creating applications in Android’s Java-based environment than in Apple’s CocoaTouch environment. On the surface, this would also seem to predict more Android applications on the Market than on the iPhone App Store.
If the openness and lack of approval restrictions on the Android platform were meant to be a refuge for disenfranchised iPhone developers who felt punished by an opaque approval process and if there are so many bright developers able to create software for the platform, then where are all the Android apps?
The iPhone was on the market for 18 months before the first Android handset — the G1 on T-Mobile’s network — was available. Developers have long been able to create third-party applications on their iPhones by jailbreaking them and writing software against unpublished application programming interfaces (APIs). As a result, by the time the official iPhone SDK was released by Apple, there was already an inspired community of experienced developers ready to start cranking out brilliant apps. T-Mobile has a much smaller subscriber base than AT&T, and handsets were not readily available to test applications on until late October of this year. Prior to that, developers had to rely solely on feature-restricted Android simulators for crafting the complex applications they were making.
Developers know that all shipping iPhones have GPS, an accelerometer, pinch and tilt capabilities — the unique combination of features that makes an iPhone an iPhone. Since Android is strictly a mobile operating system designed to span myriad device form factors, developers are forced to consider what may be significant variances between phone features when building their apps. The second Android device — the Kogan Agora — was released in Australia last week with no accelerometer. This week’s announcement of a QIGI’s Android device in China showed an even more restricted feature set.
To illustrate the effects of these challenges, I’ve put together a simple chart (above) indicating the predicted growth of Android Market based upon the first three days. The results are striking. Assuming a linearly decreasing growth rate of about 50 percent calculated every two days (based on the results of the first five days), the results indicate that by today, Android Market should contain at least 789 applications, almost twice the current figures.
But this is only a piece of this equation. The lack of a payment model for applications available in Android Market may be a deterrent to developers, who are delaying the release of their apps until the first quarter of 2009 when Google implements their payment system. Additionally, the Open Handset Alliance yesterday announced 14 new partners, including Sony Ericsson and Vodafone, noteworthy members who will add considerable strength to the adoption of the platform, both in the U.S. and internationally. Carriers who are not selling the iPhone need a strong, competitive response, and Google’s Android is a very attractive alternative.
While there is currently significantly more reach on the iPhone, the app marketplace is crowded and discovery of new applications is already difficult. Google, which has strong incentive to own the mobile experience and the Android platform, as well as the applications built atop it, will continue to grow and evolve its offering with each new device and operating system version. The earliest apps in the iPhone App Store fill the ranks of the top download lists, and those positions have yet to be secured on Android. This is a great opportunity for developers to push the boundaries of what can be done on the platform and build creative apps that break out as hits — before Android Market becomes overcrowded with tip calculators and lighter apps.
Rana Sobhany is VP of Marketing at New York-based Medialets, a premium advertising network and analytics provider for mobile platforms such as iPhone and Android.
Источник
Where are all the Android laptops?
PC OEMs seem obsessed with making complicated, high-cost, Windows 8-baed devices. Why are none of them trying to make cheap Android laptops?
Here’s a riddle for you.
Microsoft’s Windows PC OEM partners are taking an approach to product design whereby they just create anything and dump it on the market. This they seem to do with the same care and consideration that a diahrreatic camel uses to choose where it’s waste falls.
They will, essentially, put anything out there that they believe they can make a dollar out of.
Seeing as making an Android laptop would be technically easy, why doesn’t anyone make one? Why do they keep banging out complicated (and expensive) Windows 8 hybrids?
If they want to try and reinvigorate their sales, banging out low-end Android laptops might be a better way to go.
Samsung
What got me thinking about this was the recently announced Samsung ATIV Q. This is a Windows 8 hybrid that also runs Android. Double-tap the physical Start button on the device and a full-on copy of Jelly Bean pops into view.
Imagine if you will trying to break this news to Steve Ballmer without causing him to spontaneously combust. One of his key OEM partners — a company that has a degree of success at shipping Android devices that from some angles it looks like Google did Android as a personal favour to Samsung’s accountants — turns round and says, «we’re not so sure about this New Windows vision of yours, we’re going to give our customers Android».
The only safe way to do that is to escort Steve to a soundproof bunker deep on campus, fill it full of two-to-three-hundred especially cute kittens and bunnies and spend a week or so breaking the news to him gently.
Intel wants Android looking good on x86. The 10″ Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 will have an Atom processor, for example. The last thing Intel wants to do is be left out in the cold by Android. I’m sure they’re delighted that the ATIV Q will be battle-testing Android on Intel chips over on the Windows side of the market.
We know that you can get a decent enough x86 or ARM-based Chromebook for about $250. We also know that the problem with Chromebooks is that their web-dependent nature makes them very limited. Building the self-same kit that happened to boot to Android rather than to Chrome OS doesn’t seem to be something you’d need to think about.
Ah, but Android is a touch-based, monochronistic (one thing at a time) operating system, whereas Windows and Chrome OS are traditional WIMP interfaces.
That can be fixed. There’s a classic open source «we take it, hack it, and make it like you want it» project in the shape of Android-x86. Intel also have a project called Android on Intel Architecture (Android-IA). Both of them let you download and install laptop-friendly versions of Android on physical devices.
Android on traditional PC hardware is happening as my ZDNet colleague John Morris discusses .
Amazon
One problem with this approach might be getting access to the Google Play services. Android itself is a normal, open operating system and people can do (more or less) whatever they like with it. However, in order to tie an Android device into Google’s services, companies have to join the Android Compatibilty Program. Look on that page and you’ll find the following statement:
Once you’ve built a compatible device, you may wish to include Google Play to provide your users access to the third-party app ecosystem. Unfortunately, for a variety of legal and business reasons, we aren’t able to automatically license Google Play to all compatible devices. To inquire about access about Google Play, you can contact us.
Which basically means that despite giving away the OS, in order for a device to be something you can actually sell, Google has the final say. In developed markets (not so much in emerging markets), a device without Google Play is essentially useless.
As such, Google are in a great position just to say «no way!» to anyone who wants to build an Android laptop. Given that Google are keen on selling Chromebooks as their laptop-esque strategy, I can’t imagine they’d be falling over themselves to make a dream of an Android-based laptop happen for any of their partners.
So how can you get around the Google Play problem?
One way would be for a vendor to cold boot their own store. Currently, the only Android device vendor with a mass big enough to do that is Samsung. In many ways it’s bizarre that Samsung haven’t done this anyway seeing as any investment they make in marketing their Android devices flows straight back to Google. That’s not actually something that Samsung needs.
But, for whatever reason, this isn’t something that Samsung has done, and I can imagine few things more likely to get Google’s executive team on a plane to South Korea faster than news that they wanted to stop shipping Google Play. (The previously mentioned ATIV Q has Google Play, by-the-way.)
Another way to get an Android laptop onto the market would be for Amazon to create «Kindle Fire» laptops.
That’s a slightly more obvious route because Amazon has two important of pieces in place to do this quite easily.
Firstly, there’s already the Amazon Appstore for Android which is already of a size large enough to make it market-appropriate. In September last year, Laptop Magazine reported that the Amazon was offering 50,000 apps, compared to 600,000 on Google Play.
Secondly, there’s the fact that Amazon knows how to successfully build, ship, and market its own hardware. Adding a laptop into the mix alongside the Fire tablets would seem to fit reasonably well into their existing strategy.
Even if Amazon were not interested in building laptops themselves, allowing manufacturers to preload the Amazon Appstore app on devices could be an interesting way to go.
I tried doing this earlier with a virtual machine I set-up using AndroVM and it worked well enough. Here’s a screenshot of Evernote running on Android Jelly Bean inside of VMware Fusion on OS X. Notice the mouse cursor.
Android running on my MacBook within VMware Fusion. Shown is an instance of Evernote that I downloaded from the Amazon Appstore. (Google Play is not included with AndroVM.)
Conclusion
The question is — is anyone going to go for this in a big way?
Where the Chromebook wins in terms of the market is that it’s a very simple, very cheap device. We know that PC buyers are interested in «very cheap», testified by the fact that average selling prices keep dropping. We also know that they’re not very interested in «complicated», testified by the fact that nine months in Windows 8 is still not a barnstormer, «must have» product.
I totally think there’s an opportunity for someone to come in and re-define the low-end laptop space as being Android-based.
What do you think? Post a comment, or talk to me on Twitter: @mbrit.
Источник
Where are all the Android apps?
Join gaming leaders, alongside GamesBeat and Facebook Gaming, for their 2nd Annual GamesBeat & Facebook Gaming Summit | GamesBeat: Into the Metaverse 2 this upcoming January 25-27, 2022. Learn more about the event.
[Editor’s note: With the iPhone and Google’s Android dominating media attention in the mobile space, it’s only natural to start drawing comparisons. Applications represent a prime arena for such a competition, except for one thing — Android doesn’t even come close to rivaling the iPhone when it comes to app offerings. Below, ad network executive Rana Sobhany, explains why Google seems to be dragging its feet.]
At this point, it’s safe to say that no one anticipated how large the download numbers would be for Apple’s App Store 150 days post-launch. But VentureBeat’s post on Friday about Apple hitting the 300,000,000 application download mark, quickly transitioned to an entirely different conversation in the comment section, shifting the focus away from iPhone metrics and onto the side-by-side comparison of applications built for the Android platform during the same time period. The App Store launched with over 500 applications; Android with 62. Now, over one month into Android Market, we have yet to see even 500 Android applications available for download, with the most recent analysis placing total count at just 472.
The promise of Google’s Android Market was that it would be dramatically different than Apple’s approach to distributing mobile software. Google created a transparent “Market” rather than a “Store” so as to convey a sense of seamless exchanges without clandestine qualifications for entry into the ecosystem—as some developers reportedly feel about Apple’s approval process. Additionally, there are far more developers who are capable of applying their existing Java skill sets to creating applications in Android’s Java-based environment than in Apple’s CocoaTouch environment. On the surface, this would also seem to predict more Android applications on the Market than on the iPhone App Store.
If the openness and lack of approval restrictions on the Android platform were meant to be a refuge for disenfranchised iPhone developers who felt punished by an opaque approval process and if there are so many bright developers able to create software for the platform, then where are all the Android apps?
The iPhone was on the market for 18 months before the first Android handset — the G1 on T-Mobile’s network — was available. Developers have long been able to create third-party applications on their iPhones by jailbreaking them and writing software against unpublished application programming interfaces (APIs). As a result, by the time the official iPhone SDK was released by Apple, there was already an inspired community of experienced developers ready to start cranking out brilliant apps. T-Mobile has a much smaller subscriber base than AT&T, and handsets were not readily available to test applications on until late October of this year. Prior to that, developers had to rely solely on feature-restricted Android simulators for crafting the complex applications they were making.
Developers know that all shipping iPhones have GPS, an accelerometer, pinch and tilt capabilities — the unique combination of features that makes an iPhone an iPhone. Since Android is strictly a mobile operating system designed to span myriad device form factors, developers are forced to consider what may be significant variances between phone features when building their apps. The second Android device — the Kogan Agora — was released in Australia last week with no accelerometer. This week’s announcement of a QIGI’s Android device in China showed an even more restricted feature set.
To illustrate the effects of these challenges, I’ve put together a simple chart (above) indicating the predicted growth of Android Market based upon the first three days. The results are striking. Assuming a linearly decreasing growth rate of about 50 percent calculated every two days (based on the results of the first five days), the results indicate that by today, Android Market should contain at least 789 applications, almost twice the current figures.
But this is only a piece of this equation. The lack of a payment model for applications available in Android Market may be a deterrent to developers, who are delaying the release of their apps until the first quarter of 2009 when Google implements their payment system. Additionally, the Open Handset Alliance yesterday announced 14 new partners, including Sony Ericsson and Vodafone, noteworthy members who will add considerable strength to the adoption of the platform, both in the U.S. and internationally. Carriers who are not selling the iPhone need a strong, competitive response, and Google’s Android is a very attractive alternative.
While there is currently significantly more reach on the iPhone, the app marketplace is crowded and discovery of new applications is already difficult. Google, which has strong incentive to own the mobile experience and the Android platform, as well as the applications built atop it, will continue to grow and evolve its offering with each new device and operating system version. The earliest apps in the iPhone App Store fill the ranks of the top download lists, and those positions have yet to be secured on Android. This is a great opportunity for developers to push the boundaries of what can be done on the platform and build creative apps that break out as hits — before Android Market becomes overcrowded with tip calculators and lighter apps.
Rana Sobhany is VP of Marketing at New York-based Medialets, a premium advertising network and analytics provider for mobile platforms such as iPhone and Android.
Источник
