Will The Android Market Be More Appealing To Developers Than The App Store?
from the let-freedom-ring dept
In the past month, it has become clear that Apple, through their App Store, is going to exercise a lot of control over the programs that iPhone users download. The list of removed App Store downloads include Tetris clones, harmless but expensive novelties, movie listings and useful wireless applications. Although many have sung the praises of the new system, this trend of contingent generativity - Jonathan Zittrain's term for intermediaries exerting control over new creativity - has some worrying implications. An ecosystem with perfect enforceability of rules will come to preempt the creativity which comes from the edge (and even piracy). If developers worry that their applications will be shut down by an overzealous enforcement organization (there is no evidence Apple is pulling applications after anything more than a third-party complaint), then innovation will stagnate.Google seems to understand this. In announcing their competing service, the Android Market, the Android team notes "We chose the term "market" rather than "store" because we feel that developers should have an open and unobstructed environment to make their content available." Application creators will be as free to post information as videographers are to post to YouTube. Although the lack of review before posting doesn't mean Google will not remove applications if complaints are made, their ethic of freedom suggests they see mobile applications in the same light as the Internet: creators will build unanticipated, useful applications if given the chance to experiment freely.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: android, app store, mobile, mobile platforms, openness
Companies: apple, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
this is just shown over and over...
I talk to more and more people that are tired of Apple's snobbery and elitist attitude, and as we see more and more people shown that Macs aren't the only cool computer out there we have more people able to make informed decisions- not decisions based on hype.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
also Iphone is some sort of status symbol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In order for a developer to install an app - even on his own iPhone - he needs to digitally sign his code and register his iPhone as a development device - there is no other option for distribution or sales available to him except the app store.
The App Store then not only taxes every app sold, but also has to approve each one individually. They then know who wrote every app, and also know every single person who downloaded it.
They are the gatekeeper, the walled garden, whatever you want to call it - the App Store is all of our net neutrality fears come true.
Even the wireless providers don't tax apps and track application developers and users!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Exactly why I don't develop for the iPhone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Openess is overrated
The whole buzz around Android is extremely overrated. Want openness to develop/distribute - there's tiny company called "Nokia". Symbian allow to install unsigned application while user is warned over potential risk.
There's about 1M Nokia devices sold EVERY DAY. iPhone is irrelevant for all except (maybe) US market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the iphone tax?
Second, obviously, nobody here has tried to list a Java app or a Windows Mobile app with one of the cell phone companies or the couple of third-party stores. If they did, they would know that they would be luck if the 'tax' was ONLY 50%. Some of them are over 60% [as in, 60% for them, 40% for you, the developer]. And you think they let you list an app for $1.00? Only if they keep $0.99.
And don't forget, your support costs will be higher for Android, because you can't count on a specific input method, or screen size, or even if specific libraries are available on the phone your customer has.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the iphone tax?
"Libraries" will not be a problem, any more than there is a problem with "libraries" on iPhone given the possibility that not everyone upgrades at the same time. In Android, libraries are either in the OS, or bundled with your application, so there are no additional variables to worry about.
With regards to input method or screen size, that problem holds true for each and every smartphone platform except iPhone, because each and every other smartphone platform actually supports more than one phone. This issue, therefore, is not unique to Android.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Apple - Schmapple
Why on earth would I buy an over-priced, overly-restrictive product from an ultra-elitist organization.
Keep your stupid little toys Apple!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The article mentions the "movie listing" app that was removed. I presume this is referring to Boxoffice, which is still there, just under a new name "Now Playing". It's a great app.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
protecting buyers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: protecting buyers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]