First Android Phone and Three Application Stores Launch

He he. I remember when the PRS500 came out that one of the common complaints that would "doom this niche gadget" to obscurity and failure was that the only way to get books for it was the Sony Connect store. (Wrong on all counts there but....)

Now they complain that for the latest gadget you can get your programs from more than one store. sigh.....

Since when did Rufus T. Firefly start doing reviews?

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by carandol

[sarcastic]Some of it even comes from *different cows!* The sooner the world genetically engineers one gigantic supercow, the better.[/sarcarstic]

i'm not buying a dedicated device until all books and apps are available exclusively from one gigantic genetically-engineered supercow (preferably an amazon cow), that's for sure. that's what's stopped me so far.

[Hadrien]

There's a huge difference between 3 application stores installed as default on a device, and the possibility to access more than a single application store.

Having a single application store installed as default is much more user-friendly. The problem with the AppStore is that Apple has complete control over the distribution of applications. Android phones should be shipped to the consumer with a single application store (based on the telco, the phone manufacturer, whatever...), and let the user install additionnal stores if they'd like to have more choice.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by Hadrien

There's a huge difference between 3 application stores installed as default on a device, and the possibility to access more than a single application store.

I'm ... not sure that any of these three are installed on the device at ship time -- if this article said one way or the other, then I missed it.

However, I freely admit that I haven't tried to research that particular point, yet, so if someone knows one way or the other, please: cast a pebble of knowledge into the ocean of my ignorance.

If there are three stores installed on the thing by default, then I can see where the concern about confusion could come from.

Otherwise, I'd think that the simple fact that folks are going out of their ways and voiding their iPhone warranties by JailBreaking their iPhones (as the article writer alludes to) is a pretty good indicator that folks don't feel they'll be overly baffled by having more than one source to choose from.

[msundman]

Originally Posted by Hadrien

There's a huge difference between 3 application stores installed as default on a device, and the possibility to access more than a single application store.

No, not really. The complexity comes from the possibility to have multiple stores. Sure, if there is only one store configured then the "select store" step could be skipped, but then you'd have to move all store-display and -config stuff somewhere else. Such stuff should only be completely hidden if there is no possibility of there being different stores.

If there's some confusion regarding the stores then it's not because there are multiple ones, but because the particular implementation of this feature has a bad user interface.

And then there are the cases of unfounded confusion just because something is new. E.g., my mother gets quite confused every time something new happens, even if it's something utterly irrelevant, such as a new version of a program having a Help-button where the previous version had no button (and although she wouldn't need to use the help the mere appearance of such a button would confuse her for some inexplicable reason).

[RickyMaveety]

Oh heck, if it comes to that, I know several people who are convinced that their TV sets are all going to explode or something if they don't run out and buy a digital box before the digital only broadcast deadline.

Notwithstanding the fact that (1) they are all new sets, (2) there is nothing but either (a) cable or (b) satellite out here, and (3) no one .... NO ONE .... has an antenna on their house.

Some people are simply hopeless. And, for those folks, if they are only presented with one store by default, that's the only place they will ever go. It would never occur to them to look for better bargains somewhere else. So, I say kudos to whoever decided to at least give them some options.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Perhaps they're just looking for a way to put some interest on the piece, but it raises an interesting thought in my mind (well interesting to my mind): where did this idea come from that the only way to succeed is to do things the way Steve Jobs does them? I mean that's worked out so very well for them historically.

These days, it's doing well indeed. Apple has demonstrated that good product design sells. And having an Apple store where you can get iPhone apps is reassuring for the consumer in one respect: anything got there has been theoretically vetted by Apple and should work as expected on the iPhone.

But Apple's desire for control may come back to bite them. Among other things, developers are complaining because the NDA they have to sign to get the SDK to develop iPhone apps not only prevents them from revealing anything about it, it also prevents them from comparing notes with other developers about how to use various features and address particular problems.

Contrast this with Android, where anyone can get the code (I have the SDK here) and there are active Google groups devoted to coding for Android and sharing tips and techniques.

It is completely fair, of course, to compare the Android phones to the iPhone, because Google is positioning the G1 as a direct competitor to the iPhone, but has the free market mindset really warped into a "company store" mindset so quickly?

Only if you a a member of the Cult of Apple...

How many folks out there are truly concerned that having a whopping three stores to choose from will actually confuse consumers?

There is a really snarky comment I could make, but best not go there.

So what about you? Are you "confused?"

Only that anyone should see it as worth comment. With Android free and open source, I expect a lot more sources of applications for it, such as here and here.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Great googley moogley -- the New York Times is running the exact same article now.

But I guess that publication is beyond feeling shame.

They are a company in a troubled industry, trying to cut costs. Their most recent financial report was grim reading.

Newspapers are hurting, with ad lineage trending steadily down. Most are laying off staff, and some are even doing things like threatening to stop subscribing to Associated Press feeds due to the costs.

Like just about everyone else, the NYT is trying to transition to the web at least in part, but online advertising revenues aren't anywhere near replacing the lost print ads.

No surprise the Technology section should choose to license content like ReadWriteWeb, as it will be a lot cheaper than developing it themselves.
______
Dennis

[madmaxmedia]

It's a non-issue for people that post on message boards for digital devices. But it is an issue for general consumers. Not because they can't fathom the concept of having more than 1 store, but because some may or may not ever become aware of other stores, or might unsuccessfully search for some game or app that they heard of, because they are at the wrong store.

It's a bit of an inconvenience as well, having to enter credit card information and registration for multiple sites. I mean I don't really care, but if you ever need to re-download something it's a no-brainer at the Apple App Store. With my old Palm PDA's I had to go hunt down registration codes, or Handango or PalmGear logins, etc.

I think the single store approach is generally better for the Kindle, if not for all Kindle owners. The G1 is a bit more techy oriented than the Kindle or iPod, so it's no big deal.

[madmaxmedia]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

These days, it's doing well indeed. Apple has demonstrated that good product design sells. And having an Apple store where you can get iPhone apps is reassuring for the consumer in one respect: anything got there has been theoretically vetted by Apple and should work as expected on the iPhone.

There were plenty of app stores for PDA's, yet Apple's App Store for the iPhone has gotten the most publicity and tons of downloads. The idea is easy to grasp, and easy for people to touch the icon and start download apps. It's certainly not perfect, but Apple nailed the overall concept- similar to the original iPod.

But Apple's desire for control may come back to bite them. Among other things, developers are complaining because the NDA they have to sign to get the SDK to develop iPhone apps not only prevents them from revealing anything about it, it also prevents them from comparing notes with other developers about how to use various features and address particular problems.

The NDA has since been changed, it is now okay for developers to discuss programming on the iPhone.

I believe it's only communications from Apple that are under the NDA.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by madmaxmedia

There were plenty of app stores for PDA's, yet Apple's App Store for the iPhone has gotten the most publicity and tons of downloads. The idea is easy to grasp, and easy for people to touch the icon and start download apps. It's certainly not perfect, but Apple nailed the overall concept- similar to the original iPod.

Sure. Ease of use has always been a paramount concern for Apple, and an Apple store with one touch downloads certainly has that. The problem for developers becomes getting approved for inclusion on the Apple store.

The NDA has since been changed, it is now okay for developers to discuss programming on the iPhone.

I believe it's only communications from Apple that are under the NDA.

That makes much more sense. If Apple wants to encourage developers to create iPhone apps, they should at least be able to talk to each other.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by madmaxmedia

It's a non-issue for people that post on message boards for digital devices. But it is an issue for general consumers. Not because they can't fathom the concept of having more than 1 store, but because some may or may not ever become aware of other stores, or might unsuccessfully search for some game or app that they heard of, because they are at the wrong store.

They'll learn, or they won't. Generally speaking, I'd like to think that people telling them about neat apps or games might also tell them where to find them.

It's a bit of an inconvenience as well, having to enter credit card information and registration for multiple sites. I mean I don't really care, but if you ever need to re-download something it's a no-brainer at the Apple App Store. With my old Palm PDA's I had to go hunt down registration codes, or Handango or PalmGear logins, etc.

I made sure I kept distribution archives of software like that to avoid the necessity of redownload. And I kept a file of serial numbers and reg codes for the occasions where I might have to hard reset and rebuild from scratch.

I've fielded a fair number of "Help! What do I do now?" questions on Palm oriented forums from folks who didn't do that, and should have. The answer was too often "Nothing. You're hosed."

I think the single store approach is generally better for the Kindle, if not for all Kindle owners. The G1 is a bit more techy oriented than the Kindle or iPod, so it's no big deal.

You may be right, since the Kindle encourages vendor lock in, but Amazon has a broad enough product offering that there will be little need to look elsewhere.
______
Dennis

[madmaxmedia]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Sure. Ease of use has always been a paramount concern for Apple, and an Apple store with one touch downloads certainly has that. The problem for developers becomes getting approved for inclusion on the Apple store.
Dennis

I agree 100% with your last point, especially since Apple doesn't seem to be very forthcoming about certain app rejections. On a big picture level I understand the idea of having an application approval process (depending on your target market), but the devil is in the details.

OTOH I think there are many happy App Store developers, the 70/30 cut seems pretty reasonable.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I made sure I kept distribution archives of software like that to avoid the necessity of redownload. And I kept a file of serial numbers and reg codes for the occasions where I might have to hard reset and rebuild from scratch.

I actually do the same thing, so I've never lost an app (though I've probably come close.) And actually, 3 stores is still a lot less than the many different avenues to buy Palm software. I personally managed fine, but I can tell you instantly what system would work better for say my wife.

You may be right, since the Kindle encourages vendor lock in, but Amazon has a broad enough product offering that there will be little need to look elsewhere.
______
Dennis

I think the Apple App Store is going for the same thing. But Amazon is much less restrictive since we're dealing with content rather than applications. I understand why many ebook users don't want the Kindle because of DRM compatibility issues. But in the overall scheme of things (trying to take a niche product mainstream) I think the path they chose really made the most sense.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by madmaxmedia

I agree 100% with your last point, especially since Apple doesn't seem to be very forthcoming about certain app rejections. On a big picture level I understand the idea of having an application approval process (depending on your target market), but the devil is in the details.

If I were developing for the platform, I'd want such ground rules clearly spelled out. The last thing I would want would be to invest significant time and effort in developing an application that could only be sold through one outlet, and then see it rejected by that outlet.

OTOH I think there are many happy App Store developers, the 70/30 cut seems pretty reasonable.

Yes, the cut is reasonable. And it's a hot market, so developers have good potential revenues if the develop a decent product.

I actually do the same thing, so I've never lost an app (though I've probably come close.) And actually, 3 stores is still a lot less than the many different avenues to buy Palm software. I personally managed fine, but I can tell you instantly what system would work better for say my wife.

And a lot of other people. It's a common problem with this sort of gadget.

I think the Apple App Store is going for the same thing. But Amazon is much less restrictive since we're dealing with content rather than applications. I understand why many ebook users don't want the Kindle because of DRM compatibility issues. But in the overall scheme of things (trying to take a niche product mainstream) I think the path they chose really made the most sense.

For Amazon, yes.

I made a post on MR a while back talking about the market and the likelihood Sony and Amazon would "stay the course".

From my perspective, for Sony, it was about the reader. They make and sell consumer electronics, and came up with a new consumer electronic device, which required them to come up with content to read on the device and an infrastructure to sell it.

For Amazon, I saw it being about the books. Amazon is a major retailer of paper volumes, and saw an opportunity to be the same for electronic works. They already had the content and the infrastructure to deliver it. They just needed a device to display it.

Sony wants to sell you readers, and doesn't care where you get the books. Amazon wants to sell you books, and does care.
______
Dennis