Entelligence: Got game?
By Michael Gartenberg 
posted Nov 15th 2009 7:01PM
posted Nov 15th 2009 7:01PM
Entelligence is a column by technology strategist and author Michael Gartenberg, a man whose desire for a delicious cup of coffee and a quality New York bagel is dwarfed only by his passion for tech. In these articles, he'll explore where our industry is and where it's going -- on both micro and macro levels -- with the unique wit and insight only he can provide.
There was a lot of buzz last week when Apple announced that there now more than 100,000 applications in iPhone App Store, and more than two billion apps downloaded. Those are impressive numbers. A former Palm executive recently told me that in the heyday of Palm OS, two thirds of users never installed a third party app and the average "power user" installed around ten. That averages out to about two apps per device -- a pretty low number compared to most iPhone users, even novice users.
But that's only part of the story. A few months ago, I discussed the viability of multiple mobile OS platforms and how it's not likely that they all will survive long term, and one big reason Apple's platform looks better and better is entertainment apps. Looking at my own device, once you get past the three core apps I use all the time (Mail, Tweetie, and Byline, a Google Reader app), the bulk of my hundred plus apps are all entertainment related -- and most of them aren't available on any other platform.
When you look at the out-of-the-box experience of most smartphones today, they're all pretty good when it comes to basics. Email, web browsing, personal information management, and voice are all acceptable. What's missing are the applications and experience that make up mobile entertainment. Media and content consumption are one core pillar. Games are another.
Media is important to mobility, and according to our research, the iPhone leads the competition by wide margin when it comes to consumers who purchase phones looking to listen to music and watch video. This makes sense, as the most popular media player on the market is the iPod and the iPhone is the only phone with the iPod experience built in. That means users can sync all their content seamlessly, and sync is important. I personally have no desire to troll through thousands of songs trying to re-create my playlists using drag and drop. Other platforms pale by comparison, with Android lagging behind most notably -- Google's OS has no native media sync support at all. Platform providers who aren't thinking of media and content sync are going to miss the
100,000 apps is impressive but it's not the number that matters -- it's the ability for consumers to use their devices for play as well as for work. |
Games are the second pillar of entertainment and Apple's been successful in making the iPhone / iPod Touch a real gaming platform. The iPhone now boasts the best collection of games for any mobile platform, and game developer after developer tells me that they're not even looking at most other platforms -- or they're porting one or two titles to dip their toe in the water. Part of it is platform capability -- the Blackberry simply can't deliver the same type of gaming experience as the iPhone -- but in other cases it's about market penetration or platform fragmentation. Several developers tell me they're avoiding Android because the platform is too fragmented to make the investment: there are different versions of the OS being sold, on hardware with different screen sizes and resolutions. Games are going to critical to any platform's success and the ability to sign up first rate developers and get exclusive content is going to be key to long-term survival.
100,000 apps is impressive but it's not the number that matters -- it's the depth and quality of those applications and the ability for consumers to use their devices for play as well as for work. If platform providers don't start focusing on high quality entertainment experiences soon, we may see some platforms fading even sooner than I might have thought.
Michael Gartenberg is vice president of strategy and analysis at Interpret, LLC. His weblog can be found at gartenblog.net, and he can be emailed at gartenberg AT gmail DOT com. Views expressed here are his own.
There was a lot of buzz last week when Apple announced that there now
*there are now
I feel like I just read a really long iPhone ad.
That's because he was right- no other company can do what apple can with regards to apps, and it's one of the top things that differentiates companies.
@RioRyan:
I don't see it as much an ad for the iPhone as it is an endorsement of Apple's approach to the smartphone market. When you remove the issues regarding the App Store review process (a whole other discussion), Apple has done a great many things right with the iPhone platform.
We're looking at a reprise of the 1980s, when the Apple Macintosh were at the forefront of the GUI revolution, only to get eclipsed by the dowdy IBM PC, with help from numerous IHVs and ISVs.
I'm shocked at this myopic Gartenberg piece, given his supposed full-time job as a pundit. People actually pay him money for this full-blinders-on treatment?
His premise: Media & games--content--are important for success in smartphones.
His arguments: iPhone is superior because,
a) only iPhone/iPod has seamless integration & syncing
b) diversity of existing iPhone apps & games
The main flaw in this argument is that it argues from a snapshot in time--i.e. Apple RIGHT NOW has better integration & more content. This ignores the dynamic change relative to time, something called MOMENTUM. It would make sense if time were to stop, and TODAY is the only thing that matters, not TOMORROW, or NEXT YEAR.
The rate of hardware vendors adopting Android, the fast pace of improvement with Android, and the enthusiasm of the tech community for Android toys are all indicative of Android's momentum. With swelling demand, improvement in the underlying OS, and enthusiast ISV support (supply), Android can only improve. And it will likely be at the expense of the iPhone/iPod. The linchpin will be the former's free licensing and open-source accessibility, vs Apple's heavy-handed "I have to approve all 3rd-party iPhone stuff" mentality.
I also don't agree with his premise, that entertainment is the make-or-break factor for smartphones. This shortchanges the potential of smartphones to be a handheld PC, augmented by external peripherals such as monitor & base station (accessed by RDP), to do real computing work. This is just the tip of the iceberg in the next PC form factor.
Credit where it is due, Apple popularized the GUI, and it popularized the smartphone for the consumer. That said, it's not so much different from the 80s and the original Macintosh.
"That means users can sync all their content seamlessly, and sync is important. I personally have no desire to troll through thousands of songs trying to re-create my playlists using drag and drop. Other platforms pale by comparison."
Bullshit. You can do this using Nokia Music for Nokia phones easily.
*sigh*,
Who here actually uses Rhapsody, or Sonos, or eBooks on their phone? Get real. Sure people download it, but do they use it? Hell. no.
Don't even get me started on games. It sucks. Bad.
Yes, Microsoft in Windows Mobile 7 is bringing Zune in to its media ability. I wish it were in 6.5, but it is not.
Seriously, you say 'Iphone takes the cake' when it comes to entertainment apps. Please, tell me something other than those 3 that I would never even think of using. Please?
Give some examples and it may inspire developers like me to create them for the Windows Phone Marketplace.
I forgot to mention the seamless media integration for Windows 7 and Windows Mobile.
@ d00b:
"I also don't agree with his premise, that entertainment is the make-or-break factor for smartphones. This shortchanges the potential of smartphones to be a handheld PC, augmented by external peripherals such as monitor & base station (accessed by RDP), to do real computing work. This is just the tip of the iceberg in the next PC form factor."
First, I'd argue that entertainment is a very, very important element in the smartphone ecosystem because it's very, very important in the PC ecosystem. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't use their own computer (not their employer's) to entertain in at least some capacity, and many Windows users cite Mac OS X's small selection of games as a reason they don't consider the platform.
Second, I don't think a device's ability to entertain affects its ability to be used productively as well. I have several productivity apps that I use daily or almost-daily on my iPhone (budgeting, maps, train schedules, Mail, nutrition management) in addition to those I use for entertainment. iPhone already offers developers the opportunity to integrate other devices (medical equipment, telescopes, GPS car kits), so there's definitely the opportunity to include the other peripherals you mentioned if the market shows a significant enough demand for them.
"The rate of hardware vendors adopting Android, the fast pace of improvement with Android, and the enthusiasm of the tech community for Android toys are all indicative of Android's momentum."
Only pace of development is likely to indicate anything concrete about momentum; I don't think hardware manufacturer adoption or tech community enthusiasm are necessarily indicative of anything. Many hardware manufacturers adopted Windows Mobile, and it has relatively little momentum. Also, the tech community generally looks for different things in devices than most consumers do, so the community's feelings may or may not translate into mainstream adoption. For example, most people probably aren't aware of the app approval issues on the App Store, and even those that are aware probably don't care all that much as long as they can find decent apps that do what they want.
"A few months ago, I discussed the viability of multiple mobile OS platforms and how it's not likely that they all will survive long term, and one big reason Apple's platform looks better and better is entertainment apps."
I'm sorry, but this is one of the least sophisticated analyses of technology that I've ever read. It's a foolish argument that states that the survival of phone OS's is completely tied to the availability of entertainment apps, and that then tries to establish this argument on the basis of a vague statement about "our research" and then follows it up with a personal litany about owning 100 apps.
People like entertainment. They will play games on any device they own, even more so if the games are free or cost 99 cents. But the most entertainment to be had is the internet, and every smartphone OS is working on making the internet more accessible on phones.
Furthermore, the fact that the author is too lazy to sort through his music collection, listens to individual songs more than whole albums, and thinks that drag-and-drop is somehow more cumbersome than iTunes bespeaks to his poor judgment and his pedestrian relationship with music. The further stipulation that it's easy to get video onto the iPhone is simply ridiculous.
The article would have been much shorter and more honest if the author had just written, "I love the iPhone! I love gadgets! I love entertainment! I own 100 apps! It rocks!"
>entertainment is a very, very important element in the smartphone ecosystem because it's very, very important in the PC ecosystem
The #1 reason why people want a smartphone is for web access anywhere. Web browsing is key. Music/movie consumption, while important, is secondary, if for nothing else than the smartphone's small screen and its limited battery life. Ditto for games; there are already dedicated game devices that are better suited for the task, and have much more content.
>iPhone already offers developers the opportunity to integrate other devices...if the market shows a significant enough demand for them.
Sure, IHVs can make accessories for the iPhone, but they can't change the iPhone. With Android, IHVs can make any device they want, without licensing fees, and without Apple's jackboot on their necks. That's the Android appeal, and that's why so many people see a big future for it. (While the same can be said for MS WinMo, the UI is crap, and you have to pay for the license.)
>Only pace of development is likely to indicate anything concrete about momentum; I don't think hardware manufacturer adoption or tech community enthusiasm are necessarily indicative of anything.
We'll see. Android still has its growing pains. Give it a year, and see if that Mac-vs-PC history isn't going to be relived.
@ d00b:
"The #1 reason why people want a smartphone is for web access anywhere. Web browsing is key. Music/movie consumption, while important, is secondary, if for nothing else than the smartphone's small screen and its limited battery life. Ditto for games; there are already dedicated game devices that are better suited for the task, and have much more content."
I agree that web is important (never said entertainment was more important), but the iPhone offers a good web experience. Most smartphone contenders actually do, so web access isn't much of a differentiating factor any more. Also, entertainment is also important because of the iPod touch, which people DO buy for entertainment. Developers who write for iPod touch also write for iPhone, offering a much larger consumer pool. If Apple can fix the review process mess (which I sincerely hope they can), it's an unbeatable combination.
"With Android, IHVs can make any device they want."
Sure they can, but do people want to carry multiple devices? I don't. Again, if Apple can fix the App Store approval process, I think accessories transform communications devices to life management devices.
"Android still has its growing pains. Give it a year, and see if that Mac-vs-PC history isn't going to be relived."
iPhone also has growing pains, particularly with the App Store; however, I don't think it will be over in a year.
@ d00b:
Talk about lazy analysis "reprise of 1980s ... blah blah"
You complain that the author is flawed because of a snapshot approach but you want replay the whole 1980's!!
One of the hallmarks of cognitive development is the ability to take different perspectives, you seem a little over identified with the Android fan boy perspective
ummm
Have you actually used an Android device lately?
how is that relevant? whether a person has or has not used it lately the fact remains the same, developers feel it is currently a fragmented os with several different versions. And that fact seems to deter some development. a developer need not use it recently to know that.
Is this about Apple? Pass.
Oh!
I'm sick of these weird abs scrolling across my page!
Oh! First! (that's for you Chris, sweetiefuk)
*ads
Are they nice rippling abs?
They gave you Risperidal for a reason.
I once saw six of them scroll across my screen at once, all in a pack
Michael makes some excellent points here that hadn't entirely considered before. Many criticize Apple for the performance of the iPhones core functionalities, but what seems to make it (currently) unsurpassable to its competitors is the apps and their streamlined functionality.
Surprisingly the majority of those buying the phone don't seem concerned about the app store approval process, the mail functionality or even the idiosyncrasies of the browser. Android has some wonderful offerings. However, until they can hold the consumers hand and offer them a streamlined, complete experience it will be impossible for them to reach the kind of market that the iPhone currently has (granted this may not be its ultimate goal, and that's great!).
LOL, your comment sucks plus you didn't get the first post. Hows that for a huge FAIL!
Why is is such a surprise that the company with the best OS for the old paradigm is so far ahead of everyone else with the best OS for the new paradigm? Add the best media ecosystem and you have an unstoppable force.
Spoken just like Steve.
the average joe doesn't know how to even install an app on a palm. Apple made the iphone easy to use...installing an app is just one of it. Even though the iphone is clearly not the most powerful phone like other winmo, it certainly is much more friendlier
much*
no need for the more
comparative rule
Every single smartphone platform has an app store type thing. They're all about equally friendly.
On Palm? Like on WebOS? It's pretty easy, you tap on the app in the catalogue and you tap install. Even the homebrew apps are pretty easy to install. If Joey Average is that stupid then humanity is pretty screwed.
I'm not saying that WebOS has apps that compete with the iPhone apps, but the installation process is pretty straightforward.
Yeah, thirdmoose... they all have one NOW. Now that they all saw how successful it was when Apple did it the way they did, and still several companies can't get it right because they don't have the infrastructure of iTunes and the (relative) consistency of the iPhone/Touch hardware. Check out the rocky road Nokia put themselves on with their store and how Palm didn't come to market with their WebOS store in order - not really "equally friendly" yet.
I have to disagree with you, I own both the Palm Pre (WebOS) and an iPod touch. Installing apps is far far easier on my Pre than the iPod. On the phone, the app catalog is an application itself, find what you want, then tap install, done! The iPod on the other hand needs plugging in to a mac/PC running iTunes, then try and navigate it to the app store, where I managed to buy apps for the iPod, not the touch, which apple will not reimburse me for, so I now have apps that I cannot use on my device. The first time I bought an app with the iPod not attached to the computer it took me quite a while to figure out how to move it across to the device.
Handandgo had one for WinMo, and I think Palm also, before the iPhone even existed. It just never saw widespread usage and wasn't designed well.
@thethirdmoose >> "Every single smartphone platform has an app store type thing. They're all about equally friendly."
What was the most popular Palm device in 2008? Centro? Treo 755p? How many people used them... for anything fun? Where did all those people buy these apps?
How many iPhones and iPod Touches were in people's hands in 2008 when the Apple App Store first opened? And where did they buy apps? iTunes.
The reason developers flocked to the iPhone platform is because they could create amazing apps for a touch screen device, using GPS, an excelerometer, etc. And it has a huge install base.
Yes... there have always been tons of apps for the Palm platform... but there's only so much you can do with a Treo keyboard and a 320x320 display. Even with the Palm Pre... there's still not much excitement for creating apps and games for it.
@ill trooper
Palm os had addit, which was an app catalog, long before the iphone was even announced. In addit you could download apps directly to your device, or you could just click on a button that would make it download the next time you sync it up with your computer.
@ David Austin:
You either don't have WiFi access for your iPod touch, or you aren't aware of the App Store application (which I find surprising since it's on the first page of apps). You can use the on-device app to download and install apps OR you can download through iTunes. Wherever you buy it, it syncs across both. I can't speak to the Pre experience, but based on your description, iPod touch and iPhone can do the same thing. I don't know if the Pre has any way of downloading on the computer.
@ David Austin
You managed to post a comment on Engadget, yet you have no idea how to navigate downloading apps directly from your iPod Touch? What's the disconnect?
David Austin has no idea what he is talking about. The iPod Touch/iPhone has an "App Store" icon that takes two clicks to find and automatically install (and update) applications. It couldn't be easier..
i was not talking about palm webOS. i was referring to the palm's pda days.
recently, i was using the HTC touch pro 2. the phone was sweet but installing apps on it wasnt as slick as on the palm pre nor apple iphone. i cant comment on android cause i havent used one yet.
It's true that Apple made it easy to install apps, and they did a good job working from the base of their pre-existing distribution mechanism in the iTunes Store. But they also have spent millions of dollars promoting apps through advertising -- in part because they make money through app sales. No other smartphone OS has seen the same level of advertising as the iPhone's.
I think other phones companies realize this by now; people like apps, despite how long they might use them.
Never used android, huh?
"100,000 apps is impressive but it's not the number that matters -- it's the ability for consumers to use their devices for play as well as for work."
THANK YOU. Do you see now? EVERY OS has fun, business, work, and play applications available to their customers. It's the quality that matters, not the quantity, and I wish more and more fanboys would realize this.
How many apps does the N900 have, like 20?
How the fuck should I know? Because of my username? Troll harder, Android fanboy.
man these android fanboys are slowly becoming just as douchy as those iPhone fanboys, huh?
You would think that you would know because your username is N900... I guess you don't do enough research with your cult of Nokia
@darbear
I almost imagine that they are apple fanboys pretending to be android fanboys because of how they are acting. I myself am a huge android fan.. but I just don't understand why people feel the need to troll.. if you like your phone good.. let other people like what they like.
Fanboys are all the same regardless of affiliation.
Actually, you would assume I would know because my name is N900. Assumptions does an ignorant person good I guess. Funny that you say I'm in a cult of Nokia when I'm not the one douching around with the name "AndroidRockz".
I said Troll HARDER, not stupider.
@ N900:
As a Mac and an iPhone user, I've always thought one of the biggest contradictions were Apple users who dismiss the idea that Windows is superior because it has more available software than OS X in one breath, then turn around and say the iPhone is better because it has more apps. They invalidate their own argument while simultaneously missing the point – quality over quantity – entirely.
N900: That Android fanboy might have had a pretty weak reply, but give me a break man, you gave yourself an online handle after a Nokia smart phone... It's completely viable to assume you know a fair amount of Nokia-related info. So... Yup.
And you really can't call him out on his name, on account of... Well, your name.
Is anyone else he really annoyed by this guys "a man whose desire for a delicious cup of coffee and a quality New York bagel is dwarfed only by his passion for tech" article intro?
It just seems really pretentious to me. I just can't stand his articles mostly because of the intro. Also he seems to blabber on about things and not really tell us anything.
how dare that pretentious asshole like coffee and bagels
no.
Hell, I love coffee and bagels. Its just something about the way its worded, it just bothers me. Its like he's one of those guys sitting in some high-end cafe typing on his laptop hoping someone will ask him what he's doing.
It adds to his urbanite hipster mystique.
So he's the Andy Rooney of Engadget?
(See the tail-end of any "60 minutes" broadcast for reference)
That's 100,000 applications to review, and review every time an update is pushed. What a waste of man-hours.
You're assuming any relevant percentage of iPhone apps are ever updates.
updated*
I quite agree with this post. But just to add on from a geek(not a fanboy)'s point of view. As good as other platforms may be (WebOS and Android, even WinMo pops into mind), there is something about being first to the game. Sure there may be plenty of useless apps in the App Store, but at the end of the day, people who are looking to spend some amount of money on a product are more likely not going to go for what is popular, what they know will work, and what has the most choices. Geeks like us are the ones who are more likely to go into the frontiers of lesser known and developing platforms and try them out, but that just doesn't cut it for a successful product
arrgh, my post came out all wrong insert "than" into "likely" and "not" so it reads right
I don't think that apple has a good long term business model. Their focus is and has always been immediate profit. Nearly all their business decisions make more enemies than friends. Simply put apple runs around being a dick to everybody. Sooner or later its going to come and bite them in the ass. This has happened over and over and over. Take Ford vs GM for example.
Business relationships matter. Apple didn't get this before and still doesn't and eventually they will end up in the same spot they were before stevo came back.
Yes I think people will go for what is popular but that is largely going to be the latest cool device of whatever platform, be that a Nokia (outside the US), one of the twenty quadrillion new Android phones, or an iPhone. I don't think most people pick phones based on available apps.. yet.
I can't see Android not being a really major platform (with major application support) in the next year or so. It's on so many devices that it is bound to start changing developer opinions. For the longest time it was just on G1 and then one or two other phones, yeah yeah, nothing that special, whatever. Now it's everywhere and people are going to buy those devices. Sure it's a fragmented platform, but just like developers manage to make apps for the ultra-fragmented Windows platform, I think they'll cope with Android.
Where I work, we're actually now developing a mobile app - initial target platforms are iPhone and Android. I'd expect that to be common in future, where previously people only targeted iPhone.
So in other words, no worries for Android, I think it'll get apps because it has phones and they are going to sell. Nokia is in more trouble IMO - they need to start getting Maemo out soonish (not just N900, entire smartphone range) before they miss the boat. If they want developers to support a third platform - we've had Objective-C (ugh), Java (yay), what do you have to use for Maemo? Sigh - then they're going to need a big market share and not 'uh we have 50% market share, but most of it's Symbian'.
Personally I don't have a smartphone at all and don't plan to get one until they start making nice ones with small screens in pocket-friendly size...
Who cares about the number of apps and how many are downloaded? Everyone knows that 99% of the apps suck.
I know right! I mean until the iphone can hack the planet (or heck, even a gibson!) OR it comes out in like a cool urban-camo color scheme. f**k it!
(disclaimer: this post is in no way serious)
It's more like 80%, and guess what? That's 20,000 apps that don't. Think about that.
yeah, that stupid "market", and people making their "own decisions" about what to buy/make. horrendous, isn't it?
Where are these 20,000 good apps that you reference? I see the same app recreated over and over and over again. How many different calculators does the average person need? One - maybe 2 if you have a specialized need. How many are there? I stopped counting once I reached a hundred. The app count numbers are total fluff.
Or take the instance of Lite and Standard apps. So many apps have at least 2 versions of the identical app. One to try and one to buy. They get counted as separate apps but they are not. Microsoft just rolled out Windows 7. You don't hear it described as they just rolled out 8 new OS's (all part of the Windows 7 family).
And don't get me started on gaming. I'm still waiting to download a game that keeps my interest for more than 5 minutes. It's great that there are so many games. It's a bummer that they are utter crap when compared to a PSP or DSi. There honestly isn't a single mulit-use platform yet that delivers a good multi-media experience and good gaming. At best, all you can say is that the Touch/iPhone offer the best PMP/Phone gaming experience but that isn't saying much. It is a far cry from being good.
@bjsguess It's not really about how many calculators YOU need, which is really what you were saying, it's about how many calculators PEOPLE need. Not everyone can get by with the same two calculators, and if every single person on the planet needed a different version of calculator, they'd probably be covered in the app store.
Steven,
I get that but the number is still bloated. Go to your app store and type in Mortgage Calculator. These calculators all do exactly the same thing. They just have slightly different skins. Yet there are tons of them.
The fact is that the App Store has a ton of waste and duplication. I'm all for allowing customers to have choice. That is a great thing. However, you could easily consolidate down the hundreds of calculators to either a single calculator app that does everything, or a basic calculator and about 10 specialized calculators.
And that's just one example. How many Twitter clients do I need? How many weather apps (especially since they all get their data from the same handful of sources)? The list goes on and on. The fact is that you could easily lop of 90,000 apps and 95% of the people would never know it.
I think you're overlooking Apple's overzealous control of what applications hit the app-store. Developers drive much of the innovation that comes to any platform, mobile or otherwise. Constrict their ability to deliver that creativity and you're only limiting the platform. I think you've clearly overestimated the benefits and ignored many of the shortfalls.
it is because of the approval process that developers strive to produce high-quality apps that we will never see any destroy the iPhone.
You should enjoy the soaring achievements of the most successful app store in history and get yourself an iPhone!
I have been thinking about this recently and have come to the conclusion that the problem is that iTunes is the EXCLUSIVE way applications are installed on the platforms. The resolution to this problem would be two levels of review from Apple: one that certifies that it will not impact the integrity of the phone and a second for availability on the iTunes Store. Apps not approved for iTunes could be downloaded and installed from the web. This solution removes the subjective content evaluation problem.
Your local grocery store chooses not to stock Juggs in its magazine section because it doesn't want the content associated with their brand; Apple's position on objectionable content would be no different if there were other ways to get apps onto the hardware. It would also speed up the review process because some apps would only need to go through the first part of the process (integrity/security check). It also allows developers whose apps are in limbo (this week's political cartoon app, for example) to get their app out there quickly while the content issues are addressed.
I appreciate Apple's desire to keep the platform stable and secure, but I don't need them to be my mommy.
whoever are the clowns that are trying to down-rank me, let me tell you something.
You can't! Don't you know who I am? I am HIGHEST RANKED!!
Maemo has been around for a long time, so it does have many useful apps
Have you read about android 2.0?
One of the issues it addresses is the different screen size problems. I believe from what I read that developers no longer have to do anything.
I'm not a huge techie but shouldn't you know about this if you're going to write about it?
However, I could have miss-understood. Can someone confirm?
Aint right andaint wrong.
Android 2.0 gives developers a way to make restrictions on display resolutions. This means you (developer) can deny to install your app if the phone has a screen resolution you can't manage.
Anyway, aplications can be designed to support many screen resolutions at the same time.
If you are going to ask microsoft " Microsoft, I'm talking to you -- just where is that Zune client for Windows Mobile?)" then you have to ask them to drop their own phone and keep it off other phones. If I could buy an HTC with a apple's OS, and their ipod player, then that would be grand. But I don't expect apple to give that to another manufacturer and lose a lot of the cheddar. I'm all for zune on the phones, but they'll destroy their own pmp if they do that.
I think Gartenberg's point is that WinMo phones (regardless of phone manufacturer) should use a Zune-based media player rather than the hideous Windows Media Player. (One could argue that 3rd-party apps are superior, but the out-of-the-box musical experience on WinMo is still a mess.) It's hard to believe sometimes that it was designed by the same company behind Zune's much more elegant interface.
WinMo and Zune are pretty much with one foot in the grave. 3rd party handset manufacturers have found their new goldenboy is Android.
OH MY GOD! Android fans, please shut the hell up! You're about 1 step away from Apple fans right now.
Every article posted about a phone, or anything really, has this amazingly helpful comment below it now:
"PUT ANDROID ON IT LOLZ!2!@23! THEN I'D BUY IT!!! EVEN THOUGH I ALREADY HAVE AN ANDROID PHONE!!!! I'D BUY ANOTHER PHONE WITHOUT EVER ACTIVATING IT AND USING IT IF IT HAD ANDROID ON IT!!!"
fire Michael Gartenberg... don't let him write articles anymore... he and engadget write about apple everytime they blow a fart, im getting sick of it
...or you could read elsewhere.
Michael shouldn't even have a job. He's a blowhard...
Yeah but apple's farts kick up ice on the moon.
Apple's attitude to the app store is ambivalent. On the one hand they let it rip with a zillion apps that any decent quality control would have weeded out from the start. Then they rather arbitrarily exclude others- maybe for legal or "conflict of interest" reasons. My guess is that they underestimated at the start just how successful it would be and simply got their knickers in a twist. Personally I don't much care for games but there are least six essential apps on my iPhone and probably the same number which I need to have from time to time. For me, it's the easy access to the store and the way the apps are presented that keeps me loyal.
"The iPhone is the only phone with the iPod experience built in"
I'd like to introduce you to the Motorola ROKR. I think you'll be impressed.
The Motorola ROKR had iTunes built in, not iPod. Look it up.
Did you just reference the ROKR? Haha.
[grammarnazi]
let's/lets...pet peeve; sorry
[/grammarnazi]
Yes, the iphone does all this entertainment, but it still is NOT a good phone. Compared to my e71 Nokia which IS a good phone and has great reception and rarely (as in almost never) drops calls. I guess I must be weird cause that's important to me.
RIM surpasses Apple by far in terms of sales. I find Blackberrys much more interesting than Iphones. Everyone I know who isn't a total geek or s snob doesn't like the Iphone and think it's too big etc. Some even find it ugly...
This article might as well have been written by Phil Schiller himself. Seriously, I find it that hard to swallow.
@ PowerTorsk
"RIM surpasses Apple by far in terms of sales."
Take a look a this link, compare 2008 with 2009 for both RIM and Apple and then think again.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/11/apple-grabs-17-of-smartphone-market-in-latest-quarter.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
"Everyone I know who isn't a total geek or s snob doesn't like the Iphone..."
The consumer and business markets most likely disagree with you.
"I find it that hard to swallow."
No comment.
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/0,39029453,49303754,00.htm?s_cid=96
Wow... these iPhone/iPod Touch Apps articles really do bring all the bitter tears from all the iPhone haters/iClone lovers huh? Love it. Keep them coming Engadget! =D
The iPhone is as successful as it is because of the App Store. It's the one thing that other phones can't emulate out of the box. You can create a phone with better features, but you can't instantly create something like the App Store. I mean, you can create an App Store, but you can't populate it with the quantity/quality of apps right away. You need developers to do that, and that can take some time.
Apple has created a barrier to entry with the App Store.
So how do you figure the original iPhone did so well when there was no app store? The iPhone is so successful because of the tie into the iPod. Not because it has a lot of apps. The iPhone has a lot of apps BECAUSE it was already so successful. The success of the device guaranteed money making potential for developers.
The real genius of the iPhone was tying it to the iPod which was already huge. Sell it as an iPod + Phone and all you need in one device. Leverage your already huge iPod market and bring in a lot of customers who had no idea what a smartphone was at the time. That's why the iPhone is so big and your average joe thinks all smartphones are imitations of iPhones. You can't replicate that kind of pre-existing market and hype without your own iPod. That is why I don't think we will ever see any new device move iPhone like numbers.
friends, what you are describing is called "product differentiation"
Apple has gone on record saying their greatest product differentiator is their software, Apple software.
OS X running on the iPhone along with core apps: Safari mobile, iPod, Mail, Address Book and the tight integration of OS X that binds them together.
Maybe consumers no longer want any variety in design and hardware form factors. Maybe what they really want is a hardware platform that is stable and less changing to attract more developers to provide greater software options.
Despite the high amount of crappiness in the App Store, it is a success. I don't think that Android can beat it due to the high amount of iPhones/iPod Touches and Apple's total control over the ecosystem, but Google can definitely make some improvements to the App Market.
For one thing, we need way more screenshots in the Market. Second, WTF am I seeing app prices in pounds and euros when I live in the U.S.? The Market can't automatically convert that to English on the main page rather than waiting until I get to the screen to buy? Coming from an iPhone that was a little offsetting. For a little while I thought that I couldn't buy those apps. And third, Google really needs to step up and make an iTunes-esque music playback/syncing program/App Market browser program. DoubleTwist and things like it are ok, but they all feel a little janky and I think Google has the resources to make a good syncing program, and since they make Android they could make sure it is compatible with all phones. I think that would really be the catalyst to improving the Android experience when it comes to making a good competitor to Apple's app environment.