Briefly: Android sales vs. App Store, Intel notebook cooling

[AppleInsider]

Despite their would-be rivalry, Android and iPhone owners have much in common with third-party app downloads even if one is more popular than the other, according to a new study. Also, Intel has taken the wraps off a notebook cooling technology that would make systems safer for laps.

Android Market, App Store share similar bias, habits

The first 24 hours of the T-Mobile G1's availability, and hence the Android Market it uses as its chief portal for third-party apps, have revealed a surprising similarities with the iPhone and App Store that they're meant to compete against, according to ad firm Medialets.

Although just 62 apps were made available for Android phones over the course of Wednesday and Thursday -- less than a tenth of the roughly 1,000 apps for iPhones on July 11th -- the distribution of app types has closely followed that of Apple's service, with games both being the most common software for Android and the largest single category of apps with more than 10,000 downloads.

G1 owners also share the tendency to favor multimedia, lifestyle, travel and productivity apps.

The exact popularity of each store is difficult to determine, however. As Apple put a temporary embargo on download numbers just 15 hours into the App Store's rollout and before most launch day iPhone 3G buyers had a chance to load their devices, first-day statistics can't be compared directly.







Even so, Medialets observes that there were nine successful Android apps that resulted in 10,000 to 50,000 downloads and that a rough minimum of 206,000 total downloads and maximum 770,000 downloads took place on Android Market's first day of operation -- rendering it very unlikely that the store will have the same volume as the App Store, which netted 10 million downloads on the first three days after the iPhone 3G launch.

Intel tech promises to avoid scorching notebook shells

In a bid to reduce the outer temperature of laptops -- which are commonly renamed as notebooks to avoid lawsuits over burn injuries -- Intel at its Developer Forum on Thursday revealed a new cooling technique.

The Core processor maker says it has found a way to imitate the laminar airflow technology of a jet engine underneath a notebook to literally push the hot air emanating from the inside of a notebook out and away from the bottom and thus prevent it from scorching the user as the metal or plastic warms up over time.

Intel uses laminar jet technology to cool a notebook's skin | Photos: Intel, CNet.

Unlike some of the technologies frequently shown at the Developer Forum, Intel expects its approach to be used in shipping products: it plans to license its invention to computer builders that want to produce thin notebooks while still using fast processors.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[g3pro]

Even so, Medialets observes that there were nine successful Android apps that resulted in 10,000 to 50,000 downloads and that a rough minimum of 206,000 total downloads and maximum 770,000 downloads took place on Android Market's first day of operation -- rendering it very unlikely that the store will have the same volume as the App Store, which netted 10 million downloads on the first three days after the iPhone 3G launch.

What is the time differential from release of a product and store between Apple and Android? Didn't the App Store from Apple get released close to a year after the original product hit stores?

[kresh]

Originally Posted by g3pro

What is the time differential from release of a product and store between Apple and Android? Didn't the App Store from Apple get released close to a year after the original product hit stores?

Wouldn't it be more relevant to compare the release times of the SDK's to the opening of the stores? Both Apple and Google released the SDK prior to opening their app stores. If Apple had released the SDK 6 months prior to their store vs Google releasing their SDK just weeks before their store (which didn't happen), then I think there could be something to it.

What does it matter when the device was delivered if the developing environment was released prior?

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by kresh

Wouldn't it be more relevant to compare the release times of the SDK's to the opening of the stores? Both Apple and Google released the SDK prior to opening their app stores. If Apple had released the SDK 6 months prior to their store vs Google releasing their SDK just weeks before their store (which didn't happen), then I think there could be something to it.

What does it matter when the device was delivered if the developing environment was released prior?

Google released Android SDK on 11/07. Apple released iPhone SDK beta on 3/08. So, the Android programmers had way more time to work on the apps.

[kresh]

Originally Posted by johnqh

Google released Android SDK on 11/07. Apple released iPhone SDK beta on 3/08. So, the Android programmers had way more time to work on the apps.

yeah, that's what I was getting at. I knew that the Google SDK was released prior to the iPhone SDK I just could not remember the dates.

[johnqh]

I also think the # downloads for the most popular apps is also a good indication of the G1 sales. Most G1 buyers are geeks, buying it specifically for the Android OS and would try the download store immediately. With so few choices, some of the apps are non-brainer (like weather channel). I wouldn't be surprised if 50% of all G1 owners have the Weather app on their phone right now.

So, I would say the Android sales is no more than 100K, probably much less since we don't know what the exact numbers are.

[SpamSandwich]

Who or what the hell is/are Medialets, and why are they slapping their logo on everything?

[THT]

I don't think you can even compare the two, especially as measures of success. The App Store and iPhone developers had 5-6 million users to sell to. All eagerly awaiting since demand was pent up for a year. The G1 has basically a 50k userbase, probably less, for developers to sell to. Not only that, all Android apps in the App Market have to be free until the end of the year. That's basically zero incentive for developers to release apps right now. The only reason there are apps are because of venture funding and because some have the Android religion that the userbase will grow huge.

The Android OS has a ways to go yet. Maybe another year we will know when there are more Android phones out. Right now, it's even less polished than iPhone OS X 1.0 was, so, any comparison with iPhone today won't be very useful. It will only show the iPhone exploded onto the scene. Android doesn't have to do that. A slow growth is also fine too. But Google better be prepared to spend some cash to make it big.

[3goldens]

cooling technology? It's about dam time, all these brainiacs running around and they finally figure this sh*t out, totally amazing!

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by THT

I don't think you can even compare the two, especially as measures of success. The App Store and iPhone developers had 5-6 million users to sell to. All eagerly awaiting since demand was pent up for a year. The G1 has basically a 50k userbase, probably less, for developers to sell to. Not only that, all Android apps in the App Market have to be free until the end of the year. That's basically zero incentive for developers to release apps right now. The only reason there are apps are because of venture funding and because some have the Android religion that the userbase will grow huge.

The Android OS has a ways to go yet. Maybe another year we will know when there are more Android phones out. Right now, it's even less polished than iPhone OS X 1.0 was, so, any comparison with iPhone today won't be very useful. It will only show the iPhone exploded onto the scene. Android doesn't have to do that. A slow growth is also fine too. But Google better be prepared to spend some cash to make it big.

I am a developer and I can tell you why iPhone gets so many apps.

First, it is easy to move C and C++ over. A lot of those games have logic in C, and it is basically a simply re-compile the core logic, then spend the rest of the time on UI. Read the X-Plane story and you will know what I mean. On this, iPhone and Windows Mobile are much easier to develop than Blackberry and Android.

Second, simple line-up, one screen size, the difference between iPhone and iTouch are minor and easy to keep track of. Windows Mobile is a big mess here - something like 6 or 7 common screen resolution, each carrier has their own OS configuration for each model. Android will be no different.

It is expensive and sometimes impossible for the developers to get all the different models of Android and WM phones. iPhone developer, on the other hand, gets one device and that's it.

This is how "open" platform fails. It is much more work to deal with openness.

[PXT]

Isn't the CEO of Google on the Apple board?

Isn't that a bit strange now that they are competing in the same business?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by johnqh

Second, simple line-up, one screen size, the difference between iPhone and iTouch are minor and easy to keep track of. Windows Mobile is a big mess here - something like 6 or 7 common screen resolution, each carrier has their own OS configuration for each model. Android will be no different.

You make valid points, but it make I wonder how Apple will tackle the next major iPhone change. When the iPhone was first introduced at MWSF in 2007 it had a dpi that was higher than the competition, but within the the last year they other OEMs have upped their came and are now offering much higher resolution, often on smaller displays. I was surprised that Apple didn't up their resolution on the 3G iPhone, thought it doesn't make sense as it makes in-house and 3rd-party development far easier to deal with. NAd frankly, the current dpi, while no longer state-of-the art, is still very adequate.

I winder if the next major revision to the iPhone next summer will increase the display resolution dramatically and possibly add an OLED display which will help battery life as a higher dpi will redice, while offering more benefit to the consumer in every way, except in price. This seems to be the trend. But how will Apple tackle the need for a higher dpi: a framework that will auto-scale the the App automatically or will apps need to be rewritten for each new version to take advantage of the new resolution?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by PXT

Isn't the CEO of Google on the Apple board?

Isn't that a bit strange now that they are competing in the same business?

In a basic sense, they are competing in the same business, but Android is an Open mobile OS meant for any and all HW platforms, while the iPhone and mobile OS X is meant for a completely different type of clientele. I've read that when they do talk about the iPhone he excuses himself from the meetings. But remember that Apple has many other aspects to it's business, with many of those working in conjunction with Google's efforts. As of right now, the Google and Apple are both both going for the same goal, but from different starting points so there is very little conflict of interest... at least at this point.

[THT]

Originally Posted by PXT

Isn't the CEO of Google on the Apple board?

Isn't that a bit strange now that they are competing in the same business?

Supposedly, Eric Schmidt does not attend iPhone related meetings, or he walks out of room during iPhone related portions of meetings.

[THT]

Originally Posted by johnqh

I am a developer and I can tell you why iPhone gets so many apps.

There are many technical reasons why developing on the iPhone is easier than for Android, but technical reasons can be overcome. Economic ones unfortunately cannot. If money isn't transferred from consumer's hands to developer's pockets, there's really no point in developing an app for the platform.

The AppStore and iPhone has millions of users to sell to. Moreover, it seems the users are willing to spend money for apps, as opposed to WM users or S60 users or Blackberry users. That to me is always the trump card. The G1 basically has none of this. It's users maybe even more frugal than iPhone users just be the demographics.

First, it is easy to move C and C++ over. A lot of those games have logic in C, and it is basically a simply re-compile the core logic, then spend the rest of the time on UI. Read the X-Plane story and you will know what I mean. On this, iPhone and Windows Mobile are much easier to develop than Blackberry and Android.

Second, simple line-up, one screen size, the difference between iPhone and iTouch are minor and easy to keep track of. Windows Mobile is a big mess here - something like 6 or 7 common screen resolution, each carrier has their own OS configuration for each model. Android will be no different.

It is expensive and sometimes impossible for the developers to get all the different models of Android and WM phones. iPhone developer, on the other hand, gets one device and that's it.

This is how "open" platform fails. It is much more work to deal with openness.

I largely agree with you the developing for iPhone is easier than for other platforms. Android app development won't be a walk in the park for developers as they have to develop in Google's Java clone language and APIs. And with the undoubted variety in handset designs, it will run into the same problems developers see with WM and S60 and RIM.

[THT]

Originally Posted by solipsism

You make valid points, but it make I wonder how Apple will tackle the next major iPhone change. When the iPhone was first introduced at MWSF in 2007 it had a dpi that was higher than the competition, but within the the last year they other OEMs have upped their came and are now offering much higher resolution, often on smaller displays. I was surprised that Apple didn't up their resolution on the 3G iPhone, thought it doesn't make sense as it makes in-house and 3rd-party development far easier to deal with. NAd frankly, the current dpi, while no longer state-of-the art, is still very adequate.

I winder if the next major revision to the iPhone next summer will increase the display resolution dramatically and possibly add an OLED display which will help battery life as a higher dpi will redice, while offering more benefit to the consumer in every way, except in price. This seems to be the trend. But how will Apple tackle the need for a higher dpi: a framework that will auto-scale the the App automatically or will apps need to be rewritten for each new version to take advantage of the new resolution?

I think Apple we continue to have a 480x320 version of the iPhone for the foreseeable future (+3 years?), but they will have a high end iPhone at 720x480. Coming maybe next year.

When that happens, Apple will expect all developers to scale up the UIs of their apps. It will be very very easy for developers to do. Some apps won't have to do anything either. It's the magic of model-view-controller programming and Interface Builder.

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by THT

I think Apple we continue to have a 480x320 version of the iPhone for the foreseeable future (+3 years?), but they will have a high end iPhone at 720x480. Coming maybe next year.

When that happens, Apple will expect all developers to scale up the UIs of their apps. It will be very very easy for developers to do. Some apps won't have to do anything either. It's the magic of model-view-controller programming and Interface Builder.

I don't think the resolution will change for a while.

What people don't realize is that battery life is a huge concern for Apple. Since I am a developer, I discovered this during my development/testing.

For example, why doesn't Apple allow background process? Security is one issue...however, if the background process keeps on checking some server status over internet (isn't that the intention?), your iphone will be out of battery less than one hour. You will get the same result with any phone (Window Mobile...). It is more obvious on iPhone because people actually use iPhone to run apps.

I truely believe that the lack of video recording is for the same reason.

You can verify that yourself by making a self-refreshing webpage, and use Safari to browse it. Leave it there and watch the juice going down.

Larger screen requires more power to drive, not just the screen, but the processor to draw on the screen. 480x320 is a happy compromise. A full VGA screen will double the CPU usage, and thus cut the battery life in half.

Once you see what I saw with the battery life, suddenly a lot of Apple's decisions make sense.

[THT]

Originally Posted by johnqh

Larger screen requires more power to drive, not just the screen, but the processor to draw on the screen. 480x320 is a happy compromise. A full VGA screen will double the CPU usage, and thus cut the battery life in half.

Once you see what I saw with the battery life, suddenly a lot of Apple's decisions make sense.

Battery energy densities advance with time, albeit slowly. Transistor densities doubles every 2 years, or get more power efficient every two years, along with every process node advance. The addition of more capabilities at basically no power cost is due to these advances. In other words, driving those increased number of pixels and larger screen will be possible because they will be just as power efficient as the current iPhone screen and CPU/GPU.

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by THT

Battery energy densities advance with time, albeit slowly. Transistor densities doubles every 2 years, or get more power efficient every two years, along with every process node advance. The addition of more capabilities at basically no power cost is due to these advances. In other words, driving those increased number of pixels and larger screen will be possible because they will be just as power efficient as the current iPhone screen and CPU/GPU.

Unfortunately, that's not the case with mobile processors. Maybe that's why Apple bought PA.

400mhz processors has been available for years, yet even today, a lost of the WM phones still ship with 200mhz ones. iPhone's processor is 620mhz, but I believe Apple runs it at 400mhz. That will give you an indication how concerned manufacturers are about battery.

Apple is doing its best to optimize the phone with both software and hardware, and try to get the most out of the battery. However, I expect the current platform to last 3 to 4 years before we see any significant changes.

[THT]

Originally Posted by johnqh

Unfortunately, that's not the case with mobile processors. Maybe that's why Apple bought PA.

Nope. It's exactly the case.

400mhz processors has been available for years, yet even today, a lost of the WM phones still ship with 200mhz ones. iPhone's processor is 620mhz, but I believe Apple runs it at 400mhz. That will give you an indication how concerned manufacturers are about battery.

Apple is doing its best to optimize the phone with both software and hardware, and try to get the most out of the battery. However, I expect the current platform to last 3 to 4 years before we see any significant changes.

When Apple went from the iPhone (1st gen) to the iPhone 3G (2nd gen), they transitioned from a very mature EDGE baseband hardware to a 2nd gen HSDPA baseband hardware, and reduced the battery from 1400 mAh to 1150 mAh. They've added capability (HSDPA tech) and reduced the battery size for the iPhone 3G!

The 1st gen HSDPA baseband hardware consumed a lot of power, resulting in a 3 hr talk times for basically all 3G handsets. It's only with 2nd gen hardware that you're seeing 5 hr talk times. The difference is that the newer hardware is built on more advanced manufacturing nodes.

I think you're wrong on the CPU MHz front. Most of the WM hardware today are moving to 400 to 600 MHz ARM processors. Prior generations used 200 to 400 MHz. This again is due to more advanced semiconductor fabrication. Also not mentioned is the increased number of transistors accompanying those MHz increases too.

[johnqh]

Originally Posted by THT

Nope. It's exactly the case.

When Apple went from the iPhone (1st gen) to the iPhone 3G (2nd gen), they transitioned from a very mature EDGE baseband hardware to a 2nd gen HSDPA baseband hardware, and reduced the battery from 1400 mAh to 1150 mAh. They've added capability (HSDPA tech) and reduced the battery size for the iPhone 3G!
.

First, Apple didn't do both...There were reports that even with every new features turned of on iPhone 3G(bluetooth wifi 3g etc.), it still gets less life on daily usage.

So, most likely, some networking related chipsets (bluetooth, wifi, and 3g/edge) got more efficient, but the phone (CPU, graphics and OS) did not.

[THT]

Originally Posted by johnqh

First, Apple didn't do both...There were reports that even with every new features turned of on iPhone 3G(bluetooth wifi 3g etc.), it still gets less life on daily usage.

What do you mean? It's kind of hard to deny that they didn't add new HSDPA/EDGE baseband hardware and reduced the battery size.

Remember the quote for EDGE is 10 hours of talk time. That's almost 50% more talk time on EDGE using a smaller battery versus the iPhone 1st gen phone. That's quite definitive to me that the new baseband hardware is using a more advanced CMOS process than the 1st gen hardware.

So, most likely, some networking related chipsets (bluetooth, wifi, and 3g/edge) got more efficient, but the phone (CPU, graphics and OS) did not.

Sure, a lot of parts didn't change, importantly, the CPU and GPU, but many of the other components are relatively small parts of the power picture. Some of those parts did change. The biggest change was iPhone OS X 2.0. It was kind of buggy and unoptimized, but Apple is slowly taking care of that.