or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Facebook advertisers see 1,790% higher returns on iOS than Android
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Facebook advertisers see 1,790% higher returns on iOS than Android - Page 3

post #81 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

No it means that Android users are less susceptible to click/purchase advertising than ios users.
I read a few different reports on this news and a few stats were given by Facebook Advertising team.
1. Men window shop/women buy (A far larger proportion of users who click/through/purchased via FB ads were women)
2. By far the larger proportion were in the older age category
3. By far the larger portion of purchases were for Apps

Do we deduce from this then that Android users are mostly young males who prefer free ad supported app versions, while ios users are made up of old women who like to pay for apps with no ads?

Lots of Androiders just want a cheap phones. I bet they are susceptible to phishing attacks and clicking on "win a free prize" ads when on the internet.
post #82 of 123
Android devices are feature phones, not smart phones. They're sold to feature phone buyers who just want phone.

Anyone who gives a damn, buys an iPhone.
post #83 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

Android devices are feature phones, not smart phones. They're sold to feature phone buyers who just want phone.

Anyone who gives a damn, buys an iPhone.

Facebook themselves would refute that... There are as many FB users on android as on IOS.

 

>>>

 

About 20.1 percent of Facebook users connect to the service on an Android device compared to 18.9 percent of users who connect with an iOS device, according to data from Optimal, Inc.

CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer last week that Facebook had more users on Android than iOS. We asked social media advertising and analytics platform provider Optimal for the details.

Optimal’s data shows about 189.8 million users active on Android devices — accessing Facebook through the native app or the mobile web. About 178.3 million are active on iOS. That’s among 944.2 million monthly active users addressable with the Facebook Ads API, not the full billionannounced last week.

post #84 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Post 38 mentions poor android users in india/china.
Indian fb users are about 5% of population.
China is at 0.05% of population.
USA is about 50%

Heh heh. Not surprised you guys have no clue how to connect dots given basic information.

 

The fact that 0.05% of China has FB, and yet Android dominates there tells you everything you need to know about the data presented in this article.

 

Tell me when/if the lightbulb goes off. I'll wait.....

post #85 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Heh heh. Not surprised you guys have no clue how to connect dots given basic information.

 

The fact that 0.05% of China has FB, and yet Android dominates there tells you everything you need to know about the data presented in this article.

 

Tell me when/if the lightbulb goes off. I'll wait.....

It doesn't mean s***, FB is blocked in China.

post #86 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post
 

It doesn't mean s***, FB is blocked in China.

Quite the opposite: it means s***, precisely because Facebook is blocked in China and lots of Android phones are sold there.

 

I didn't expect you to get it.

post #87 of 123
Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Quote

The fact that 0.05% of China has FB, and yet Android dominates there tells you everything you need to know about the data presented in this article.

/EndQote

 

Quite the opposite: it means s***, precisely because Facebook is blocked in China and lots of Android phones are sold there.

I didn't expect you to get it.

 

You are making absolutely no sense. The article is specifically about FB click through revenue and android vs ios. FB is blocked in China so the 0.05% FB usage in China has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the article.

If you are making some lame attempt to say that 99.95% of android phones in china are feature phones, then that is just nonsense.

 

If you have some obtuse point to make you should state it explicitly because what you have posted up to now sounds like jibberish.

post #88 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

 

If you have some obtuse point to make you should state it explicitly because what you have posted up to now sounds like jibberish.

Sure, I'll do you a favor -- this time -- by spelling it out, since you (and your type) seem to be incapable of following a thread of arguments.

 

Some fandroid (whose name I cannot recall, but look the first page of the thread, if interested) asked this here:

"Someone actually clicks on stupid Facebook ads? iOS users click on them like they've got the antidote or something. That's what needs to get answered: Why the F are they clicking on stupid Facebook ads in the first place?"

 

Let's keep things simple and consider some representative numbers. Assume the US and China are the only countries where FB is available, and that 75% of, say, 200M US smartphone users are on FB (i.e., 175M), while only 1% of, say, 200M Chinese smartphone users are (i.e., 2M). Assume that US share of iOS:Android is 60:40, and that in China 20:80.

 

Total number of iOS devices globally: 120 + 40 =160

Total number of Android devices globally: 80 + 160 = 240

Global share of iOS:Android -- 160 : 240 (i.e., Android has a larger global share, as often reported).

 

Total number of FB users on iOS devices globally: 105 + 0.4 = 105.4

Total number of FB users Android devices globally: 60 + 1.6 = 61.6

Global share on FB iOS:FB Android -- 105.4 : 61.6

 

Even if iOS and Android users clicked on ads at the same rate -- and leaving aside click-throughs for purchases, where cheapskate Androiders perhaps just window-shop -- where do you think most of FB clicks will come from?

 

Now, extrapolate similar data to the rest of the world.... and you can get to the answer you would give the fandroid who made the original post that I responded to.

post #89 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Sure, I'll do you a favor -- this time -- by spelling it out, since you (and your type) seem to be incapable of following a thread of arguments.

 

Some fandroid (whose name I cannot recall, but look the first page of the thread, if interested) asked this here:

"Someone actually clicks on stupid Facebook ads? iOS users click on them like they've got the antidote or something. That's what needs to get answered: Why the F are they clicking on stupid Facebook ads in the first place?"

 

Let's keep things simple and consider some representative numbers. Assume the US and China are the only countries where FB is available, and that 75% of, say, 200M US smartphone users are on FB (i.e., 175M), while only 1% of, say, 200M Chinese smartphone users are (i.e., 2M). Assume that US share of iOS:Android is 60:40, and that in China 20:80.

 

Total number of iOS devices globally: 120 + 40 =160

Total number of Android devices globally: 80 + 160 = 240

Global share of iOS:Android -- 160 : 240 (i.e., Android has a larger global share, as often reported).

 

Total number of FB users on iOS devices globally: 105 + 0.4 = 105.4

Total number of FB users Android devices globally: 60 + 1.6 = 61.6

Global share on FB iOS:FB Android -- 105.4 : 61.6

 

Even if iOS and Android users clicked on ads at the same rate -- and leaving aside click-throughs for purchases, where cheapskate Androiders perhaps just window-shop -- where do you think most of FB clicks will come from?

 

Now, extrapolate similar data to the rest of the world.... and you can get to the answer you would give the fandroid who made the original post that I responded to.


That "fandroid" (don't know where that came from) was me. You did way too much work to still not answer the question while showing just enough snide comments to show that you think Apple success = your success (somehow) and Android success = your failure (somehow). 

 

The question needs to be asked because:

 

1) Facebook sucks greatly (iOS, Android, PC, and Mac).

2) Embedded ads suck worse than Facebook.

3) Only the intellectually disabled, traumatic brain injury sufferers, and/or lead paint eaters click on ads anywhere on purpose. Doubly so on a phone or tablet.

4) This report would have us believe that there are a zillion iOS users willingly clicking the crap out of stupid Facebook ads despite 1, 2, and 3.

 

Do you know anyone that clicks on ads? Do you know anyone that clicks on Facebook ads in particular?

post #90 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post


That "fandroid" (don't know where that came from) was me. You did way too much work to still not answer the question .....

Yep, I did. Not for you -- since, as the rest of your post confirms, you are rather clueless -- but for that other guy.

 

I have no issues with anyone's success of failure. You apparently do, with Facebook's success. 

post #91 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

Yep, I did. Not for you -- since, as the rest of your post confirms, you are rather clueless -- but for that other guy.

 

I have no issues with anyone's success of failure. You apparently do, with Facebook's success. 

 

The sum total of your connect the dots argument was that more IOS users click ads on FB, well hello, that was clearly stated in the article.

 

What the hell is your point?

 

FYI:

USA FB ios=44% android=39%

 

China doesn't even register.

 

Globally 190M FB users on Android, 178M on IOS.


Edited by patpatpat - 10/17/13 at 7:15pm
post #92 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

 
Yep, I did. Not for you -- since, as the rest of your post confirms, you are rather clueless -- but for that other guy.

I have no issues with anyone's success of failure. You apparently do, with Facebook's success. 

The sum total of your connect the dots argument was that more IOS users click ads on FB, well hello, that was clearly stated in the article.

What the hell is your point?

FYI:
USA FB ios=44% android=39%

China doesn't even register.

Globally 190M FB users on Android, 178M on IOS.

Oh boy.

Whatever.
post #93 of 123
Android has 2 primary types of customers:
1) Just cheap. Period. Doesnt pay for anything, and is not much of a consumer. Their main criteria is price. This can be due to low personal finance or just plain frugalness. Doesnt matter.

2) Hacker-ish Pirates. This is the person with the mentality that open source is king no matter what. All software and content has to be and should be free. I fiddle with my gadget and the only good gadgets are ones I can mess with, customize, alter, add/change my own ____, regardless of whether I ever need to or not. The mentality here is rooted in individualism, and entitlement: "Software should be free and open, along with content" is indeed an entitlement.
post #94 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrittoreSabino View Post

Android has 2 primary types of customers:
1) Just cheap. Period. Doesnt pay for anything, and is not much of a consumer. Their main criteria is price. This can be due to low personal finance or just plain frugalness. Doesnt matter.

2) Hacker-ish Pirates. This is the person with the mentality that open source is king no matter what. All software and content has to be and should be free. I fiddle with my gadget and the only good gadgets are ones I can mess with, customize, alter, add/change my own ____, regardless of whether I ever need to or not. The mentality here is rooted in individualism, and entitlement: "Software should be free and open, along with content" is indeed an entitlement.

 

 Type 2 also includes a significant number of people who for various (often spurious) reasons, will never buy Apple.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #95 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrittoreSabino View Post

Android has 2 primary types of customers:

 

Do iOS customers next!

post #96 of 123

Anecdote time:

 

I work in an office tower, where one of the tenants is a certain Android-heavy nationwide cell provider.  Specifically, their call center takes up 2-1/2 floors of this facility.  And because it's a call center, we're talking cheap labor.

 

All of them (they must wear visible badges) carry Androids of one sort or another, because they can get them at a discount.  (And I've been told, they're not allowed a corporate discount for iPhones.)  Now bear with me here:

 

Over the last six years, I've ridden elevators with these folk, as well as more typical office tower denizens.  All the call-center types EVER do with their big honkin' Android phones on the elevators, is TALK on them.  (And this, despite building signs pointing out the rudeness of talking on your phone while riding an elevator... but don't get me started.)

 

On the other hand, iPhone tenants check their email, browse the web... DATA stuff.  And quietly.

 

This study surprises me not.

post #97 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrittoreSabino View Post

Android has 2 primary types of customers:
1) Just cheap. Period. Doesnt pay for anything, and is not much of a consumer. Their main criteria is price. This can be due to low personal finance or just plain frugalness. Doesnt matter.

2) Hacker-ish Pirates. This is the person with the mentality that open source is king no matter what. All software and content has to be and should be free. I fiddle with my gadget and the only good gadgets are ones I can mess with, customize, alter, add/change my own ____, regardless of whether I ever need to or not. The mentality here is rooted in individualism, and entitlement: "Software should be free and open, along with content" is indeed an entitlement.

Given that the most popular android smartphone is the samsung s3/s4 series which were $500+ phones at launch , your first point doesn't make a lot of sense.
You can get a 4s for free now, a 5c for $50, Apple phones are as cheap as androids.

Secondly given that less than 1% of Android users root their phone, your second point is equally off.

People choose android for a variety of reasons, very few of which have anything to do with either of your points.
Edited by patpatpat - 10/17/13 at 10:40pm
post #98 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Oh boy.

Whatever.

Night night, don't stay up late now clicking through all those fb ads.
Maybe you will have a clearer head in the morning, but somehow I seriously doubt it. :-D
post #99 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScrittoreSabino View Post

Android has 2 primary types of customers:
1) Just cheap. Period. Doesnt pay for anything, and is not much of a consumer. Their main criteria is price. This can be due to low personal finance or just plain frugalness. Doesnt matter.

2) Hacker-ish Pirates. This is the person with the mentality that open source is king no matter what. All software and content has to be and should be free. I fiddle with my gadget and the only good gadgets are ones I can mess with, customize, alter, add/change my own ____, regardless of whether I ever need to or not. The mentality here is rooted in individualism, and entitlement: "Software should be free and open, along with content" is indeed an entitlement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Given that the most popular android smartphone is the samsung s3/s4 series which were $500+ phones at launch , your first point doesn't make a lot of sense.

I'll jump in here.

True... the Galaxy S3/S4 are the bestselling single models of Android phones. However... they only make up a small part of the total number of Android phones around the world.

There were 177 million Android phones sold last quarter. How many were Galaxy S3/S4?

And... how many were "cheap" Android phones?

Android is now where Symbian was all those years ago... the default phone. If someone walks into a store to buy "a phone" they are now walking out with an Android phone.

And many (most?) are cheap, er, inexpensive phones.

I disagree with the way ScrittoreSabino explained it... but there is some truth to it.

There is a HUGE percentage of Android users who just walked into a store... and the phone they bought just happened to be running Android. And they probably bought that phone based on price... see below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

You can get a 4s for free now, a 5c for $50, Apple phones are as cheap as androids.

That's true in the US. But in most parts of the world there are no subsidies. An iPhone or Galaxy S4 may cost $600 to buy outright.

If someone only has $150 or less to spend on a smartphone... their only option is an Android phone. And that story plays out in many parts of the world.

We spend so much time talking about a few expensive flagship phones... but it's the budget phones that make up most of the world's sales.
post #100 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Given that the most popular android smartphone is the samsung s3/s4 series which were $500+ phones at launch , your first point doesn't make a lot of sense.
You can get a 4s for free now, a 5c for $50, Apple phones are as cheap as androids.

Secondly given that less than 1% of Android users root their phone, your second point is equally off.

People choose android for a variety of reasons, very few of which have anything to do with either of your points.

Are you comparing on contract with off contract prices? Nuts.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #101 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post
 


Yes, because Nike couldn't figure out how to support their super complex (it's not), feature heavy (it isn't), computationally crippling (nope), Bluetooth software other than by throwing monkeys with typewriters at it. Why would they need to constantly update the app that ties into their expensive shoe and band product because some poor people outside of their target markets with what amounts to a pile of burner phones have an old version of Android? That's stupid. 

mind giving me a copy of that super easy to code software in Java??

They need to constantly update it because they can only reach a small portion of android users by coding for like 1 version or 1 screen size.

I mean, that is if they really wanted to give out the app to android users.....

The ones who spend almost 0 money on apps and peripherals.

post #102 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post
 

mind giving me a copy of that super easy to code software in Java??

They need to constantly update it because they can only reach a small portion of android users by coding for like 1 version or 1 screen size.

I mean, that is if they really wanted to give out the app to android users.....

 

Only Apple devs code for specific resolutions and screen sizes. Any Android dev that coded for versions and specific screen sizes instead of API levels and the basic densities/resolutions is an idiot with an app that probably sucks since they can't follow directions well or read for comprehension. They only need to reach a small portion of Android owners. The ones that spent real money (read: more than or equal to what it would cost to get the good iPhone) and can't use Nike's product by Nike's choice! Assuming that most Android owners have cheap burner dumbphones, they should only target Samsung flagships, HTC flagships, and maybe throw Google a bone with Nexus support. That would cover almost the entirety of the Android phone buyers that spent iPhone class money or more to even get a phone. If you wouldn't spend money to buy a phone, you probably wouldn't spend money to buy expensive shoes. Makes sense. Not that much work to support what? 10 phones (even if you did it individually like a dumb-ass) compared to stupidly trying to support every specific free phone of 3 or more years ago. Must be a non-stupid reason they wouldn't do it.

 

Quote:
 The ones who spend almost 0 money on apps and peripherals.

 

When the free app meets your needs well enough, why buy a different one? The underlying OS differences drive the purchasing. If iOS gets the ability to share to and default to use whatever app you want at an OS level, app purchases will drop way off on iOS, too (IMO). Probably why it will never happen. Apple loves that you app chase. You wouldn't need 4 different twitter clients or 3 different note taking apps if you just had one that did everything you wanted (and on Android it would probably be free or $.99). When manufacturers make quality peripherals  that people can actually buy, for the Android phones that people spent iPhone money on, they get purchased. When lifeProof finally got around to making their S3 and S4 cases available after 2 years of people bugging them, they immediately sold out and continue to sell out. How many messages did Mophie get about making cases for flagship Android phones?   

post #103 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


Are you comparing on contract with off contract prices? Nuts.

Vast majority of US is on contract. Walk into any carrier and you will get a 4S or 5c for the same price as any android phone.

post #104 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

Vast majority of US is on contract. Walk into any carrier and you will get a 4S or 5c for the same price as any android phone.

Which is irrelevant to my rebuttal of your point.

Are you comparing off contract Android prices to on contract iPhone prices.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #105 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post



I'll jump in here.

True... the Galaxy S3/S4 are the bestselling single models of Android phones. However... they only make up a small part of the total number of Android phones around the world.
 

I'll jump in and say that if you believe Samsung's report from earlier this year, over a 100M Galaxy S phones have been sold which is 10% of all Android activations, if you believe Google.

You go to any mobile store and you see that the Android phones are all high end phones (there's usually one cheapo model in there), but in the US the majority of people who walk out of these stores could have as easily walked out with  either an iPhone or an Android for the SAME price.

post #106 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post

I'll jump in and say that if you believe Samsung's report from earlier this year, over a 100M Galaxy S phones have been sold which is 10% of all Android activations, if you believe Google.
You go to any mobile store and you see that the Android phones are all high end phones (there's usually one cheapo model in there), but in the US the majority of people who walk out of these stores could have as easily walked out with  either an iPhone or an Android for the SAME price.

You honest believe all Androids are high end? Is that why only Sammy is marking money on Android?
post #107 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


You honest believe all Androids are high end? Is that why only Sammy is marking money on Android?

Dude. The phones on display in carrier stores are almost entirely this year's high-end or last year's high-end, whether iOS or Android.

 

Of those that are Android phones, Samsung sells the most, has the best deals with carriers, and the highest priced phones so they make all the Android money. 

post #108 of 123
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post
You go to any mobile store and you see that the Android phones are all high end phones

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #109 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post
 

Only Apple devs code for specific resolutions and screen sizes. Any Android dev that coded for versions and specific screen sizes instead of API levels and the basic densities/resolutions is an idiot with an app that probably sucks since they can't follow directions well or read for comprehension. They only need to reach a small portion of Android owners. The ones that spent real money (read: more than or equal to what it would cost to get the good iPhone) and can't use Nike's product by Nike's choice! Assuming that most Android owners have cheap burner dumbphones, they should only target Samsung flagships, HTC flagships, and maybe throw Google a bone with Nexus support. That would cover almost the entirety of the Android phone buyers that spent iPhone class money or more to even get a phone. If you wouldn't spend money to buy a phone, you probably wouldn't spend money to buy expensive shoes. Makes sense. Not that much work to support what? 10 phones (even if you did it individually like a dumb-ass) compared to stupidly trying to support every specific free phone of 3 or more years ago. Must be a non-stupid reason they wouldn't do it.

 

 

When the free app meets your needs well enough, why buy a different one? The underlying OS differences drive the purchasing. If iOS gets the ability to share to and default to use whatever app you want at an OS level, app purchases will drop way off on iOS, too (IMO). Probably why it will never happen. Apple loves that you app chase. You wouldn't need 4 different twitter clients or 3 different note taking apps if you just had one that did everything you wanted (and on Android it would probably be free or $.99). When manufacturers make quality peripherals  that people can actually buy, for the Android phones that people spent iPhone money on, they get purchased. When lifeProof finally got around to making their S3 and S4 cases available after 2 years of people bugging them, they immediately sold out and continue to sell out. How many messages did Mophie get about making cases for flagship Android phones?   

How do you do that??

anyway

"Only Apple devs code for specific resolutions and screen sizes. Any Android dev that coded for versions and specific screen sizes instead of API levels and the basic densities/resolutions is an idiot with an app that probably sucks since they can't follow directions well or read for comprehension. They only need to reach a small portion of Android owners. The ones that spent real money (read: more than or equal to what it would cost to get the good iPhone) and can't use Nike's product by Nike's choice! Assuming that most Android owners have cheap burner dumbphones, they should only target Samsung flagships, HTC flagships, and maybe throw Google a bone with Nexus support. That would cover almost the entirety of the Android phone buyers that spent iPhone class money or more to even get a phone. If you wouldn't spend money to buy a phone, you probably wouldn't spend money to buy expensive shoes. Makes sense. Not that much work to support what? 10 phones (even if you did it individually like a dumb-ass) compared to stupidly trying to support every specific free phone of 3 or more years ago. Must be a non-stupid reason they wouldn't do it."

I am a dev and I would know better than your imagination.

android devs have to code for all the different screen sizes and versions to reach a small portion of android users.

you don't code like

"support for s4"

"support for note3"

you have to specify the different screen sizes and version you are going to support.

covering only high end smart phones will leave out most of android market."

"When the free app meets your needs well enough, why buy a different one? The underlying OS differences drive the purchasing. If iOS gets the ability to share to and default to use whatever app you want at an OS level, app purchases will drop way off on iOS, too (IMO). Probably why it will never happen. Apple loves that you app chase. You wouldn't need 4 different twitter clients or 3 different note taking apps if you just had one that did everything you wanted (and on Android it would probably be free or $.99). When manufacturers make quality peripherals  that people can actually buy, for the Android phones that people spent iPhone money on, they get purchased. When lifeProof finally got around to making their S3 and S4 cases available after 2 years of people bugging them, they immediately sold out and continue to sell out. How many messages did Mophie get about making cases for flagship Android phones?  "

Do you have a free app that can replace nikes app?

The point is android users don't pay for peripherals.

so releasing it for android wouldn't make sense anyway.

post #110 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post

Only Apple devs code for specific resolutions and screen sizes. Any Android dev that coded for versions and specific screen sizes instead of API levels and the basic densities/resolutions is an idiot with an app that probably sucks since they can't follow directions well or read for comprehension. They only need to reach a small portion of Android owners. The ones that spent real money (read: more than or equal to what it would cost to get the good iPhone) and can't use Nike's product by Nike's choice! Assuming that most Android owners have cheap burner dumbphones, they should only target Samsung flagships, HTC flagships, and maybe throw Google a bone with Nexus support. That would cover almost the entirety of the Android phone buyers that spent iPhone class money or more to even get a phone. If you wouldn't spend money to buy a phone, you probably wouldn't spend money to buy expensive shoes. Makes sense. Not that much work to support what? 10 phones (even if you did it individually like a dumb-ass) compared to stupidly trying to support every specific free phone of 3 or more years ago. Must be a non-stupid reason they wouldn't do it.


When the free app meets your needs well enough, why buy a different one? The underlying OS differences drive the purchasing. If iOS gets the ability to share to and default to use whatever app you want at an OS level, app purchases will drop way off on iOS, too (IMO). Probably why it will never happen. Apple loves that you app chase. You wouldn't need 4 different twitter clients or 3 different note taking apps if you just had one that did everything you wanted (and on Android it would probably be free or $.99). When manufacturers make quality peripherals  that people can actually buy, for the Android phones that people spent iPhone money on, they get purchased. When lifeProof finally got around to making their S3 and S4 cases available after 2 years of people bugging them, they immediately sold out and continue to sell out. How many messages did Mophie get about making cases for flagship Android phones?  
 

You seem to envision an app development world where devs work for free before they eventually die of starvation. Or will they make money from ads? This report suggests not.

In short what's hard to understand about the Android market, to me at least, is why it exists.

You also imply that apps exist on iOS because they are not available as part of the OS. This would explain only a tiny fraction of apps ( ie flashlight apps in iOS 6). The vast majority of titles are not like that, most money is made in games. Hardly an OS feature.

In future I think Android apps will be produced by service providers, banks, municipalities as services for their users and citizens - like websites now. iOS will have that, commercial apps, and ad driven apps.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #111 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by patpatpat View Post
 

I'll jump in and say that if you believe Samsung's report from earlier this year, over a 100M Galaxy S phones have been sold which is 10% of all Android activations, if you believe Google.

You go to any mobile store and you see that the Android phones are all high end phones (there's usually one cheapo model in there), but in the US the majority of people who walk out of these stores could have as easily walked out with  either an iPhone or an Android for the SAME price.

 

don't make me laugh.

they probably said 100 million samsung phones.

post #112 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post
 

How do you do that??

anyway

"[SNIP]

I am a dev and I would know better than your imagination.

android devs have to code for all the different screen sizes and versions to reach a small portion of android users.

you don't code like

"support for s4"

"support for note3"

you have to specify the different screen sizes and version you are going to support.

covering only high end smart phones will leave out most of android market."

 

 

What? The Android developer guide only says not to code for specific screen resolutions, screen dimensions, and Android versions in upwards of 500 to 600 places. The briefest of Google searches could have told you that. Who cares if you leave out most of the Android market? Nike doesn't care about the poor people of the world, Nike wants relatively wealthy market segments that buy things. People that buy expensive flagship Android phones tend to buy other relatively expensive things, too. Why not throw them a bone and support the only phones that people spend real money on? If they bite, keep it rolling.

 

Quote:

 Do you have a free app that can replace nikes app?

The point is android users don't pay for peripherals.

so releasing it for android wouldn't make sense anyway.

Where did that come from? Why would there be a free app alternative that interfaces with Nike's stuff? Android users as a whole, cheap garbage burners + flagships, don't buy many things compared to the iPhone group. Android users that spent top dollar on flagships do if it is available. Just because they are using android doesn't invalidate their spending $200+ dollars on a phone. Just like row after row of ugly junk iPhone cases and garbage peripherals sit on shelves unpurchased, despite the quality of the iPhone itself. Junk doesn't sell. Quality sells. But only if it is available to buy. If you put out junk, don't be surprised when it doesn't sell. You can't say, "What, I half-assed some poorly made garbage for Android phones! Those cheapskates didn't buy it! I'll stick with Apple, because that market isn't crowded or anything." 

post #113 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


You seem to envision an app development world where devs work for free before they eventually die of starvation. Or will they make money from ads? This report suggests not.

In short what's hard to understand about the Android market, to me at least, is why it exists.

You also imply that apps exist on iOS because they are not available as part of the OS. This would explain only a tiny fraction of apps ( ie flashlight apps in iOS 6). The vast majority of titles are not like that, most money is made in games. Hardly an OS feature.

In future I think Android apps will be produced by service providers, banks, municipalities as services for their users and citizens - like websites now. iOS will have that, commercial apps, and ad driven apps.

Google shot themselves in the foot by pushing free apps to the detriment of everything else in an attempt to bolster their usage for ads, and their personal footprint. They are basically like the online newspaper industry if it was run by advertisers. It's too late to try and push $5 apps now or try to have a successful newspaper online behind a paywall. The genie is out of the bottle. Google shouldn't have pushed the going rate towards free, so now only clearly superior efforts even warrant a consideration for purchase.

 

I implied that if Apple made it so that you could set default apps and everyone knew it, prices would begin trending downwards. Right now, on iOS, using a particular app is a continued conscious effort. I want to do this, so I go to the app that currently does it.  This leads to chasing potential better alternatives. If I have to go out for lunch every day, I might stop at a different place to give it a try (download a different app), so advertising and quality are main draws (if I wanted free, I wouldn't be going out). With Android, you've picked a place (or you get the building default) and that's where you get lunch delivered from. Until you make a conscious effort to stop the default and look for something better. The alternative needs to be cheaper and/or (more likely this since the first choice was probably free) demonstrably better, and presented to you. Much harder to happen. 

 

 iOS apps just need something a little different. A twist or hook to get buyers to give them a try. Android apps (other than popular games) need to be so good their superiority is undeniable, but still cheap since the prior "good enough" alternative was probably free from Google. Not many are willing to put in that amount of dedication. Unless you have a captive market, like Nike. It makes no sense for them to not offer an Android version since they have sole control over the interface for their wares, no one can offer an alternative.

post #114 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post
 

When the free app meets your needs well enough, why buy a different one? The underlying OS differences drive the purchasing. If iOS gets the ability to share to and default to use whatever app you want at an OS level, app purchases will drop way off on iOS, too (IMO). Probably why it will never happen. Apple loves that you app chase. You wouldn't need 4 different twitter clients or 3 different note taking apps if you just had one that did everything you wanted (and on Android it would probably be free or $.99). 

Why would the ability to set default apps make someone no longer need 3 different note taking apps? The reason for someone to have more than one note taking app is that no one app meets all of that person's requirements. 


Edited by d4NjvRzf - 10/19/13 at 7:09pm
post #115 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post
 

Where did that come from? Why would there be a free app alternative that interfaces with Nike's stuff? Android users as a whole, cheap garbage burners + flagships, don't buy many things compared to the iPhone group. Android users that spent top dollar on flagships do if it is available. Just because they are using android doesn't invalidate their spending $200+ dollars on a phone. Just like row after row of ugly junk iPhone cases and garbage peripherals sit on shelves unpurchased, despite the quality of the iPhone itself. Junk doesn't sell. Quality sells. But only if it is available to buy. If you put out junk, don't be surprised when it doesn't sell. You can't say, "What, I half-assed some poorly made garbage for Android phones! Those cheapskates didn't buy it! I'll stick with Apple, because that market isn't crowded or anything." 

by coding for only high end phones, you are coding for well under 10% of android market.

10% of 80% is 0.08%.

They might as well code for 20% of the market with much less problems.

post #116 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post

by coding for only high end phones, you are coding for well under 10% of android market.
Would you mind sharing your source(s) for that figure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post

10% of 80% is 0.08%
Actually, 10% of 80% is 8%.
post #117 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post


Would you mind sharing your source(s) for that figure?
Actually, 10% of 80% is 8%.

my bad.

I don't think it takes sherlock holmes to find out that if there are thousands of whitebox droids and low end crap droids in the market, the top 3 doesn't come close to sales of the next say, 1997 phones/tablets.

and the android market share isn't 80%.

it's 80% only in smart phones.

post #118 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by bananaman View Post

my bad.
I don't think it takes sherlock holmes to find out that if there are thousands of whitebox droids and low end crap droids in the market, the top 3 doesn't come close to sales of the next say, 1997 phones/tablets.
and the android market share isn't 80%.
it's 80% only in smart phones.
If backing up your figures is so "elementary" please do so instead of throwing out more questionable figures without backing them up.
post #119 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post


If backing up your figures is so "elementary" please do so instead of throwing out more questionable figures without backing them up.

Ok.

let us agree on some facts.

The number of low end phones in android are a lot more than the high end phone.

by a lot I mean a whole lot like 1000s

given the number that I don't have, I think it is safe to assume that sales of about 10 high end phones is not much compared to the rest.

post #120 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealCBONE View Post

Google shot themselves in the foot by pushing free apps to the detriment of everything else in an attempt to bolster their usage for ads, and their personal footprint. They are basically like the online newspaper industry if it was run by advertisers. It's too late to try and push $5 apps now or try to have a successful newspaper online behind a paywall. The genie is out of the bottle. Google shouldn't have pushed the going rate towards free, so now only clearly superior efforts even warrant a consideration for purchase.

Studies show that 90% of the apps iOS users have on their iPhones are free. Must be contagious.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Facebook advertisers see 1,790% higher returns on iOS than Android