Huh? Considering most Android devices are more than $100 cheaper than a comparable iOS device, that doesn't induce stickiness at all! Add to the fact that most comparable apps are then free on Android, and it does things than iOS never will (flash, widgets, etc) and you have an even more compelling argument to actually make the switch!
Remarkable density of misinformation per word, there.
While I would agree that 'apps' are generally sticky, I would disagree with including music in that category. I don't have an android device but I would assume they are able to play AAC files.
Also, I would imagine that many apps that are purchased are no longer used (I know that is the case for me) so that the actual amount of money that each user would need to spend to get the main apps that he/she uses on a regular basis will be smaller than the user's total history of expenditures on apps.
They're going to start calling you a fandroid and a troll if you start using logic. Especially considering that the chart indicates that about $45 of that $100 is actually music. Going by the weird logic that music creates "stickiness" with a brand implies that I must have about $1400 worth of stickiness with my Pre 2 (since there's over 1400 songs on it right now). But although WebOS has the potential to be a great mobile OS, my next phone won't be running it.
I don't consider 'stickiness' a reason for sticking onto particular brands. Their offering however do followed by usefulness and longevity. Cost is similarly irrelevant. So, if Apple is to suddenly change their principal and philosophy in the way they make their hardware and OS then I would jump ship providing there are truly better alternatives and not just because.
Horace Dediu has a good post on this topic here. I don't think he uses the term "sticky" but it's what he's talking about.
He makes the argument that customer loyalty is a function of "good enough" (where the costs of changing brands are not outweighed by any appreciable gains in user experience) and that the smart phone market probably isn't "good enough" yet on any platform to lock in users:
Quote:
So with this hypothesis in mind, it makes sense to analyze whether Android or iOS, the current presumed champions, are “good enough” on the basis of how often users switch out of them. My bet is that neither is good enough and that there will be increasing churn between platforms. I imagine that Android is less sticky (and hence less than good enough) based on app consumption but there is little evidence of churn because most phones in use have been bought less than one device generation ago. More importantly, there have been few opportunities yet for switching as many Android buyers don’t even have the choice of other platforms either due to where they live or how much income they have available.
To really tell where we stand, we would need to collect stats on switchers to know just how satisfactory the platforms may be. Remember that a choice of a new deodorant on the same shelf at nearly the same price is the test for loyalty. For an adequacy test we need to see better distribution and more choices for consumers. It’s still very early even in the US for any conclusions to be drawn about the adequacy of Android.
Huh? Considering most Android devices are more than $100 cheaper than a comparable iOS device, that doesn't induce stickiness at all! Add to the fact that most comparable apps are then free on Android, and it does things than iOS never will (flash, widgets, etc) and you have an even more compelling argument to actually make the switch!
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
Developers might make migration easier. Give apps on both platforms (iOS and Droid) the ability to acquire a one-time redeemable code, sent by email, to get the same app on the other platform for free. That should also work with Mac OS X apps. Developers could build into a non-app-store update the ability to get a code a user could redeem for a free app-store version. The app itself would keep the code from being redeemed more than once.
Of course, the app store on each platform would have to support that redemption. But a strong incentive to do so would be there. If Apple refuses to support the idea, then it'd be easier to move from iOS to Droid than vice versa. Apple and Google would both have reason to subsidize the move to get more market share.
Why is app portability a right? Or even a need? It is certainly not a given on PCs, where portability is far more important.
I find myself looking at new Android phones and wonder what it would be like to use one. Then I remember that such musings are pointless as I own so much iTunes media and apps that I am locked into the Appleverse for life.
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
Google Navigation and software programs like it kill developer opportunities and decrease "stickiness" and reliance on purchased software.
An example, I bought GPS software for $15 over a year ago it works on my iPad and iPhone, it has red and speed camera warnings along with speed limits, including school zones with variable limits, it was developed locally, with local voices AND it links into Google search for POI's if required.
My iPhone does what I need, I don't need Google's offering.
Google Navigation and software programs like it kill developer opportunities and decrease "stickiness" and reliance on purchased software.
An example, I bought GPS software for $15 over a year ago it works on my iPad and iPhone, it has red and speed camera warnings along with speed limits, including school zones with variable limits, it was developed locally, with local voices AND it links into Google search for POI's if required.
My iPhone does what I need, I don't need Google's offering.
So by your logic the new mobile Safari Reader mode decreases iOS's stickiness, since it replaces Instapaper, and "kills developer opportunities?"
You've obviously never used the Google Maps app on Android, which is superb, and free, and is a very good reason to stick with the Android platform.
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
Why is app portability a right? Or even a need? It is certainly not a given on PCs, where portability is far more important.
I agree with Inkling - app portability is certainly there on PCs - I can move from a Lenovo to an HP with no issue. And most apps support cross-grades from MacOS --> Windows and vice versa, in cases where the same app exists on each platform.
And most popular apps are available on both iOS and Android, making this even more of an obvious step.
Suddenly, a wild observation appears! Why has no one commented that the purple line is kind of flatlining towards the end of the graph? Yes iOS is still "sticky" but the purple line indicates people are plateauing on their spending per unit. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm happy to accept that - if you can tell me why. What is misinformation in my post? Let's look at the points one-by-one shall we?
Price. An HTC Desire S costs $293 less than the cheapest iPhone 4. A Samsung Galaxy SII costs $187 less.
Apps. Fact: Android has more free apps.
Is this the breadth of fresh air or what? Finally somebody admitted what we've known all along: Android is a cheaper platform (generally speaking). Where are all the denialists?
I paid $50 for the Tom Tom app alone. It seems also that $4.99 is the new $0.99 as I paid $4.99 each for the Weber Grill and Cyclemeter 5.0 apps.
To think that at least a quarter of the iPhones out there are jailbroken and running pirated apps, so the amount spent on apps by legit iPhone owners could be $150+.
I am an avid iOS user, but my iPhone is jail broken (it's a 2g on T-mobile) and I don't have a single "pirated app", I jail broke so I could avoid AT&T and still have GSM for international travel. I have quite a few paid Cydia Apps installed to add functionality such as lock screen notifications (a $9.99 app). I think the general US public is under educated about how jail breaking works and what value it adds (for users like me and developers alike). My iPad2 is bone stock, after Apple enabled mirroring for certain apps (my iPad1 was jail broken for a while, for that reason), but I think there is still functionality it lacks. I am excited for iOS 5, and I hope the next iPhone will also support T-mobile 3G/4G, otherwise I will continue with used older models and jail break.
Your (judgemental) assumption brings up a good question though: Was the Cydia App store accounted for when calculating the dollar volume? I am guessing not, which means that the financial commitment to iOS may be even higher.
Although I don't necessarily like the idea of being locked into a platform, if Apple continues how they have been going, I don't see the problem with it. I am very happy being "locked into" the Apple ecosystem at the moment. \ Everything just works... More than I can say for my previous Android experience. There, I felt the need to jump ship. And that wasn't very sticky, let me tell you.
Comments
Huh? Considering most Android devices are more than $100 cheaper than a comparable iOS device, that doesn't induce stickiness at all! Add to the fact that most comparable apps are then free on Android, and it does things than iOS never will (flash, widgets, etc) and you have an even more compelling argument to actually make the switch!
Remarkable density of misinformation per word, there.
While I would agree that 'apps' are generally sticky, I would disagree with including music in that category. I don't have an android device but I would assume they are able to play AAC files.
Also, I would imagine that many apps that are purchased are no longer used (I know that is the case for me) so that the actual amount of money that each user would need to spend to get the main apps that he/she uses on a regular basis will be smaller than the user's total history of expenditures on apps.
They're going to start calling you a fandroid and a troll if you start using logic. Especially considering that the chart indicates that about $45 of that $100 is actually music. Going by the weird logic that music creates "stickiness" with a brand implies that I must have about $1400 worth of stickiness with my Pre 2 (since there's over 1400 songs on it right now). But although WebOS has the potential to be a great mobile OS, my next phone won't be running it.
He makes the argument that customer loyalty is a function of "good enough" (where the costs of changing brands are not outweighed by any appreciable gains in user experience) and that the smart phone market probably isn't "good enough" yet on any platform to lock in users:
So with this hypothesis in mind, it makes sense to analyze whether Android or iOS, the current presumed champions, are “good enough” on the basis of how often users switch out of them. My bet is that neither is good enough and that there will be increasing churn between platforms. I imagine that Android is less sticky (and hence less than good enough) based on app consumption but there is little evidence of churn because most phones in use have been bought less than one device generation ago. More importantly, there have been few opportunities yet for switching as many Android buyers don’t even have the choice of other platforms either due to where they live or how much income they have available.
To really tell where we stand, we would need to collect stats on switchers to know just how satisfactory the platforms may be. Remember that a choice of a new deodorant on the same shelf at nearly the same price is the test for loyalty. For an adequacy test we need to see better distribution and more choices for consumers. It’s still very early even in the US for any conclusions to be drawn about the adequacy of Android.
so many stoopid posts all at once .
>>>>>
back on topic
>>>>>>>
if you buy apps 3 or 5 yrs ago and buy a ios device
bamn all those old apps down load into your devices and your mac
So what apple has done is and what the cloud will cement IS Apple really takes care of us . they made tons of great apps super cheap
they have made a policy of no more discs any more so if you buy a new computer all you apps like Aperture or Pages simply download,S right in .
SO apple will make it so cheap and easy and safe to buy software from them .
APPLE will make a ton of money off this .
rock on
9
Huh? Considering most Android devices are more than $100 cheaper than a comparable iOS device, that doesn't induce stickiness at all! Add to the fact that most comparable apps are then free on Android, and it does things than iOS never will (flash, widgets, etc) and you have an even more compelling argument to actually make the switch!
Does your Android device have this?
I'm quite enjoying the iOS App on my iPhone or iPad, plenty of entertaining live music provided by Apple.
That's entertainment, that's ecosystem, that's stickyness.
Does your Android device have this?
I'm quite enjoying the iOS App on my iPhone or iPad, plenty of entertaining live music provided by Apple.
That's entertainment, that's ecosystem, that's stickyness.
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
Developers might make migration easier. Give apps on both platforms (iOS and Droid) the ability to acquire a one-time redeemable code, sent by email, to get the same app on the other platform for free. That should also work with Mac OS X apps. Developers could build into a non-app-store update the ability to get a code a user could redeem for a free app-store version. The app itself would keep the code from being redeemed more than once.
Of course, the app store on each platform would have to support that redemption. But a strong incentive to do so would be there. If Apple refuses to support the idea, then it'd be easier to move from iOS to Droid than vice versa. Apple and Google would both have reason to subsidize the move to get more market share.
Why is app portability a right? Or even a need? It is certainly not a given on PCs, where portability is far more important.
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
Google Navigation and software programs like it kill developer opportunities and decrease "stickiness" and reliance on purchased software.
An example, I bought GPS software for $15 over a year ago it works on my iPad and iPhone, it has red and speed camera warnings along with speed limits, including school zones with variable limits, it was developed locally, with local voices AND it links into Google search for POI's if required.
My iPhone does what I need, I don't need Google's offering.
With the Zune brand rumored to come back as a subscription service, I don't think MS will get its act anytime soon.
Come back? It never left.
Clearly you have never used it. As we wait for iCloud, you can stream today on 3G using Zune and the Mango update.
Maybe I don't understand what you were trying to say.
Google Navigation and software programs like it kill developer opportunities and decrease "stickiness" and reliance on purchased software.
An example, I bought GPS software for $15 over a year ago it works on my iPad and iPhone, it has red and speed camera warnings along with speed limits, including school zones with variable limits, it was developed locally, with local voices AND it links into Google search for POI's if required.
My iPhone does what I need, I don't need Google's offering.
So by your logic the new mobile Safari Reader mode decreases iOS's stickiness, since it replaces Instapaper, and "kills developer opportunities?"
You've obviously never used the Google Maps app on Android, which is superb, and free, and is a very good reason to stick with the Android platform.
Yes it is. At the same time Google Navigation adds it's own degree of stickiness to Android. Each platform has a few apps that users might find hard to replace if they decide to try out the competition.
http://xkcd.com/461/
Remarkable density of misinformation per word, there.
I'm happy to accept that - if you can tell me why. What is misinformation in my post? Let's look at the points one-by-one shall we?
Price. An HTC Desire S costs $293 less than the cheapest iPhone 4. A Samsung Galaxy SII costs $187 less.
Apps. Fact: Android has more free apps.
Flash. iOS does not do Flash.
Widgets. iOS doesn't have widgets.
Where then, exactly, is this "remarkable density of mis-information"?
Why is app portability a right? Or even a need? It is certainly not a given on PCs, where portability is far more important.
I agree with Inkling - app portability is certainly there on PCs - I can move from a Lenovo to an HP with no issue. And most apps support cross-grades from MacOS --> Windows and vice versa, in cases where the same app exists on each platform.
And most popular apps are available on both iOS and Android, making this even more of an obvious step.
I'm happy to accept that - if you can tell me why. What is misinformation in my post? Let's look at the points one-by-one shall we?
Price. An HTC Desire S costs $293 less than the cheapest iPhone 4. A Samsung Galaxy SII costs $187 less.
Apps. Fact: Android has more free apps.
Is this the breadth of fresh air or what? Finally somebody admitted what we've known all along: Android is a cheaper platform (generally speaking). Where are all the denialists?
I paid $50 for the Tom Tom app alone. It seems also that $4.99 is the new $0.99 as I paid $4.99 each for the Weber Grill and Cyclemeter 5.0 apps.
To think that at least a quarter of the iPhones out there are jailbroken and running pirated apps, so the amount spent on apps by legit iPhone owners could be $150+.
I am an avid iOS user, but my iPhone is jail broken (it's a 2g on T-mobile) and I don't have a single "pirated app", I jail broke so I could avoid AT&T and still have GSM for international travel. I have quite a few paid Cydia Apps installed to add functionality such as lock screen notifications (a $9.99 app). I think the general US public is under educated about how jail breaking works and what value it adds (for users like me and developers alike). My iPad2 is bone stock, after Apple enabled mirroring for certain apps (my iPad1 was jail broken for a while, for that reason), but I think there is still functionality it lacks. I am excited for iOS 5, and I hope the next iPhone will also support T-mobile 3G/4G, otherwise I will continue with used older models and jail break.
Your (judgemental) assumption brings up a good question though: Was the Cydia App store accounted for when calculating the dollar volume? I am guessing not, which means that the financial commitment to iOS may be even higher.