Citing DED is rarely a good choice when trying to support an argument.
DED was citing market research. Seriously, it was just that information from market research in the article that I'm referring to and citing you for anything is far more pointless at least DED has market research on that article, where's yours?
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
This is precisely why Eric’s now laughable prediction that developers would be Android first and iOS second or not at all has not come to pass. He made that prediction two years ago, in December 2011. He was full of shit back then and still is.
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
This article doesn't mention Smurfberrys, so where did you come up with that flawed argument?
Also, you said "most of the money isn't made selling apps, then you say that money today is in selling in app purchases." what do you mean by those statements?
If you look at demographics, Apple iOS users are "GENERALLY" have higher incomes, older, and higher education levels. There is also more iOS users that are business professionals or in specific industries that use iOS products that will buy apps, since some of those aren't free apps like Doctors, Lawyers, Musicians, pilots, video production, scientists, teachers, etc. etc. Apple just sells to a different crowd that spends MONEY. IOS devices are more prevalent in schools/colleges/government and businesses than Android.
I've been looking at the $1 Million on up housing market for $hits and grins and every home that lists a home automation system, they mention iOS based and not Android based. When I look at the higher end audio systems, it's pretty much iOS, OS X, and full Windows, but mostly I see iPads being used along with MacMinis, that seems to be the most popular. They will spend money on 3rd party apps.
how else are games free? They need to make money some how. I think its brillant to let people play the game for free and if they really like it they 'pay' for it by in app purchases. Sure beats buying a game in the old days, finding out it sucks and not being able to return it. I remember saving months to buy a Nintendo game. Only to find out the game sucked and I could not return it.
You can return a paid app within 15 mins.
Micro transaction games SUCK. Rather pay for full game up front.
This article doesn't mention Smurfberrys, so where did you come up with that flawed argument?
Also, you said "most of the money isn't made selling apps, then you say that money today is in selling in app purchases." what do you mean by those statements?
Lets see, go to the iOS app store and look at the Top Grossing apps. Under this list, you'll see pages of "free" apps. It's not until number 19 that there's a single "paid" app on the list. In the top 100 there are a total of 6 applications that aren't "free"... I could continue on from there, but it's pretty clear that most of the money is made using freemium apps (it's possible that ads make up a non-insignificant chunk of revenues, but that seems highly unlikely). Even amongst the paid apps, many offer in app purchases, and likely make a large chunk of their money that way.
As far as the argument that in app purchases are better than the old method of having to buy stuff... I disagree. You used to be able to rent games, try them out first. A large portion of games with in app purchases are made to waste people's time... The goal is to get people addicted to mindless gameplay so that they spend money to AVOID playing the game. The publisher's goal is not to make the game fun, but rather to find ways to extract more money from the user. I've had an ipad for almost two years now, and I can't really say I've seen many good games come out for it, they're all freemium crap.
So yes, I think I'll stand by my argument that what this article really shows is that iOS users are more likely to waste money on smurfberrys than android users. Some of them have more money (as you argued), that's also clear because iOS has a higher market share in the USA, europe etc than it does in poorer countries.
With the A7 chip and A8 chip next year we will see a ton of console game makers shift their focus to iOS. With a fragmented Android it will not be worth it to develop games when only 10% of the users have KitKat while everyone else has 2-3 year old OS that won't run the games correctly.
Mike tyson punch out is more exciting and took more skills
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
Got any proof of those claims of yours? Have you seen any numbers of percentage of shares coming from in-apps purchase vs store purchases? Besides at the end it doesn't matter which payment model developers chooses as long they (big or small) can make profit with their work.
Androids is not a profitable platform for the majority of third party developers, most Androids users will never do a transaction with google store.
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
Really? One man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm sure you've spent $$$ on items many people consider junk...like Android phones.
Lets see, go to the iOS app store and look at the Top Grossing apps. Under this list, you'll see pages of "free" apps. It's not until number 19 that there's a single "paid" app on the list. In the top 100 there are a total of 6 applications that aren't "free"... I could continue on from there, but it's pretty clear that most of the money is made using freemium apps (it's possible that ads make up a non-insignificant chunk of revenues, but that seems highly unlikely). Even amongst the paid apps, many offer in app purchases, and likely make a large chunk of their money that way.
As far as the argument that in app purchases are better than the old method of having to buy stuff... I disagree. You used to be able to rent games, try them out first. A large portion of games with in app purchases are made to waste people's time... The goal is to get people addicted to mindless gameplay so that they spend money to AVOID playing the game. The publisher's goal is not to make the game fun, but rather to find ways to extract more money from the user. I've had an ipad for almost two years now, and I can't really say I've seen many good games come out for it, they're all freemium crap.
So yes, I think I'll stand by my argument that what this article really shows is that iOS users are more likely to waste money on smurfberrys than android users. Some of them have more money (as you argued), that's also clear because iOS has a higher market share in the USA, europe etc than it does in poorer countries.
Phil
How can a FREE app be a top grossing app? 100,000,000 copies of something that cost $0, is still $0. I don't know how a bunch of Free games should even be listed as a top grossing app in the first place.
I think a little more in depth view of the apps that sell into different markets is a better way to analyze this.
Market share can be viewed a ton of different ways and to draw assumptions by just one viewpoint doesn't always give the proper picture of what's REALLY going on. That's why superficial market research is not the best way to draw assumptions which is what you are doing.
And what color is the sky? If you asked that question from 50 people spread around the world, they'll give you a different answer depending on the time of day/night, weather conditions, etc.
If you are into games, here a list of original games created because of iOS:
Angry Birds,
Bad Piggies
Zen Bound
Temple runs
The Room
Contre Jour
Badland
Fruit Ninja
Infinity Blade
Real Racing
Asphalt
Pocket Frog
Gunner Z
Here is a list of games or type of games ported on the iPad
Tetris
Bejewels
GTA
Deadspace
Civilization
X-Com
Needs for speed
Final Fantasy series
Plants VS Zombies
Sudoku
Cards and mahjong games
Pinballs machines
Well, if you just want to look at games, then you just look at games, if you want to analyze different types of apps in different industries, then you have to look at different industries.
There are a lot of customization apps (which are more development apps) on Android, but those aren't productivity apps, they are more for themes, which is not a productivity app, it's more like Eye Candy which is more of just a time consuming app rather than a time saving app.
How can a FREE app be a top grossing app? 100,000,000 copies of something that cost $0, is still $0. I don't know how a bunch of Free games should even be listed as a top grossing app in the first place.
I think a little more in depth view of the apps that sell into different markets is a better way to analyze this.
Market share can be viewed a ton of different ways and to draw assumptions by just one viewpoint doesn't always give the proper picture of what's REALLY going on. That's why superficial market research is not the best way to draw assumptions which is what you are doing.
And what color is the sky? If you asked that question from 50 people spread around the world, they'll give you a different answer depending on the time of day/night, weather conditions, etc.
did you miss the whole part where I mentioned in app purchases? The apps aren't making money on the initial download of the app, but when the user is buying smurfberrys. Also, I put out numbers straight from the iOS app store. Maybe it's a fluke that right now all the top grossing apps are "free", but I seriously doubt that that just happens to be the case every time I look at the store.
The data we have is not specific enough to draw some of the conclusions you and others are making. One game may generate a lot of money, but it might not be as many downloaded as another. The bottom line of the article is Apple developers make more money than Android. Aren't more cheater game hacks on Android which attracts more cheaterS?
Still waiting for any evidence that Android has a larger installed based than iOS. All we've seen so far is propaganda paid for by google, samsung, etc.
A shame that AI keeps reporting this crap as fact.
The only numbers to look at are active accounts. That is probably the only real method, i've seen that being posted from time to time and those numbers change daily, but try to do a search for that.
I don't know how many times I've seen an Android app for $0.99 and the same iPhone app for $1.99. Or the Android app being free while the iPhone app is $0.99. iPhone developers may be making more money, but I wonder if iPhone users are getting fleeced some of the time, because of the "prestige" status.
Comments
Here's an article that suggests that 81% of the Android phones are just junky $215 smartphones, which is probably pretty close.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/12/idc-data-shows-66-of-androids-81-smartphone-share-are-junk-phones-selling-for-215
Citing DED is rarely a good choice when trying to support an argument.
Citing DED is rarely a good choice when trying to support an argument.
DED was citing market research. Seriously, it was just that information from market research in the article that I'm referring to and citing you for anything is far more pointless at least DED has market research on that article, where's yours?
Citing DED is rarely a good choice when trying to support an argument.
QFT
But but but Androiders love ads!
Adsnoids you mean?
But but but Androiders love ads!
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
That is okay. He can drink whiskey until he gets Schmidt-faced.
Correction: "full of Schmidt"
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
This article doesn't mention Smurfberrys, so where did you come up with that flawed argument?
Also, you said "most of the money isn't made selling apps, then you say that money today is in selling in app purchases." what do you mean by those statements?
If you look at demographics, Apple iOS users are "GENERALLY" have higher incomes, older, and higher education levels. There is also more iOS users that are business professionals or in specific industries that use iOS products that will buy apps, since some of those aren't free apps like Doctors, Lawyers, Musicians, pilots, video production, scientists, teachers, etc. etc. Apple just sells to a different crowd that spends MONEY. IOS devices are more prevalent in schools/colleges/government and businesses than Android.
I've been looking at the $1 Million on up housing market for $hits and grins and every home that lists a home automation system, they mention iOS based and not Android based. When I look at the higher end audio systems, it's pretty much iOS, OS X, and full Windows, but mostly I see iPads being used along with MacMinis, that seems to be the most popular. They will spend money on 3rd party apps.
how else are games free? They need to make money some how. I think its brillant to let people play the game for free and if they really like it they 'pay' for it by in app purchases. Sure beats buying a game in the old days, finding out it sucks and not being able to return it. I remember saving months to buy a Nintendo game. Only to find out the game sucked and I could not return it.
You can return a paid app within 15 mins.
Micro transaction games SUCK. Rather pay for full game up front.
This article doesn't mention Smurfberrys, so where did you come up with that flawed argument?
Also, you said "most of the money isn't made selling apps, then you say that money today is in selling in app purchases." what do you mean by those statements?
Lets see, go to the iOS app store and look at the Top Grossing apps. Under this list, you'll see pages of "free" apps. It's not until number 19 that there's a single "paid" app on the list. In the top 100 there are a total of 6 applications that aren't "free"... I could continue on from there, but it's pretty clear that most of the money is made using freemium apps (it's possible that ads make up a non-insignificant chunk of revenues, but that seems highly unlikely). Even amongst the paid apps, many offer in app purchases, and likely make a large chunk of their money that way.
As far as the argument that in app purchases are better than the old method of having to buy stuff... I disagree. You used to be able to rent games, try them out first. A large portion of games with in app purchases are made to waste people's time... The goal is to get people addicted to mindless gameplay so that they spend money to AVOID playing the game. The publisher's goal is not to make the game fun, but rather to find ways to extract more money from the user. I've had an ipad for almost two years now, and I can't really say I've seen many good games come out for it, they're all freemium crap.
So yes, I think I'll stand by my argument that what this article really shows is that iOS users are more likely to waste money on smurfberrys than android users. Some of them have more money (as you argued), that's also clear because iOS has a higher market share in the USA, europe etc than it does in poorer countries.
Phil
Infinity Blade 3.
End of discussion.
With the A7 chip and A8 chip next year we will see a ton of console game makers shift their focus to iOS. With a fragmented Android it will not be worth it to develop games when only 10% of the users have KitKat while everyone else has 2-3 year old OS that won't run the games correctly.
Mike tyson punch out is more exciting and took more skills
Lets be honest here... Most of the money isn't made selling apps, nor is it made selling ads. The money today is in selling in app purchases, and suckering people to pay money to avoid doing stupid repetitive tasks in games....
So what this article is saying is that Apple users are far more likely to waste money on smurfberrys. From a business point of view, it's brilliant. From a user standpoint it speaks volumes and doesn't exactly put apple users in a positive light.
Phil
Got any proof of those claims of yours? Have you seen any numbers of percentage of shares coming from in-apps purchase vs store purchases? Besides at the end it doesn't matter which payment model developers chooses as long they (big or small) can make profit with their work.
Androids is not a profitable platform for the majority of third party developers, most Androids users will never do a transaction with google store.
Really? One man's trash is another man's treasure. I'm sure you've spent $$$ on items many people consider junk...like Android phones.
Lets see, go to the iOS app store and look at the Top Grossing apps. Under this list, you'll see pages of "free" apps. It's not until number 19 that there's a single "paid" app on the list. In the top 100 there are a total of 6 applications that aren't "free"... I could continue on from there, but it's pretty clear that most of the money is made using freemium apps (it's possible that ads make up a non-insignificant chunk of revenues, but that seems highly unlikely). Even amongst the paid apps, many offer in app purchases, and likely make a large chunk of their money that way.
As far as the argument that in app purchases are better than the old method of having to buy stuff... I disagree. You used to be able to rent games, try them out first. A large portion of games with in app purchases are made to waste people's time... The goal is to get people addicted to mindless gameplay so that they spend money to AVOID playing the game. The publisher's goal is not to make the game fun, but rather to find ways to extract more money from the user. I've had an ipad for almost two years now, and I can't really say I've seen many good games come out for it, they're all freemium crap.
So yes, I think I'll stand by my argument that what this article really shows is that iOS users are more likely to waste money on smurfberrys than android users. Some of them have more money (as you argued), that's also clear because iOS has a higher market share in the USA, europe etc than it does in poorer countries.
Phil
How can a FREE app be a top grossing app? 100,000,000 copies of something that cost $0, is still $0. I don't know how a bunch of Free games should even be listed as a top grossing app in the first place.
I think a little more in depth view of the apps that sell into different markets is a better way to analyze this.
Market share can be viewed a ton of different ways and to draw assumptions by just one viewpoint doesn't always give the proper picture of what's REALLY going on. That's why superficial market research is not the best way to draw assumptions which is what you are doing.
And what color is the sky? If you asked that question from 50 people spread around the world, they'll give you a different answer depending on the time of day/night, weather conditions, etc.
Originally Posted by philgar
I've had an ipad for almost two years now, and I can't really say I've seen many good games come out for it, they're all freemium crap.
If you are into games, here a list of original games created because of iOS:
Angry Birds,
Bad Piggies
Zen Bound
Temple runs
The Room
Contre Jour
Badland
Fruit Ninja
Infinity Blade
Real Racing
Asphalt
Pocket Frog
Gunner Z
Here is a list of games or type of games ported on the iPad
Tetris
Bejewels
GTA
Deadspace
Civilization
X-Com
Needs for speed
Final Fantasy series
Plants VS Zombies
Sudoku
Cards and mahjong games
Pinballs machines
If you are into games, here a list of original games created because of iOS:
Angry Birds,
Bad Piggies
Zen Bound
Temple runs
The Room
Contre Jour
Badland
Fruit Ninja
Infinity Blade
Real Racing
Asphalt
Pocket Frog
Gunner Z
Here is a list of games or type of games ported on the iPad
Tetris
Bejewels
GTA
Deadspace
Civilization
X-Com
Needs for speed
Final Fantasy series
Plants VS Zombies
Sudoku
Cards and mahjong games
Pinballs machines
Well, if you just want to look at games, then you just look at games, if you want to analyze different types of apps in different industries, then you have to look at different industries.
There are a lot of customization apps (which are more development apps) on Android, but those aren't productivity apps, they are more for themes, which is not a productivity app, it's more like Eye Candy which is more of just a time consuming app rather than a time saving app.
How can a FREE app be a top grossing app? 100,000,000 copies of something that cost $0, is still $0. I don't know how a bunch of Free games should even be listed as a top grossing app in the first place.
I think a little more in depth view of the apps that sell into different markets is a better way to analyze this.
Market share can be viewed a ton of different ways and to draw assumptions by just one viewpoint doesn't always give the proper picture of what's REALLY going on. That's why superficial market research is not the best way to draw assumptions which is what you are doing.
And what color is the sky? If you asked that question from 50 people spread around the world, they'll give you a different answer depending on the time of day/night, weather conditions, etc.
did you miss the whole part where I mentioned in app purchases? The apps aren't making money on the initial download of the app, but when the user is buying smurfberrys. Also, I put out numbers straight from the iOS app store. Maybe it's a fluke that right now all the top grossing apps are "free", but I seriously doubt that that just happens to be the case every time I look at the store.
Phil
A shame that AI keeps reporting this crap as fact.
I don't know how many times I've seen an Android app for $0.99 and the same iPhone app for $1.99. Or the Android app being free while the iPhone app is $0.99. iPhone developers may be making more money, but I wonder if iPhone users are getting fleeced some of the time, because of the "prestige" status.