You can't eliminate half to two thirds of the smartphone sales and say that the information provided is meaningful.
That would be like comparing the car sales of GM, Ford and Chrysler and concluding that GM has 45% marketshare, 60% of leather seats, and 64% of aftermarket add-ons. It's ludicrous!
I'n not the only one to have noticed this either.
This is a very biased report, even if it's not intended to be.
No it doesn't. You can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that they only want to know how well these platforms are doing against each other. They don't give a crap about the rest of the platforms. It is very meaningful when it is all the data you're looking for. If I only want to target two cell phones, but want to know which is doing better, then all the data I need is to compare those two devices. If I want to know how well Android is doing against the iPhone, Windows Mobile numbers are worthless to me. Why would I want to know them, if I'm not interested in them anyway? The report is not saying that the iPhone has 80% market share of the entire market. It is saying that of these platforms, iPhone has an 80% share. That's a huge difference that for some reason you and others can't comprehend.
You need to read the report for what it is and not make assumptions based off of pretty graphs. If this company came out and said here our assessment of the overall cell phone market... Then yes, this would be a very inaccurate and biased report. But that's not what the report represents. The report clearly states that it represents the shares of each platform within the four platform scope that is important to them and their clients.
No it doesn't. You can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that they only want to know how well these platforms are doing against each other. They don't give a crap about the rest of the platforms. It is very meaningful when it is all the data you're looking for. If I only want to target two cell phones, but want to know which is doing better, then all the data I need is to compare those two devices. If I want to know how well Android is doing against the iPhone, Windows Mobile numbers are worthless to me. Why would I want to know them, if I'm not interested in them anyway? The report is not saying that the iPhone has 80% market share of the entire market. It is saying that of these platforms, iPhone has an 80% share. That's a huge difference that for some reason you and others can't comprehend.
You need to read the report for what it is and not make assumptions based off of pretty graphs. If this company came out and said here our assessment of the overall cell phone market... Then yes, this would be a very inaccurate and biased report. But that's not what the report represents. The report clearly states that it represents the shares of each platform within the four platform scope that is important to them and their clients.
That's not true. It doesn't say that anywhere.
No matter how you spin it, this is just a partial account of what's happening. It doesn't tell the full story.
It's a good fluff piece but does point two very prominent things out clearly. The App-Store is what it is and what it always should have been. And last the other players are loosing developers to Apple because of it.
Think about it this way. Your a small developer/development house. You have no $$ for advertising. You create a sweet little app that works on WinMobile/BB/Palm. How do you tell the audiance? And at what cost? The Apple route: You place you app in the store, in the right classification. EVERY customer goes to that ONE store, you reduce the need to advertise and can spend more time on teaching/showing/demonstrating it which is what makes sales.
So what brings developers is what caters to their weakness, sales and marketing. Apple does something similar with their software section on the site but the app store took it 2 steps further.
But that doesn't give or even guarantee Apple a monopoly position in the market, it just promises a thriving ecosystem. And you can make the argument that it worked out that way for the iPod, but the music player and cell phone markets, while both being mobile devices, are very different markets. The main difference is of course the fact that cell phones are sold along with subscription plans. (Of course, this doesn't apply to the iPod touch, which isn't counted as an iPhone anyway.)
I never mentioned monopoly. I replied to your comment that stated that having a rich App Store has nothing to do with the iPhone's marketshare. I just tried to point out how it's connected.
Why is anyone surprised???? Apple and some sweaty palm fan exec outs this spin everytime msft releases a new stat or commercial plus with apple giving their financials today, no one should be surprised.
Spin like this is almost as bad as an apple keynote or the first :30 minutes anyway, where apple praises itself over and over and talks about their .01265% growth. LOL
Yep its that M$ troll time of year again. :-) user is " hi i ma mac" yet is totally an ms fanboy.
Now, I believe (like most mac users) that people should use what ever platform they most desire. But MS does scare me. They do not mind using that $$ power to buy, bribe, steal.... what ever they want.
The Flurry website says which platforms they currently have support for. So, only those developers would be interested in this data.
That's why it's a problem. The charts are fake, in that they make it look as though it's the actual smartphone market.
There are more than a few people who will look at those charts, and not even realize that some of the biggest companies are being left out, and will think that those numbers are actually representing the smartphone market rather than a subset of it.
That's why it's a problem. The charts are fake, in that they make it look as though it's the actual smartphone market.
There are more than a few people who will look at those charts, and not even realize that some of the biggest companies are being left out, and will think that those numbers are actually representing the smartphone market rather than a subset of it.
The real problem here is that the wrong people are reading the reports. These reports are obviously meant for those developers that use Flurry's statistical monitoring code. Not consumers who apparently don't understand what the data means or is used for. Any developer that uses this code to monitor their applications usage is well aware which platforms are supported and would fully understand the scope of this data and it's meaning to them.
You're absolutely correct in that most people are too lazy to do anything other than read what is put in front of them without being knowledgeable in what they are looking at and just make assumptions based off of it. Unfortunately, like so many other regurgitated news stories, the author failed to do any research and didn't mention the fact that Flurry currently only supports the platforms on the chart, and only recently started supporting BlackBerry.
So I stand by the fact that there's nothing wrong with the report. The only thing wrong is the way it is being presented and misunderstood by less knowledgeable readers.
Why is anyone surprised???? Apple and some sweaty palm fan exec outs this spin everytime msft releases a new stat or commercial plus with apple giving their financials today, no one should be surprised.
Spin like this is almost as bad as an apple keynote or the first :30 minutes anyway, where apple praises itself over and over and talks about their .01265% growth. LOL
yeah, cause Microsoft doesn't spin anything?
Good grief, think I blew soda out my nose! Seriously, don't make me laugh anymore!
The way I understand it (fwiw), Flurry is not a market research firm, but a company providing services/advise to mobile application developers (analysis tools like path tracking, cross-promotions, embedded ads, etc.). What they have analyzed here is their own customer base. It seems to be a fairly new company (there is no press release before September '08) and their services seem to be free until now(?)... As they are not around since long, they may mainly have newer, unexperienced developers among their clients. This does likely cause the overweight of new platforms. Symbian and WinMob developers are around since ages, they may not be too interested in consulting from a company being less experienced than themselves?!
Hi all,
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Regarding not including Windows Mobile, Symbian (and Palm and BREW for anyone counting) in our roll-up, it's simply because we don't support those platforms. We shipped our analytics solution to support iPhone, Android, Blackberry and JavaME. We chose to hold off on the others due to the lack of demand from the developer community. We spoke with dozens of developers before we started building our service, and with many more since. To us, it seemed that the four platforms we covered matched what our customers wanted. We'd be happy to support other platforms, and it's relatively easy for us to do, since the back end is built in a way that knocking out additional SDK's for those is not a major issue. So we're happy to do so, but just waiting for the right amount of demand (based on our POV of the market).
What we think this could show is where the development community is spending its time. They are putting a significant amount of resources toward the iPhone vs. other platforms. We get very, very few requests to support WinMo. We do get more for Symbian, but primarily from Europe (which makes sense), but not quite as much as we would have once expected. And JavaME apps do run on the Symbian platform, so where the developer is using the J2ME app for S60, we could run there.
Another issue I'd like to volunteer regarding the data is that with WinMo, Symbian, JavaME and Blackberry (two of which we cover) distribution of those applications primarily goes through the carrier channel. So if a developer wants to add an analytics solution to an existing app, she would have to go through the whole carrier submission and approval process all over again. Anyone who has dealt with carriers directly (I have my scars) knows this is challenging. Updating apps for iPhone and Android is very easy, relatively speaking. This could account for the proportions of support for iPhone and Android as well.
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Regarding not including Windows Mobile, Symbian (and Palm and BREW for anyone counting) in our roll-up, it's simply because we don't support those platforms. We shipped our analytics solution to support iPhone, Android, Blackberry and JavaME. We chose to hold off on the others due to the lack of demand from the developer community. We spoke with dozens of developers before we started building our service, and with many more since. To us, it seemed that the four platforms we covered matched what our customers wanted. We'd be happy to support other platforms, and it's relatively easy for us to do, since the back end is built in a way that knocking out additional SDK's for those is not a major issue. So we're happy to do so, but just waiting for the right amount of demand (based on our POV of the market).
What we think this could show is where the development community is spending its time. They are putting a significant amount of resources toward the iPhone vs. other platforms. We get very, very few requests to support WinMo. We do get more for Symbian, but primarily from Europe (which makes sense), but not quite as much as we would have once expected. And JavaME apps do run on the Symbian platform, so where the developer is using the J2ME app for S60, we could run there.
Another issue I'd like to volunteer regarding the data is that with WinMo, Symbian, JavaME and Blackberry (two of which we cover) distribution of those applications primarily goes through the carrier channel. So if a developer wants to add an analytics solution to an existing app, she would have to go through the whole carrier submission and approval process all over again. Anyone who has dealt with carriers directly (I have my scars) knows this is challenging. Updating apps for iPhone and Android is very easy, relatively speaking. This could account for the proportions of support for iPhone and Android as well.
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement may exist. If such an agreement exists, it needs to be disclosed.
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement.
No we don't have a co-marketing agreement. To be honest, we don't know any of the people at AppleInsider. We're just active in several developer forums and only became aware of this one when Flurry was being discussed.
And honestly, I don't think that agreeing that our data is not statistically significant is what I'd call promoting flurry ;-) What we're good at is providing real-time data about how users interact with individual applications. Every once in a while we can roll up data from across large groups of apps to spot a trend and share them, like we did wrt developer activity across the four platforms we cover. Read Write Web covered that news and that discussion eventually found its way here into this forum. That's pretty much it.
That's an unfair accusation. Its not impossible that he caught wind of his company being mentioned in the article and wanted to address its intent.
We should be happy and welcome first hand sources to add information to our discussions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement may exist. If such an agreement exists, it needs to be disclosed.
No we don't have a co-marketing agreement. To be honest, we don't know any of the people at AppleInsider. We're just active in several developer forums and only became aware of this one when Flurry was being discussed.
And honestly, I don't think that agreeing that our data is not statistically significant is what I'd call promoting flurry ;-) What we're good at is providing real-time data about how users interact with individual applications. Every once in a while we can roll up data from across large groups of apps to spot a trend and share them, like we did wrt developer activity across the four platforms we cover. Read Write Web covered that news and that discussion eventually found its way here into this forum. That's pretty much it.
I think it's very interesting. What you are saying is what I've been saying, that these charts do not represent the smartphone market, but rather a subset of it, and so do not tell us (the public) what the actual percentage are for any of those statistical markers.
By the way, Win Mobile apps have been marketed through third party stores for as long as I can remember, just as Palm apps have been. While the carriers do offer some of the Win Mobile apps, it's not close to being a large percentage of the apps available.
I'm also not certain that you can judge all that well the platforms you don't cover. I understand that you say that since there isn't much call for your service from the other platforms, there might not be as much developer activity, but that might not be true. It's an assumption.
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Hey pfarago.
Thanks for the posts.
My problem was not so much with your report (I have not read it), but with AppleInsider writing an article about "the app market" using your report without making clear its limitations--at least not until the very end. It gives one the impression, as one reads it, that it is talking about the entire market so the percentages seem to be bad information.
I do agree, however, that the general thrust of the article is true and is supported by your report--that the Apple ecosystem is thriving and drawing the attention of developers.
Comments
Yes, it does.
You can't eliminate half to two thirds of the smartphone sales and say that the information provided is meaningful.
That would be like comparing the car sales of GM, Ford and Chrysler and concluding that GM has 45% marketshare, 60% of leather seats, and 64% of aftermarket add-ons. It's ludicrous!
I'n not the only one to have noticed this either.
This is a very biased report, even if it's not intended to be.
No it doesn't. You can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that they only want to know how well these platforms are doing against each other. They don't give a crap about the rest of the platforms. It is very meaningful when it is all the data you're looking for. If I only want to target two cell phones, but want to know which is doing better, then all the data I need is to compare those two devices. If I want to know how well Android is doing against the iPhone, Windows Mobile numbers are worthless to me. Why would I want to know them, if I'm not interested in them anyway? The report is not saying that the iPhone has 80% market share of the entire market. It is saying that of these platforms, iPhone has an 80% share. That's a huge difference that for some reason you and others can't comprehend.
You need to read the report for what it is and not make assumptions based off of pretty graphs. If this company came out and said here our assessment of the overall cell phone market... Then yes, this would be a very inaccurate and biased report. But that's not what the report represents. The report clearly states that it represents the shares of each platform within the four platform scope that is important to them and their clients.
No it doesn't. You can't seem to wrap your head around the fact that they only want to know how well these platforms are doing against each other. They don't give a crap about the rest of the platforms. It is very meaningful when it is all the data you're looking for. If I only want to target two cell phones, but want to know which is doing better, then all the data I need is to compare those two devices. If I want to know how well Android is doing against the iPhone, Windows Mobile numbers are worthless to me. Why would I want to know them, if I'm not interested in them anyway? The report is not saying that the iPhone has 80% market share of the entire market. It is saying that of these platforms, iPhone has an 80% share. That's a huge difference that for some reason you and others can't comprehend.
You need to read the report for what it is and not make assumptions based off of pretty graphs. If this company came out and said here our assessment of the overall cell phone market... Then yes, this would be a very inaccurate and biased report. But that's not what the report represents. The report clearly states that it represents the shares of each platform within the four platform scope that is important to them and their clients.
That's not true. It doesn't say that anywhere.
No matter how you spin it, this is just a partial account of what's happening. It doesn't tell the full story.
Think about it this way. Your a small developer/development house. You have no $$ for advertising. You create a sweet little app that works on WinMobile/BB/Palm. How do you tell the audiance? And at what cost? The Apple route: You place you app in the store, in the right classification. EVERY customer goes to that ONE store, you reduce the need to advertise and can spend more time on teaching/showing/demonstrating it which is what makes sales.
So what brings developers is what caters to their weakness, sales and marketing. Apple does something similar with their software section on the site but the app store took it 2 steps further.
But that doesn't give or even guarantee Apple a monopoly position in the market, it just promises a thriving ecosystem. And you can make the argument that it worked out that way for the iPod, but the music player and cell phone markets, while both being mobile devices, are very different markets. The main difference is of course the fact that cell phones are sold along with subscription plans. (Of course, this doesn't apply to the iPod touch, which isn't counted as an iPhone anyway.)
I never mentioned monopoly. I replied to your comment that stated that having a rich App Store has nothing to do with the iPhone's marketshare. I just tried to point out how it's connected.
Why is anyone surprised???? Apple and some sweaty palm fan exec outs this spin everytime msft releases a new stat or commercial plus with apple giving their financials today, no one should be surprised.
Spin like this is almost as bad as an apple keynote or the first :30 minutes anyway, where apple praises itself over and over and talks about their .01265% growth. LOL
Yep its that M$ troll time of year again. :-) user is " hi i ma mac" yet is totally an ms fanboy.
Now, I believe (like most mac users) that people should use what ever platform they most desire. But MS does scare me. They do not mind using that $$ power to buy, bribe, steal.... what ever they want.
Just a thought.
en
That's not true. It doesn't say that anywhere.
No matter how you spin it, this is just a partial account of what's happening. It doesn't tell the full story.
The Flurry website says which platforms they currently have support for. So, only those developers would be interested in this data.
The Flurry website says which platforms they currently have support for. So, only those developers would be interested in this data.
That's why it's a problem. The charts are fake, in that they make it look as though it's the actual smartphone market.
There are more than a few people who will look at those charts, and not even realize that some of the biggest companies are being left out, and will think that those numbers are actually representing the smartphone market rather than a subset of it.
That's why it's a problem. The charts are fake, in that they make it look as though it's the actual smartphone market.
There are more than a few people who will look at those charts, and not even realize that some of the biggest companies are being left out, and will think that those numbers are actually representing the smartphone market rather than a subset of it.
The real problem here is that the wrong people are reading the reports. These reports are obviously meant for those developers that use Flurry's statistical monitoring code. Not consumers who apparently don't understand what the data means or is used for. Any developer that uses this code to monitor their applications usage is well aware which platforms are supported and would fully understand the scope of this data and it's meaning to them.
You're absolutely correct in that most people are too lazy to do anything other than read what is put in front of them without being knowledgeable in what they are looking at and just make assumptions based off of it. Unfortunately, like so many other regurgitated news stories, the author failed to do any research and didn't mention the fact that Flurry currently only supports the platforms on the chart, and only recently started supporting BlackBerry.
So I stand by the fact that there's nothing wrong with the report. The only thing wrong is the way it is being presented and misunderstood by less knowledgeable readers.
Apple should not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native applications. Web apps are really SWEET.
Where's your smiley? Am I wrong to interpret this comment as sarcasm?
Where's your smiley? Am I wrong to interpret this comment as sarcasm?
His replies are always like that. It's an odd passive-aggressive form of trolling.
Where's your smiley? Am I wrong to interpret this comment as sarcasm?
Why is anyone surprised???? Apple and some sweaty palm fan exec outs this spin everytime msft releases a new stat or commercial plus with apple giving their financials today, no one should be surprised.
Spin like this is almost as bad as an apple keynote or the first :30 minutes anyway, where apple praises itself over and over and talks about their .01265% growth. LOL
yeah, cause Microsoft doesn't spin anything?
Good grief, think I blew soda out my nose! Seriously, don't make me laugh anymore!
The way I understand it (fwiw), Flurry is not a market research firm, but a company providing services/advise to mobile application developers (analysis tools like path tracking, cross-promotions, embedded ads, etc.). What they have analyzed here is their own customer base. It seems to be a fairly new company (there is no press release before September '08) and their services seem to be free until now(?)... As they are not around since long, they may mainly have newer, unexperienced developers among their clients. This does likely cause the overweight of new platforms. Symbian and WinMob developers are around since ages, they may not be too interested in consulting from a company being less experienced than themselves?!
Hi all,
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Regarding not including Windows Mobile, Symbian (and Palm and BREW for anyone counting) in our roll-up, it's simply because we don't support those platforms. We shipped our analytics solution to support iPhone, Android, Blackberry and JavaME. We chose to hold off on the others due to the lack of demand from the developer community. We spoke with dozens of developers before we started building our service, and with many more since. To us, it seemed that the four platforms we covered matched what our customers wanted. We'd be happy to support other platforms, and it's relatively easy for us to do, since the back end is built in a way that knocking out additional SDK's for those is not a major issue. So we're happy to do so, but just waiting for the right amount of demand (based on our POV of the market).
What we think this could show is where the development community is spending its time. They are putting a significant amount of resources toward the iPhone vs. other platforms. We get very, very few requests to support WinMo. We do get more for Symbian, but primarily from Europe (which makes sense), but not quite as much as we would have once expected. And JavaME apps do run on the Symbian platform, so where the developer is using the J2ME app for S60, we could run there.
Another issue I'd like to volunteer regarding the data is that with WinMo, Symbian, JavaME and Blackberry (two of which we cover) distribution of those applications primarily goes through the carrier channel. So if a developer wants to add an analytics solution to an existing app, she would have to go through the whole carrier submission and approval process all over again. Anyone who has dealt with carriers directly (I have my scars) knows this is challenging. Updating apps for iPhone and Android is very easy, relatively speaking. This could account for the proportions of support for iPhone and Android as well.
Peter Farago
VP Marketing
www.flurry.com
http://blog.flurry.com
http://twitter.com/FlurryMobile
Hi all,
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Regarding not including Windows Mobile, Symbian (and Palm and BREW for anyone counting) in our roll-up, it's simply because we don't support those platforms. We shipped our analytics solution to support iPhone, Android, Blackberry and JavaME. We chose to hold off on the others due to the lack of demand from the developer community. We spoke with dozens of developers before we started building our service, and with many more since. To us, it seemed that the four platforms we covered matched what our customers wanted. We'd be happy to support other platforms, and it's relatively easy for us to do, since the back end is built in a way that knocking out additional SDK's for those is not a major issue. So we're happy to do so, but just waiting for the right amount of demand (based on our POV of the market).
What we think this could show is where the development community is spending its time. They are putting a significant amount of resources toward the iPhone vs. other platforms. We get very, very few requests to support WinMo. We do get more for Symbian, but primarily from Europe (which makes sense), but not quite as much as we would have once expected. And JavaME apps do run on the Symbian platform, so where the developer is using the J2ME app for S60, we could run there.
Another issue I'd like to volunteer regarding the data is that with WinMo, Symbian, JavaME and Blackberry (two of which we cover) distribution of those applications primarily goes through the carrier channel. So if a developer wants to add an analytics solution to an existing app, she would have to go through the whole carrier submission and approval process all over again. Anyone who has dealt with carriers directly (I have my scars) knows this is challenging. Updating apps for iPhone and Android is very easy, relatively speaking. This could account for the proportions of support for iPhone and Android as well.
Peter Farago
VP Marketing
www.flurry.com
http://blog.flurry.com
http://twitter.com/FlurryMobile
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement may exist. If such an agreement exists, it needs to be disclosed.
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement.
No we don't have a co-marketing agreement. To be honest, we don't know any of the people at AppleInsider. We're just active in several developer forums and only became aware of this one when Flurry was being discussed.
And honestly, I don't think that agreeing that our data is not statistically significant is what I'd call promoting flurry ;-) What we're good at is providing real-time data about how users interact with individual applications. Every once in a while we can roll up data from across large groups of apps to spot a trend and share them, like we did wrt developer activity across the four platforms we cover. Read Write Web covered that news and that discussion eventually found its way here into this forum. That's pretty much it.
Peter Farago
VP Marketing
www.flurry.com
http://blog.flurry.com
http://twitter.com/FlurryMobile
We should be happy and welcome first hand sources to add information to our discussions.
Do you have some kind of co-marketing deal with Apple Insider? Because your reply and the coverage of this story seems to me like some kind of an advertising agreement may exist. If such an agreement exists, it needs to be disclosed.
No we don't have a co-marketing agreement. To be honest, we don't know any of the people at AppleInsider. We're just active in several developer forums and only became aware of this one when Flurry was being discussed.
And honestly, I don't think that agreeing that our data is not statistically significant is what I'd call promoting flurry ;-) What we're good at is providing real-time data about how users interact with individual applications. Every once in a while we can roll up data from across large groups of apps to spot a trend and share them, like we did wrt developer activity across the four platforms we cover. Read Write Web covered that news and that discussion eventually found its way here into this forum. That's pretty much it.
Peter Farago
VP Marketing
www.flurry.com
http://blog.flurry.com
http://twitter.com/FlurryMobile
I think it's very interesting. What you are saying is what I've been saying, that these charts do not represent the smartphone market, but rather a subset of it, and so do not tell us (the public) what the actual percentage are for any of those statistical markers.
By the way, Win Mobile apps have been marketed through third party stores for as long as I can remember, just as Palm apps have been. While the carriers do offer some of the Win Mobile apps, it's not close to being a large percentage of the apps available.
I'm also not certain that you can judge all that well the platforms you don't cover. I understand that you say that since there isn't much call for your service from the other platforms, there might not be as much developer activity, but that might not be true. It's an assumption.
One can't prove a negative.
Hi all,
I work for Flurry, and completely agree that this is not a randomly selected, statistically significant sample. It clearly suffers from self-selection bias, and the fact that all platforms in the mobile ecosystem are not represented. Dreyfus2 is spot on about what Flurry does, and the potential bias in the data. The analytics service is free btw. It's worth noting that Flurry never positioned this data as a scientific study, but rather simply rolling up and presenting the data we were seeing so others could consume it. However, we believe there are things that can be learned from the data.
Hey pfarago.
Thanks for the posts.
My problem was not so much with your report (I have not read it), but with AppleInsider writing an article about "the app market" using your report without making clear its limitations--at least not until the very end. It gives one the impression, as one reads it, that it is talking about the entire market so the percentages seem to be bad information.
I do agree, however, that the general thrust of the article is true and is supported by your report--that the Apple ecosystem is thriving and drawing the attention of developers.
Thanks for dropping in to clear things up!
That's an unfair accusation. Its not impossible that he caught wind of his company being mentioned in the article and wanted to address its intent.
We should be happy and welcome first hand sources to add information to our discussions.
It was not an unfair accusation. It was an impression I got from reading the article and the reply. He denied it. End of discussion.