I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
I don't know of any Apple app with an in-app-purchase.
I am sure there are a few but Apple does things different so I do not see how you can compare. Look at the Kindle app. On Android I can buy right from the App which would be considered an in app purchase but on my iPad I have to go to the webpage which would not generate an in app purchase. Regardless it is nice to see money being generated on all platforms which in turn generates innovation which in turn generates cool stuff for me.
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
It is in app purchases which you can do on the Kindle Android app but not on the iOS app because Amazon refused to share 30% with Apple on every in app purchase so they set it up different and you must buy from the Amazon website then download the eBook from the app.
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
For a while, the iOS Kindle app sold eBooks as in-app purchases -- until Apple said that in-app purchases were subject to the same terms as purchased apps...
So, if Kindle has an Android app in the Google and Amazon stores -- likely, it would have in-app purchases, and be "popular" enough to be included in this study!
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
Agreed. I have and use the Amazon store far more than Google and having everything linked to my Amazon Prime makes it that much easier and easy to make impulse purchases.
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
I don't think anyone would disagree that the Amazon numbers in comparison to Google numbers is plausible. It is the comparison to iOS that is in question.
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
But, the study only measures in-app purchases -- and so it is skewed...
Might as well measure apps containing the word "lite" or "HD" -- it would be just as meaningless!
For a while, the iOS Kindle app sold eBooks as in-app purchases -- until Apple said that in-app purchases were subject to the same terms as purchased apps...
So, if Kindle has an Android app in the Google and Amazon stores -- likely, it would have in-app purchases, and be "popular" enough to be included in this study!
But do we know this as fact and that eBooks aren't singularly charged as Amazon eBook revenue or is this just speculation? I extremely doubt that even evil Amazon would double count. They would not want to take away the eBook figures from eBook sales. This sound like we're streching it here. Again I don't find this difficult to believe as most Android customers would find it easier to purchase Apps there than GooglePlay.
But, the study only measures in-app purchases -- and so it is skewed...
Might as well measure apps containing the word "lite" or "HD" -- it would be just as meaningless!
Where are you getting this "only measure in-app purchases" nonsense from my friend?
It clearly states in the article:
Quote:
But the latest figures are the first to also include the Amazon Appstore, and suggest that Amazon has been far more successful at convincing users to pay for mobile software than Google.
But do we know this as fact and that eBooks aren't singularly charged as Amazon eBook revenue or is this just speculation? I extremely doubt that even evil Amazon would double count. They would not want to take away the eBook figures from eBook sales. This sound like we're streching it here. Again I don't find this difficult to believe as most Android customers would find it easier to purchase Apps there than GooglePlay.
I don't think it is "evil" or even duplicitous -- the "study" is what it is -- it is counting "in-app-purchases" by popular apps.
I suspect that Kindle is a popular app, that has a lot of in-app-purchases that Flurry counted for this survey.
This has nothing to do with how Amazon counts their app sales or their eBook sales!
We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android. Their primary business models are in-app purchase, which is the revenue type we compare for this analysis. Combined, these apps average 11 million daily active users (DAUs). We measured their revenue over a 45-day period, from mid-January through the end of February 2012.
I don't have any experience with Android or Amazon app stores, but lots of experience with the iTunes app store -- we have 870 iOs apps across 5 iPhones and 7 iPads, with 5 people ages 12, 13, 16 47, 72.
In my opinion, the use of "in-app purchases" doesn't represent the way the majority of apps in the iTunes store are "sold".
I have read, that many apps for Android are offered as a free "starter" app with few functions/levels -- then upgradeable to the full app with in-app purchases.
Aside from games, I have used few iOS apps that are "sold" this way -- rather a free "lite" version and a separate, fee "full" version.
If that's the case, than this study is artificially skewed towards a few, popular, "in-app-purchase" apps -- and does not represent a valid comparison of the stores.
Edit: I do teach my grandkids to read carefully and critically -- it has served my family very well over the years.
I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.
I don't believe them either. There is no way they could assemble an accurate estimate based on their limited sampling.
Comments
I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
This "study" is a perfect example of why I taught my daughter and grandkids -- Question [don't believe] anything you read!
I don't know of any Apple app with an in-app-purchase.
I am sure there are a few but Apple does things different so I do not see how you can compare. Look at the Kindle app. On Android I can buy right from the App which would be considered an in app purchase but on my iPad I have to go to the webpage which would not generate an in app purchase. Regardless it is nice to see money being generated on all platforms which in turn generates innovation which in turn generates cool stuff for me.
This "study" is a perfect example of why I taught my daughter and grandkids -- Question [don't believe] anything you read!
especially on fan/rumor sites
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
It is in app purchases which you can do on the Kindle Android app but not on the iOS app because Amazon refused to share 30% with Apple on every in app purchase so they set it up different and you must buy from the Amazon website then download the eBook from the app.
AI's used Flurry before as a supposed trusted source.
The only trusted sources that AI uses are the ones that deliver clicks and page views.
haha Android sucks
Thanks for the contribution. Your stellar, to the point and very informative remark made this thread. /s
An how exactly does one buy eBooks in an App store?
For a while, the iOS Kindle app sold eBooks as in-app purchases -- until Apple said that in-app purchases were subject to the same terms as purchased apps...
So, if Kindle has an Android app in the Google and Amazon stores -- likely, it would have in-app purchases, and be "popular" enough to be included in this study!
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
Agreed. I have and use the Amazon store far more than Google and having everything linked to my Amazon Prime makes it that much easier and easy to make impulse purchases.
The only trusted sources that AI uses are the ones that deliver clicks and page views.
... nailed it
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
I don't think anyone would disagree that the Amazon numbers in comparison to Google numbers is plausible. It is the comparison to iOS that is in question.
I don't find this hard to believe at all- more people shop at Amazon than anywhere else. They've killed Borders, Circuit City, Virgin, etc , etc- and soon Best Buy too. This rightfully explains the huge difference with Googleplay too as Amazon is all about one-stop shopping. You don't need to give your information out twice to get Apps. If I had a Google device I would get them there- the store is very well laid out and conducive to browsing.
But, the study only measures in-app purchases -- and so it is skewed...
Might as well measure apps containing the word "lite" or "HD" -- it would be just as meaningless!
For a while, the iOS Kindle app sold eBooks as in-app purchases -- until Apple said that in-app purchases were subject to the same terms as purchased apps...
So, if Kindle has an Android app in the Google and Amazon stores -- likely, it would have in-app purchases, and be "popular" enough to be included in this study!
But do we know this as fact and that eBooks aren't singularly charged as Amazon eBook revenue or is this just speculation? I extremely doubt that even evil Amazon would double count. They would not want to take away the eBook figures from eBook sales. This sound like we're streching it here. Again I don't find this difficult to believe as most Android customers would find it easier to purchase Apps there than GooglePlay.
I extremely doubt that even evil Amazon would double count. They would not want to take away the eBook figures from eBook sales.
They don't report either eBook or apps sales and this data is not coming from Amazon anyway.
But, the study only measures in-app purchases -- and so it is skewed...
Might as well measure apps containing the word "lite" or "HD" -- it would be just as meaningless!
Where are you getting this "only measure in-app purchases" nonsense from my friend?
It clearly states in the article:
But the latest figures are the first to also include the Amazon Appstore, and suggest that Amazon has been far more successful at convincing users to pay for mobile software than Google.
But do we know this as fact and that eBooks aren't singularly charged as Amazon eBook revenue or is this just speculation? I extremely doubt that even evil Amazon would double count. They would not want to take away the eBook figures from eBook sales. This sound like we're streching it here. Again I don't find this difficult to believe as most Android customers would find it easier to purchase Apps there than GooglePlay.
I don't think it is "evil" or even duplicitous -- the "study" is what it is -- it is counting "in-app-purchases" by popular apps.
I suspect that Kindle is a popular app, that has a lot of in-app-purchases that Flurry counted for this survey.
This has nothing to do with how Amazon counts their app sales or their eBook sales!
Where are you getting this "only measure in-app purchases" nonsense from my friend?
It clearly states in the article:
I read the linked article and posted the methodology below:
I read the report linked in the article:
For Generating App Revenue, Amazon Shows Google How to Play
The study is for:
We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android. Their primary business models are in-app purchase, which is the revenue type we compare for this analysis. Combined, these apps average 11 million daily active users (DAUs). We measured their revenue over a 45-day period, from mid-January through the end of February 2012.
I don't have any experience with Android or Amazon app stores, but lots of experience with the iTunes app store -- we have 870 iOs apps across 5 iPhones and 7 iPads, with 5 people ages 12, 13, 16 47, 72.
In my opinion, the use of "in-app purchases" doesn't represent the way the majority of apps in the iTunes store are "sold".
I have read, that many apps for Android are offered as a free "starter" app with few functions/levels -- then upgradeable to the full app with in-app purchases.
Aside from games, I have used few iOS apps that are "sold" this way -- rather a free "lite" version and a separate, fee "full" version.
If that's the case, than this study is artificially skewed towards a few, popular, "in-app-purchase" apps -- and does not represent a valid comparison of the stores.
Edit: I do teach my grandkids to read carefully and critically -- it has served my family very well over the years.
I don't believe them. There's no way Amazon had 89% of Apple's revenue if they were counting the same things. I suspect that there's a difference in what's being counted. For example, Amazon's numbers may include eBook sales while Apple's do not.
I don't believe them either. There is no way they could assemble an accurate estimate based on their limited sampling.