Taking the limits of the survey, this is easily plausible. I do not understand the negative reactions?
Yeah...
As I read it:
If you have a popular cross-platform game or eReader app that exists on iOS and Android -- you will make 3-4 x as much money on in-app purchases over Google's Store (except that popular cross-platform game eReader apps on iOS don't allow in-app purchases)
I don't know what that means...
It would be very useful to know the apps being measured and whatever other metrics they can provide.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
This make a lot more sense than the in-app conspiracy theorists.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
I can buy this. Not only is the Fire new but the store is new and just became available to all Android devices. This would also generate an inflated purchase arc because of the newness. With that said though, the Amazon store is very nice and I prefer it over the Google one and IMHO, compares favorably to the Apple App Store. Amazon gives away one paid app every 24 hours, makes me open the store each day to look which sometimes generates a purchase from me.
You're faulting me for not reading the multiple links and not the AI reporting as such?
Rich.
Yes!
Do you pick up the New York Times (or any newspaper), read an OpEd piece, then accept it as fact -- without even evaluating any citations provided... Or at the very least consider supporting and opposing opinions?
If you accept anything that AI (or any web site, blog, etc.) says at face value -- you've got some hard lessons to learn in the real world!
I can buy this. Not only is the Fire new but the store is new and just became available to all Android devices. This would also generate an inflated purchase arc because of the newness. With that said though, the Amazon store is very nice and I prefer it over the Google one and IMHO, compares favorably to the Apple App Store.
I have not used the Amazon App Store, but I suspect it is well done -- based upon using the regular Amazon Store...
Can you integrate app purchases, with digital music purchases, and physical hard-good purchases?
If so, I think Amazon would have a significant advantage over any store that sells only digital (download) media and apps.
I thought of that, and if it were averaged out per device, but I have no way knowing if the specifics so while it seems highly suspect I'll still give a golf clap to the impressive numbers shown here.
SolipsismX, how can you possibly say that a set of reported numbers are suspect but impressive at the same time? What am I missing ? Unless you're saying .... It's probably not true, but what a lie, huh ?
I looked at the same AI article that you did, and I know you're familiar with the past history of Apple/Flurry so given that history and given the old saw about how "figures lie and liars figure" (Flurry, not you ) I'm wondering how you "square that circle."
Can you integrate app purchases, with digital music purchases, and physical hard-good purchases?
Yes, my Amazon account goes across all platforms and purchases. This is a good thing BUT can be dangerous when you have a 15 year old with a Fire. Her Fire is attached to my account and if she wanted could easily purchase whatever she wanted. Thankfully she understands this and I have not had problems but you read about people getting $2000 bills because of this stuff.
SolipsismX, how can you possibly say that a set of reported numbers are suspect but impressive at the same time? What am I missing ? Unless you're saying .... It's probably not true, but what a lie, huh ?
I looked at the same AI article that you did, and I know you're familiar with the past history of Apple/Flurry so given that history and given the old saw about how "figures lie and liars figure" (Flurry, not you ) I'm wondering how you "square that circle."
I took his comments as the method was suspect but within that method the numbers are impressive.
[QUOTE=AppleInsider;2084859]A new analysis shows that Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers than Google Play, though Apple's iOS App Store remains the market leader. [END=QUOTE]
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
"The statistics come from 11 million daily active users of top-ranked applications available on iOS, Amazon and Android"
Limited set of applications. straight from the article.
A new analysis shows that Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers than Google Play, though Apple's iOS App Store remains the market leader. [END=QUOTE]
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
Oye! Oye!
The way this article was headlined and written it is nothing but link bait!
The AI author did not bother to read/understand the underlying the study -- rather he took some specific, qualified numbers and sensationalized them into a grossly misleading headline and article...
His only demonstrated journalistic integrity was linking to the underlying article -- so anyone interested could discern the facts/validity of the assertions for himself.
The way this article was headlined and written it is nothing but link bait!
The AI author did not bother to read/understand the underlying the study -- rather he took some specific, qualified numbers and sensationalized them into a grossly misleading headline and article...
His only demonstrated journalistic integrity was linking to the underlying article -- so anyone interested could discern the facts/validity of the assertions for himself.
The AI way, at least it was linked. Been some before with no linky.
"The statistics come from 11 million daily active users of top-ranked applications available on iOS, Amazon and Android"
Limited set of applications. straight from the article.
Yes, but... The AI article didn't say this was for "in-app-purchases".
I certainly suspect if an app has 11 million daily active users -- that it is a game or eReader app.
I control all the purchases on our iDevices -- and we very seldom make in-app purchases... but we have 870 apps, 148 iBooks, 3 Kindle Books and 4 Nook Books. Almost all the eBooks are in-app purchases. I would bet we have made less than 75 in-app purchases for games and less than 15 for serious (less-popular) apps.
That's over a span of approximately 1 year -- In app purchases were initiated on Apr 15, 2011.
So, for our household of 2 adults and 3 teenagers -- these stats have no meaning.
I estimate we spent approximately:
-- $150 on new apps and books in the 45 days of the study period.
-- $10 on in-app game purchases in the 45 days of the study period (the grandkids have to pay me to make these purchases).
To make this study's stats have any meaning -- it would help to know the app categories... tho I surmise it is games and eBooks.
If I'm reading this right, it's comparing numbers based on an active user basis. For comparative purposes, Apple is set at the absolute value of 100%. Thus:
- Each Amazon user generates $0.89 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.
- Each Android user generates $0.23 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.
It makes no mention of the total number of users on each platform. If Applw has 1,000 users and Amazon has 300, Amazon isn't making 89% of what Applw generates.
IMO, this is not purposes for a comparison to Apple, which is why Apple is set at the absolute value. The purpose is to compare Amazon users to Android users, and it's showing that Amazon users spend more than Android users.
Please note I do not endorse the method of collecting the data, as it is likely a flawed approach.
Actually, I think the key here is per active user. Although other Android devices can access the amazon app store as well, it is likely many of the the owners are kindle fire owners where for apple app store, the percentage is higher for iPhone. And I think studies have shown that tablets owners are likely to purchase more apps.
Also, since the fire was released in Dec, the amount of apps purchased from jan-feb should be high.
We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android.
Alas, this is not a particularly useful approach to generate informative comparisons. By pre-selecting apps with "similar presence", the authors of the study have biased it towards similar results across platforms. Their method throws out the information about how many such top-ranked apps are sold in each app store, and if there are any large differences between the lower-ranked apps.
The only conclusion that could be made is that apps with similar presence in all stores drive in similar revenue from in-app purchases. Summing these revenues or directly comparing them is not very meaningful.
Comments
I don't believe them either. There is no way they could assemble an accurate estimate based on their limited sampling.
Taking the limits of the survey, this is easily plausible. I do not understand the negative reactions?
Taking the limits of the survey, this is easily plausible. I do not understand the negative reactions?
Yeah...
As I read it:
If you have a popular cross-platform game or eReader app that exists on iOS and Android -- you will make 3-4 x as much money on in-app purchases over Google's Store (except that popular cross-platform game eReader apps on iOS don't allow in-app purchases)
I don't know what that means...
It would be very useful to know the apps being measured and whatever other metrics they can provide.
Impressive numbers Amazon.
Absolutely not the case.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
Absolutely not the case.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
This make a lot more sense than the in-app conspiracy theorists.
I read the linked article and posted the methodology below:
Edit: I do teach my grandkids to read carefully and critically -- it has served my family very well over the years.
You're faulting me for not reading the multiple links and not the AI reporting as such?
Rich.
You're faulting me for not reading the multiple links and not the AI reporting as such?
Rich.
Get used to AI, they grab the juicy parts and leave out the facts.
Absolutely not the case.
It is comparing apples and oranges. To compare something in equilibrium with something that is ramping up rapidly makes no sense whatsoever.
In the initial stages of the life of a new device (such as the Fire, which is only a few months old), almost all the apps in the device are new and recently purchased. By comparison, I did not buy a single new app from the iTunes Store even though I have 150 apps on my new iPad.
I can buy this. Not only is the Fire new but the store is new and just became available to all Android devices. This would also generate an inflated purchase arc because of the newness. With that said though, the Amazon store is very nice and I prefer it over the Google one and IMHO, compares favorably to the Apple App Store. Amazon gives away one paid app every 24 hours, makes me open the store each day to look which sometimes generates a purchase from me.
You're faulting me for not reading the multiple links and not the AI reporting as such?
Rich.
Yes!
Do you pick up the New York Times (or any newspaper), read an OpEd piece, then accept it as fact -- without even evaluating any citations provided... Or at the very least consider supporting and opposing opinions?
If you accept anything that AI (or any web site, blog, etc.) says at face value -- you've got some hard lessons to learn in the real world!
I can buy this. Not only is the Fire new but the store is new and just became available to all Android devices. This would also generate an inflated purchase arc because of the newness. With that said though, the Amazon store is very nice and I prefer it over the Google one and IMHO, compares favorably to the Apple App Store.
I have not used the Amazon App Store, but I suspect it is well done -- based upon using the regular Amazon Store...
Can you integrate app purchases, with digital music purchases, and physical hard-good purchases?
If so, I think Amazon would have a significant advantage over any store that sells only digital (download) media and apps.
I thought of that, and if it were averaged out per device, but I have no way knowing if the specifics so while it seems highly suspect I'll still give a golf clap to the impressive numbers shown here.
SolipsismX, how can you possibly say that a set of reported numbers are suspect but impressive at the same time? What am I missing ? Unless you're saying .... It's probably not true, but what a lie, huh ?
I looked at the same AI article that you did, and I know you're familiar with the past history of Apple/Flurry so given that history and given the old saw about how "figures lie and liars figure" (Flurry, not you ) I'm wondering how you "square that circle."
Can you integrate app purchases, with digital music purchases, and physical hard-good purchases?
Yes, my Amazon account goes across all platforms and purchases. This is a good thing BUT can be dangerous when you have a 15 year old with a Fire. Her Fire is attached to my account and if she wanted could easily purchase whatever she wanted. Thankfully she understands this and I have not had problems but you read about people getting $2000 bills because of this stuff.
SolipsismX, how can you possibly say that a set of reported numbers are suspect but impressive at the same time? What am I missing ? Unless you're saying .... It's probably not true, but what a lie, huh ?
I looked at the same AI article that you did, and I know you're familiar with the past history of Apple/Flurry so given that history and given the old saw about how "figures lie and liars figure" (Flurry, not you ) I'm wondering how you "square that circle."
I took his comments as the method was suspect but within that method the numbers are impressive.
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
"The statistics come from 11 million daily active users of top-ranked applications available on iOS, Amazon and Android"
Limited set of applications. straight from the article.
A new analysis shows that Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers than Google Play, though Apple's iOS App Store remains the market leader. [END=QUOTE]
Someone failed basic statistics here. No where in the story does the author say that the analysis is of a limited set of applications, but the headline and first paragraph give the impression that for every $1.00 of revenue generated by Apple Amazon earns $0.89 and Google earn $0.23. That is only true of the apps that make up the universe of this comparison.
Total revenues are a different story and the author should have said so.
Oye! Oye!
The way this article was headlined and written it is nothing but link bait!
The AI author did not bother to read/understand the underlying the study -- rather he took some specific, qualified numbers and sensationalized them into a grossly misleading headline and article...
His only demonstrated journalistic integrity was linking to the underlying article -- so anyone interested could discern the facts/validity of the assertions for himself.
Oye! Oye!
The way this article was headlined and written it is nothing but link bait!
The AI author did not bother to read/understand the underlying the study -- rather he took some specific, qualified numbers and sensationalized them into a grossly misleading headline and article...
His only demonstrated journalistic integrity was linking to the underlying article -- so anyone interested could discern the facts/validity of the assertions for himself.
The AI way, at least it was linked. Been some before with no linky.
"The statistics come from 11 million daily active users of top-ranked applications available on iOS, Amazon and Android"
Limited set of applications. straight from the article.
Yes, but... The AI article didn't say this was for "in-app-purchases".
I certainly suspect if an app has 11 million daily active users -- that it is a game or eReader app.
I control all the purchases on our iDevices -- and we very seldom make in-app purchases... but we have 870 apps, 148 iBooks, 3 Kindle Books and 4 Nook Books. Almost all the eBooks are in-app purchases. I would bet we have made less than 75 in-app purchases for games and less than 15 for serious (less-popular) apps.
That's over a span of approximately 1 year -- In app purchases were initiated on Apr 15, 2011.
So, for our household of 2 adults and 3 teenagers -- these stats have no meaning.
I estimate we spent approximately:
-- $150 on new apps and books in the 45 days of the study period.
-- $10 on in-app game purchases in the 45 days of the study period (the grandkids have to pay me to make these purchases).
To make this study's stats have any meaning -- it would help to know the app categories... tho I surmise it is games and eBooks.
- Each Amazon user generates $0.89 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.
- Each Android user generates $0.23 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.
It makes no mention of the total number of users on each platform. If Applw has 1,000 users and Amazon has 300, Amazon isn't making 89% of what Applw generates.
IMO, this is not purposes for a comparison to Apple, which is why Apple is set at the absolute value. The purpose is to compare Amazon users to Android users, and it's showing that Amazon users spend more than Android users.
Please note I do not endorse the method of collecting the data, as it is likely a flawed approach.
Also, since the fire was released in Dec, the amount of apps purchased from jan-feb should be high.
We examine a basket of top-ranked apps that have similar presence across iOS, Amazon and Android.
Alas, this is not a particularly useful approach to generate informative comparisons. By pre-selecting apps with "similar presence", the authors of the study have biased it towards similar results across platforms. Their method throws out the information about how many such top-ranked apps are sold in each app store, and if there are any large differences between the lower-ranked apps.
The only conclusion that could be made is that apps with similar presence in all stores drive in similar revenue from in-app purchases. Summing these revenues or directly comparing them is not very meaningful.