We dont need separated Android "App stores"

[davidnc]

I really only use one store anyhoo, Market Place /app brain. lol

 

[DenverRalphy]

What if Angry Birds, the most popular game available on Android was ONLY available on the T-Mobile store? Not the Google Marketplace, not the AT&T store, or the Verizon store or any other store for that matter.(using T-Mobile as an example..they haven't come out and said they are making a store yet however)

That would lock out everyone on other carriers, all AT&T users and will need hacking to get it to install, and all the other users will need to search the web for a hacked .apk; look at the AT&T Uverse app.. only available on AT&T devices.. this locks out all Verizon users who have AT&T Uverse.. STUPID MOVE AT&T.

1 store where EVERYTHING can be found. I(and I bet the majority of users), don't want to have to guess what app store will have a certain app.

The flaw in your logic is the assumption that a developer would make the insanely bad decision to limit their apps to a smaller demographic. Any app worth it's merit would be marketed to the largest consumer base possible. If anything, you'll find most apps become available on multiple markets.

The only time you would see an app exclusive to a carrier's app market would be when the carrier themselves developed it to be used exclusively with their service (ie.. VZ Navigator for Verizon).

A definite upside to multiple markets is that some markets will make it a point to heavily monitor the apps they sell. The major downside of the Android Market is that anybody can put their apps up there, and will reside there for quite some time before somebody notices that a particular app is malicious.

 

[sniffs]

The flaw in your logic is the assumption that a developer would make the insanely bad decision to limit their apps to a smaller demographic. Any app worth it's merit would be marketed to the largest consumer base possible. If anything, you'll find most apps become available on multiple markets.

The only time you would see an app exclusive to a carrier's app market would be when the carrier themselves developed it to be used exclusively with their service (ie.. VZ Navigator for Verizon).

A definite upside to multiple markets is that some markets will make it a point to heavily monitor the apps they sell. The major downside of the Android Market is that anybody can put their apps up there, and will reside there for quite some time before somebody notices that a particular app is malicious.

There's no flaw here. If a dev wants to open his app to multiple "markets" why aren't the VAST majority of the great apps on the iPhone app store on the Android Market?

 

[DenverRalphy]

There's no flaw here. If a dev wants to open his app to multiple "markets" why aren't the VAST majority of the great apps on the iPhone app store on the Android Market?

Really? iPhone apps aren't in the Android Market? Of course not. Do you really not see the difference here?

 

[Insp_Gadget]

The flaw in your logic is the assumption that a developer would make the insanely bad decision to limit their apps to a smaller demographic. Any app worth it's merit would be marketed to the largest consumer base possible. If anything, you'll find most apps become available on multiple markets.

The only time you would see an app exclusive to a carrier's app market would be when the carrier themselves developed it to be used exclusively with their service (ie.. VZ Navigator for Verizon).

A definite upside to multiple markets is that some markets will make it a point to heavily monitor the apps they sell. The major downside of the Android Market is that anybody can put their apps up there, and will reside there for quite some time before somebody notices that a particular app is malicious.

You're assuming that the decision to have an app available on all markets is left solely to the developer. The potential problem is that the carriers have a bad habit of striking exclusivity deals in order to differentiate themselves.

They do it with phone manufacturers all the time. What's to stop carriers from saying "If you want your app in OUR market then you can't publish it anywhere else."? If you want examples of this in action, look at the game console market. It already happens there. Certain games simply aren't available on other platforms because of exclusivity deals, not because of technical limitations or lack of interest on the part of developers.

 

[sniffs]

Really? iPhone apps aren't in the Android Market? Of course not. Do you really not see the difference here?

Notice I said "vast" majority?

Where are all the good games at? Plants v Zombies? Defender Chronicles? StarDefense? PocketGod? PocketLegends? Sentinel(both)? etc..

Those are all developers limiting themselves to 1 market. iPhone. Just like if there were multiple app stores..developers would limit themselves to 1 market..especially if there were exclusivity royalties.

 

[kenyee]

handster apparently is setting up a new market for LG. This is really getting out of hand...

 

[sniffs]

Terrific...

 

[DenverRalphy]

You're assuming that the decision to have an app available on all markets is left solely to the developer. The potential problem is that the carriers have a bad habit of striking exclusivity deals in order to differentiate themselves.

They do it with phone manufacturers all the time. What's to stop carriers from saying "If you want your app in OUR market then you can't publish it anywhere else."? If you want examples of this in action, look at the game console market. It already happens there. Certain games simply aren't available on other platforms because of exclusivity deals, not because of technical limitations or lack of interest on the part of developers.

As I mentioned earlier, the assumption here is that a developer would make the drastic mistake of locking themselves into a really bad deal. Sure, let a market make such demands... any developer with a quality product would tell them to go suck a rock, and sell to the largest consumer base possible.

The Smartphone market is NOT the same as a game console market. Not by a close margin. If it were to happen, it would already be happening; and as it stands now, it isn't. The addition of more android markets would not negatively impact the Platform development at all. If anything, it would promote more Android development because it allows for a larger consumer base.

Notice I said "vast" majority?

Where are all the good games at? Plants v Zombies? Defender Chronicles? StarDefense? PocketGod? PocketLegends? Sentinel(both)? etc..

Those are all developers limiting themselves to 1 market. iPhone. Just like if there were multiple app stores..developers would limit themselves to 1 market..especially if there were exclusivity royalties.

You're arguing different platforms when the basis of this topic is additional Android markets. Pick one or the other to champion. Platform development, or additional Android markets, which is it you're trying to argue?

The examples you cite in that quote have already announced they are working on Android versions. They haven't limited themselves, they just haven't completed expansion yet (big difference). So they're now actively expanding cross platform. With that effort, do you honestly think they will limit themselves to a smaller Android market by selecting one that will limit their sales?

You really need to check your pessimism.

 

[bucky716]

I don't get it. You can already download apps from a ton of different web sites.. the same with Blackberry's, you can download apps from different places too. Choices are better.. otherwise you end up with one store that controls everything and gets to pick and choose what developers can make. What fun is that?

 

[Insp_Gadget]

As I mentioned earlier, the assumption here is that a developer would make the drastic mistake of locking themselves into a really bad deal. Sure, let a market make such demands... any developer with a quality product would tell them to go suck a rock, and sell to the largest consumer base possible.

The Smartphone market is NOT the same as a game console market. Not by a close margin. If it were to happen, it would already be happening; and as it stands now, it isn't. The addition of more android markets would not negatively impact the Platform development at all. If anything, it would promote more Android development because it allows for a larger consumer base.

How soon people forget. It's already happening. How long did we wait for the exclusivity deal between Skype and Verizon to end before non-Verizon Android phones could (legally) get the Skype client? Those kinds of deals are exactly what I'm talking about, and they will only grow when Verizon and its rivals open their own stores.

The smartphone market has changed due to Apple's influence. App stores are in command of distribution of apps now, not the individual developers. It is very possible and even probable that developers (especially small ones) can be strong-armed into exclusivity deals in order to get visibility for their apps... especially if the likes of Verizon restrict their phones to only allow purchases through the Verizon Market, and lock out the Android Market (something I can see Verizon and other carriers doing).

All I'm saying is that we consumers need to be cautiously optimistic with regard to carrier-based app stores. Carriers have screwed us far too many times for us to NOT be cautious. A tiger doesn't change its stripes overnight.

 

[DenverRalphy]

How soon people forget. It's already happening. How long did we wait for the exclusivity deal between Skype and Verizon to end before non-Verizon Android phones could (legally) get the Skype client? Those kinds of deals are exactly what I'm talking about, and they will only grow when Verizon and its rivals open their own stores.

Actually, I well remember that deal. And Skype kicked themselves in the pants for doing it (and they're still kicking themselves, as the deal with Verizon still isn't over). The whole debacle is an active example demonstrating the folly of limiting your consumer base. The whole thing is a laughing stock internet wide, and Skype isn't thrilled with their decision either. As well it doesn't help that Skype's Android app is actually a piece of crap.

 

[Insp_Gadget]

U

Actually, I well remember that deal. And Skype kicked themselves in the pants for doing it (and they're still kicking themselves, as the deal with Verizon still isn't over). The whole debacle is an active example demonstrating the folly of limiting your consumer base. The whole thing is a laughing stock internet wide, and Skype isn't thrilled with their decision either. As well it doesn't help that Skype's Android app is actually a piece of crap.

My point is Skype got in bed with the Devil (a carrier) and the result is their product for Android is only a shadow of what it should be. They're so worried about alienating Verizon and Apple, that they've gimped the Android version.

And all this is without a carrier-based app market. Imagine what would have happened if Verizon had their own Android market.

I don't trust the carriers to have our best interest at heart when it comes to app availability. Their track record shows that they'll use it to screw us rather than help the platform.

 

[sniffs]

As I mentioned earlier, the assumption here is that a developer would make the drastic mistake of locking themselves into a really bad deal. Sure, let a market make such demands... any developer with a quality product would tell them to go suck a rock, and sell to the largest consumer base possible.

The Smartphone market is NOT the same as a game console market. Not by a close margin. If it were to happen, it would already be happening; and as it stands now, it isn't. The addition of more android markets would not negatively impact the Platform development at all. If anything, it would promote more Android development because it allows for a larger consumer base.



You're arguing different platforms when the basis of this topic is additional Android markets. Pick one or the other to champion. Platform development, or additional Android markets, which is it you're trying to argue?

The examples you cite in that quote have already announced they are working on Android versions. They haven't limited themselves, they just haven't completed expansion yet (big difference). So they're now actively expanding cross platform. With that effort, do you honestly think they will limit themselves to a smaller Android market by selecting one that will limit their sales?

You really need to check your pessimism.

Do you not see the similarities I'm trying to bring up? Regardless if they are a different platform, they are different "markets"..Platform or different market's the theme is the same. Developers limiting them self to one market, (market meaning phone app store).

If Developers really wanted massive exposure, why not bring to both?

Smaller Android market? for how long? It's already dominating most other platforms in sales recently.. to not bring these iPhone apps to the Android platform is only hurting themselves.

You can go ahead and state that having multiple markets is good for choice.
It's good as long as both markets have the same app.

Imagine Target sold a cheap cordless drill and Wal-Mart didnt.. yet you have been banned from buying at Target. Same premise.. cheap app on AT&T app store, not available on Verizon.

 

[sniffs]

How soon people forget. It's already happening. How long did we wait for the exclusivity deal between Skype and Verizon to end before non-Verizon Android phones could (legally) get the Skype client? Those kinds of deals are exactly what I'm talking about, and they will only grow when Verizon and its rivals open their own stores.

The smartphone market has changed due to Apple's influence. App stores are in command of distribution of apps now, not the individual developers. It is very possible and even probable that developers (especially small ones) can be strong-armed into exclusivity deals in order to get visibility for their apps... especially if the likes of Verizon restrict their phones to only allow purchases through the Verizon Market, and lock out the Android Market (something I can see Verizon and other carriers doing).

All I'm saying is that we consumers need to be cautiously optimistic with regard to carrier-based app stores. Carriers have screwed us far too many times for us to NOT be cautious. A tiger doesn't change its stripes overnight.

Exactly!