Could Someone Explain the Economics of Leaving App Development to 3rd Parties?

44Joan

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
41
0
0
Visit site
I had to return my S2 because it just didn't offer enough to make it cost-effective (biggest functionality missing for me was no Google Tasks app). It's been frustrating as the watch flawless took voice memo's, which was the other major thing I was looking for.

Just curious why it has to be this way? In order to ensure success, why doesn't Samsung just hire a slew of programmers (or buy a company or something) and crank out core apps that would make the watch more attractive to a broader set of people?
 

Rukbat

Retired Moderator
Feb 12, 2012
44,529
27
0
Visit site
Because a lot of apps are developed because the developer needs the app and, once he has it working, he releases it to make a little money. And never writes another app. So Samsung (or whomever) would have to keep hiring people who had an idea for an app, and the skill to bring it from idea to marketable app, over and over. IOW, they'd have just about every developer in the world passing through their doors.

Why isn't there just one cellphone manufacturer? One car manufacturer? One world company?

If I want to develop an app, your way means that I have to get a job with Samsung. What if I don't want to? I'm not allowed to develop my app?
 

44Joan

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
41
0
0
Visit site
Doesn't have to be either / or. Samsung could hire developers to develop "core" apps (e.g., GOOGLE TASKS!), and still have ecosystem be open to outside developers who do whatever they want.
 

tstreete

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2015
142
0
0
Visit site
Interesting question. Before the microcomputer appeared in the late 1970s, most computer companies tried to provide complete software systems with their machines; DEC, Wang, and a bunch of other companies went under in the 1980s because upstarts like the Apple II just provided a platform and let a thousand flowers blossom. Ever since, companies have had to find the ideal mix of openness vs. completeness, and have often not done very well at it. Samsung did provide a handful of core apps and functions, and have been hoping they can let independent developers do the rest. That's been rocky so far, but there has been some progress. Remains to be seen how it all plays out.
 

slev

Member
Jan 27, 2016
23
0
0
Visit site
Because Samsung really wants to push Tizen. They have a Tizen based phone as well. Their goal is to make Tizen as robust as Android. If they could (tip: they likely can't) they'd be able to sell the Galaxy as a Tizen phone and distance themselves from Google. Their problem is they're behind on everything, S-Voice is mediocre, The Samsung App store is nearly empty, and Tizen just doesn't do enough to make people switch.

This is their attempt to drive the switch, sadly it's pretty bad.
 

supersoulfly

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2010
144
0
0
Visit site
I had to return my S2 because it just didn't offer enough to make it cost-effective (biggest functionality missing for me was no Google Tasks app). It's been frustrating as the watch flawless took voice memo's, which was the other major thing I was looking for.

Just curious why it has to be this way? In order to ensure success, why doesn't Samsung just hire a slew of programmers (or buy a company or something) and crank out core apps that would make the watch more attractive to a broader set of people?


There is a tasker app available for the S2. I use it all the time.

If you were expecting a fully formed app market this is the wrong platform for you. It just started in October. It takes time. Won't truly develop unless Samsung maintains it and uses the same market for future hardware like the S3. As it is, it's an early adopter period now. Not for everyone. I personally love it. Get to experience a product improve over time.
 

evlarberryman

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2016
231
0
0
Visit site
Does somebody have a case of the Mondays? I believe he was simply weighing in that another task manager was available in case you weren't aware.

I find that people in this forum try to be helpful, even if they don't directly address your question. I hope you get an answer to your seemingly ambivalent and perhaps existential question soon.

Posted via the Android Central App
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Laura Knotek

Moderator Captain
Moderator
Jan 8, 2011
11,891
4,293
113
Visit site
[WARN]Lets keep the discussion civil please. If there is a problem with a post then please report it so the Mod team can take a look, attempting to resolve it yourself is not advisable.
Thanks.[/WARN]
 

44Joan

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
41
0
0
Visit site
My question didn't involve task managers, so I fail to see the relevance of "Tasker" being available. Is the idea that with Tasker you can get around not having a specific app by developing some functionality yourself, or is there a lack of awareness of, or research into, what "Google Tasks" actually is?
 

Furious10

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2015
56
0
0
Visit site
"Google Tasks" keeps track of what you need to do. I use the calendar feature and notifications on the S2 for this. I haven't looked for a specific (copycat) app but it may be there or you can develop your own. That, to me, is the beauty of Tizen and others like it. Everyone has the potential to be a developer and apps can be developed much faster and more specific. That's why I'm "android" and not proprietary iSO. That being said, I don't have the tools or time to develop apps and rely on others to do so. It is slow but it is better than 3 months ago when I started. Tizen may or may not endure, but it takes time to know. The technology changes sooo fast it is hard to keep up. I'm sure millions of dollars have gone in to Tizen's development. If I were Samsung I'd want it to succeed. The problem with today's society is that we want it the way we want and we want it now...
Tasker was actually a good answer. With "AutoRemote", you can set up "to do" lists and have them delivered to any device by email, text, voice or whatever and however you want. Google Play has this scenario as an example: Let your wife send you a spoken shopping list when you get off work:
You can use AutoRemote with other Tasker conditions, such as the Date and Time conditions. Create a "shop=:=" command and combine it with a 5PM condition. Then, share your personal AutoRemote URL with your wife and have her send stuff she needs you to buy like "shop=:=carrots and ice cream". Then, at 5PM your phone could say that list out loud: "You need to go shopping! You need to buy carrots and ice cream".
The possibilities and conditions are endless with Tasker and its companion apps.
 
Last edited:

44Joan

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
41
0
0
Visit site
It's interesting to hear your perspective and I wonder what percent of consumers would share it (?) The other side of the coin is from the perspective of a busy, tech-aware but not tech-expert person who would look to a watch to provide some additional, fun, functionality.
In my case, I could justify the purchase of the watch if I could, say, leave my phone in my car when I go grocery shopping. For that, I need to be able to use Android or Samsung Pay and need my grocery list. As I already manage my grocery list on my phone and PC with "Tasks," it's really not worth delving into Tasker to copy that functionality, especially since the watch isn't really adding any substantive new capabilities (i.e., it'd be just sort of cool to be able to read a Google Task list on the watch.) And even if I was a Tasker expert, the functionality you describe appears pretty cumbersome for keeping a constantly changing, universally accessible list.
(Similarly, the average consumer, I'm guessing, isn't so interested in developing their own apps for something that provides marginal improvement over just using what already exists on the phone.)
To me, this all says that Samsung would have a better shot at making the watch, and Tizen overall, a success, if it "primed the pump" a bit more--i.e., find out what core functions people would like to use a smart watch for and then provide a relatively complete package that meets consumers needs in those areas. Maybe a rephrase of my original question is are they making a rational, finance-based decision or are they just missing the ability to see things from the end-user perspective?
 
Last edited:

tstreete

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2015
142
0
0
Visit site
I do leave my phone in my car when I go grocery shopping, but that's partly because my grocery store won't take mobile payments at all -- it's not just Samsung that's taking its time implementing it -- and partly because I've been using "My Notes in Gear" to keep my grocery list synced between phone and watch. I'll admit that the interface of My Notes is a bit awkward to use; I've corresponded with the developer, who claims they're working on an update that will make it better to use for shopping lists.
 

edubb256

Well-known member
Oct 22, 2010
606
0
0
Visit site
Maybe a rephrase of my original question is are they making a rational, finance-based decision or are they just missing the ability to see things from the end-user perspective?

I think the former. There are already a lot of core apps included (messaging, email, calendar, S Health, music, weather, and many more). In deciding which core apps to include, they need to determine where marginal benefit equals marginal cost. You mentioned Google Tasks as a core app. I wonder how many consumers would consider that a core app and how for how many it would influence a purchase decision (or satisfaction of the product after purchase). Speaking for myself, I use a different platform for managing my ToDo list and would not see any benefit in Samsung developing an app for Google Tasks. I don't even think Google has a Google Tasks app for Android.
 

Furious10

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2015
56
0
0
Visit site
In my case, I could justify the purchase of the watch if I could, say, leave my phone in my car when I go grocery shopping. For that, I need to be able to use Android or Samsung Pay and need my grocery list. As I already manage my grocery list on my phone and PC with "Tasks," it's really not worth delving into Tasker to copy that functionality, especially since the watch isn't really adding any substantive new capabilities (i.e., it'd be just sort of cool to be able to read a Google Task list on the watch.) And even if I was a Tasker expert, the functionality you describe appears pretty cumbersome for keeping a constantly changing, universally accessible list.
To me, this all says that Samsung would have a better shot at making the watch, and Tizen overall, a success, if it "primed the pump" a bit more--i.e., find out what core functions people would like to use a smart watch for and then provide a relatively complete package that meets consumers needs in those areas. Maybe a rephrase of my original question is are they making a rational, finance-based decision or are they just missing the ability to see things from the end-user perspective?
I use an app called "shopping lists" that is on the watch and it is a standalone...I add (speak) things directly to the watch. I am waiting for Samsung Pay to be available on the watch. These watches are not for everybody...my own husband has no interest in them what-so-ever. I think, for Samsung or any company, it is a matter of benefit vs cost issue. It is most likely impossible to determine "core apps". Samsung has what they consider "core apps" including email, weather, messaging, music and others based on their perception of the consumer (end-user). Perceptions don't always equate to facts. Samsung probably believes they have covered all the essentials needed. I am tech savvy and embrace/learn new technology, but am decidedly not interested in being a developer. My personal belief is Samsung has developed this platform and is waiting for others (consumer devs) to pick up the baton and run with it. Thus the Gear Watch Designer. Hundreds, if not thousands, of end-users are churning out watch faces at lightning speed. I'm sure this will eventually include applications development. In the meantime, Samsung is free to use it's resources for the "next big thing". Follow the money...
 
Last edited:

nickdeck

Well-known member
Oct 9, 2010
274
2
0
Visit site
Yup, I think Tizen just needs more time. Both Android Wear and Pebble have a lot more apps to address specific needs (daily train departure times for Stockholm, anyone?). Don't know about Apple, because they tend to be more closed up. At least with Tizen, if the demand for the watch is there, the devs will come.
 

44Joan

Active member
Nov 10, 2015
41
0
0
Visit site
Interesting article on topic is "The Gear S2 needs more apps or it will fail like every other Samsung smartwatch"
Subtitle is "Samsung's latest watch needs to make sure it fits into our lives," which is my main conclusion.
[I can't post link]
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
943,725
Messages
6,919,769
Members
3,159,186
Latest member
Johnathan319