

   Why Aren't Android Developers Flocking To The iPhone? - vascoos01
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/6/three_reasons_why_android_developers_aren_t_flocking_to_the_iphone

======
mdasen
Would you want to play by Apple's rules? While I wouldn't want to be beholden
to Google any more than Apple, Google doesn't own and control Android any more
than Linus owns and controls Linux. Android avoids lock-in. Should Google move
against you, screw them! You have their source code. Really, the manufacturers
are the bigger obstacle and there are enough of them that they're unlikely to
try as much as a monopoly would.

Apple's user-base is attractive, but it's also putting your eggs into a basket
that can be taken away from you at any time. I love Apple, but I can
understand why people would be hesitant to throw money in that direction.

~~~
elad
That and more: Apple's platform probably won't be adopted by anyone else, so
even though the user base is attractive right now, down the road it would look
diminutive compared with the user base for an open platform that could gain
support of multiple vendors.

7-8 years ago I used to develop mobile apps in both Palm OS (closed platform,
just one vendor) and J2ME (open, widely adopted). Palm had the more attractive
installed base back then, but as their fortunes changed, that investment is
now worthless. Compare with J2ME, which kept growing thanks to support by most
vendors.

~~~
abstractwater
The most significant difference IMO is the distribution model. An iPhone user
will have one place to look for new apps: the Apps Store. Whatever app s/he is
looking for, it will be there or not be at all. That's a huge advantage for a
software developer. An advantage the Palm didn't have.

Also: sure, in 8 years the iPhone may be dead and Apple bankrupt, but (1) do
you really think so? and (2) do you really need to plan that far in advance?

~~~
elad
Palm actually did have the distribution in place - through palmgear
(interestingly, it still exist) which was THE go-to place for Palm apps.

Regarding advantages to the software developer, having just one place where
you distribute, and that place being controlled by Apple, isn't a good thing
at all. It may mean that it's easier to start selling, but also that you have
no negotiating power if and when your app becomes a success.

The stupid music companies managed to hand over the keys to their distribution
to Steve Jobs, but they're not exactly happy about the fact that he now has so
much control over their fate. Apple's great at creating consumer electronics
that actually appeals to people, but they don't seem to be a very nice company
to deal with as a business.

------
KirinDave
It always stuns me when software developers say, "I don't know <language
here>, so that isn't an option."

Good programmers don't learn languages, they learn methodologies. You don't
learn how to program in Lisp, you learn how to program functionally with
flexible syntax. You don't learn Objective-C, you learn how to write good code
in a message-passing OO system.

Sure, the libraries can take some time to acclimate too, but this is _our
job!_ I just shake my head and sigh where I hear programming language is the
barrier. I can never tell if it's a clever excuse for the press, or if people
actually believe it.

~~~
elad
That's true on the sole hacker level. If you're considering writing some
mobile apps, and the iphone seems like a nice platform, then learning a new
language for the purpose should seem like an opportunity, not a problem.

However, I guess the article refers to a mobile app shop that wants to make
money, and that's when economic considerations set in. New language/framework
means an investment in re-training your (mostly average) developers.
Objective-C vs. Java also means having a tougher time locating experienced
developers. In short, it makes less business sense.

------
mechanical_fish
It's easy to love a platform that hasn't shipped yet. There's no ugly reality
to interfere with your beautiful dreams.

As long as Android has no paying customers, it's easy for it to be great.
There are no tough compromises to be made. There's no battery to be drained by
your resource-hungry app, and no customer to complain about that drained
battery. There's no need to broker deals with carriers (who, incidentally,
have stricter and stupider rules than Apple ever will), no need for effective
marketing, no need to worry about market share or competitors or profits or
even _prices_. There isn't even any need to fix your bugs. You can live
happily in cloud-cuckoo-land; a place where your apps can do anything they
want (take over the phone? use 85% of the available bandwidth? accidentally
overwrite other application's databases?) without ethical, legal, or physical
constraint; a place in which you don't even have to _study_ anything in order
to develop gorgeous, easy-to-use, insanely profitable mobile applications.

Meanwhile, Apple is very, very likely to do to Android what they did to the
Linux desktop: Deliver 85% of the features and 175% of the usability in a
consistent, beautiful, well-marketed package that will promptly become the
platform of choice for users who have any money... who, incidentally, are also
the users that are most likely to spend money on third-party software.

------
pmjordan
I don't know, Objective C seems a relatively minor issue to me. (although I
have to admit I don't know Obj-C either)

Right now, developing for the iPhone seems scarily similar to developing for a
game console in the amount of politics and bureaucracy involved.

~~~
Tamerlin
The only thing that makes learning Objective-C difficult for me is
availability, because AFAIK I can't compile Obj-C code on anything but a mac,
and I don't happen to have one.

Other than that, I agree... it's just another programming language, and from
my experience spending a little bit of time learning it when I worked for a
company that provided me a mac, it's a pretty nice language. (That was v2. I
hear v3 is significantly improved.)

Some day I might add a mac to my computer lineup, but for now it's not
feasible, largley due to financial constraints... meaning that although I'm
not exactly struggling to make the mortgage payments, my budget is finite, and
I have other priorities besides yet another computer at the moment :)

~~~
MaysonL
gcc + gnustep is available for many non-Mac machines

~~~
davidw
And the emulator? Developing cell phone apps without an emulator is... not an
easy thing.

------
tstegart
I suggest that Android developers get on the iPhone bandwagon soon, or they'll
be toast. Android might sound nice on paper, but it doesn't actually sell
applications. It will be spread out over who knows how many phones, each
having different requirements. There is unlikely to be a central place selling
applications that does it as well as the App Store will. Why develop for
Android when you can work out all the kinks on the iPhone platform and THEN
port it over to popular Android phones? iPhone developers will have a head
start, so it makes business sense to start there first. Closed systems to have
their advantages, and developers are ignoring them at their peril.

------
byrneseyeview
A side note:

When people who aren't brokers or traders are referring to companies by stock
symbol rather than name, sell.

~~~
jamesbritt
I was wonder that myself. In my mind I was trying to parse "American
Association of ... what? Programming Lanaguages?" until it clicked.

------
evgen
I would probably guess that this is because it is easier to develop for a
nebulous piece of vaporware than an actual product platform. If you are
developing for the latter then eventually people expect your code to work and
ship, while for the former allows you to write endless blog posts about how
your port of the Duke Nukem Forever engine is going to look...

------
adsyoung
We're currently developing in Android as it seemed the easiest path to getting
a prototype of our idea up and running. We kinda figure that getting to play
with something and refine the idea based on the experience is more important
at this early stage as the platforms are settling down. We can always rewrite
it later. Do you guys think am I being ridiculously naive in underestimating
the importance of picking the winning platform early on?

~~~
tstegart
Nope. Any entrepreneur can get a solid business going if its a great idea and
done right. Its just that the iPhone platform is going to be done first, so if
people have apps done for that they can work on their Android stuff while
they're selling on the iPhone. If you're in a crowded genre, you'll be
fighting uphill for a bit, but if your idea stands on its own then take the
time to do it right, no matter what platform you choose.

------
kschrader
It seems to me that most of the more compelling apps on these platforms will
be heavily server dependent anyway (location data, etc).

If that's the case, then presumably a lot of the heavy lifting will be done on
the back end and writing multiple front ends won't be a huge problem. (i.e.
Loopt)

------
TrevorJ
They may, when revenue for the Apple aps starts to come in.

~~~
jsjenkins168
Then they may go back to Android, when they realize Apple is taking 30% of
their app revenue first.

~~~
ComputerGuru
I'm not a mobile developer, but if I were, that wouldn't bother me. The
concept of an app store shipping on every iPhone and Apple doing the marketing
for you... it's pretty enticing and IMHO well worth that 30%. I'd imagine a
high-profile application (read: fad) would gather more money, traffic, and
downloads on a forced-down-your-throught app store on the iPhone than on
Android where your users have to go more or less out of their way to get it.

~~~
jsjenkins168
Google has said that they intend to offer an "AppStore" for Android, much like
Apples.

The differences however will be: 1) You do not _have_ to use it. 2) They will
take much less than 30% (so they say)

While I agree with you for small-scale apps made by individuals, I think
AppStore is a problem for startups looking to monetize their apps on a larger
scale. 30% is a huge chuck off your total revenue any way you slice it. And
remember, there is _no_ legal alternative to AppStore for the iPhone.

~~~
tstegart
Good point. However, many applications monetized on a larger scale are built
on advertising models, which don't have to give a cut to Apple. But you're
right, traditional, expensive, stand-alone software is going to take a hit. On
the other hand, its not like this will mean developers will lose money, they
will just be paying more than they should for the value they get from the App
Store. Actually, they're likely to make the same profit as their competitors
who will also have to give a cut. Either way, Apple can always change its mind
and give discounts for large volume sellers, expensive apps, etc, these rules
aren't set in stone. Thats the best part about setting limits. Its easier to
relax them than to set limits where none before existed.

