Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android is for startups

blog.audobox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 310 posts

Re: Android is for startups

#51

Post by slantyyz »

jcromartie wrote: post #21

I know that Android users are starved for slick apps that look good and work well, because I'm one of them (when using my Nexus 7). But as a developer I know that I can't make money from them. There is no way forward for (paid) Android apps that can make a living. You need to sell on iOS in order to make any sort of revenue. So if your startup is built on a free app, then by all means use Android to test your idea. B…

>> There is no way forward for (paid) Android apps that can make a living. You need to sell on iOS in order to make any sort of revenue.

Yes, that is kind of sad. As someone who does pay for Android software, I imagine I'm in the minority. I've got extended family members who balk at the notion of paying even a dollar for software on Android.

OTOH, I'm curious how many paid apps on the iOS App store actually hit the break-even point.

Re: Android is for startups

#52

Post by drp4929 »

watty wrote: post #29
opendomain wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android Apss are easier to deploy, but becuase of that, you get bad code - or WORSE - viruses! There are several Andoid apps that are Malware - there is not one in Apple App store.

So you're saying that Android should make it more difficult to deploy to decrease malware and bad code? Come on, stop drinking the kool aid.

Trick is to find a balance in the process so that author of an App is legally identifiable. This is to avoid episodes like "Fake Angry Bird App" and "Fake Mobile Banking App".

IMO, when I download ETrade App on my smartphone, it is good to know that someone checked that it was submitted by someone who is from ETrade really. If the process is rigorous for E*Trade, so be it. But as an end user I'd prefer it to be that way instead of making it _my_ responsible to verify before installing the app.

Re: Android is for startups

#53

Post by ajross »

umsm wrote: post #44

I don't agree with this. Basically the author thinks that you can test the market if a particular idea / app is worth making by releasing on Android first. The problem is that the android users will most likely hate the UI and the bugs as it will probably be thrown together. When releasing an app on iOS, you don't have to include ALL features, you can release an app that is well designed and functions well with limit…

I'm not following your arguments at all. Android apps must inherently be buggy and "thrown together"? Android apps must "include ALL features" before release?

Re: Android is for startups

#54

Post by rpedela »

myko wrote: post #48
benihana wrote: post #39

Another post on the top of Hacker News making the mistake of thinking paying customers give a crap about how easy it is to [write|deploy|test|debug] your app. Even with all the pain associated with the App Store people still write more apps for it than ever. Why? Cause people pay for apps there. They don't on the Play Store.

> Why? Cause people pay for apps there. They don't on the Play Store. Is this based on your opinion, or what?

There is some research that backs up the claim.

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/articles/17985/20130531/ios-app...

Re: Android is for startups

#55

Post by calbear81 »

myko wrote: post #48
benihana wrote: post #39

Another post on the top of Hacker News making the mistake of thinking paying customers give a crap about how easy it is to [write|deploy|test|debug] your app. Even with all the pain associated with the App Store people still write more apps for it than ever. Why? Cause people pay for apps there. They don't on the Play Store.

> Why? Cause people pay for apps there. They don't on the Play Store. Is this based on your opinion, or what?

There's some evidence of that here: http://blog.appannie.com/app-annie-index-market-q2-2013/

People on iOS are more willing to buy apps and do more in-app purchases but the gap doesn't seem that wide to bridge, especially as iOS users move to Android.

Re: Android is for startups

#56

Post by marcosdumay »

benihana wrote: post #39

Another post on the top of Hacker News making the mistake of thinking paying customers give a crap about how easy it is to [write|deploy|test|debug] your app. Even with all the pain associated with the App Store people still write more apps for it than ever. Why? Cause people pay for apps there. They don't on the Play Store.

People also write more apps for the Play Store than ever.

Users do care how easy it is to develop, they care by proxy when they choose the earlier to market, better designed or most inovative one.

Re: Android is for startups

#57

Post by djrogers »

KirinDave wrote: post #42
opendomain wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android Apss are easier to deploy, but becuase of that, you get bad code - or WORSE - viruses! There are several Andoid apps that are Malware - there is not one in Apple App store.

Malware apps come and go in both platforms, and both platforms actively try to stop malware when it's reported. Seriously. It's documented iOS has had malware: http://www.forbes.com/sites/adriankingsleyhughes/2012/07/06/...

There's a big difference between a platform with several hundred thousand known pieces of malware in the wild vs a platform with a tiny handful of what are mostly proof-of-concept apps.

Open vs closed & other religious wars aside, it's ridiculous to imply that both platforms carry the same risk to end users.

Re: Android is for startups

#58

Post by umsm »

ajross wrote: post #53
umsm wrote: post #44

I don't agree with this. Basically the author thinks that you can test the market if a particular idea / app is worth making by releasing on Android first. The problem is that the android users will most likely hate the UI and the bugs as it will probably be thrown together. When releasing an app on iOS, you don't have to include ALL features, you can release an app that is well designed and functions well with limit…

I'm not following your arguments at all. Android apps must inherently be buggy and "thrown together"? Android apps must "include ALL features" before release?

From what I understood from the article:

- You can iterate quickly on android. If you notice that people don't care for your app, you can stop at the splash screen I assume. Or stop when you've added enough features that and yet no one is downloading.

- When you release on android, it's almost instant. This means that you don't test it as well as you should because you know you can always patch it tomorrow.

Re: Android is for startups

#59

Post by benologist »

jcromartie wrote: post #21

I know that Android users are starved for slick apps that look good and work well, because I'm one of them (when using my Nexus 7). But as a developer I know that I can't make money from them. There is no way forward for (paid) Android apps that can make a living. You need to sell on iOS in order to make any sort of revenue. So if your startup is built on a free app, then by all means use Android to test your idea. B…

The Amazon app store has millions of paying customers waiting for your app.

Re: Android is for startups

#60

Post by jamesjguthrie »

umsm wrote: post #44

I don't agree with this. Basically the author thinks that you can test the market if a particular idea / app is worth making by releasing on Android first. The problem is that the android users will most likely hate the UI and the bugs as it will probably be thrown together. When releasing an app on iOS, you don't have to include ALL features, you can release an app that is well designed and functions well with limit…

> you don't have to include ALL features

You sure do have to include a lot of features though. You've no chance if your app is a simple one because you'll get hit with one of these:

2.12: Apps that are not very useful, are simply web sites bundled as apps, or do not provide any lasting entertainment value may be rejected

Post reply on HN