One App Store To Rule Them All Is A Bad Idea
Published by Ewan Spence at 21:51 UTC, September 14th 2008
When your application is blacklisted because it duplicates the functions on the phone, something has gone wrong. Ewan considers the issue of a single monolithic app store, and why he thinks the Symbian way is better.
In case you missed it, last week saw a number of developers commenting on Apple's handling of a submission to the Apple iPhone Store - specifically the fact that Apple would not let an application into their store. This isn't the first time that an app has been blackballed... the irreverent 'Pull My Finger' that let out a rather rude sound on stroking a virtual finger, and the more useful 'NetShare' that let your iPhone act as a modem for your PC or Mac being two notable banned apps for reasons of 'limited utility' of the former and probably encroaching on legal issues between Apple and AT&T on the latter.
But the banning of 'Podcaster' is much more worrying - Apple refused to carry it in the store. Why? "Since Podcaster assists in the distribution of podcasts, it duplicates the functionality of the Podcast section of iTunes."
On any other platform this wouldn't be an insurmountable problem, the author would just submit the application to another online store, or even look at hosting the installation file on their own web site, perhaps using Paypal to process the transaction. Unfortunately for Apple developers, the iTunes store is by definition the only game in town.
In the long term, an open ecosystem is much better for a platform, and the ability for people to decide what to put on their devices should be paramount. Some of these banned applications may be silly, but I did love the quote though on one blog that said "I can think of many good uses for a TCP/IP whoope cushion."
And of course, having developers taking up the mantle of providing better code or applications than those built in is a good thing. I'm reminded back in the days of Psion [cue Steve...] that the application BusyView augmented the built in Agenda by providing a graphical view of when you were busy. Later versions of the Series 3 had this facility built in. Or RMR's FTP software that was initially shareware, but eventually bundled in the ROM of the Psion Netbook. Coming right up to date, the main alternative to Nokia's regular email client was provided by Lonely Cat Games (although Nokia have a beta of a new client currently available).
The open nature of programming and distribution positively encourages developers to take on any challenge. The idea of a rising tide lifting everyone is generally acknowledged, and definitely applies to the smartphone market. When you have the handset manufacturer saying you can't do anything related to the apps we already do (or are planning to do in the future that we've not told you about), how can that be reassuring for developers?
Of course Symbian has many issues that make developers think twice, such as the past fragmentation of the platform and the obscure nature of Symbian C++, but these have been addressed through the Symbian Foundation and the new languages Nokia are bringing to S60, but at least developers (and those funding them) won't suddenly have Nokia cutting off their route to market.
The argument that this is there to prevent the user experience from becoming poor is valid to a certain extent (I'm wondering just how many different Clock applications the iPhone actually needs), but there is a way for developers to to address this. If someone, such as a network operator, needs the reassurance that an application will be 'safe', then this is what Symbian Signed was designed for. Symbian OS has this certification and trust when required, but it is balanced by the open nature of "anyone can code, and anyone can distribute".
Having a solitary point of contact for discovering new applications may be great when there are 100 applications, or 1000, and it does make it somewhat easier for a new platform with people just discovering the ability to install third party apps. But as you approach 10,000 it's going to get very hard to be fair when promoting new applications, bestsellers, large publishing houses bundling 20 titles at a time, and still continue to be perceived as being a fair and level marketplace. And there's no easy route for people who have quirky or fun applications that a censor thinks is 'trivial.' One man's trivia might be another's Zen Garden.
Apple have decided on a single point of distribution (and curiously giving them almost 100% control of what appears on individual phones that people have paid a significant amount to own). Symbian have gone for a more open approach on the internet, while continuing to provide carriers with the tools to have 'trusted' applications available through their on-deck portals.
I know which model I prefer, and I know which model provides the greatest stability in the ecosystem for developers and investors. And it's the one that sits behind the largest mobile OS system on the planet.
-- Ewan Spence, September 2008
Categories: Comment
Platforms: General, S60 3rd Edition
Feature Discussion
It might look like theres lots of people using apps when you read this site and browse the forums, but in reality, only a small amount of smartphone users even know they can install apps.
Apples app store has had a huge number of people install apps, mainly because its all in one place.
You dont get people asking in the forums searching for where apps are, or if one exists which does xxxx.
Theres nothing to stop Nokia from having an app store as successful as Apple's, and still having third party sites that offer them (Samir being a good example).
The others don't have any mainly because they don't have time to trawl the net looking for it, and if they did wouldn't know how to get it too their phone and install it.
For this reason the single Appstore works, Apple's latest figures for their Appstore state that over 3000 applications are now available with over 100 million downloads since the store started in July.
http://www.intomobile.com/2008/09/09...3000-apps.html
I'd be surprised if the S60 figures are anywhere near to this,
The fact that just about any S60 application is hacked and pirated and available for free within hours of being released, adds even more weight to the argument for an Apple type store, at least their approach means that the developers of applications get fair payment for their work, personally I don't know why anyone bothers developing anything other than freeware for S60 such is the rampant piracy.
1) Apple isn't the only party that sets restrictions on the kind of apps it allows in its store. Other resellers have very similar terms and conditions, the wordings in the contracts being so similar that they appear to be drafted by the same person doing a copy&paste from a master document.
2) In the Symbian world, the manufacturer can in certain circumstances also prevent apps from being installed on a device. Symbian Signed and Manufacturer-approved capabilities come to mind.
3) Discovery is as much of a problem on a PC with a browser as it is on an on-device client. This more a matter of having a good category system and lots of ways to sort.
4) As far as I can see, Apple doesn't look at the triviality of the app. It has a policy, but the app being trivial is allowed by that policy.
5) The problem with Apple (or any other party) having lost of control is because of the fact that these phones are subsidized; "He who pays the piper gets to name the tune". The number of people paying for the entire device themselves is too low to make an impact. Compare this for instance to the games console market, where hardware is sold at a loss, and costs are recovered by letting developers pay huge licensing costs for developing for a console.
Now for the good things on the AppStore, in order of commercial importance.
A) Developers make money. The single most important issue for a commercial developer. According to a number of public statements made by developers they are making lots more money than for other platforms.
B) Fulfillment costs are very low and known. This makes it possible to let the market determine the price of an app, and it makes a mass-market approach possible. With the high fulfillment costs which is is the norm for selling Symbian software (and also WinMob, Palm etc) a commercial developer can only cater for niche markets.
C) Obvious route-to-market. Having the AppStore frontend on the device itself and making it very easy to buy and install an app, these things make shopping for iPhone apps an enjoyable experience. There's almost no hassle, no endless are-you-sure dialogs or other things that might put off the punter. Again, a mass-market approach.
So I do too know which model I prefer. AppStore is not perfect, but it is much better than what we have in the Symbian world right now.
Symbian offers choice. Choice to preselect for only signed applications of know sources or take any program. Nokia could even go for Nokia approved, Symbian signed (know origin), or unknown origin software. It's what N-gage is doing at the moment. They might be clearer to the customer about the threefold prong approach and the freedom of choice that is given. New users might go for Nokia only until more familiar with the platform's reliable 3rd party software distributors. Phones contain a lot of private information and have a pay-per-sms/call ability. As such each should be able to select his own level of desired security.
Personally, in the real world of my family, I would like a very simple controlled experience. I have set-up Apple networks and Windows networks - one for my brother and one for my sister. All I can say is that the Apple method of limited hardware choices and software compared to the Windows world of loads of choices of hardware and software is that it was SO much easier to work in the Apple world.
I think as phones are basically computers that the simpler the better for most people. Sometimes more choice = less choice. In my practical experience if something doesn't work first time then people give up.
|
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Like many readers of this site - I have to configure my families phones, computers and networks... and we all know how difficult that is!!!
|
And this is actually not the issue. The issue is wether or not you get a choice!
People are happy to make purchases from the Apple's Apps Store because it is easy to browse and make a purchase. The products are also relatively cheap and of high quality.
|
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Apple has also made sure that the software in the Apps Store are affordable and yet the quality is high. More than 95% of the high quality software are below USD10.
|
I think for s60 to reach the masses (especially in the U.S., where power users are becoming more frequent but are not the majority) they need to make the experience as user friendly as possible. One way to do this, is to create a place where they can see all the interesting things that S60 phones can do.
However, there are significant problems of how iPod / Touch and appStore are managed:
* Apple dictate what content and applications are acceptable
* Apple can refuse applications on a whim ( http://www.macrumors.com/2008/09/13/...aise-concerns/ ) - and once refused - that application cannot be offered / sold elsewhere ( except for jail breaking )
* SDK is very much crippled - no bluetooth API, no background applications etc etc.
* 3rd party Applications cannot compete with Apple applications* See link above
The sorry mess of the Symbian application discovery and vending landscape that is known well enough to the readers of this forum - that's another evil.
Now can a have a third way please? Not at the moment, as it looks. I *have* to decide - app store guarded by a just-ok dictator or a sorry mess of a market. So which do I take, as an application developper?
Hands down Apple's app store, of course. For me, that's clearly the lesser of the two evils, at least so far, at the moment.
Many people seem to have problems with the very concept of "the lesser of two evils" - probably because they cannot help themselves and continue to dream about a third, better alternative, that might appear like a miracle - where there really is none.
So the lesser of the two evils is it, then - Apple's app store.
1. my E90 will automatically download new podcasts when connected to my home WiFi network;
2. I don't need to use my laptop (and iTunes) to get podcasts into my device of choice;
3. I can listen to podcasts (and music obviously!) using Bluetooth headphones, something my iPod is not capable of.
So apple, in their infinite wisdom, have stifled an application which would be truly useful and would make great use of the iPhone's/iPod's WiFi capability, simply because it duplicates (or rather, supercedes) a function provided by iTunes; this is typical of the fascist dictator that is Mr. Jobs...
I love my iPod Touch, but would never consider buying the not-so smart smartphone...
With just one app store owned by the manufacturer, things can go wrong. Like today its a podcasting app, maybe tomorrow they'll block a browser simply because Safari (ahem) is the best browser in the world. (Steve Jobs' fantasy world maybe).
For the true spirit of competition to unleash, we need multiple app stores, exactly the way symbian has. :-)
Apple makes things simple, brilliant and stuff that JUST works..... The App store provides a single point of visibility for developers for applications, reduces the rampant piracy that is prevalent with Nokia applications and it provides way more confidence to investors than the cluttered mess symbian application distribution system has...!
|
Originally Posted by Hardeep1singh
For the true spirit of competition to unleash, we need multiple app stores, exactly the way symbian has. :-)
|
Handango is probably the best bet for software (Nokia download and the online version of it has so little software it should not even be counted) for S60, but even then lots is missing.
And it seems rather high priced to me.
Plus, who actually knows about places like Handango? Your average smartphone user doesn't.
I agree that restricting it to a single source only would not be much better.
But perhaps thats why its so fragmented? Because you can pimp your application on your own website only, many people do.
Nokia should at least try to make it as attractive for developers have it with Apple. By creating an app store as good as Apples offering, they are at least giving developers a choice.
Personally, I think this whole discussion is moot until Nokia sort it out, until then the Apple app store is going to win hands down.
|
Originally Posted by Unregistered
I don't agree that the point is moot. While I agree that Nokia's Download! store is a bit rubbish, the problem with the iTunes App Store is a fundamental one; do you want the manufacturer of your device to have total control over what applications you can install on your phone? If you don't mind, then great, the App Store is probably suitable for you. If you disagree with such a policy, and I most certainly do, then an iPhone is definitely not a good choice...
|
I do off course realise that most people aint gonna jailbreak their iPhone, but still, in a forum like this, it's worth mentioning. :)
"I think most bloggers on S60 are bias because they are power users"
No, most bloggers on S60 are bias because they get sent free phones by Nokia. And many get to go to Nokia PR events for S60 bloggers.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07...nity_paid_for/