App Store Increases Revenue Lead Over Google Play in Q1 2015

[mejsric]

Right. That's why Android users had 70% more app downloads that Apple users.

My classmate keep reseting his android phone co'z it get laggy day by day.

or Maybe because they keep resetting their phone and download all apps again?

 

[sinsin07]

Right. That's why Android users had 70% more app downloads that Apple users.

Yes. App downloads are more important than income.

 

[sinsin07]

Also, why do you sound bitter about this article?

The answer to this question is obvious. It makes Android users appear not to spend any money.

This sums it up nicely:
Disparity between iOS and Android users

----------

Or the fact that many apps on android are free. Having had both android and iOS. There are apps that were free on android that I had to pay for on iOS. Since I got my iPhone 6+ I find myself spending more money on apps then I normally would have spent when I had my gs4 and note 4.

What that means is iOS app purchasers are subsidizing Android apps.

Sort of like an app welfare for Android.

I get so tired of the elitist attitude that android is for poor people.

See link above in this post.

 

[e93to]

I have Galaxy Tablet 10.1, and it's true many apps are free (all Angry Birds games are free on Android...). I also noticed that Androids lack quite a lot of professional apps. I am an engineering PhD student, and I found a lot more iOS apps that suit my study needs.

As for the map showing the divide between iOS and Android users based on locations... Well... 95% of those around me don't have Twitter accounts. And those who have Twitter accounts have distinctive personalities (they prefer Apple products, etc.).

 

[sinsin07]

As for the map showing the divide between iOS and Android users based on locations... Well... 95% of those around me don't have Twitter accounts. And those who have Twitter accounts have distinctive personalities (they prefer Apple products, etc.).

Anecdotal experience is proof of nothing.

You can easily see how many tweets are around you here:
Twitter Mapbox

 

[Robisan]

70% more app downloads and yet devs make a lot less money. Doesn't sound like a very good business model.

As mentioned upthread, direct payment for apps is not the only revenue source for apps. Many free apps derived ad revenue not counted here. If you're going to examine business models then look at them in totality.

----------

Also, why do you sound bitter about this article?

Not bitter at all. To the contrary, I'm LMAO at the fish in the barrel clapping louder about being such easy marks.

 

[e93to]

Anecdotal experience is proof of nothing.

You can easily see how many tweets are around you here:
Twitter Mapbox

http://www.ibtimes.com/breakdown-facebook-instagram-twitter-users-infographic-1616600

Those are a lot of wealthy 15-19 and 20-24 year olds.

 

[crazy dave]

I think the biggest reason for the disparity is competition. The App Store has none. GP Store has competition from multiple sources.

It's funny how some in this forum like to say iPhone users have & are willing to spend more money but will complain like tightwads about spending more than $0.99 on an app.

Either way. Neither company is hurting.

Because of the agency model, most digital stores on most platforms (even PC) tend not to compete on price. App stores in the same ecosystem (or even across ecosystems) compete with each other on app exclusivity, curation, and buying experience, but the developer of the App often sets the price. Even the 30% cut that stores take for selling apps is pretty standard and discount sales are often, though not always, offered at the same time at the same discount level on multiple stores. This also applies to other digital goods (think about the recent music industry articles & Apple trying - and failing - to undercut its competitors on price). It even applies to physical goods (though less often).

The difference seen in the graphs from the story is often attributed to a difference in the type of users in each ecosystem. Generally iPhone/iPad users are seen as able and willing to pay more, just generally wealthier, than Android users - and there are some stats to back that up. So when developers make their cross-platform apps, they set their price and ad-reliance relative to what they think users in each ecosystem can/will pay upfront. Which also means if you are an Android user who buys an Android flagship phone and could pay like an iPhone user, then it is a good deal in many ways as the same apps are likely to be cheaper, though possibly at the cost of seeing a greater number of ads (which may or may not bother you). As for iPhone users complaining about $0.99 apps, everyone complains about everything - this is the internet .

But also, quite agree, neither platform or company is really hurting .

 

[k995]

The question is then whether the extra work is worth entering that market, and that might not be the case for some developers. It is less likely to be worth it for small developers.

Yet the google play app store has more apps now (and has for a couple of months)

http://mashable.com/2015/01/15/google-play-more-apps-than-ios/

So more people are creating apps for android.

----------

Look At The graph. With Google, Developers compete with more people for less money.

Yet more apps get crated for android and the total app store is now bigger for android then for ios

http://mashable.com/2015/01/15/google-play-more-apps-than-ios/


Sorry this is a silly discussion people see at what they know/familiar with and develop for that. Actual developers (besides perhaps some pro brand complete brainwashed like some here) "Oh its only 7billion in revenue compared to apple 10 billion thats nothing "

 

[Juicy Box]

My classmate keep reseting his android phone co'z it get laggy day by day.

or Maybe because they keep resetting their phone and download all apps again?

This is funny.

I'm not saying that iOS doesn't have issues, but it seems like most people that use Android are always having issues with their phone.

Some complain about it constantly, others make excuses.

I say this, but it seems like iOS have more bugs than I ever remember lately. But certainly not a deal killer.

 

[LordVic]

The answer to this question is obvious. It makes Android users appear not to spend any money.

This sums it up nicely:
Disparity between iOS and Android users

----------

its an interesting conundrum that isn't easily as explainable with a simple line though "android is for poor people" is a very biased one sided and rather shallow claim.

There a re android devices that cost as much and offer tremendous value similar to those of iPhones.

However, unlike iPhones, there are 'cheap' options.

Disregarding contract discounts, since those with limited income or unstable income can't tend to get them, the cheapest new iPhone someone can buy, is $549 (iphone 5s on their website)

this by nature excludes 'poorer people' from entering into the market.

Android on the other hand, can be found on devices as low as $100, unlocked that are fully functional devices as standard phone and smartphone functionality (such as ****ter, facebook and the like). Nobody will ever claim these are GOOD phones, but this is the realm that poor people have no choice but to buy.

If anything, the correct statement would be, not that Android is for poor people, is that the iPhone is aimed at the affluent.

So, the stats will always skew to show that the iPhone users are generally going to spend more for stuff, because on general they do have more money.

Android is for everyone, Apple is for the Affluent

and think about it, as a tax paying individual, do you really want someone who is accepting government assistance for example buying iPhones with that money?

 

[CEmajr]

Probably has a lot to do with the fact that most of those low end junk devices in China and India that make up the majority of Android's market share don't generate any revenue for the Google Play store.

Also haven't their been articles articles published saying the average iPhone user had higher income than the average Android user? That might be another factor.

It's really remarkable seeing the sheer massive volume of Android devices on the market compared to Apple.

 

[kerrikins]

Or the fact that many apps on android are free. Having had both android and iOS. There are apps that were free on android that I had to pay for on iOS. Since I got my iPhone 6+ I find myself spending more money on apps then I normally would have spent when I had my gs4 and note 4.

I get so tired of the elitist attitude that android is for poor people.

I've never really seen anyone sniff and say 'oh, Android is for ~poor~ people'. Instead it is rightfully pointed out that Android has a lot of lower cost devices that are available in emerging markets that are very popular, and those emerging markets tend to have less discretionary income to spend on apps for their phone.

 

[firewood]

Or the fact that many apps on android are free. Having had both android and iOS. There are apps that were free on android that I had to pay for on iOS. Since I got my iPhone 6+ I find myself spending more money on apps then I normally would have spent when I had my gs4 and note 4.

I get so tired of the elitist attitude that android is for poor people.

Those apps are free on android because developers have found out that if they make their android apps paid, they get no money and no downloads. That really encourages developers to want to improve and do more android apps Not.

Kid gets 2 jobs offers (much better than one or none), one job for $7/hr one in a busy mall, the other for $12/hr in an upscale shopping district. Which job will most kids choose?

 

[sinsin07]

its an interesting conundrum that isn't easily as explainable with a simple line though "android is for poor people" is a very biased one sided and rather shallow claim.

You start with the above, and end in this:

and think about it, as a tax paying individual, do you really want someone who is accepting government assistance for example buying iPhones with that money?

snip...Disregarding contract discounts, since those with limited income or unstable income can't tend to get them, the cheapest new iPhone someone can buy, is $549 (iphone 5s on their website)

this by nature excludes 'poorer people' from entering into the market.

Android on the other hand, can be found on devices as low as $100, unlocked that are fully functional devices as standard phone and smartphone functionality (such as ****ter, facebook and the like). Nobody will ever claim these are GOOD phones, but this is the realm that poor people have no choice but to buy.

If anything, the correct statement would be, not that Android is for poor people, is that the iPhone is aimed at the affluent.

So, the stats will always skew to show that the iPhone users are generally going to spend more for stuff, because on general they do have more money.

A lot of words to same the same thing in the link. You just re-enforced it.

 

[JayIsAwesome]

Android is for poor people. I have an android. Guess that makes me poor. But I have an iPhone sitting next to me. Damn it, now I'm confused

 

[lowendlinux]

This is funny.

I'm not saying that iOS doesn't have issues, but it seems like most people that use Android are always having issues with their phone.

Some complain about it constantly, others make excuses.

I say this, but it seems like iOS have more bugs than I ever remember lately. But certainly not a deal killer.

This post made me smile.

I think everyone makes excuses like you just did.

 

[Palladium SG]

Apple is so effective in churning out income that it's frightening.

I'll bet iDevice demand actually increases with price until some threshold value.

 

[LordVic]

You start with the above, and end in this:



A lot of words to same the same thing in the link. You just re-enforced it.

I wasn't countering your comment itself. sorry

it was the article you linked. Once you click on it, the title changes to what's in your link and it goes on to say "Android is for poor people" (its quite literally the real articles title)