Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nov 23rd, 2009Not exactly the tone of a company reported to be dramatically scaling back android efforts.
Well, you've no reason to doubt the original quotes from this post. Business is business. They've already put a substantial amount of investment in Android and have seen poor results for it.

In order to recoup their investment, they will promote what they have with what they have. Just because the finance director tells investors that they are scaling back investment in Android, doesn't mean the marketing director should suddenly shift from playing up their offerings to... I don't know, what? Say they're giving things away for free? Not sure what you were expecting.

~ CB
 
Well, you've no reason to doubt the original quotes from this post. Business is business. They've already put a substantial amount of investment in Android and have seen poor results for it.

In order to recoup their investment, they will promote what they have with what they have. Just because the finance director tells investors that they are scaling back investment in Android, doesn't mean the marketing director should suddenly shift from playing up their offerings to... I don't know, what? Say they're giving things away for free? Not sure what you were expecting.

~ CB

In order to develop games for high end new devices like the XPERIA and DROID, it's going to take a substantial additional investment. If you are saying they already have the DROID optimized games ready to go you're mistaken.

p.s. Since this isn't email and this forum states who you are and who you are quoting, it is completely unnecessary to sign your post at the end. Ya dig?
 
If Android ever gains significant marketshare, social-engineering will cause spammers, spyware, malware, etc to have a field day.
~ CB
Ya, open source is known for spammers, spyware, malware, etc. You see it all the time on Linux and not on closed architectures like Windows. The above is just flat out wrong.
It's flat out RIGHT actually.

As confident as you are, you're blinding yourself to the basic facts. Mac OS has less exploited exploits... why? Because its simply more secure? No, its mostly because it has the smaller marketshare (most security experts agree on this). If the iPhone was as insecure NOW as it was when it launched, spammers, spyware, and malware would be having a field day due to its what? It's number of users and popularity. Exactly.

And no, I'm sorry, but you're not allowed to broadly equate my statements about Android and Android marketplace to the entire spectrum of open source software as a whole. Specifically... about Android and Android marketplace... unless something changes, I'm predicting a very rocky future with regards to spammers, spyware, and malware. KNOWING THIS, Google charges developers $25 to join its network. Why? Not because Google needs their money, but because... well, let me let them tell it:
You must register to be able to distribute your products through Android Market. There is a one time $25 registration fee. We charge this fee to encourage higher quality products on the market (e.g. less spammy products).
READ: "As a deterrent to the spamware we would otherwise get." COST is the single most compelling reason why we deal with as much EMAIL spam as we do. Scott Chasin, the chief technology officer for Denver-based e-mail security firm MX Logic Inc., made the insightful comment that, "The reverse cost structure of e-mail is a hard problem to solve before you have some identity technology in place." But, whereas email gives spammers cart blanche for their payload, a VERY low cost gateway (like Android Marketplace) can only provide a minimal deterrent.

We'll see though. I think Google's 24 hour try/buy return policy is a PART of the solution to the SPAM (not the malware or spyware), but it certainly provides a disincentive for many developers who'd prefer all sales to be final (for legitimate reaons, much like the stores that are now changing return policies to prevent people from people from buying/returning big screen TVs after game night and most places don't allow refunds on software... this is now being called "casual fraud"). Effectively, as it stands today, Android allows 24hour one-time only rentals of EVERY application in its marketplace. If I'm missing something on this point, someone tell me... 'cause that's disturbing in my book (from a developer standpoint).

If Linux was as popular as Windows, I'm sure it wouldn't need security through obscurity to start having serious problems with exploits/spamware/spyware/malware that take advantage of its users. Believing otherwise continues to be a long-running canard. Moreover, the weakest link for any computer security issue will always be PEBKAC.

~ CB
 
In order to develop games for high end new devices like the XPERIA and DROID, it's going to take a substantial additional investment. If you are saying they already have the DROID optimized games ready to go you're mistaken.

p.s. Since this isn't email and this forum states who you are and who you are quoting, it is completely unnecessary to sign your post at the end. Ya dig?
I'm trying to figure out if you're saying Gameloft's financial director lied to investors. You sound like you're making this about my opinion or something. Right now, my only intention was to provide a plausible way to connect your press release to the recent comments to investors about ongoing expenditures. We don't know HOW much money was scaled back after anticipating a more favorable market, do we? The degree of ongoing investment may still hit certain goals, but not represent as much substantial risk to ROI.

If you're looking for a dour "tone" in a press release you might be somewhat misguided, I'd say someone isn't doing their job if its anything but upbeat and forward looking (no matter what the underlying details are). That's just common sense. I'd certainly pride myself on a press release that made a lot out of a little. I love words.

~ CB
 
If Linux was as popular as Windows, I'm sure it wouldn't need security through obscurity to start having serious problems with exploits/spamware/spyware/malware that take advantage of its users. Believing otherwise continues to be a long-running canard. Moreover, the weakest link for any computer security issue will always be PEBKAC.

It would depend on the Distro being used really. RedHat Distros are by the most secure Distro because of SELinux. SELinux can even deny messages from the Keyboard being sent to the screen. :rolleyes:
 
It would depend on the Distro being used really. RedHat Distros are by the most secure Distro because of SELinux. SELinux can even deny messages from the Keyboard being sent to the screen. :rolleyes:
lol. True, I'm honestly just weighing benefits of attempting to create a free market with no limits against trying to create a market with enough "controls" in place to promote stability, safety and trust for average consumers. It's a REALLY hard balance. If I sold razorblades, I'd be very reticent to sell them to just anyone out of an open box.

"Well, for crying out loud... who the hell told you to reach in there that quick?"

~ CB
 
I think it is funny that they would be scaling back now of all times since Verizon just got the Droid and they have more models coming. Maybe Apple is pressuring them to slow development? I bought a Motorola Droid and it is a great device. I live in an area where the iPhone was never available and is still not available, but I am very happy with my Droid.

Demand for Android is on the rise and will only continue to get stronger. The only people who are laughing off Google are people on this message board. I hope that Apple is taking note of Android because if they are treating it as a joke like many here do it is going to blindside them one day and they will never regain traction.

The Droid is a wonderful handset and it is the first real iPhone competitor for Verizon. Motorola itself is planning on introducing several new Android handsets this year and HTC is also planning more. If Apple is smart they would take note. One phone or carrier doesn't need to overtake the iPhone. It will be a combination of devices and carriers that will do it. If that happens then this decision to stop developing games for Android will be pretty silly.

I predict by this time next year there will be many more Android handsets from several companies and they will be available on every network in the US. As for the iPhone... It will look like the same old phone with a few new features, additional storage capacity and maybe if your lucky a new color or two. Will it go to other carriers? I doubt it. Apple seems to have a love affair with AT&T that even a crappy 3G network or a slow 4G rollout couldn't stop.
 
A dumb statement?!

I think your reply may qualify as one of the "less enlightened" responses I've ever seen here ... but the original statement was pretty insightful.

A smartphone is NOT some "portal to the cloud", by any means! Apart from the primary job it does (you know, that telephone part?), which is just a way to transmit bi-directional voice communications between two handsets, much of what makes a smartphone "smart" has to do with the additional capabilities rolled into it. Arguably, that even includes things like the camera on it, assuming it includes some intelligent photo management software on the device that goes with the camera hardware itself. But largely, it seems to me a phone gets a "smartphone" title almost automatically if it includes a full keyboard of some sort, email and basic web capabilities. Email and web access are just digital communications "staple items" these days, NOT cloud computing.

"The network is the computer" was simply an advertising slogan invented by Sun Microsystems. Ironic too, because much of that was part of their Java push. Yet today, when you look around, all you see are people trying to develop alternatives to "getting stuck with Java". It seems Sun wasn't quite the visionary they claimed to be.....

I'm not discounting cloud computing as irrelevant or pointless. All I'm saying is, it's not the "end all, be all" either. In the beginning, yes, people did most of their computing from dumb terminals and all the software and control was centralized on a back-end minicomputer or mainframe. The *personal computer* broke people free from those chains, saying "Why settle for that, when you can have a full-blown, powerful computer on your very own desk instead? Now YOU are in the driver's seat!" Now, companies like Google are trying to make it come full-circle, convincing people to use their full-blown computer as though it was a "modern day dumb terminal" and let them be the centralized "mainframe".

We still live in a world where supposedly developed, advanced nations (like the USA) can't even supply a good percentage of people with inexpensive broadband connections. (Heck, AT&T can't even manage to quit dropping my phone calls about 30% of the time!) So WHY would I want to buy a device that's tethered to and totally relies on the "cloud", when I know the infrastructure that connects me is still the "weakest link" on a mobile device?


That's perhaps the dumbest statement, or group thereof, that I've ever seen on this forum. What, exactly, is a smartphone if not just a portal to the cloud? I, too, used a computer before the internet became popular. Their usefulness was limited by that. Anyone who doesn't understand that we are in an age where the network IS the computer has the vision of a bat.

Dumb terminals were great, except that the experience was a little less than "rich." Along comes the GUI. But both network and hardware limitations make the necessity to work locally a reality for many, many years. Now, hardware and connectivity are catching up, and the innovations of companies like Google are going to make the cloud the reality of computing. The web has just been a precursor to that. Apple understands this. Microsoft understands this (and it scares them to death). But Google has built the framework of their business model around this. This, my friends, is why they are already ahead of the game.
 
I predict by this time next year there will be many more Android handsets from several companies and they will be available on every network in the US. As for the iPhone... It will look like the same old phone with a few new features, additional storage capacity and maybe if your lucky a new color or two. Will it go to other carriers? I doubt it. Apple seems to have a love affair with AT&T that even a crappy 3G network or a slow 4G rollout couldn't stop.

I agree with your whole post except this last part. I personally have a Droid but believe the iPhone is a solid platform and that it has been designed very well. By this time next year we wont only see new Android phones though, we will also see iPhone OS 4.0 out and a new iPhone (4G maybe?) which will again improve on the hardware and features the iPhone has.

I want to see both Apple and Google do well in the Smart Phone market because I like both of their products.
 
I hope that Apple is taking note of Android because if they are treating it as a joke like many here do it is going to blindside them one day and they will never regain traction...One phone or carrier doesn't need to overtake the iPhone. It will be a combination of devices and carriers that will do it.

And yet this same strategy didn't seem to work out very well for Windows Mobile smartphones in terms of coming to dominate the market. Every carrier offers multiple models with multiple OS versions offering multiple features, so you'd think they would literally be "all things to all users" just through the sheer number of options available being able to satisfy the needs of every end-user. And yet, total marketshare continues to fall to "closed" systems like the iPhone and Blackberry.
 
And yet this same strategy didn't seem to work out very well for Windows Mobile smartphones in terms of coming to dominate the market. Every carrier offers multiple models with multiple OS versions offering multiple features, so you'd think they would literally be "all things to all users" just through the sheer number of options available being able to satisfy the needs of every end-user. And yet, total marketshare continues to fall to "closed" systems like the iPhone and Blackberry.

Manufacturers don't have to pay a fee to Google to use Android where as they have to pay Microsoft to licence Windows Mobile.

That alone makes the 2 completely different.
 
Manufacturers don't have to pay a fee to Google to use Android where as they have to pay Microsoft to licence Windows Mobile.

That alone makes the 2 completely different.

It does make them different in terms of how Google makes it's money off the platform (through advertisements running in it's applications and selling user demographic data it's applications record) versus charging a license fee like Microsoft does.

But the fact Microsoft charges for it's OS has not stopped the release of hundreds of different smartphone models running Windows Mobile from scores of manufacturers on scores of service providers all over the world. And plenty of models on plenty of carriers is what many Android Aficionados are claiming makes the platform so much more desirable than the iPhone, so I don't see how they're different in that regard.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.5; en-gb; HTC Hero Build/CUPCAKE) AppleWebKit/528.5+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Mobile Safari/525.20.1)

Android must be more deseirable for the OEMs as it straight off the bat makes a saving on some R&D. Less licencing costs will also lead to cheaper handets or higher profit.

I liked my iPhone (and my iPod touch before that) and I'm now loving my Android based hero. The only way I can see it is that things will only get better for owners of either platform as they mature and as others jump on the Android bandwagon it'll be Microsoft and Symbian who suffer most, not Apple.

The two platforms started some of the most revolutionary things that have happened to the smartphone arena and I for one am pleased at the way things went.

Moving symbian to opensource seems to be a knee jerk reaction to Android (why would they have paid for symbian licences when android is free?) so having the biggest smartphone OS go to an open source model, Google must be doing something right wih Android. Microsoft are probably too stubborn to open Windows Mobile so that will slowly decline.

Android doesn't have to eat away at the iphone, there is still plenty of other marketshare for it to eat into and the two platforms can coexist quite nicely imo.
 
It's funny how you have someone in this thread blaming Apple for Gameloft deciding to slow down Android development, yeah big ol bully Apple.
 
I'm trying to figure out if you're saying Gameloft's financial director lied to investors. You sound like you're making this about my opinion or something. Right now, my only intention was to provide a plausible way to connect your press release to the recent comments to investors about ongoing expenditures. We don't know HOW much money was scaled back after anticipating a more favorable market, do we? The degree of ongoing investment may still hit certain goals, but not represent as much substantial risk to ROI.
~ CB

Well I think the issue here might be that you guys are trying to make sense out of a VERY contradictory message from this company - which is what he was trying to say. What if Gameloft issued a statement that they where scaling down development on the iPhone platform, then a few days later said "We are excited for the new iPhone 3GS and are already developing new exciting games!" Even if the company was scaling back development, by announcing it to the public it presents a message that it is not worth the time developing Android games, and then they turn around and say "Get ready for our new Android games!"

It really doesn't make any sense. Not that this is anyone's fault besides the company itself. Definitely puzzling, and I'm not sure what they could have hoped to gain by doing this.
 
It's funny how you have someone in this thread blaming Apple for Gameloft deciding to slow down Android development, yeah big ol bully Apple.

Apple has a lot of power and influnce in the smartphone market right now and if they want to influence a developer it would not be too hard for them. Apple is just as guilty as everyone else when it comes to protecting marketshare and profit. Android just got a high profile phone on a high profile carrier and Apple is going to do whatever it takes to try and stop Android from gaining anymore traction. Now I have no idea what goes on in backdoor corporate dealings but it would not suprise me that this type of stuff goes on with many different companies.
 
Apple has a lot of power and influnce in the smartphone market right now and if they want to influence a developer it would not be too hard for them. Apple is just as guilty as everyone else when it comes to protecting marketshare and profit. Android just got a high profile phone on a high profile carrier and Apple is going to do whatever it takes to try and stop Android from gaining anymore traction. Now I have no idea what goes on in backdoor corporate dealings but it would not suprise me that this type of stuff goes on with many different companies.

That sort of software exclusivity dealing would be problematic for them given the small number of competitors in the "app phone" market. It would raise interesting antitrust issues.
 
Well I think the issue here might be that you guys are trying to make sense out of a VERY contradictory message from this company - which is what he was trying to say. What if Gameloft issued a statement that they where scaling down development on the iPhone platform, then a few days later said "We are excited for the new iPhone 3GS and are already developing new exciting games!"
Here is the statement again in its entirety (please note that Gameloft is NOT saying, "We are stopping development on Android", "We hate Android", "We think Android is a bad platform.", "We will not be supporting any upcoming Android platforms."):

French mobile phone games company Gameloft said it and other software developers were cutting back investment in developing games and other applications for Google's Android platform.

Android has won attention in the mobile industry lately, with Motorola and Sony Ericsson choosing it for their new top models.

"We have significantly cut our investment in Android platform, just like ... many others," Gameloft finance director Alexandre de Rochefort said at an investor conference.

Rochefort said the company has cut back on investment mostly due to weaknesses of Android's application store.

"It is not as neatly done as on the iPhone. Google has not been very good to entice customers to actually buy products. On Android nobody is making significant revenue," Rochefort said.

Games for iPhone generated 13 percent of Gameloft's revenue in the last quarter. "We are selling 400 times more games on iPhone than on Android," Rochefort said.

Even if the company was scaling back development, by announcing it to the public it presents a message that it is not worth the time developing Android games, and then they turn around and say "Get ready for our new Android games!"
So, when INVESTORS look at the books and see that Gameloft has scaled back development and have to search for answers themselves... how little sense does THAT make.

No, they need to talk about their significant focus changes openly and offer common sense reasons why (because iPhone makes more money by orders of magnitude). Gameloft isn't STOPPING development. Gameloft telling investors that they're scalling back dvelopment on other platforms (including Android) because they're not as profitable as the iPhone.
It really doesn't make any sense. Not that this is anyone's fault besides the company itself. Definitely puzzling, and I'm not sure what they could have hoped to gain by doing this.
Companies need to explain their financials to investors. That's the bottomline. They still may be VERY excited about Android... they just can't AFFORD to spend the money on it. You could have a core of developers at Gameloft that are REALLY excited about what's coming up for Gameloft and Android... except they know the company can't continue justifying poor results with high investment dollars, so they'll work with that and hope market conditions change.

~ CB
 
Here is the statement again in its entirety (please note that Gameloft is saying, "We are stopping development on Android", "We hate Android", "We think Android is a bad platform.", "We will not be supporting any upcoming Android platforms."):

I believe you meant to say, "Gameloft is NOT saying..." those things.

Just that they're scaling back for now.

?
 
And yet this same strategy didn't seem to work out very well for Windows Mobile smartphones in terms of coming to dominate the market. Every carrier offers multiple models with multiple OS versions offering multiple features, so you'd think they would literally be "all things to all users" just through the sheer number of options available being able to satisfy the needs of every end-user. And yet, total marketshare continues to fall to "closed" systems like the iPhone and Blackberry.


You're desperatley clinging to the "but look at Microsoft" argument.


Were you saying the same thing about ask.com when google came out?
 
That sort of software exclusivity dealing would be problematic for them given the small number of competitors in the "app phone" market. It would raise interesting antitrust issues.

Anti-trust issues require a trust. Apple has no such status. :rolleyes:

And it works in the console world. Even Microsoft does it without getting hit by any kind of anti-trust action. I don't think anyone would care if Apple used cash to buy some exclusives for its platform.
 
Anti-trust issues require a trust. Apple has no such status. :rolleyes:

And it works in the console world. Even Microsoft does it without getting hit by any kind of anti-trust action. I don't think anyone would care if Apple used cash to buy some exclusives for its platform.

Under antitrust law the monopoly depends on the definition of the market. That's why I referenced the "app phone" market. In that market, Apple either has a monopoly or is very closed to having one.

In the console market, no single company has a monopoly. Further, you have to differentiate between the suggestion that Apple COERCED a third party developer and what happens in the console market where third party developers freely enter into exclusivity arrangements.

Go get a law degree before you start babbling again.
 
Under antitrust law the monopoly depends on the definition of the market. That's why I referenced the "app phone" market. In that market, Apple either has a monopoly or is very closed to having one.

Except that's not the case at all. App phones have been around since before the iPhone and Apple has less market share than Blackberry. So they are not even close to a monopoly. :rolleyes:

In the console market, no single company has a monopoly. Further, you have to differentiate between the suggestion that Apple COERCED a third party developer and what happens in the console market where third party developers freely enter into exclusivity arrangements.

Go get a law degree before you start babbling again.

Microsoft has a monopoly on operating systems. Using cash from Windows/Office sales to buy exclusivity deals for the Xbox to try and gain monopoly status in the console market would be anti-trust violations.

A law degree doesn't mean squat if you don't understand the markets you are talking about.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.