4 ms·

I don't think you really answered anything from his article except the mention of the ad-supported applications, which you are correct if impolite about. The r

I don't think you really answered anything from his article except the mention of the ad-supported applications, which you are correct if impolite about. The rest of your post seems to be filled with content you've prepared ahead of time? For example: 'iOS high revenue is not chance', 'iOS is a popular choice', 'android is fragmented'. OK. But, we've all heard those before, and they are not confronted by the article. What was confronted by the article was deliberate skewing of charts - percentage gaming - in order to show unflattering android numbers instead of actual relevant real-time data. The author suggests that this is misleading, and it is exactly that. It is the sort of political tactic which turns this: "Do you think it's a good idea that children should pass if they have bad test scores?" Into this: "89% of people polled supported No Child Left Behind."

onemoreact 15y ago
When the androids authority's best evidence that Android marketplace is not terrible is to present and tare down a straw man argument that's simply not convincing. If there was a good news story supported by actual income he could have said so, but he did not. There I just refuted his entire argument. Now to support my point of view I could list all the reasons why Android fails but then you would attack them and miss the point. PS: idspispopd was being more polite but he used the same argument.
- esmevane 15y ago
  I really want to see income levels as well. There's no denying that the article didn't retort with actual data, a huge flaw. I even went to the end of the article expecting to see a data-driven response, and was disappointed that there wasn't one. If you are interested in my honest opinion, I don't feel like you've refuted anything. May I remind you, the article pointed out the skewed nature of the charts and claimed that was misleading. I think that in order to refute that, you would have to supply reasoning as to why it was not misleading or skewed. Don't you agree? I will concede that if you feel like this is a faulty stance and you don't think you need to refute it, that is fine. Why refute something you believe to be patently false? It feels like you're attempting to champion something here, and you expect me to do the same. That seems to be the central theme with a lot of the responses I'm seeing here. Why so defensive? What's wrong with someone pointing out bad data? Isn't that something worth looking into?
  - mikeryan 15y ago
    Without actual numbers nothing was refuted in the article either. The original article is trying to say that the 7% of revenues numbers could be wrong by pointing out some flaws in the data collection. But since it doesn't have its own numbers to counter with then the whole thing is a bunch of handwaving. Its strange to call someone out for "not refuting" an article which doesn't actually refute anything itself. Its like asking someone to prove a negative.
  - onemoreact 15y ago
    I think he could have pointed out the error in a tweet and I would have been fine if someone had linked such a tweet. Having read a little more I was expecting a little more. And sure he presented a new idea, but it's a well worn argument with plenty of evidence on both sides of the issue. When you break it down there are two arguments one of which was well supported and another that was left hanging. And leaving me hanging makes me feel that the first point was simply a straw man being torn down which left a bitter taste in my mouth. PS: I have little skin in this game, Edit: I suspect Android may reach parity with Apple, but this article did little but annoy me and convince me that we are far from that parity. aka years vs months.
    - esmevane 15y ago
      I don't know if android and iOS will be matched any time soon. One day, cars could fly (more frequently than they do now). I'm with you on the essence of the article being worth a blurb or a micropost of some sort. It was an objection article, without any substantiative data. I think my root motivation here was the desire to see that substantiative data, which I think another poster in this comments has provided. The numbers ARE pretty low in comparison by that data point.
- tensor 15y ago
  The point of the article was that the original "study" it discusses was biased and incorrect. He suggested ways that the study could be improved. Unfortunately, the article doesn't present data for these measurements. Your posts have not added nor taken anything away this article. Your parroting the popular opinion based on anecdotal facts is not helpful to anyone.
yardie 15y ago
But exactly did the charts skew? Marketplace and App store opened around the same time frame (September and July 2008, respectively). So your saying they should disregard Android 1.5-2.1 data as well as iPhone 2.0-3.1 data because it doesn't support the narrative? And while Apple has been very forthcoming about their numbers (when you're winning you love to tell everyone), Google has been less so. I think what a lot of analysts are saying is that Apple and Google approach their app stores very differently. Take me for example, I don't use my credit card in the app store or market. I've been using the same $100 itunes gift card I got with my iPod 5G (~4 years ago). iTunes users treat apps like any other downloaded song (ie. "I heard this was good, I'll get it.") because they can. Google has no gift card alternative and this is killing app revenue. I don't break out a credit card for just any purchase and I feel I'm not the only one who thinks this way.
- esmevane 15y ago
  The allegation was that a skew occurred based on the timetable of a full-steam advertised marketplace vs. a growing, unadvertised marketplace. The narrative in this case is not something which supports the reader, whether or not it supports android or iOS is (in my opinion) irrelevant. I suspect that if you showed current, monthly snapshots of revenue, it would still show iOS as the clear winner. I don't think that is what would change. What would change is that the reader would get an accurate, modern, current-day view of what is going on, as opposed to a weighted value. This can make a huge difference. What is impeding Google's marketplace vs. iOS is probably an entirely new topic. There are a lot of good reasons, in addition to yours, absolutely. They could do better.
idspispopd 15y ago
What I don't like to see around here is flagrant "fanboyism", this is in the form of making baseless assumptions that remain unchallenged because they're popular with the status quo. Often I find myself writing about apple/microsoft/google, for which I have no particular loyalty to any brand (I believe we should always choose what is best for ourselves and never buy into PR bullshit that each business is spinning to vie for our loyalty.) My post ridicules the author for making a hopeful and completely unsourced argument, my exhaustive list (that you're implying as boiler plate, it's not) is a well thought out rationale for the many reasons why the app store is performing better. In short: "na-ah" isn't a counterpoint.

onemoreact 15y ago

When the androids authority's best evidence that Android marketplace is not terrible is to present and tare down a straw man argument that's simply not convincing. If there was a good news story supported by actual income he could have said so, but he did not. There I just refuted his entire argument. Now to support my point of view I could list all the reasons why Android fails but then you would attack them and miss the point. PS: idspispopd was being more polite but he used the same argument.

esmevane 15y ago
I really want to see income levels as well. There's no denying that the article didn't retort with actual data, a huge flaw. I even went to the end of the article expecting to see a data-driven response, and was disappointed that there wasn't one. If you are interested in my honest opinion, I don't feel like you've refuted anything. May I remind you, the article pointed out the skewed nature of the charts and claimed that was misleading. I think that in order to refute that, you would have to supply reasoning as to why it was not misleading or skewed. Don't you agree? I will concede that if you feel like this is a faulty stance and you don't think you need to refute it, that is fine. Why refute something you believe to be patently false? It feels like you're attempting to champion something here, and you expect me to do the same. That seems to be the central theme with a lot of the responses I'm seeing here. Why so defensive? What's wrong with someone pointing out bad data? Isn't that something worth looking into?
- mikeryan 15y ago
  Without actual numbers nothing was refuted in the article either. The original article is trying to say that the 7% of revenues numbers could be wrong by pointing out some flaws in the data collection. But since it doesn't have its own numbers to counter with then the whole thing is a bunch of handwaving. Its strange to call someone out for "not refuting" an article which doesn't actually refute anything itself. Its like asking someone to prove a negative.
- onemoreact 15y ago
  I think he could have pointed out the error in a tweet and I would have been fine if someone had linked such a tweet. Having read a little more I was expecting a little more. And sure he presented a new idea, but it's a well worn argument with plenty of evidence on both sides of the issue. When you break it down there are two arguments one of which was well supported and another that was left hanging. And leaving me hanging makes me feel that the first point was simply a straw man being torn down which left a bitter taste in my mouth. PS: I have little skin in this game, Edit: I suspect Android may reach parity with Apple, but this article did little but annoy me and convince me that we are far from that parity. aka years vs months.
  - esmevane 15y ago
    I don't know if android and iOS will be matched any time soon. One day, cars could fly (more frequently than they do now). I'm with you on the essence of the article being worth a blurb or a micropost of some sort. It was an objection article, without any substantiative data. I think my root motivation here was the desire to see that substantiative data, which I think another poster in this comments has provided. The numbers ARE pretty low in comparison by that data point.
tensor 15y ago
The point of the article was that the original "study" it discusses was biased and incorrect. He suggested ways that the study could be improved. Unfortunately, the article doesn't present data for these measurements. Your posts have not added nor taken anything away this article. Your parroting the popular opinion based on anecdotal facts is not helpful to anyone.

yardie 15y ago

But exactly did the charts skew? Marketplace and App store opened around the same time frame (September and July 2008, respectively). So your saying they should disregard Android 1.5-2.1 data as well as iPhone 2.0-3.1 data because it doesn't support the narrative? And while Apple has been very forthcoming about their numbers (when you're winning you love to tell everyone), Google has been less so. I think what a lot of analysts are saying is that Apple and Google approach their app stores very differently. Take me for example, I don't use my credit card in the app store or market. I've been using the same $100 itunes gift card I got with my iPod 5G (~4 years ago). iTunes users treat apps like any other downloaded song (ie. "I heard this was good, I'll get it.") because they can. Google has no gift card alternative and this is killing app revenue. I don't break out a credit card for just any purchase and I feel I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

esmevane 15y ago
The allegation was that a skew occurred based on the timetable of a full-steam advertised marketplace vs. a growing, unadvertised marketplace. The narrative in this case is not something which supports the reader, whether or not it supports android or iOS is (in my opinion) irrelevant. I suspect that if you showed current, monthly snapshots of revenue, it would still show iOS as the clear winner. I don't think that is what would change. What would change is that the reader would get an accurate, modern, current-day view of what is going on, as opposed to a weighted value. This can make a huge difference. What is impeding Google's marketplace vs. iOS is probably an entirely new topic. There are a lot of good reasons, in addition to yours, absolutely. They could do better.

idspispopd 15y ago

What I don't like to see around here is flagrant "fanboyism", this is in the form of making baseless assumptions that remain unchallenged because they're popular with the status quo. Often I find myself writing about apple/microsoft/google, for which I have no particular loyalty to any brand (I believe we should always choose what is best for ourselves and never buy into PR bullshit that each business is spinning to vie for our loyalty.) My post ridicules the author for making a hopeful and completely unsourced argument, my exhaustive list (that you're implying as boiler plate, it's not) is a well thought out rationale for the many reasons why the app store is performing better. In short: "na-ah" isn't a counterpoint.