8 ms·

Why we’ve decided to stop producing TNW Magazine for Android

15 points by amatheus 14y ago

jacquesm 14y ago
Suggestion: stop making it for iOs as well and make the site work properly in any browser.
- bane 14y ago
  I really don't understand why news sites bother with dedicated apps. It doesn't sound like anything they're doing couldn't be handled by web design these days, music, video, images, layout etc. Sidenote: From the writeup it sounds like TNW is struggling more with their tooling than with Android. Anybody know of better alternatives?
  - petercooper 14y ago
    Ease of sales. It's easier to sell an app than a subscription through a Web paywall. This is also why more developers sell Mac apps through the App Store than direct now. Psychology, discoverability, and ease of making impulse purchases all comes into play.
    - bane 14y ago
      I could see that for something like NYT, but TNW doesn't offer subscriptions. Do people discover web sites through an app store? I wonder if there's an opportunity there?
      - petercooper 14y ago
        Ah, I'm not familiar with the TNW magazine so didn't realize it was free. In that case, it's because of advertising rates. I run several e-mail newsletters that would work just as well as Web sites but the CPM is 10x higher for e-mail than Web so I use the format. I imagine they can sell the magazine by the page at a healthy rate in a way run of site banners wouldn't work.
        bane 14y ago
        Actually somebody else here pointed out that strangely they offer a subscription to additional content via the iOS app -- so I may be wrong. I would think they'd make it prominent on the web page as well to get more eyes on a way towards revenue.
- greghinch 14y ago
  Exactly. When your content is text and photos, there is no reason you can't make it web only, optimized for various resolutions.
- rbarooah 14y ago
  They offer an optional subscription through in-app purchase on iOS. I imagine they get a lot more support that way than they would if they put it on the web with a 'donate' button, so basically they are putting their effort into the audience who is willing to pay them. Why would they just give it away rather than going to the market that values their product?
- Steko 14y ago
  The selling point of the magazine is that it's not just the website, it has it's own content.
  - Tomdarkness 14y ago
    So put the content on the website and charge for it?
    - Steko 14y ago
      Some people do that, why should we care if they want to try selling content in a different way. I'm not here to run everyone's business for them. They invested in iOS and in Android and one failed. If you don't want to read the obvious lesson here and instead pivot to a tangent about how their whole business model is wrong feel free.
      - Tomdarkness 14y ago
        I was not saying that. Rather I was pointing out that having exclusive content in the magazine is not a valid argument against making the site work properly in every browser and discontinuing the iOS version.
        rbarooah 14y ago
        The valid argument is that it's generally harder to convince people to pay for web content than it is for content on iOS where this product is already successful, presumably because iOS users are a self-selected group who are more willing to pay for digital content. There doesn't seem to be any argument for making the site work 'properly' in 'every' browser and discontinuing the iOS version other than a dislike for iOS or iOS users. Why should they discontinue a successful product?
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
dregin 14y ago
So, you stopped releasing a version for android because the software you're using can't deal with the formatting properly (even though it says it can) and the material you're using is locked to one provider... The majority of the blame definitely lies somewhere other than on android's doorstep.
- rbarooah 14y ago
  They did put the effort in to overcome those issues, only to discover that for every 80 iOS users they had 1 Android user, so they concluded that continuing to do the work wasn't justified because there was a lack of demand. If they'd had comparable demand from Android users, they'd have continued to invest.
  - igravious 14y ago
    But if they had a crappy product for Android is it any wonder that their uptake ratio was so out of kilter? If they had platform feature parity at launch your argument would be valid but they didn't so you cannot draw the conclusion you have drawn.
    - rbarooah 14y ago
      It's not really my conclusion - it's the conclusion from the TWN piece. That said, even though it's not a controlled experiment, the fact that they didn't have feature parity doesn't completely invalidate their experience. 80-1 is a high ratio particularly for a free product that people presumably would have expected to improve over time if they had been interested. See Zaheer's comment on this thread too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4991585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4991585
  - garuda 14y ago
    Android is Open Source, so it belongs to everyone. Content producers need to do their part alongside developers to make it great, even if that means putting in more investment than supporting a propriety platform like iOS.
ChuckMcM 14y ago
I suppose this is a call to action for a better magazine publishing tool. It is an interesting challenge, and one illustrates the 'ecosystem' effect. They're publishing software supplier (Mag+) is better at supporting iOS than Android, so supporting Android becomes too onerous. On the one hand that is sad for TNW, after all more subscribers is always good, but it is really bad for Mag+ since it points out a gaping hole in their strategy. By not investing in Android they leave the larger market share of Android devices open to another publishing company, and when that company uses the strength of their Android base to enter the iOS market, their customers (like TNW) will switch because they are all about the subscriber numbers. Lets see how Mag+ responds ...
Zaheer 14y ago
I have an application out for Android & iPhone both with same exact functionality. The Android version sells maybe 10 a day max while iPhone constantly sells 10x that. I'm becoming more and more convinced the Android market is just not that attractive.
- dannyr 14y ago
  For any kind of app or just your kind of app?
- eavc 14y ago
  What is your application?
  - Zaheer 14y ago
    Sorta late but another commenter above linked to it.
- rogerbinns 14y ago
  Other than games, when I see apps available on both and that were ported from the iOS version it is very apparent they are not "proper" Android apps. Big clues are having menu and back buttons. Others are using builtin 3rd party integration (eg fb, twitter, dropbox) instead of the system. A well structured Android application is like a mashup of different screens, processing (services), event handlers (broadcast receivers), data (content providers), user accounts etc. And it works with other components on the system, not its own little island as on iOS. You haven't stated what your app is so this issue may not apply. A good example of a bad app is "Beat The Traffic" which is terrible on Android being an iOS port.
  - chris_wot 14y ago
    I'm really not clear why this comment was voted down. If you disagree, I'm very interested in knowing what the issue is. Speak up!
    - 14y ago
dannyr 14y ago
It looks like there isn't much downloads for blog-specific magazines on Android. Engadget's Distro app only has 50K+ downloads.
Steko 14y ago
I think all the people blaming TNW or their tools or the lack of publishing platforms are all just missing the point as, despite market share, Android fails by many of the app and content dollar metrics. The point being missed is that Google might simply not have enough credit cards. Despite being one of the most valuable and trusted brands in the world, Google is not a brand people have trusted with their credit card for very long. Apple and Amazon have been doing it since 2003 and 1994 and have pretty good reputations for customer service. Google is still building that and until they do they may continue to under-perform their market share in some of these measures.
- dotBen 14y ago
  "The point being missed is that Google might simply not have enough credit cards." Or, perhaps Android users just don't wish to be nickle and dimed into buying stuff. Cynical view, but even myself as a v affluent individual + owner and lover of several apple mac computers shuns iOS because frankly I don't wish to pay for every app and content I might consume. Case in point is this NextWeb magazine - sounds like it actually costs money to buy. I'm not at all interested, esp if I can visit the website for free. Android has a higher install rate than iOS but iOS tops dollar metrics because it is the platform of choice of those with the most disposable income.
  - Steko 14y ago
    The demographics are certainly part of it but I doubt they favor Apple at anything like an 80:1 ratio.
bryanlarsen 14y ago
There have been a lot of comments blaming stingy Android users and poor ports for poor sales on Android compared to iOS. I think there's a third factor: exposure & marketing. I'm an Android user, I know that I've read articles from thenextweb before, but I did not know that they actually had an application/magazine for sale.
- MaysonL 14y ago
  Then again, I'm an iOS user who occasionally reads their articles also, and did not have any idea they had an app/magazine.
mattquiros 14y ago
- On Android's fragmentation: From my experience, any developer or publisher who makes a big deal out of Android's fragmentation are just lazy people making excuses. There's ALWAYS a way to make the same iOS app on Android, and if any devices can't run your Android app, then that device just sucks too much. If it doesn't, either you do, or in this case, your publishing software. - "You make a beautiful magazine for the iPad, and then you dumb it down for Android." Probably because your developer who told you this has no experience developing any real apps for Android and is forcing iOS's UI elements into it? Or maybe you're bombarding your magazine with too much content in the first place (you mentioned embedded music--seriously, isn't that information pollution?). I've seen beautiful apps on iOS that offer the same, consistent experience in Android, e.g., Evernote. What is your excuse for not pulling this off? - "For every Android user that downloads an Android magazine we have 80 iOS downloads." But what about the Android users who read your content via your mobile website? Or, for many Android tablets from Samsung, via Pulse? Exactly what is your value proposition to these users why they should download your app when they can get most of your content for free? The way I see it, Android users are just being smart because they find ways to bypass having to pay for free content. - "...with the current state of technology and the way the market is divided we can’t afford to invest in it anymore." Your target market is fragmented, DEAL WITH IT. If you want to make money, see it as an untapped opportunity and seize it. It's really TNW's call, but to me, their reasons for not developing for Android are just like fat people's excuses for not going to the gym.
- MaysonL 14y ago
  There actually is significant fragmentation in the Android user base, and it's harder to deliver significant apps with equality of performance and features for Android than iOS. See, for example, the BBC's experience: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/12/android_update.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/12/android_updat...
  - mattquiros 14y ago
    Yes, but the reality of the market is that not everybody is getting an iPhone, and not all Android users get high-end Android devices. It is still THE market, nonetheless. I don't think any blame should go to either iOS or Android because it's the people who patronized these products. However, it would be just as absurd to blame the market you're trying to target. If you want to reach as many people as possible, you're going to end up grouping them into categories anyway.

15 points by amatheus 14y ago

jacquesm 14y ago

Suggestion: stop making it for iOs as well and make the site work properly in any browser.

bane 14y ago
I really don't understand why news sites bother with dedicated apps. It doesn't sound like anything they're doing couldn't be handled by web design these days, music, video, images, layout etc. Sidenote: From the writeup it sounds like TNW is struggling more with their tooling than with Android. Anybody know of better alternatives?
- petercooper 14y ago
  Ease of sales. It's easier to sell an app than a subscription through a Web paywall. This is also why more developers sell Mac apps through the App Store than direct now. Psychology, discoverability, and ease of making impulse purchases all comes into play.
  - bane 14y ago
    I could see that for something like NYT, but TNW doesn't offer subscriptions. Do people discover web sites through an app store? I wonder if there's an opportunity there?
    - petercooper 14y ago
      Ah, I'm not familiar with the TNW magazine so didn't realize it was free. In that case, it's because of advertising rates. I run several e-mail newsletters that would work just as well as Web sites but the CPM is 10x higher for e-mail than Web so I use the format. I imagine they can sell the magazine by the page at a healthy rate in a way run of site banners wouldn't work.
      - bane 14y ago
        Actually somebody else here pointed out that strangely they offer a subscription to additional content via the iOS app -- so I may be wrong. I would think they'd make it prominent on the web page as well to get more eyes on a way towards revenue.
greghinch 14y ago
Exactly. When your content is text and photos, there is no reason you can't make it web only, optimized for various resolutions.
rbarooah 14y ago
They offer an optional subscription through in-app purchase on iOS. I imagine they get a lot more support that way than they would if they put it on the web with a 'donate' button, so basically they are putting their effort into the audience who is willing to pay them. Why would they just give it away rather than going to the market that values their product?
Steko 14y ago
The selling point of the magazine is that it's not just the website, it has it's own content.
- Tomdarkness 14y ago
  So put the content on the website and charge for it?
  - Steko 14y ago
    Some people do that, why should we care if they want to try selling content in a different way. I'm not here to run everyone's business for them. They invested in iOS and in Android and one failed. If you don't want to read the obvious lesson here and instead pivot to a tangent about how their whole business model is wrong feel free.
    - Tomdarkness 14y ago
      I was not saying that. Rather I was pointing out that having exclusive content in the magazine is not a valid argument against making the site work properly in every browser and discontinuing the iOS version.
      - rbarooah 14y ago
        The valid argument is that it's generally harder to convince people to pay for web content than it is for content on iOS where this product is already successful, presumably because iOS users are a self-selected group who are more willing to pay for digital content. There doesn't seem to be any argument for making the site work 'properly' in 'every' browser and discontinuing the iOS version other than a dislike for iOS or iOS users. Why should they discontinue a successful product?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

dregin 14y ago

So, you stopped releasing a version for android because the software you're using can't deal with the formatting properly (even though it says it can) and the material you're using is locked to one provider... The majority of the blame definitely lies somewhere other than on android's doorstep.

rbarooah 14y ago
They did put the effort in to overcome those issues, only to discover that for every 80 iOS users they had 1 Android user, so they concluded that continuing to do the work wasn't justified because there was a lack of demand. If they'd had comparable demand from Android users, they'd have continued to invest.
- igravious 14y ago
  But if they had a crappy product for Android is it any wonder that their uptake ratio was so out of kilter? If they had platform feature parity at launch your argument would be valid but they didn't so you cannot draw the conclusion you have drawn.
  - rbarooah 14y ago
    It's not really my conclusion - it's the conclusion from the TWN piece. That said, even though it's not a controlled experiment, the fact that they didn't have feature parity doesn't completely invalidate their experience. 80-1 is a high ratio particularly for a free product that people presumably would have expected to improve over time if they had been interested. See Zaheer's comment on this thread too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4991585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4991585
- garuda 14y ago
  Android is Open Source, so it belongs to everyone. Content producers need to do their part alongside developers to make it great, even if that means putting in more investment than supporting a propriety platform like iOS.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

I suppose this is a call to action for a better magazine publishing tool. It is an interesting challenge, and one illustrates the 'ecosystem' effect. They're publishing software supplier (Mag+) is better at supporting iOS than Android, so supporting Android becomes too onerous. On the one hand that is sad for TNW, after all more subscribers is always good, but it is really bad for Mag+ since it points out a gaping hole in their strategy. By not investing in Android they leave the larger market share of Android devices open to another publishing company, and when that company uses the strength of their Android base to enter the iOS market, their customers (like TNW) will switch because they are all about the subscriber numbers. Lets see how Mag+ responds ...

Zaheer 14y ago

I have an application out for Android & iPhone both with same exact functionality. The Android version sells maybe 10 a day max while iPhone constantly sells 10x that. I'm becoming more and more convinced the Android market is just not that attractive.

dannyr 14y ago
For any kind of app or just your kind of app?
eavc 14y ago
What is your application?
- Zaheer 14y ago
  Sorta late but another commenter above linked to it.
rogerbinns 14y ago
Other than games, when I see apps available on both and that were ported from the iOS version it is very apparent they are not "proper" Android apps. Big clues are having menu and back buttons. Others are using builtin 3rd party integration (eg fb, twitter, dropbox) instead of the system. A well structured Android application is like a mashup of different screens, processing (services), event handlers (broadcast receivers), data (content providers), user accounts etc. And it works with other components on the system, not its own little island as on iOS. You haven't stated what your app is so this issue may not apply. A good example of a bad app is "Beat The Traffic" which is terrible on Android being an iOS port.
- chris_wot 14y ago
  I'm really not clear why this comment was voted down. If you disagree, I'm very interested in knowing what the issue is. Speak up!
  - 14y ago

dannyr 14y ago

It looks like there isn't much downloads for blog-specific magazines on Android. Engadget's Distro app only has 50K+ downloads.

Steko 14y ago

I think all the people blaming TNW or their tools or the lack of publishing platforms are all just missing the point as, despite market share, Android fails by many of the app and content dollar metrics. The point being missed is that Google might simply not have enough credit cards. Despite being one of the most valuable and trusted brands in the world, Google is not a brand people have trusted with their credit card for very long. Apple and Amazon have been doing it since 2003 and 1994 and have pretty good reputations for customer service. Google is still building that and until they do they may continue to under-perform their market share in some of these measures.

dotBen 14y ago
"The point being missed is that Google might simply not have enough credit cards." Or, perhaps Android users just don't wish to be nickle and dimed into buying stuff. Cynical view, but even myself as a v affluent individual + owner and lover of several apple mac computers shuns iOS because frankly I don't wish to pay for every app and content I might consume. Case in point is this NextWeb magazine - sounds like it actually costs money to buy. I'm not at all interested, esp if I can visit the website for free. Android has a higher install rate than iOS but iOS tops dollar metrics because it is the platform of choice of those with the most disposable income.
- Steko 14y ago
  The demographics are certainly part of it but I doubt they favor Apple at anything like an 80:1 ratio.

bryanlarsen 14y ago

There have been a lot of comments blaming stingy Android users and poor ports for poor sales on Android compared to iOS. I think there's a third factor: exposure & marketing. I'm an Android user, I know that I've read articles from thenextweb before, but I did not know that they actually had an application/magazine for sale.

MaysonL 14y ago
Then again, I'm an iOS user who occasionally reads their articles also, and did not have any idea they had an app/magazine.

mattquiros 14y ago

- On Android's fragmentation: From my experience, any developer or publisher who makes a big deal out of Android's fragmentation are just lazy people making excuses. There's ALWAYS a way to make the same iOS app on Android, and if any devices can't run your Android app, then that device just sucks too much. If it doesn't, either you do, or in this case, your publishing software. - "You make a beautiful magazine for the iPad, and then you dumb it down for Android." Probably because your developer who told you this has no experience developing any real apps for Android and is forcing iOS's UI elements into it? Or maybe you're bombarding your magazine with too much content in the first place (you mentioned embedded music--seriously, isn't that information pollution?). I've seen beautiful apps on iOS that offer the same, consistent experience in Android, e.g., Evernote. What is your excuse for not pulling this off? - "For every Android user that downloads an Android magazine we have 80 iOS downloads." But what about the Android users who read your content via your mobile website? Or, for many Android tablets from Samsung, via Pulse? Exactly what is your value proposition to these users why they should download your app when they can get most of your content for free? The way I see it, Android users are just being smart because they find ways to bypass having to pay for free content. - "...with the current state of technology and the way the market is divided we can’t afford to invest in it anymore." Your target market is fragmented, DEAL WITH IT. If you want to make money, see it as an untapped opportunity and seize it. It's really TNW's call, but to me, their reasons for not developing for Android are just like fat people's excuses for not going to the gym.

MaysonL 14y ago
There actually is significant fragmentation in the Android user base, and it's harder to deliver significant apps with equality of performance and features for Android than iOS. See, for example, the BBC's experience: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/12/android_update.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2012/12/android_updat...
- mattquiros 14y ago
  Yes, but the reality of the market is that not everybody is getting an iPhone, and not all Android users get high-end Android devices. It is still THE market, nonetheless. I don't think any blame should go to either iOS or Android because it's the people who patronized these products. However, it would be just as absurd to blame the market you're trying to target. If you want to reach as many people as possible, you're going to end up grouping them into categories anyway.