View Single Post
Old 01-06-2013, 06:57 PM   #546
PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PatNY ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
PatNY's Avatar
Posts: 1,022
Karma: 47809468
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: iPod Touch, Sony PRS-350, Nook HD+ & HD
Originally Posted by holymadness View Post
Earlier in the thread, you wrote: "A having more apps than B certainly does mean that A has more developers. Of course it does."

Now you wax indignant that anyone would say you claim there are more Android than iOS devs. You can't even keep your arguments straight.
No, I wax indignant that you continuously fail to read and comprehend my posts correctly. Instead of asking when you don't understand or would like clarification, you instead fill in the blanks with whatever fits your agenda.

It's gross mischaracterization and I don't know if you have some reading or mental disability or are just trying to be obnoxious. But if you don't make a better attempt to avoid distorting my opinions then I'm just going to have to ignore you. Your problem is really chronic.

It's really getting tiresome because you do it post after post after post. And what's notable is that you always neglect to use exact quotes because then that lets you paraphrase, twisting words into your own false concoctions. Only when asked to use a direct direct quote will you then produce one and then you start to insist it means what you tried to make it mean. But your failure to use exact quotes leads me to believe you're just doing this on purpose and it's not just some severe reading/mental disability of yours.

Take the phrase in question. This is exactly what I said:

"A having more apps than B certainly does mean that A has more developers."


"A having more apps than B certainly does mean that A has more developers creating apps for that platform."

This is how you chose to interpret:

"A having more apps than B certainly does mean that A has more developers creating apps exclusively for that platform."

It's you who put the exclusivity meaning in there when there was NONE in the beginning

Murray has given multiple reasons for the increased number of apps on Android. Your decision to focus on one while ignoring the others is not convincing.
And none of them made sense. If you think one does, then take up the banner for it and defend it.

You are simply wrong. It is not up for discussion that developing for Android first means eschewing immediate profits with Apple. Devs can earn 4x as much money now, or wait for an unspecified amount of time (up to two years, according to your baseless estimates) to earn the same amount of money developing for Android.
LMAO. Once again you don't know how to read. It's truly bizarre. This is exactly what I said:

No, I am arguing that developers are betting that the longer term (1-2 years) profit potential of apps is greater with Android than iOS due to the fact that the platform itself is growing faster than Apple. They are saying if they go with Apple, they may be leaving money on the table.

This means that developers, when they have an idea in their heads, can usually only tackle one platform at a time. So they are choosing Android first in the majority of cases. They choose to invest their time first where they think they will have the greatest potential for profits over a period of time -- perhaps 1-2 years. I've tried to explain to you several times already that I am not saying a developer is expecting to wait for 2 years to recoup any money at all, lol. I don't know where you get these crazy ideas from.

As I said in a previous post:

You do know that app profits are a continuous stream, don't you? Developers don't realize profits only at a set point in time. For at least a moderately successful app, the profits come in almost right away with initial sales, and will continue to grow if either (a) the app grows in popularity OR (b) the user base grows larger. So, since the android user base is growing exponentially faster than iOS, a developer can submit his app to Google Play tomorrow, start getting good profits almost right away, then sit back for the next few years and watch his profits continue to roll in (with maybe only a few app updates in the interim needed). So he's counting on the Android user base to be maybe twice the current size in 12 or 16 months, increasing his profit potential in tandem. It's like investing for continuous dividends and compounded growth. And in this case the developers are "investing" with Android more heavily.

Do you need further explanation? Do you understand this? Just let me know and I'll try to spell it out another way if you don't. But bottom line is that the way app evenue works is that it is a stream that starts shortly after the app goes on the market and will continue for another few years -- a continuous stream. This of course assumes an app is at least moderately successfully. I gave a period of 1-2 years because for the vast majority of apps -- be it iOS or Android -- I'm guessing that's the period of time when the majority of revenue will be realized. Many apps have a shelf life in terms of their revenue potential. Not all, but a good majority of them do.

You are literally arguing that people would choose to take a 75% pay cut for two years as an "investment."
No, I am not, lol. Either literally or figuratively. It's merely your typical distortion of my opinions in order to try to get them to fit your agenda.

Where are revenues from the Amazon app store? And the revenues for the Apple store include items that don't involve developer revenues -- ie, newspapers and newstand sales. So, big FAIL!

The ad revenue is in the Opera mobile network link, already posted a half dozen times.
The Opera network is but a small part of the total mobile ad universe. Where are revenue for Airpush and AdMob?
By the way, hokey means "corny," not whatever you think it means.
I know what it means but it's an especially appropriate term for the hilarious reports you alway try to link to which either are (a) out of date (b) unread and/or misunderstood by you or (c) incomplete in terms of data or (d) otherwise don't support your arguments.

This is irrelevant to the subject under discussion. App development is not a lucrative business, on the whole. People with an interest in developing professionally need to be paid. Whether they are paid monthly or bi-weekly has no bearing on the amount they earn. They earn significantly less developing for Android than for iOS, so there is no reason to accept your argument that developers are primarily financially motivated to develop for Android in preference over iOS.
LOL, it's relevant because YOU were under the wrong impression (as usual) that I was saying developers were waiting for 2 years to be paid, lol. So I had to explain to you how app revenues work And regardless of which platform is paying higher at this exact moment in time, developers realize that Android's growth is far outstripping iOS so that's where they think the better profit potential is for the next few years. So they are choosing Android in greater numbers than iOS right now. A simple fact.

You did write "only," though you went back and edited your post to remove that word from your post. Anyone can check the timestamps, you know. The original is quoted in my reply to you.

Regardless, you are avoiding the point. Whether you write "only" or "specific to," you are claiming that this study is discussing only ads that are being displayed by the Opera browser. That has been shown to be incorrect over and over. You are denying that 80% of these ads are being shown in apps, which is quite clearly stated in the article. The other 20% are being shown in all mobile browsers, not merely Opera's.
Wow, what you just did in lying is truly utterly despicable. You have just accused me of changing a post when, in fact, the timestamps on the posts back me up and prove you are either lying or just so profoundly confused.

Anyone can see for themselves. In post #524 is my original phrase and it has a timestemp a full 20 minutes earlier than your post #526 in which you added the word "only." Shame on you.

I never said anywhere that the Opera report was referring to only browser-based ads, and I think you know it. You're just mad I had to explain the report to you in the first place, even though you were the one to post it.

Your continued mischaracterization of my posts, topped off by your false accusations, are disgusting and unless you apologize, I'll have to ignore you in the future. It's such a waste of time having to correct you so frequently and reiterate almost everything I say because you choose to distort it.

Your suggestion that the developer interest for each platform should be added together to give us the "overall interest" in Android is more evidence that you don't understand basic math or statistics. The graph in question measures the percentage of surveyed developers who are 'very interested' in developing for a platform. You are suggesting that 216% of developers are very interested in developing for Android. Heh.
In this case (and this case only) I did use imprecise phrasing. I didn't mean a literal "add" but instead meant that theoretically, based on that chart which is broken out pretty poorly, the number of people interested in developing for the android platform could be higher than for the iOS platform, depending on where any overlaps could be in the responses. Moreover, I think it's pretty clear that if you consider the positive responses to each option (vs percentages) then indeed, "it appears that the Android platform has more overall interest." (my original exact quote) So my original conclusion still stands.

PatNY is offline