[holymadness]

Originally Posted by PatNY

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."

Meaning:

"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

Retroactively adding words to your posts and claiming you meant things that you didn’t write is just embarrassing, PatNY. Your original meaning was very clear.

You claimed that because Android had more apps, it “has more developers.” (Your words) There continues to be no evidence of this, as with the remainder of your assertions.

And none of them made sense. If you think one does, then take up the banner for it and defend it.

To recap:

PatNY claim: More developers are developing for Android first because of the platforms greater profitability.
Fact: Android is 350-400% less profitable to develop for, regardless of whether apps are monetized by ad revenue or user purchases.

By contrast, murraupaul’s hypotheses, combined with jbjb’s additions, are very compelling. On the contrary, it is you who have failed to prove any aspect of your argument. You offer no proof of any claim. Every statistic is against you. When confronted with your falsehoods, you pretend to have said something else.

LMAO. Once again you don't know how to read. It's truly bizarre. This is exactly what I said:

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:

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.

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.

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.

Once again, there is no evidence that developers are “choosing Android first in the majority of cases.” The available evidence that we have, the developer survey linked to above, shows that Android consistently ranks below iOS in attractiveness for professional developers.

No one has denied app revenue is a continuous stream. All that has been explained to you is that this fact is irrelevant to the argument you are trying to make. App revenue on Android is still 400% less profitable, regardless of how that money is paid out. An iOS-first developer is also being paid in a continuous stream, but his revenue stream is 400% larger than his Android-first analogue.

No rational economic actor, given a choice between the two platforms, would ever develop for Android first over iOS when motivated by potential profitability.

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!

These are feeble objections. If you have contradictory data, please present it. If you can demonstrate that adding Amazon developer revenues and subtracting newsstand subscriptions can make up a 400% revenue gap, please do so. Otherwise, simply accept that you are wrong.

The Opera network is but a small part of the total mobile ad universe. Where are revenue for Airpush and AdMob?

If you have data that contradicts what has been posted so far, then post it. You have presented not one single fact or figure in this thread to date. You are simply refusing to admit what the available evidence represents. The Opera report looked a very large sample size over a sizeable period of time, at multiple platforms and delivery mechanisms (apps and browsers). If you have a problem with its statistical margin of error, state what you think it is and explain why.

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.

No, I don’t think you did. That lesson is free of charge, but I suggest you invest in a good dictionary in the future.

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.

You are quite aware of your actions, feigned outrage notwithstanding.

For the benefit of observers: PatNY wrote his reply as it is quoted in my post #526. I immediately clicked reply and started composing my reply. During that time, he went back and edited his post. Because it was a long reply, I spent 45 minutes or so on it, which is why my post appears after the timestamp of his edit. Then PatNY, to distract from his untenable position, accused me of misquoting him.

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.

"The data in this report is specific to the Opera browser." - PatNY

It has been explained to you several times that this is incorrect. There is no mischaracterization of your position. Your position is there for everyone to see.

You continue to avoid answering the questions that would expose your incorrect understanding of a very basic document. You persist in refusing to acknowledge that the data in this report is not specific to the Opera browser, but that it applies to the Opera mobile ad network which appears for the most part in native apps.

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.

So your premises are all incorrect, but your conclusion still stands. You are a funny guy PatNY.