tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11208750234976969262024-03-12T19:48:20.372-07:00Polyclef BlogDerekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.comBlogger144125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-1010772340383458862013-06-07T07:22:00.000-07:002013-06-07T07:22:00.076-07:00Amazon Proves to be Indie FriendlyAmazon recently launched a section of their storefront devoted specifically to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/b/?node=6923534011">indie games</a>. This is a pretty sweet move. Indie games are most likely not a high upfront profit sector for most digital storefronts. But the effort to implement them is relatively small, and the additional benefits are numerous, including:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Fostering start-ups that may just have that next big hit</li>
<li>Engendering good will in the indie community</li>
<li>Exposing end users to a wider range of content</li>
</ul>
<br />
Developers take notice of this sort of move, and they're more likely to be attracted to a platform that makes even marginal effort to help them succeed. Google seemed to understand this in their core business practices early on, and certainly with their posture toward Android developers in the early days of the platform.<br />
<br />
Now, though, there is no longer a "Just In" category in Google Play and there never was a dedicated indie channel, so since indie's can't afford massive marketing budgets exposure is virtually zero for a new title. This has caused the Android segment of Google Play to devolve into <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_attachment">preferential attachment</a>, or a "rich-get-richer" dynamic. If someone from Google has data to the contrary, I'd like to see it, but I think it's highly likely that the average download rate for new apps (excluding those that are from major publishers or are ports of popular apps) have declined steadily over the past two years.<br />
<br />
Google should learn a thing or two about fostering a healthy developer ecosystem from Amazon. <br />
<br />
Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-64146250758331732502013-03-27T14:14:00.001-07:002013-03-27T14:14:09.168-07:00The 4.2.2 UpdateAh, the joys of Android development!<br />
<br />
Yesterday I received the over-the-air update to my Samsung Galaxy Nexus to version 4.2.2. The update broke compatibility with the custom app I wrote to track my online sales. I didn't figure it was that big a deal. I'd just fire up Eclipse, investigate the error and fix it.<br />
<br />
But hm...suddenly the Android Debug Bridge (ADB), the software that lets my Android device talk to my PC development environment, wasn't recognizing my device. First things first, I went to check my developer options on the phone to make sure that USB Debugging was enabled.<br />
<br />
Hm...no developer options. That seemed really strange. After a bit of Googling, I found out how to enable developer options on this version of Android. You open up Settings, scroll to About Phone, and click it 7 times. Yes, that's right...I'm not joking. Google put the dev options in an Easter egg format. This is cute, but from a usability standard it's downright stupid. You shouldn't outright hide such options. If they're worried a hapless end user is accidentally going to enable an option that puts their phone at greater risk for malware, the sensible thing to do is to use warning dialogs. You know, like "Are you sure you want to enable this feature? Doing so could be really bad for you if you don't know what you're doing." If a naive user continues past this point, they deserve what they get. But hiding the option altogether is just silly.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I enabled the dev options, made sure USB Debugging was enabled, and plugged the phone into my PC (which is running Windows 7 x64, by the way). It worked, right? Nope. Drivers were being installed upon connection, but I was getting a new warning: "Hardware ID missing. Windows cannot identify the device plugged into Samsung USB Composite Device." Hm...okay.<br />
<br />
An hour of research later, I find a forum post that suggests upgrading the Android SDK tools, including the ADB. Sounds sensible. However, it takes me a while to figure out that I don't actually have the latest versions of the appropriate platform tools because the Android SDK Manager is showing that older versions are actually the most recent, and is not prompting me to update. Well that's cool. So back to the forums, and another dev reports the same issue, and suggests manually downloading the tools. So I do that, and finally, after rebooting my PC and phone for what seems like the 100th time, I finally get the prompt on my phone that looks something like this:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh3dws9B5CZ7-1K_4Fd2_xOYgZmaBThSRRQ2ntDJLQEBuy_hxWonlCrCTqyNx5151HrMfZS_847jh2HUoeq815MA2x_TNmqNfAJF-OjHGSuAbLCV4levkT_yAOM0MaghbPg2jFpiLNlo-V/s1600/hDGxh.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhh3dws9B5CZ7-1K_4Fd2_xOYgZmaBThSRRQ2ntDJLQEBuy_hxWonlCrCTqyNx5151HrMfZS_847jh2HUoeq815MA2x_TNmqNfAJF-OjHGSuAbLCV4levkT_yAOM0MaghbPg2jFpiLNlo-V/s320/hDGxh.png" width="180" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
You see, in Android 4.2.2 Google added a new security feature to USB debugging, so you can't establish a connection between your phone and PC without first getting this prompt and clicking OK. Finally that did it. I fixed the problem with my app and ran it.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Total time to get my phone talking to my computer after the update: the whole day. Awesome...thanks Google!</div>
<br />Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-66458719875539362812012-07-09T06:44:00.001-07:002012-07-09T07:54:25.060-07:00The End of Indie Game Development on AndroidI got back from San Francisco and the Google I/O developer conference there last week. Google was yet again gracious with the hardware giveaways, giving out Nexus 7 tablets, Galaxy Nexus phones, a Nexus Q, and a Chromebox.<br />
<br />
But the real takeaway for me was what I had seen happening to my indie business over the past year, and that's that indie game development for Android is pretty much dying. The main reasons are competition and discovery.
Now that Android is a hugely successful platform, the major game developers have entered the market. Smaller devs simply cannot compete for visibility with limited or nonexistent marketing budgets. Coupled with the removal of the only free visibility channel (the Just In category), and new indie titles that weren't already hits on another platform are dead in the water.
But this isn't just me whining in the wind.<br />
<br />
I spoke to two different Google employees, one of which gave a talk on game development at I/O and who has served on the editorial team responsible for picking featured apps and games.
I didn't want to sound like I was just bitching and moaning, so I asked him an actionable question: In his talk, he mentioned several things NOT to do as a game developer. If he were an indie developer like me, who had been successful the past three years but was now dying in the market, what would be his game plan?<br />
<br />
His answer was telling: Try to publish through one of the big game publishers.<br />
<br />
In other words, you can't make it as an indie anymore. He said in the past couple of years that developers had "been given a bit of a free ride." I'm aware of the realities of the market, and I wasn't sure I'd be able to do this for a decade or more, but I tried to make the point that there might be a middle ground, assuming that Google cares, which I think they should.<br />
<br />
Chris Anderson's <a href="http://www.longtail.com/about.html">The Long Tail</a> is an excellent treatise on the revolution of digital marketplaces. He points out that nearly all markets have a long tail distribution, meaning there are a small number of products in a given market that are hits, a middle ground of moderately successful products, and a "long tail" of products that only sell a small number of units each. Because media was traditionally only sold in brick and mortar stores, where shelf space is limited, if you were a music seller in the 80's, would you rather fill your shelf space with the latest Michael Jackson album, or a plethora of obscure indie titles? The answer is obvious. But with digital distribution, shelf space is no longer an issue. Since inventory space is virtually unlimited in a digital marketplace, you can now offer all the obscure stuff you want. The issue then becomes discovery. If it's relatively easy for fans of obscure titles to find them, what will happen is that you'll still sell the mega-hits, but that long tail will get fatter, since you'll sell non-significant numbers of the obscure titles as well, increasing the overall area under your sales curve. In other words, purely hit-driven markets generally make less money than those with a fat, healthy long tail.<br />
<br />
In the past year, Google Play has shifted into a more hit-driven market. By doing away with the only channel that would facilitate discovery of indie titles (other than the golden ticket of being featured), they've flattened out their long tail. People are not going to search for games or apps that they don't know exist. They will simply default to known quantities, such as Angry Birds or the latest Zynga or Gameloft game.
Every single digital game store that I know of has a "What's New" channel, except for Google Play. Excluding that, I suggested to the Googler that they might add a channel for indie games, which the Xbox market has. He said he'd take that back to the team.
And lest you think I'm alone, here's a bit from the Android Fireside Chat at I/O this year:
<br />
<blockquote>
Q: For my new app I got 30 downloads on Android, 4,000 downloads on iOS. Probably because What's new section was removed from the Play Store. I understand you were getting a lot of spam but are there any plans to bring it back?<span style="background-color: white;"> </span></blockquote>
<blockquote>
A: Looking at it. We care about app discoverability. Launched recommendations, that should help.
</blockquote>
Peer-to-peer recommendations can't hurt, but how are you supposed to get the ball rolling? I can get my family and friends to download and recommend my new game, but their social network will likely be very cannibalistic. And if I'd like people in Europe or Asia to see my game, recommendations aren't going to do squat.<br />
<br />
Killing visibility for new apps is making Google Play a more top-heavy market, hurting existing indie developers, alienating devs, making it much riskier to launch a new indie title on the market, and ironically, probably hurting the overall profitability of the market by thinning out the long tail.
I'll be all right, even if my business doesn't survive another year. But I couldn't in good conscience recommend Google Play as a viable market to a new indie developer. As much as I dislike Apple, if I were recommending a mobile gaming platform for a new dev, I'd tell them they should focus on iOS first. And if one of Android's most successful indie devs is recommending a competing platform, you know things are really screwed up.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com29tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-20681630104570570332012-03-27T08:06:00.002-07:002012-03-27T08:06:21.101-07:00Google I/O 2012: The Agony and the EcstasyGoogle I/O is a developer conference run since 2008. Ostensibly the purpose is for developers using Google's products to learn about upcoming software, network, and help Google help them make better products.<br />
<br />
I attended in both 2010 and 2011, and found the conference useful and interesting. I met other Android game developers, and Google engineers actually working on the platforms I was developing for. But probably mostly due to the increase in tech giveaways (in 2010 I got 2 Android phones, in 2011 a tablet and a Chromebook), demand for the conference has shot through the roof. The conference sold out in under an hour last year.<br />
<br />
So I was heartened to hear that Google intended to implement some kind of screening process for registration this year, to make sure that actual developers would be able to attend. A Google rep last year said something like "brush up on your programming skills" in anticipation for registration. A coding test would have been difficult to administer. I guess they were sort of referring to the <a href="https://developers.google.com/events/io/input-output/ahNzfmdvb2dsZS1kZXZlbG9wZXJzcg0LEgVCb2FyZBjWizYM" target="_blank">mechanical widget builder</a> on the Google I/O page. Supposedly there was an Easter egg for early registration, though I didn't hear much about this, and it's a pretty pale substitute for any kind of screening process.
Also, supposedly attendees for the past three years got preregistration, though this seems conflicting as well. I just saw a tweet from someone who said they've attended since 2008 and didn't get it.
So basically it was a free-for-all.<br />
<br />
This morning at 7am PST, Google opened its registration site. They insisted that the snafus from last year (all sorts of technical issues with the registration site) would be resolved. They were using new servers...etc, etc.
Just before the allotted time, I had the page open, and started hitting refresh. Right on time, I got the "Registration is open" message. It still prompted me to sign in to Google+, which I already was, so I may have lost a couple of precious seconds there. But when I clicked "Register", I got this page:
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY2y97h40XA-EiWZU46fFRUywpEFLoliVNPiQUYXx7Os9W5fST36c9NfpuyMR87Lr_MLazY9UVYlxJMITBPy0GslUZWJbrjH9dpBlOxHkeBd8hmbTFDQ_pw2I4buGlXvNmBbpEiTL-UNXo/s1600/google_io_2012.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY2y97h40XA-EiWZU46fFRUywpEFLoliVNPiQUYXx7Os9W5fST36c9NfpuyMR87Lr_MLazY9UVYlxJMITBPy0GslUZWJbrjH9dpBlOxHkeBd8hmbTFDQ_pw2I4buGlXvNmBbpEiTL-UNXo/s400/google_io_2012.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Okay, fair enough. I waited three minutes on this screen, then got this screen:
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtuRTnDTZLaO980ClIdhhymhhZyURc94O-Sd2LgiONEPqWNAt7mVz60DEUGBhTgN39YX8Z3Ql9j-WrVsOsFswEjgDRuIEyWUtvYkHhAgFqj4kbbpris6Mt85vJX4StRNVUAqgu20ggJcCn/s1600/google_io_notickets.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="164" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtuRTnDTZLaO980ClIdhhymhhZyURc94O-Sd2LgiONEPqWNAt7mVz60DEUGBhTgN39YX8Z3Ql9j-WrVsOsFswEjgDRuIEyWUtvYkHhAgFqj4kbbpris6Mt85vJX4StRNVUAqgu20ggJcCn/s400/google_io_notickets.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Ah well, I thought. That was that. I was already pretty disgruntled at the way Google had handled the whole registration process, so I was feeling a bit of sour grapes. My friend Jeremy suggested I keep at it, though. I preregistered last year, avoiding any nonsense, but he went through the free-for-all registration and initially got "sold out" only to get a ticket later.
So I clicked on "Register" again. Several more minutes went buy, and the same indicator of no tickets available came up. I tried again. Third time did it, and I got a "We found a ticket for you!" message. So I registered.<br />
<br />
Even though I got a spot, I have mixed feelings, and I'm still not happy about the way Google has handled this. I'm seeing droves of tweets from devs who didn't get in. What would have been the fairest way to handle registration? I don't know, but I don't think Google put much effort into it.<br />
<br />
What would have been ideal would be for some kind of vetting process to make sure the people attending are actual developers, and not swag-hungry people who would otherwise get nothing from the conference. I think a white list of verified devs would be a start, those people who had registered Android developer accounts, who had some kind of history developing with Google products. The full-time developer advocates could have helped out with this. Instead, Google I/O is turning into a tech-grab with artificially high demand for what should be primarily attended by developers. As far as I know, there is no way for Google to verify that the people who registered aren't just people trying to profit from the tech giveaways, or flip their registration. Jeremy just sent me a link to someone who just <a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/Google-IO-2012-GA-Adult-Ticket-/230768084849?pt=US_Tickets_all_in_one&hash=item35bad98771#ht_500wt_1182">flipped their registration on Ebay</a>.<br />
<br />
Awesome.<br />
<br />
So while I'm happy that I got a golden ticket, I'm still not happy with Google about the way they've handled this. And I feel for all the devs who got shafted.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-39970561274268019282012-01-18T07:05:00.000-08:002012-01-18T07:18:41.999-08:00How Google is Killing Indie Android Developers<br />
I've been a full-time indie Android developer for over two years now. It's been an awesome experience, but this is going to be a watershed year, and at the end of it, I'm not sure I'll still be in business.<br />
<br />
First some background...
I published my first app on the Android Market in March of 2009. At the time I was a graduate student hoping for some pizza money. I didn't expect it to turn into a full-time business, but that's what ended up happening.<br />
<br />
My early efforts at apps were clumsy. I published simple utility calculators just to learn the development environment and get my feet wet. Then I moved on to games. I was the first to publish some staple games on the platform, like Spades and Dominoes. And my version of Golf Solitaire has also been very popular. Because I was one of the more successful early indie publishers on the market, I was approached by a Russian developer to resell EasyTether, because at that time Russian devs were unable to publish in the market. So we worked out a publishing agreement and I've been very fortunate to be able to publish that app.
In total, I've published 39 apps on the Android Market. Many are very simple. You can see them in the market <a href="https://market.android.com/search?q=polyclef&c=apps">here</a>. Some have done well, and some have flopped. But all of my new apps had a fighting chance.
Until last summer.<br />
<br />
In July 2011 Google revamped the Android Market and removed the "Just In" category. I can't speak for other devs, but this decision may have wrecked my small business. Why? Because for most indie devs, the Android Market is their primary distribution channel, and if users don't see it there, they don't see it. Some section of the market displaying the newest releases is very nearly the only way indie apps are going to get any exposure. Instead, there are now "Top New Paid" and "Top New Free" sections, which only reinforce the popularity of apps that already have exposure, and do nothing for new apps that have no traction.
This <a href="http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/08/19/editorial-why-removing-the-markets-just-in-section-is-good-for-everyone-except-app-spammers/">editorial </a>over at Android Police was in favor of the change at the time. They said:
<br />
<blockquote>
Of course, the problem is that these developers can't actually determine what percentage of their app's "clicks" come from the "Just In" section - there seems to be a tacit assumption that it's a large number, without any evidence to back up this claim. I don't think that is at all the case, but I don't have any numbers, either - just my own personal experience that I think many of you will be able to corroborate.</blockquote>
Well, I have several years of direct experience with the market, publishing numerous apps. Let me share a little with you.<br />
<br />
Here are the first day sales for apps published:<br />
<br />
Drywall Calculator, Jan2010 (4)<br />
Friction Loss Calculator, Jan2010 (8)<br />
Puzzle Lords, Jan2010 (4)<br />
ReceiptBook, Apr2010 (5)<br />
HairBook, Feb2011 (4)<br />
<br />
HairBook, a hair stylist customer database app, went on to sell 30 copies in the first week. All of these apps, and all of my earlier apps and games benefited from the initial exposure of the Just In section. What typically happens is that sales tend to either drop off after that first week, or pick up and plateau (as has happened with my more popular games).<br />
<br />
Now let me share first-day sales figures for the last two apps I've released:<br />
<br />
Flick Hearts, Oct 2010: (0)<br />
Save the Egg, Jan 2012 (0)<br />
<br />
Flick Hearts was admittedly an experimental game of sorts. It requires multiple devices to play, and was designed to use a hi-res device (such as a tablet or Google TV) as the playing surface, with phones used for holding your cards. Users flick the cards from their phones to the host device (like playing cards on a table), which tracks tricks, points, and scores. Admittedly the market is smaller for this game, because of the requirements and format. But zero sales?
The most disheartening, though, and possibly the nail in the coffin, is my latest game, Save the Egg. It's a physics-based puzzler, a game type that has been very popular and performed well for indie developers (e.g. Apparatus, X Construction). This game represents a significant investment in time and money, and to have it fall completely flat on the first day is just horrible.
It's not dead in the water, but not having that initial exposure in Just In hurts its chances. This is undeniable.<br />
<br />
Now, I've tried marketing efforts in the past for other games, and I can tell you from my experience that they have been utterly worthless. Ad campaigns have led to no significant increase in sales or downloads. My guess is that you have to have a critical threshold for an advertising budget to begin to see any kind of return.
For Save the Egg, I have done what I can to set it up for success. I'm in the process of issuing a press release. I've published a free demo version with the first 5 levels (which got exactly 1 download on its first day). I'm cross-promoting the app with house ads in my other apps. I've announced the release via my company's Twitter feed. I've published the app in secondary markets such as the Amazon Appstore and SlideMe.<br />
<br />
The fact is this: <b>The single largest factor for sales or downloads is exposure in the market.</b> An indie cannot advertise their way into this exposure. They can hope they get free exposure from being featured, but this is akin to winning the lottery.<br />
<br />
Currently the only way for most users to discover new apps is reading blogs (which many do not do), or searching for the app. If the app or game is novel, and not a clone of an existing concept, users simply will not find it via search. My dominoes app may be found this way, because people purchasing an Android phone who want to play dominoes, will search for that term. But original apps and games will be disproportionately punished by a lack of ad hoc discovery.
My revenues are down significantly from the previous two years. January is going to be one of the worst months I've ever had. Some of my older games are still chugging along, thanks to gaining market rank in their respective categories. But they are not enough.<br />
<br />
I cannot sustain on a business model where I continue to invest time and money into new projects that do not generate any new revenue.
If Google had wanted to avoid unscrupulous devs from spamming such a section, there were much less drastic and more more effective ways of doing it. The Just In category was indicating updated, as well as new apps. They could have restricted it to newly published apps. And for those devs who might just rename apps and publish tons of new apps every day, simply restrict the number of apps published per week. If a company has a legitimate reason to publish more than 3 apps a week, for example, give them an appeal process. Though it is highly unlikely that any developer should be publishing a large number of apps. Instead of targeting the problem, Google simply hacked it off, thereby severely hurting legitimate developers.<br />
<br />
Other developers may have different experiences, but I can only speak for myself and my company. And I can say without a doubt that the current state of the Android Market is killing my business, slowly but surely.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-9535533413564340012011-09-15T10:16:00.001-07:002011-09-15T10:17:27.318-07:00Flick HeartsOur newest game, Flick Hearts, is out!
<a href="https://market.android.com/details?id=com.flickhearts&feature=search_result">https://market.android.com/details?id=com.flickhearts&feature=search_result</a>Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-74759101425452919222011-08-04T13:48:00.000-07:002011-08-04T13:48:27.943-07:00Google, Android, and the Patent WarsLots of vitriol flying around the internet today regarding <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-patents-attack-android.html" target="_blank">this Google blog post</a> by David Drummond, Google's Chief Legal Officer:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>I have worked in the tech sector for over two decades. Microsoft and Apple have always been at each other’s throats, so when they get into bed together you have to start wondering what's going on. Here is what’s happening:<br />
<br />
Android is on fire. More than 550,000 Android devices are activated every day, through a network of 39 manufacturers and 231 carriers. Android and other platforms are competing hard against each other, and that’s yielding cool new devices and amazing mobile apps for consumers. <br />
<br />
But Android’s success has yielded something else: a hostile, organized campaign against Android by Microsoft, Oracle, Apple and other companies, waged through bogus patents.<br />
<br />
They’re doing this by banding together to acquire Novell’s old patents (the “CPTN” group including Microsoft and Apple) and Nortel’s old patents (the “Rockstar” group including Microsoft and Apple), to make sure Google didn’t get them; seeking $15 licensing fees for every Android device; attempting to make it more expensive for phone manufacturers to license Android (which we provide free of charge) than Windows Phone 7; and even suing Barnes & Noble, HTC, Motorola, and Samsung. Patents were meant to encourage innovation, but lately they are being used as a weapon to stop it.<br />
<br />
A smartphone might involve as many as 250,000 (largely questionable) patent claims, and our competitors want to impose a “tax” for these dubious patents that makes Android devices more expensive for consumers. They want to make it harder for manufacturers to sell Android devices. Instead of competing by building new features or devices, they are fighting through litigation.<br />
<br />
This anti-competitive strategy is also escalating the cost of patents way beyond what they’re really worth. The winning $4.5 billion for Nortel’s patent portfolio was nearly five times larger than the pre-auction estimate of $1 billion. Fortunately, the law frowns on the accumulation of dubious patents for anti-competitive means — which means these deals are likely to draw regulatory scrutiny, and this patent bubble will pop.<br />
<br />
We’re not naive; technology is a tough and ever-changing industry and we work very hard to stay focused on our own business and make better products. But in this instance we thought it was important to speak out and make it clear that we’re determined to preserve Android as a competitive choice for consumers, by stopping those who are trying to strangle it.<br />
<br />
We’re looking intensely at a number of ways to do that. We’re encouraged that the Department of Justice forced the group I mentioned earlier to license the former Novell patents on fair terms, and that it’s looking into whether Microsoft and Apple acquired the Nortel patents for anti-competitive means. We’re also looking at other ways to reduce the anti-competitive threats against Android by strengthening our own patent portfolio. Unless we act, consumers could face rising costs for Android devices — and fewer choices for their next phone. </blockquote><br />
Of course, I make my livelihood from Android, so I can't claim to be unbiased, but here Google is clearly right. <br />
<br />
But there's stuff like this generating lots of traffic:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://fireballed.org/linked/2011/08/04/google/">Google Are Pussies</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote>Everything -- every single fucking thing -- since Bill Clinton has been a copy, a steal, a buy-out -- or a take down.<br />
<br />
And now, you pussies, you are in a fight with companies that are equally big, probably better run, and have something you don't: scars, scars from real battles, and you run to the PR teams and the lobbyists and the government and cry: no fair. <br />
<br />
Patents bad. We want! Give us!<br />
<br />
Tell me, pussies. Which of the Oracle and Microsoft and Apple patents are "bogus"? You say it above. BOGUS PATENTS...Oracle, Apple, Microsoft. <br />
<br />
Which ones? Don't be a pussy. Tell us. Which ones are bogus?<br />
<br />
And while you're at it, tell us which patents are not bogus? Any? Do you believe in intellectual property? Property ownership? Or is it all there for Google's taking?</blockquote><br />
I think I can answer that one pretty well. Which of the patents that Microsoft and Apple just banded together to fork out billions of dollars to acquire from Novell's old patent portfolio are bogus?<br />
<br />
All of them. In the sense that these were not technological innovations that Apple or Microsoft conceived and used the patent system to protect. These patents are ammunition, plain and simple. They have nothing to do with protecting the intellectual property of any of the companies involved. <br />
<br />
Microsoft, Apple, and the other purchasers of the patent portfolio are making a calculated investment in these patents under the assumption that they will either: <br />
<br />
A) Be able to severely hurt Android's market share by filing patent lawsuits based on this portfolio, thereby helping the market share of their own products in a highly competitive space.<br />
<br />
and/or <br />
<br />
B) Generate direct revenue by essentially extorting Google for licensing fees.<br />
<br />
Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with protecting intellectual property, which is the purpose of the patent system. In fact, it's the opposite. Apple and Microsoft are going to use this war chest of purchased patents to file lawsuits and injunctions against their largest competitor, rather than trying to compete by building a better product.<br />
<br />
People are calling out Google as hypocrites for bidding on the patents themselves, and now sore losers for not being able to get them for the price they bid. It's obvious that they bid on the patents as a defensive move. Unfortunately the patents themselves are meaningless in terms of actually representing true innovations developed in house at these companies. These patents are simply fuel for proxy battles. And Google can't merely sit by while their competitors snatch up patent portfolios, giving them more and more ammunition for endless lawsuits.<br />
<br />
Basically the whole system is fucked, but it is unlikely to change anytime in the near future. I'd like to hear that the patent system, especially with regard to software, is undergoing review for massive reforms, but I don't think that's the case. As it is, the big dogs will just continue to try to amass as many patents as possible and hash out these issues in expensive, lengthy legal disputes. This will be time and money that won't go into actually developing cooler, better products, and in fact the proxy patent wars will lead to overall higher prices for consumers no matter what the outcome.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-65236374152668114182011-08-02T08:45:00.001-07:002011-08-02T08:45:24.252-07:00Save the Egg PreviewOver at Google+, I've posted a preview video of our newest game, <b>Save the Egg</b>. Check it out:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://plus.google.com/115741823263310305343/posts/QEN3FQK8Xjk">https://plus.google.com/115741823263310305343/posts/QEN3FQK8Xjk</a>Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-8237006452641118892011-07-05T07:00:00.000-07:002011-07-05T07:00:15.549-07:00Chromebook FailAt the end of last week I received my new Samsung Chromebook that was promised to all attendees of Google I/O 2011.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUk8ADTKReooKpHT9J4Cv18yQ1EIv7l7HgugMEKFXVs8cYhTReXL83utP8jk0f1hF53xUzY2H0UTfP6qZP1WgALZkGw8Rvx_fd7gy8r7Vs4af07SrJaQNbhW43Gn87cakfEssXMLK9_fJ-/s1600/chromebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUk8ADTKReooKpHT9J4Cv18yQ1EIv7l7HgugMEKFXVs8cYhTReXL83utP8jk0f1hF53xUzY2H0UTfP6qZP1WgALZkGw8Rvx_fd7gy8r7Vs4af07SrJaQNbhW43Gn87cakfEssXMLK9_fJ-/s320/chromebook.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The form factor is very nice. It's light, with a great screen and a very comfortable, responsible keyboard. The trackpad actually depresses when you push it, and it's one of the nice trackpads I've used on a laptop-type device.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I resigned myself to the fact that it really is not a primary computing device. That is, like a tablet, it's an auxiliary device, something you would just use to do lightweight computing, such as browsing while watching TV or in a coffee shop. I actually loaned it to my girlfriend to see if it would replace her aging laptop.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So she called me up the next day and said "How do you change the screen timeout settings?" See, she was trying to cook something new, and had the recipe up on the Chromebook while she cooked. The screen kept timing out.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I didn't know, but when I got onto the device, I checked the system settings, which are very limited. Nothing for screen timeout. Turns out that you cannot change these settings. Here's the info from the <a href="http://www.google.com/support/chromeos/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1060909">Chromebook online help guide</a>:</div><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;">Your Chromebook screen also automatically turns off if it's been inactive for a period of time. When plugged in to a power source, the screen turns off after 8 minutes of inactivity. When unplugged, the screen turns off after 3 minutes of inactivity.</span></blockquote>Yep, that's right. This is<i> hard-coded in</i> and not configurable. In a forum discussing this issue with the CR-48 test devices, testers complained. The response from a Google engineer was basically that they didn't want to add unnecessary complexity to the settings, so they went with default settings that most people would find acceptable.<br />
<br />
Fail.<br />
<br />
I'm all for simplicity in user interfaces, but this is not something that should be unconfigurable. As in the above-mentioned use case, if you're using the device for any purpose where you are using it as a reference and are using your hands for something else, a 3-minute screen timeout is going to render it unusable. I haven't tested it for media (music or video), but this might also be a deal-breaker.<br />
<br />
What's worse is that they actually got this feedback during testing, but decided to ignore it and release a production device without this setting enabled. Apparently they are selling well on Amazon, though I haven't heard anything about what the return rate is like.<br />
<br />
In another forum, I found info about how to toggle the device into developer mode and modify the setting from the command line, though I ran into issues booting into developer mode and could never get access to the shell.<br />
<br />
Also, the Chromebook didn't recognize my Droid when I plugged it in to see if I could transfer files back and forth between the devices, which made me wonder how the Chromebook handles driver issues (I'm guessing that in most cases, it just doesn't).<br />
<br />
I really wanted to like this device, and approached it with reduced, realistic expectations that it would not replace a computing device with a full-featured operating system. Even with the lowered bar, so far it has failed. The hardware itself is great, but this is my first experience with Chrome OS, and from what I've seen so far they've stripped away too much to make it viable, even as a casual secondary device.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-29374693045568074762011-06-30T09:33:00.000-07:002011-06-30T09:33:40.609-07:00Recording Your App In ActionLately I've been working on a couple of new game projects, one that is mostly outsourced, a physics-based game called <i>Save the Egg</i>, and one that I'm doing mostly myself, <i>Flick Hearts</i>, a local multiplayer version of Hearts, using multiple devices.<br />
<br />
Video screen capture doesn't allow me to show the interactions between devices, which is important to demo for users who might be interested in the game. So I decided to try recording the devices with a video camera.<br />
<br />
This immediately poses some technical issues. For the camera, I shopped around a little, but decided to just use my girlfriend's Canon digital camera, which records pretty high-quality video. There's no sense buying a dedicated video camera for close-up video shoots. Then there's the issue of stabilizing the camera for recording. A traditional tripod doesn't work, because what you need is a top-down perspective, from about 2 feet away. I read that what I needed was a <a href="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=copy+stand">copy stand</a>. Not wanting to shell out the cash for a relatively simple piece of equipment, I read some DIY advice on a couple of forums. <br />
<br />
Then it was a trip to Lowe's to buy some PVC pipes and screws. $15 and about an hour later, and I had my own recording stand.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif5eQznyAHyT8bayhcc6KfggGu9x-H_B209HFjv6hox_0epoNVrEfYLzR4II5z7Cblk41Pb5AGonQvxeyuDv1V4qe-QwfOXTO-RuYEup3oUGZ24f1FuSpZtvr-Zts1p85pvBzuv2_BQMpD/s1600/IMG_20110630_082148.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif5eQznyAHyT8bayhcc6KfggGu9x-H_B209HFjv6hox_0epoNVrEfYLzR4II5z7Cblk41Pb5AGonQvxeyuDv1V4qe-QwfOXTO-RuYEup3oUGZ24f1FuSpZtvr-Zts1p85pvBzuv2_BQMpD/s320/IMG_20110630_082148.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFdKkARAxk1ttV2_80RnJ2Xvfy97B_E95-fnTdUkiSHwHr-g0aF7NomM4Tj3g_Fgc6guSag0p-EIIawRi1TBMH4O12wrSobxsweaE_vvxoEcwi3qMkEb1wdXuvxDdz_sSR_HjqNh0bf19A/s1600/IMG_20110630_082200.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFdKkARAxk1ttV2_80RnJ2Xvfy97B_E95-fnTdUkiSHwHr-g0aF7NomM4Tj3g_Fgc6guSag0p-EIIawRi1TBMH4O12wrSobxsweaE_vvxoEcwi3qMkEb1wdXuvxDdz_sSR_HjqNh0bf19A/s320/IMG_20110630_082200.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrxEp6XTeghos0PC0Rn5fpDqTpknjNodmCxjprqe18MSh3Lo_5FeMgyzWhPBts2ftSVRQmb9G0EpHr3T8wHQe_-5bqIxjTt_X8hjNpcekW3l1pd3jKiEWQ3Qk3eOdXoo_RQ58njP37fjqD/s1600/IMG_20110630_082318.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrxEp6XTeghos0PC0Rn5fpDqTpknjNodmCxjprqe18MSh3Lo_5FeMgyzWhPBts2ftSVRQmb9G0EpHr3T8wHQe_-5bqIxjTt_X8hjNpcekW3l1pd3jKiEWQ3Qk3eOdXoo_RQ58njP37fjqD/s320/IMG_20110630_082318.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4lsyaamGlDnJgdMd4okSq0g9gzvxvqAoEJs4xbQNgP8aq6hsojQxnNkDQ-24p3g12JjrQSlTDoLuq_Z0fXUN5FCTbEVDaU1J4JfwFlPUdXtzXOxj6jz0MDtdpACIMeEiy481zbxO1K-Rg/s1600/IMG_20110630_082114.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4lsyaamGlDnJgdMd4okSq0g9gzvxvqAoEJs4xbQNgP8aq6hsojQxnNkDQ-24p3g12JjrQSlTDoLuq_Z0fXUN5FCTbEVDaU1J4JfwFlPUdXtzXOxj6jz0MDtdpACIMeEiy481zbxO1K-Rg/s320/IMG_20110630_082114.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><br />
This last shot shows the stand set up on my Poker table. The biggest problem was that the camera is picking up on light, and the devices produce a lot of light, being backlit. Suggestions from the forums included lowering the brightness on the devices and trying to get ambient light balanced with the brightness of the devices. I fiddled around with this for a while with mixed results.<br />
<br />
The resulting video is okay...not great. You can at least get a sense of how the game works. Lower brightness settings did work better, but this is with the brightness set to the minimum on all devices. My Motorola Droid was the brightest, even at min brightness.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/x7CPA0SggSw?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div><br />
I had a couple of issues flicking from the Eris. I need to adjust the sensitivity for the gesture, but you get the general idea. Hopefully I can continue to refine the recording procedure to make it look even nicer in the future, but this isn't a bad first cut.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-90345617873903410192011-06-08T06:53:00.001-07:002011-06-08T06:53:55.588-07:00Bluetooth Chat: One Server, Multiple ClientsIn attempting to solve this issue, I believe I have successfully extended the official Android Bluetooth Chat example to work with a server connecting to multiple clients.<br />
<br />
I've uploaded my modifications to github here:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://github.com/polyclef/BluetoothChatMulti">https://github.com/polyclef/BluetoothChatMulti</a><br />
<br />
One device acts as the server by selecting "Menu>Make discoverable". Each client then connects by selecting "Menu>Connect a device". I was successfully able to connect my Motorola Droid and HTC Eris as clients to my Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1". Each message sent from a client displays only on the server. A message sent from the server displays on all clients.<br />
<br />
This was a tedious process getting it to work at all. Connectivity with the HTC devices is sporadic, though. I've read elsewhere that bluetooth on HTC is buggy, so I'm chalking it up to that.<br />
<br />
Hopefully someone else will find this example useful. If you have any questions, suggestions, or other feedback, please let me know.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-58829808918953280442011-05-27T15:45:00.000-07:002011-05-27T15:45:58.546-07:00What We've Got Here is...Failure to Communicate: Bluetooth, Android, and iPhoneI'm disheartened and exhausted now, after trying to break ground on a new game that would involve peer-to-peer networking among a number of Android and iPhone devices.<br />
<br />
What I want is to have an app that would install on tablets (e.g. Xoom, iPad) and act as a server. Players would connect to the server with phone-sized devices and exchange information with the server. <br />
<br />
My first inclination was to use bluetooth. Well, just getting two test devices connected to a tablet is something I haven't been able to accomplish. The <a href="http://developer.android.com/resources/samples/BluetoothChat/src/com/example/android/BluetoothChat/BluetoothChat.html">BluetoothChat </a>example in the Android SDK enables connection and communication between two devices, with a single app that can function as either the server or client. I've tried to modify this app into two distinct apps: a dedicated server and client, and that works fine. But attempting to connect a second device has proven undoable so far. <br />
<br />
I made a couple of modifications to the example code so that the AcceptThread continues to listen, even after the first connection is made (the example stops listening after the one connection is made, because it only needs to establish connections between two devices). I created an ArrayList to handle the multiple connections. Each time a new connection is attempted from a remote device, a new ConnectedThread is created and added to the list.<br />
<br />
The first client connects just fine.<br />
<br />
When the second client attempts to connect, the connection fails. The log output is:<br />
<br />
D/BluetoothEventLoop( 140): Device property changed: <device address> property: Connected value: true<br />
I/BluetoothService( 140): ACL connected, mAclLinkCount = 2<br />
D/BluetoothEventLoop( 140): Device property changed: <device address> property: Connected value: false<br />
I/BluetoothService( 140): ACL disconnected, mAclLinkCount = 1<br />
<br />
So it looks like the second connection attempt is successful, but then it is immediately disconnected. This looks like it's happening at a low level, outside anything the code is handling. This happens with a number of different types of test devices, so I don't think it's due to a particular firmware or hardware issue. <br />
<br />
At the Lafayette Mobile Developer's meetup last night, we talked about bluetooth communication between Android and iPhone devices. I hadn't even looked into the iPhone side, but I should have known that they basically don't have a bluetooth API for iOS. Or rather, they don't have one that allows Apple devices to talk to non-Apple devices. Bluetooth on iOS can be done through GameKit. <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2080644/is-it-possible-in-principle-for-an-android-device-to-interface-with-an-iphone-o">This thread</a> on Stack Overflow suggests that it would be possible to spoof the GameKit functionality on Android to allow an Android device to talk to an iOS device, but I can see no indication that anyone has done such a thing.<br />
<br />
I noticed in the same thread that the Bump API is mentioned, and I always assumed that it used bluetooth or some other kind of local connectivity. Nope...it uses a device's data connection, sends information to the cloud and syncs up devices based on their GPS position, which is kind of cool, but it also means that devices without a network connection (e.g. wifi only devices) can't use it. This is a deal breaker, because a lot of tablets are going to be wifi only.<br />
<br />
So what about wifi? Well, on that front it sounds like Android does not support ad-hoc peer-to-peer networks, at least according to <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1932150/can-android-do-peer-to-peer-ad-hoc-networking">this post</a>.<br />
<br />
I find this ridiculous and depressing that these devices are all equipped with multiple ways to communicate locally, but in both cases (Android and iOS), the SDK functionality doesn't allow a way for them to talk to one another enough to write a simple app that pass something like a string between devices. NFC technology might enable local communication effectively, but it doesn't sound like NFC capabilities are coming to iPhone anytime soon, and they may be locked down if/when they do.<br />
<br />
At this point I'm not even sure that a wifi-only tablet and multiple phone client app is going to work. It will likely work fine within a given platform, but not cross-platform, and that is extremely limiting. <br />
<br />
Bah.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-74418798758230259392011-05-12T12:31:00.000-07:002011-05-13T13:27:24.291-07:00Google I/O 2011<a href="http://www.google.com/events/io/2011/index-live.html">Google I/O 2011</a> wrapped up yesterday. Overall it was another great experience. I attended for the first time last year.<br />
<br />
First off, I/O had a much bigger Android footprint than last year. That might have something to do with the fact that the platform has exploded in growth. But this year they devoted an entire floor to Android. Some pics...<br />
<br />
Here's me showing my love for the green guy:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://goo.gl/photos/54qbQwo9xS" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcoCpcd_r7eyC9iky4-7SWoCVDnTcv4KvR1LOK3gh-KIuxzf8duYPIKcOMOgAxm5VvJH8PtHm19JNJAqil_VHZ9Jfe_7Vze6IeXIuKSnmbu1FMGh9RGgVR5wqACwzIbXharQCbmldNMgAv/s512/IMG_20110511_164954.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
Here you can see the giant Android figures all over the place:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://goo.gl/photos/sxsk3tXFkj" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMY3prOjgro-7345wAYzDOpxc1k7xOGoyqW7Cjarnmrm6YKlmt9ev2baz6brjv0q5Ekdu-paBeM5PUSCV6KB5BzB2VMvzkxyvTpeXfRqQ-ucWx-AbJJPPA_TWdMpbx_-9k2JLvmhaRODJJ/s512/IMG_20110511_165035.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://goo.gl/photos/U2PFSuki44" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5J0DG4GqaeRMb4LEDxiHUnabzLpYjSR9EbDF3ZjWn1MGJ76Zh9O0CnoOEC8q_fDqIieoCFG7YUJT2biq_S-ZGKp2FzQmjqtDDNuGjD0sLpDSsZCdhPl_Gc8kHlh5yiBzsphq8NhY3qS92/s512/IMG_20110511_165101.jpg" /></a><br />
<br />
They even tore up the carpet on the third floor and put down custom Android carpeting. There were autonomous Android-bots roaming around bumping into people and chirping as well. <br />
<br />
And the first day keynote focused on Android, rather than teasing us until the second day, like last year. <br />
<br />
Goodie-wise, they gave us all a new Samsung Galaxy limited edition 10.1" tab, which is pretty sweet, though I hope they don't release the software in this condition when it goes live. I've found some page rendering in the browser (ironically, the acceptance to Google Music Beta didn't render properly on my tab). I couldn't find the books app, either natively installed or on the market. And I couldn't find a native video player. When I uploaded an mp4 to try it out, I could not find it via the file explorer or any other way. So I basically couldn't figure out how to play a video that I put on the device. Unlike other Android devices, when you attach it to a PC it either needs to be in USB debugging mode, and if that is toggled off, you can then mount for file transfer. But every other Android device allows you to do both when attaching to a PC. This is pretty weird. We're supposed to get an OS update in "a few weeks", so hopefully that will clear up a lot of these issues.<br />
<br />
We also got invitations to Google Music Beta. I'll discuss that when I play around with it more. We got a promise that we'd get information on how to claim free ChromeBooks, laptops running the new ChromeOS. I'm somewhat skeptical about this paradigm, but I'm still looking forward to trying it out. And finally, we all got mobile wi-fi hotspots with 3 free months from Verizon. Thanks to Google and the manufacturers!<br />
<br />
Some people also received the new Sony-Ericsson Xperia play phones if they were lucky enough to attend a particular session on Day 2. I think this was a pretty bad idea. First of all, second day Android sessions had very severe capacity issues, so many devs, including myself, weren't able to attend most of the Android afternoon sessions, including the one with the giveaway. In fact, I think it's possible that rumors of a giveaway may have created the congestion. So this was bad for the two main reasons that it possibly kept some developers from attending sessions they wanted to attend, and it probably engendered some bad feelings from devs who selectively received free phones.<br />
<br />
I actually heard another rumor that HTC wanted to give away phones to everyone, but Google thought that level of hardware giveaway would be too extreme. Ah well. So I didn't get a phone, which I need to upgrade. And unfortunately the Nexus S is not available on Verizon. So I'll probably end up getting a Thunderbolt, or possibly switching carriers.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I had a good time, and got to talk to a lot of nice folks from Google, as well as other devs. I didn't meet up with nearly as many devs as last year. I think they could do a better job of facilitating networking between devs with common interests, and I told them as much in my feedback note.<br />
<br />
So I'll most likely be there next year as well.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-84352432923916404772011-03-25T06:18:00.000-07:002011-03-25T06:18:28.423-07:00Polyclef Apps Now Available on Amazon App StoreSo Amazon launched its Android app store this week. Leading up to its release, I was skeptical that it would really do any better than any other 3rd-party app store. The official Google Android Market comes preinstalled on most devices. A 3rd-party app store requires the user to go out and find it, set their phone to accept non-market installs, and install it manually. Amazon has the further requirement of entering in payment information, even if you only want to download free apps.<br />
<br />
Who would jump through all these hoops for a market with way fewer apps than the Android Market, most of them shared between the two?<br />
<br />
Well apparently a lot of people. The reason? I guess I should have trusted that the people at Amazon would have a trick or two up their sleeves, and the magic ingredient was Angry Birds. Specifically, a new app called Angry Birds Rio that is exclusive to the Amazon App Store, and free for a limited time. Angry Birds is so incredibly popular that exclusive content was a genius way to drive users specifically to the Amazon Appstore. Once the user has jumped through the initial hoops, the market is just as reliable and easy to use as the official one.<br />
<br />
I have over 30 apps on Android. I took a cautious approach to the Amazon Appstore by only submitting two apps, WordWise Pro and Golf Solitaire. So far they're doing well enough to get me to submit additional apps. There may just be an initial rush, but I don't think so. I'm thinking now that Amazon has probably done things right and will continue doing so.<br />
<br />
For now, here are the links to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Polyclef-Software-LLC-WordWise-Pro/dp/B004CFHELC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=mobile-apps&qid=1301058681&sr=1-1">WordWise Pro</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Polyclef-Software-LLC-Golf-Solitaire/dp/B004QJFFUG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=mobile-apps&qid=1301058681&sr=1-2">Golf Solitaire</a> on the Amazon Appstore. More to come soon.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-66401648295060268632011-02-12T08:09:00.000-08:002011-03-15T07:09:26.362-07:00Match and Hatch for Android Preview<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I'm happy to announce that we're close to releasing a new match-3 game for Android called "Match and Hatch".</div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiI0mYXCvxtW0aegwed8PAADxWw6qos7lvGG1xlbMG0gbHR_gtW1npskiYHHGQz4CrbpyLRzrKiFHh6XvohUQ7s3DK-bD2TSW4BfRkiwSDsch3aZgg-Rfq2qw6heV6xsWtD9yebHD_EeJd/s1600/matchandhatch01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiI0mYXCvxtW0aegwed8PAADxWw6qos7lvGG1xlbMG0gbHR_gtW1npskiYHHGQz4CrbpyLRzrKiFHh6XvohUQ7s3DK-bD2TSW4BfRkiwSDsch3aZgg-Rfq2qw6heV6xsWtD9yebHD_EeJd/s320/matchandhatch01.png" style="cursor: move;" width="213" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">If you're not familiar with the match-3 genre of casual games, like Bejeweled, basically the goal is to move elements on the screen to make matches of 3 or more of the same element in a row, either horizontally or vertically.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Ahead of Easter, I thought an egg theme would be kind of cool, though it's not explicitly an Easter game. There are a couple of twists on typical match-3 play. For one, every time you make a match, the eggs hatch open, revealing either points, pets, or food.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_mvH4l_kIAEhs8AeWCv6NDxjf7fnFx8QCwIMdRn6zga_ff0spHPL2g0rpH79L185IsV36xmZqlb-LVCdOCQz07-UsvfYi4Xl84aW2pYHbM7vbhNdpCz-0vz2yxfVPgpJHyuZQmfAuUrbI/s1600/matchandhatch02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_mvH4l_kIAEhs8AeWCv6NDxjf7fnFx8QCwIMdRn6zga_ff0spHPL2g0rpH79L185IsV36xmZqlb-LVCdOCQz07-UsvfYi4Xl84aW2pYHbM7vbhNdpCz-0vz2yxfVPgpJHyuZQmfAuUrbI/s320/matchandhatch02.png" style="cursor: move;" width="213" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">If you find a pet (some are much rarer than others), you can then view them on the pet screen:</div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD1jd1ry6BYgE5zipqdLDghgKiEo8iH0_9oPBguBwdE_esyL8kOi66iRpKcaYC8a35gqgd5GkUJrC0EwA6VYjijWPhzYreH_-slDNiSXJkrmYSQU5qQMrv6e2qZ3Y0hJaNIRdx1Pfojrgd/s1600/matchandhatch04.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD1jd1ry6BYgE5zipqdLDghgKiEo8iH0_9oPBguBwdE_esyL8kOi66iRpKcaYC8a35gqgd5GkUJrC0EwA6VYjijWPhzYreH_-slDNiSXJkrmYSQU5qQMrv6e2qZ3Y0hJaNIRdx1Pfojrgd/s320/matchandhatch04.png" style="cursor: move;" width="213" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Once you hatch a pet, you'll need to take care of it at least a couple of times a day, by feeding it and showing it a little attention (you can pet the critters by rubbing their head or their belly). This increases their happiness and levels them up. If you neglect your pets long enough, they'll level down and eventually run away.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I thought this blend of match-3 and virtual pets would be a cool hybrid. We'll see. I'm going to release the paid version first, probably for $1.99, followed closely by a free ad-based version. Then I'm going to look into using Google's new in-app purchase system to allow users to directly purchase food and pets. Some players may want to spend hours and hours hatching eggs, but others may enjoy the pet aspect more.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">And I'm also likely going to commission an iPhone version in the near future.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Stay tuned...I'll let you know when it hits the market!</div>Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-40210818339878447522011-02-12T07:54:00.000-08:002011-02-12T07:54:46.104-08:00PetPass for iPhone is Now Live!It took a while, but our new social networking app PetPass is now live on the iTunes app market:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://itunes.apple.com/ru/app/petpass/id385460118?mt=8">http://itunes.apple.com/ru/app/petpass/id385460118?mt=8</a><br />
<br />
If you have an iPhone or know someone who does, check it out! It's free.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-61760703337748064062010-11-18T05:53:00.000-08:002010-11-18T05:53:23.794-08:00PetPass<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRHInE_bBbCtsKHDADYASEoLbJiV2LcB_SKYWduAu9vPolStv-nae0PBmL6hfWDkrzE54bp9erGvyLniauX_H63ibPHV1JokEJrhZbfSqm-LvGRACVBnIH4pZHusm7F0gmJUxOT8mUxxaN/s1600/petpass_icon512x512.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRHInE_bBbCtsKHDADYASEoLbJiV2LcB_SKYWduAu9vPolStv-nae0PBmL6hfWDkrzE54bp9erGvyLniauX_H63ibPHV1JokEJrhZbfSqm-LvGRACVBnIH4pZHusm7F0gmJUxOT8mUxxaN/s320/petpass_icon512x512.png" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This summer I commissioned an app based on an idea I had: What if you could create a virtual mail carrier, put a message and/or photo in its mailbag, and pass it (physically) to a friend, then they could add a message and/or photo and pass it to someone else, and so on? You could also track your pet's journeys around the world and see all the places and people it has interacted with. That was the idea behind PetPass...kind of a chain mail Twitter with cute animals, leveraging the Bump API.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFdkkr_8TSprAghujb692oHiQqRIVaCSxzpVCDdTyOEXls-7mh2wpYA4tEXf9Ozg13_3tCLPyDfGGX5c0KzNzjdVPmOqKv3B4fzjzWeRY2dLq6WuzvofltBaxZcEKlL_4djnxsi4EEJ8oz/s1600/petpass_monkey.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFdkkr_8TSprAghujb692oHiQqRIVaCSxzpVCDdTyOEXls-7mh2wpYA4tEXf9Ozg13_3tCLPyDfGGX5c0KzNzjdVPmOqKv3B4fzjzWeRY2dLq6WuzvofltBaxZcEKlL_4djnxsi4EEJ8oz/s320/petpass_monkey.png" width="213" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><br />
It's been a rocky road getting this thing produced, but we finally got it submitted to Apple yesterday. It's still a little rough around the edges (especially when it comes to handling poor network connectivity). Here's how it works:<br />
<br />
The app is free. You get 100 credits with the free download. It costs 10 credits to create a new pet. You choose a pet type (monkey, panda, robot, etc.) and give it a unique name. Then you add a message and (optionally) a photo to its mailbag. You click Pass Pet. A friend of yours who also has the app on their device clicks Receive Pet. You shake your phones near each other and the pet passes from your phone to theirs. You earn 1 credit for each pet you pass, though you can't earn more credits by passing the same pet multiple times. You can also purchase 10 credits for $0.99.<br />
<br />
Will people like and use this app? I really don't know. I thought the idea sounded cool at the time. I'd been wanting to produce a social networking app, and one that used both in-app purchases and the Bump API. But who knows?<br />
<br />
It is implemented reasonably well, and it is free. Though I've found that ironically users tend to be even harsher on free apps than they are on paid ones. You do get a lot more downloads with a free app, so the chances of it catching on are increased by the price tag. It should take another week or so for the app to be approved (or rejected). If the app does reasonably well on the iPhone, I will develop an Android version. The Bump API allows for transactions between iPhone and Android devices. But we'll have to see how it does first.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-47698446498659470522010-10-12T07:06:00.000-07:002010-10-12T07:06:38.269-07:00Why Microsoft's New Mobile Phone Platform Poses No Threat, and Who Was the Ad Wizard That Came Up With That?Wired has a ridiculous article entitled <a href="http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/10/windows-phone-7-4/" target="_blank">Why Windows Phone 7 Will Make Android Look Chaotic</a>. <br />
<blockquote>The crucial part of Microsoft’s new phone strategy is the quality control it imposes onto its hardware partners. Rather than code an operating system and allow manufacturers to do whatever they want with it — like Google is doing with Android — Microsoft is requiring hardware partners to meet a rigid criteria in order to run Windows Phone 7.<br />
<br />
Each device must feature three standard hardware buttons, for example, and before they can ship with Windows Phone 7, they have to pass a series of tests directed by Microsoft. <br />
<br />
...<br />
<br />
The effort to control quality and consistency may be just what Microsoft needs to regain some ground in the phone battle.</blockquote>Yep, I'm sure a more closed, rigid OS is exactly what's needed to gain more market share. Good grief.<br />
<br />
Microsoft may carve out a marginal slice of the smartphone market share. It's a rapidly expanding market with lots of room. But they are not going to pose a serious threat to Android's trajectory to become the dominant player in the market. The two main reasons are: apps and specs. Microsoft has actually done a pretty good job providing the necessary tools to devs to make cool apps for the platform. But there has to be some intrinsic appeal to cause devs to cross-port or migrate. With Android it was an obvious platform to lure devs away from iOS because it is a less restrictive development and publishing environment. The two things that are going to lure a dev to a new platform are either money or coolness. Android initially didn't have the first, but it had the second. What does WP7 have? If the app store ramps up and they get enough phones into people's hands this holiday season to make it seem like a viable decision to port apps over, then Microsoft might be able to muscle into a minority market share.<br />
<br />
But the other big issue is the one highlighted in the article, which actually works against them: hardware.<br />
<br />
As one commenter pointed out, when you put more restrictions on the hardware manufacturers, you get more consistency, but you limit the range of devices and the speed of adoption to new hardware. The new WP7 devices are shipping with chipsets that are already second-best in the market. That gap is only going to get worse as the development cycle for WP7 phones lags while Android devices flood the market at blinding speeds. This is the same reason Android will continue to chew away market share from the iPhone. The rate of innovation for Android, both in terms of the OS and hardware, will drastically outpace other restrictive platforms. Very soon we'll be seeing dual-core chipsets in devices running Android, with version 3.0 and a revamped market. Android will be on a broader spectrum of devices, meaning a wider demographic will be able to buy the phone for their budget, and the high-end devices will be clearly superior spec-wise than models with competing OSs.<br />
<br />
And Microsoft's head-scratching marketing campain won't help either. Check this out:<br />
<br />
<object height="390" width="640"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EHlN21ebeak&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EHlN21ebeak&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object><br />
<br />
The commercial is well done, if what you want to do is make people feel bad or guilty for using their smartphones. It would be a great public service announcement to spend more time and pay more attention to your loved ones. What they're sort of trying to say is that their phones are so efficient you won't want to use them. I think that's pretty counter to the motivations of most users and buyers, though. This is exactly the opposite of "There's an app for that", or the Droid's campaign of morphing you into a next-level cybernetic entity by augmenting you with their device. The WP7 campaign isn't saying you'll want to spend more time with your device because of all the cool stuff it can do, but that you'll want to do less with it. I understand the strategy, but it's a horrible one.<br />
<br />
I'm always ready to eat some crow when it comes to prediction, but in this case I'll be very surprised if WP7 is able to carve out even 5% of the smartphone market.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-66438359052357170422010-10-04T15:45:00.000-07:002010-10-04T15:45:53.770-07:00WordWise for iPhone 1.01 Update ReleasedOur release of WordWise for iPhone was rocky, to say the least. That first version probably shouldn't have been submitted or made it through review. We really rushed to try to be first-to-market with Android/iPhone cross-compatibility, and the quality suffered. <br />
<br />
But today 1.01 of WordWise for iPhone was approved, and most of the major issues should be fixed. Specifically, the game was crashing on most older phones and the iPod touch when loading games with lots of tiles, such as a game near completion. This was a memory issues and should now be resolved. There was an issue with loading games that should have affected all versions, but was particularly problematic on the iPad, keeping games from being launched at all. This should be fixed. And overall, performance in terms of moving and dropping tiles should be smoother. <br />
<br />
Thanks a heap to the guys over at <a href="http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/" target="_blank">In a Day Development</a> for their help. Go check out their apps (and buy some)!<br />
<br />
As mentioned in an earlier post, while testing, we reverted to the development keys for notification, and forgot to change them back to production keys, so notifications are likely broken. We're going to submit yet another update (sigh) to get those working again. Hopefully the game is much more playable and those of you who want to play between Android and iPhone should be able to.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-58712438529806507322010-09-23T12:15:00.001-07:002010-09-23T12:20:51.975-07:00WordWise for iPhone IssuesWordWise was developed primarily on iPhone OS 3, and we tested it on iOS 4, but we're getting reports of issues in two main areas:<br /><br />1) Error connecting to server<br />2) Crashes loading the game after several moves are made<br /><br />The first issue is likely to do with storing and using authentication information. What's probably happening is that the authentication used to log into our servers is timing out, and we need to fix the app to either refresh or fetch new credentials.<br /><br />The second is most likely a memory issue. Each tile is a separate graphic, and since the crash is occurring later in games, while attempting to load, it is likely because the memory required to render a larger number of tiles is causing the crash. This is probably mostly occurring on older devices.<br /><br />Sorry for the issues. We're going to get them fixed as soon as we can. In the meantime, if you do have problems, if you could email us at polyclefsoftware@gmail.com and let us know what happened and what device and OS you're using, that would really help us troubleshoot.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-40418557052379711062010-09-21T06:51:00.001-07:002010-09-21T08:51:48.312-07:00WordWise for iPhone Released!<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEji4ksQYjHJDi33Gr2pT9-SS7K5cvR1t1eEAGLABoEgDKSHn-Y5icHomN50qjJ9oQScPh7zxDMALjyIazcO-J2n6Rkpen8cAVgeClqCBhINli1s2Loyoo5tQDYcx30Vx0at3Rbkuruh09z8/s1600/wordwise_android_iphone.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 341px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEji4ksQYjHJDi33Gr2pT9-SS7K5cvR1t1eEAGLABoEgDKSHn-Y5icHomN50qjJ9oQScPh7zxDMALjyIazcO-J2n6Rkpen8cAVgeClqCBhINli1s2Loyoo5tQDYcx30Vx0at3Rbkuruh09z8/s400/wordwise_android_iphone.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5519394953079971234" /></a><br /><br />The wait is over...WordWise for iPhone is now available in the iTunes App Store for just 99 cents!<br /><br />Judging by the amount of emails I get requesting Android/iPhone cross-platform play, there is pretty big demand for a game of this type. So if you've got an iPhone, check it out. If your friends have iPhones, tell them to check it out.<br /><br />And remember this is v1.00, so it's not going to be nearly as polished or feature-rich as it will with a few more updates. But it will get you started on playing between Android and iPhone.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-43731505592588654182010-09-17T06:43:00.001-07:002010-09-17T06:50:15.305-07:00Polyclef is Interviewed for Newsweek ArticleSo a reporter from Newsweek contacted me a couple of weeks ago asking if I'd be willing to answer a few questions about the app business on Android.<br /><br />It's not really an article...more like a featurette. It's called <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/15/how-to-build-a-better-smart-phone-app.html" target="_blank">How to Build a Better App: Mobile app makers share tips on creating a successful app</a>. From the intro:<blockquote>So what does it take for a new app maker to get in on this action? We asked two entrepreneurs who have already done it. Ilene Jones, 38, is cofounder of Kitty Code, maker of iPhone’s Hurricane storm-tracking app, which has logged 60,000 downloads at $3.99 a pop. Derek James, 39, who runs Polyclef Software, has created paid games for Android that have clocked more than 50,000 downloads.<br /></blockquote>And my Android-specific advice that made it in?<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span><br /><blockquote>1. Think local<br />When it comes to picking a developer, says James, it may be better to hire someone you can work with directly, as opposed to someone in Mumbai. To find the right person, he suggests checking out Craigslist, contacting local tech groups, and leaving fliers at nearby universities.<br /><br />2. Go where the app lovers are<br />In 2009, James was a graduate student looking to make “pizza money” when he got into the app game. To figure out what to make, he began reading Android forums and looking for mentions of popular games that users wanted as apps. He started with card games—first Spades and then Hearts.<br /><br />3. In chaos lies opportunity<br />Unlike Apple, Google doesn’t review every app. Developers basically upload and push “publish,” says James. And with fewer apps than Apple, Android has more unexploited niches. That said, any Android app will have to be written in multiple versions to accommodate various smart phones.<br /><br />4. Experiment with pricing<br />James tinkers with his games to find the right price point. He’s started some games at $2.99, then lowered them to 99 cents for a week to see how that affects downloads. Most settle at $1.99, but WordWise, a game he invented, draws about 40% more downloads a day at 99 cents than at $1.99.<br /><br />5. Use search to your advantage<br />James decided to make apps based on games consumers could easily identify. “Someone searches ‘domino,’ and my [Domino] app comes up,” he says. For WordWise, he put a mention of Scrabble in the description so it would show up in related searches.<br /></blockquote>I haven't seen the print version, but I'm assuming it's the same. Either way, it's nice to have the exposure in a national publication.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-16569193202164125582010-09-09T09:16:00.000-07:002010-09-09T09:54:56.326-07:00Why Would Anyone Choose Android over iPhone?MG Siegler over at TechCrunch has <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/09/android-open/" target="_blank">a pretty stupid article</a> in which he follows up on <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/05/apple-android/" target="_blank">another silly article</a> in which he rhetorically wondered out loud if the reason why Android was overtaking the iPhone in market share was because of AT&T exclusivity for the iPhone.<br /><br />In that first article, he wrote:<br /><blockquote><br />While I obviously understand that people have different tastes, I can’t see how you can objectively say that the overall experience of using an Android phone isn’t worse than using an iPhone.<br /></blockquote><br />In response to this, people then proceeded to give reasons other than AT&T that the Android experience is better than the iPhone. In the second article, he picks what he perceives as the primary reason: openness. He then proceeds to say that the idea that Android is more open than the iPhone is "a load of crap".<br /><br />His justification? Recent demo models of Android phones he has received come with a bunch of pre-installed apps he doesn't want. <br /><br />There's also this:<br /><blockquote><br />From what we’re hearing, Verizon is also planning to launch this store on their Android phones as well in the future. Obviously, this store would be pre-installed, and it would likely be more prominently displayed than Android’s own Market for apps.<br /></blockquote><br />Um, V Cast is already included on Verizon phones, as a channel in the Android Market alongside existing ones. I guess it's possible that Verizon would replace the official Android Market with their own, but I highly doubt it. I don't think Siegler has a clue what he's talking about here.<br /><br />Then he talks about how certain models of Android phones don't allow the installation of non-market apps. Then he talks about how tethering is not available via the native support for it in 2.2. Hint: You can buy <a href="http://www.appbrain.com/app/com.mstream.easytether_polyclef" target="_blank">EasyTether</a> and tether away to your hearts content.<br /><br />Then he goes on to bash the carriers for not updating Android to the most current OS version fast enough. Look, I wish every Android phone was running 2.2, but here's the situation: Android devices are coming out at a breakneck speed, with bigger and better specs all the time. Older devices (and we're just talking 6-12 months old) often don't have the hardware hefty enough to run the latest version of Android optimally. There's a trade-off here. You can either have rapid innovation and a certain amount of buyer's remorse when the phone you bought 6 months ago is eclipsed by the newest phone with much better specs, or we can just slow down the pace of innovation so better devices only come out once a year or so. Which would you prefer? I'll take the rapid innovation, personally. As a dev it makes compatibility a bigger problem, and as a consumer you may feel like you're getting left in the dust, but I'd take than any day over a much slower pace of increasing specs.<br /><br />Realistically compare this to the PC market. If you buy the newest PC, within a relatively short amount of time it will no longer be the best and brightest. You can upgrade the OS and hardware yourself (though your average consumer won't), but you certainly don't get automatic updates to an entirely new version for free, mediated by your ISP. I think it is reasonably for the average Android user to expect 1-2 full version upgrades in the lifetime of their device.<br /><br />Anyway, back to one core question: Is Android more open? Of course it is.<br /><br />You <i>can</i> tether on Android, without rooting, either by being on a support OS/carrier, or buying a tethering app (which would never make it onto the iTunes market). Steve Jobs derisively talked about a "porn store" on Android, and guess what? A lot of people like porn. If you don't want Apple to be your nanny when it comes to app content, you might just prefer an Android device. It is simply an irrefutable fact that in terms of functionality and content of apps, Android allows a wider range than the iPhone. No one in their right mind would dispute this, and it is a far more sensible metric of openness than any that Siegler gives.<br /><br />So what about the other big question originally raised by Siegler: Why would anyone in their right mind choose an Android phone over an iPhone?<br /><br />Here are a few:<br /><br />1) Choice. The iPhone only has a few models, and only one newest model. With Android, besides having your choice of carrier, you also have your choice of hardware. Do you want a hardware keyboard? Do you want a huge display? A small one? Is the camera especially important to you? The point is that with Android you have a vast array of choices in terms of specs, features, and price, and that spectrum is only getting larger. <br /><br />2) Price. You can get a budget Android phone or go for top-of-the-line. Not everyone wants to fork out the max amount for the best available phone. In this respect, Android has a huge edge that is analogous to the PC market. Some consumers prefer to trade features and specs for a bit of money in savings.<br /><br />3) Google. Yes, the iPhone allows some Google apps to run (but apparently not others, such as Google Voice). If you are already an avid user of Google's web-based services, you just might want the tight integration with things like GMail and Google Calender that the Android environment provides.<br /><br />These are three big ones off the top of my head. There are others, such as the liberal Android Market return policy that is very consumer-friendly. But look, the iPhone is a great device, very well designed and very user friendly. But it is not perfect, and it is currently no longer the objectively best smartphone on the market. In terms of specs and functionality, the newest Android devices, such as the Evo and Droid X are better. The gap has closed, and the scary thing for Apple is that soon there will be Android devices that are clearly superior to the iPhone in virtually every respect. Android innovation is not on a yearly schedule like the iPhone. By this holiday season, there will be new Android devices with specs that outperform the iPhone in every category. Android 3.0 (Gingerbread) will be released this year as well, along with the improved Android Market with over-the-air purchases and installs and integration with Google's new music service. Apple apologists can currently continue to make arguments that the iPhone is at or near the top of the heap, but very, very soon that argument will simply be made obsolete by the steady march of better and better Android devices.<br /><br />So while there are already good reasons to prefer an Android device over an iPhone, right now to a large degree it is personal preference. Over the next 6 months that will no longer be the case and the chasm will widen. The iPhone won't fall away, but it will be relegated to a much smaller market share, just as in the PC market. And I'm sure guys like Siegler will be whining louder than ever.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-21598044664852012152010-09-08T07:07:00.000-07:002010-09-08T07:28:59.988-07:00Android Market and TaxesA fellow developer wrote me today and said:<blockquote>I have had some success with one of my apps and I'm starting to get concerned on how I should be handling taxes. Do you have any links you could suggest on how I should be reporting income and sales tax?</blockquote>Disclaimer here: It is entirely possible I have no clue what I'm talking about, so you should take everything I say with a huge grain of salt.<br /><br />Near the end of 2009, when my apps started doing reasonably well, I began to investigate tax issues. It's hard to find decent information and get clarification from Google, so your best bet is to find either a good tax attorney, CPA, or both if you are generating enough revenue to be worried about it. If your apps are making less than $5K a year, then you're probably well under the radar.<br /><br />Anyway, last summer I formed an LLC as the sole member, and basically my taxes on my company's income were treated the same as an individual. This year I've hired a local CPA who advised forming an S corporation, which will supposedly save on paying self-employment taxes and end up costing me less in taxes than I would as an LLC. No matter how you handle it, if you're making a substantial amount of money, you need to be declaring it and paying taxes on it.<br /><br />As for sales tax, that's pretty murky. I searched around quite a lot in various forums, and ended up with the following understanding: Developers selling apps through the Android Market are responsible for collecting any associated sales tax as a result of each sale. I am based in Louisiana, so I contacted the Louisiana Department of Revenue and the representative I spoke with confirmed that I am responsible for collecting sales tax on transactions that take place in the same state in which my company is based. So basically I collect the 4% sales tax on app sales in Louisiana. I file monthly sales tax reports through the LDR website, basically reporting $X in gross sales minus $Y in interstate and international sales, which are exempt from taxation in Louisiana. The sales tax can be set up in the Google Checkout console (Settings tab, Tax Setup). Then, because reporting is so abysmal in Google Checkout, I manually look up the number of sales of a given app at its taxed price. In other words, at the end of each month I search Google Checkout for all apps sold at $1.03, which are all my $0.99 apps plus the 4% sales tax. I <b>manually</b> count these sales because I am not able to generate a CSV report and export it from Google Checkout. This is, of course, a crapload of fun. I should probably just be thankful I only have to collect sales tax in my state, and not for every state, country, and territory.<br /><br />So I do business under the assumption that I do not either need to collect or pay sales tax in states or countries other than the one in which I am based. Google has not done a good job communicating tax liabilities to developers, so if this information isn't correct, I'm not in very good shape, and neither is the Android Market. Hopefully it is the way we're supposed to be doing business. This is one area where the iPhone app market is clearly superior. Apple apparently collects any necessary taxes associated with sales, handles currency conversions, and provides developers with very clear itemized monthly sales reports. Google is taking a much more laissez faire approach, and if it ends up biting some developers in the butt because they're not handling their taxes right, that would be damaging for everyone. I just figure I've done due diligence and look at potential unforeseen tax liabilities as a mitigated risk.<br /><br />Anyway, that's my understanding of how things work and a description of how I currently handle taxes. I'd be interested in hearing other stories or getting any clarifications from anyone who knows better.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1120875023497696926.post-78996174282300488062010-09-07T09:49:00.001-07:002010-09-07T09:52:43.830-07:00Update: WordWise for iPhoneSo we submitted WordWise for the iPhone to Apple about 10 days ago. After about a week, the first version was rejected. Turns out we had a nasty bug to do with the login process.<br /><br />We fixed that, but in the process found another bug. So we spent another day fixing that. This morning we resubmitted to Apple. It looks like the review process is taking about a week these days, so we should know something next Wednesday. It's a fairly complex app, so it wouldn't totally surprise me if it takes multiple rounds of submissions to make it through the process. Hopefully not, but for those who are looking forward to playing across platforms, between Android and iPhone, thanks for your patience.Derekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.com3