LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: droid

Speculating On Motorola + Google TV

Posted on by
Googorola!

Googorola!

Google is planning to acquire Motorola Mobility, which is a deal about patents and Android, but also one to raise questions on quite a few existing product lines.  What will happen with Moto Droids and the Google Nexus line?  Where do Android tablets go from here?  Is MOTOBlur dead?   (my answers: bye bye Nexus, tbd, and yes).  The other interesting area is Google TV, particularly interesting because the Motorola Mobility dept is the one that makes the set-top boxes (which are, next to refrigerators, one of the least likely products to be mobile in my house, but maybe that’s just me).

I’ve seen tons of speculation this week about what the deal means, as it pertains to Google TV, and have batched together some of the perspectives that are floating around.  Most common theme: now that Google owns the STB business, they can just sprinkle Android into all the next-gen cable boxes…

That gives Google an attractive footprint to leverage on a number of different fronts within the digital home, perhaps with a Trojan Horse strategy of pushing Android-based middleware out to shore up its lacklustre connected TV strategy.

Source: With Motorola, Google gains a big TV strategy | News | Rapid TV News http://www.rapidtvnews.com/index.php/2011081514335/with-motorola-google-gains-a-big-tv-strategy.html#ixzz1VEtbiUZe

Also surmised by Apple Insider, Robert Scoble, CNET, Business Insider, NewTeeVee, and Lost Remote (and others).  Here’s the thing, this isn’t even a topic/issue/option in play, at all.  It’s not exactly like Motorola’s been unable to acquire operating systems to power their set tops, and could easily have chosen Google TV prior to now.  Further, there’s simply no such thing as “sneaking” technology into the cable infrastructure, not even a tiny bit.  We’ve seen (and I’ve worked for) many companies try to accomplish some set of these tasks, and not one shred of success.  Why?  Because the cable industry commissions the hardware and features they want, and not the other way around.

Burger King creepy guy

You Can Have it Your Way. aka 7' tall and creepy.

Another widely spread philosophy is that the only reason Google TV hasn’t caught on yet is due to not having had the right chance/opportunity:

“Google TV has not caught on yet,” wrote AOL journalist Saul Hansell on his personal blog. “This could be the wedge to get it in millions of living rooms.”

Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20092451-261/motorola-could-help-cure-ailing-google-tv/#ixzz1VExC7Dqg

Shared feelings from Zatz Not Funny, Lost Remote, NewTeeVee, and more, but not by myself (nor my friend Dan Frommer, though he’s much nicer about it than I would’ve been).  Google TV hasn’t caught on with consumers because it’s the wrong value proposition for consumers, period.  In my ten-plus years of building “connected TV” products, the thing I’ve learned is that the more interaction you throw on the screen, the less you engage and benefit your users.  While there are moments for “lean-forward” activities, they are fleeting.  Google TV is built on the opposite premise.

Maxell dude + Venom

This isn't exactly the lean-back experience I was expecting.

One last comment that I’ve seen making the rounds was that Google just gained a bunch of knowhow regarding building boxes.  This doesn’t much pass the sniff test either, as other than Apple, everybody builds boxes the same, and there’s very little secret sauce here.  If anything, they should consider offloading all hardware production that still gets done internally or dive in deep in fully integrated software/hardware solutions.  More on that in a bit.

So that’s enough about everybody else’s theories, time for a few of my own.

  1. The acquisition was entirely about the patent portfolio, the synergy (or not) between Google TV (G-TV) and Motorola’s STB division (M-STB) is positive, but was coincidental.
  2. Google must demonstrate to current M-STB customers that they will not disband nor change the status quo there in the short term (let’s call it 2-5 years).  If this doesn’t happen quickly, we could see an exodus to the numerous viable competitors.
  3. Google would be better off moving G-TV inside M-STB than vice versa.  M-STB has the requisite business practices savvy for dealing with the cable industry, which is significantly more vital to longevity than any software platform.  In fact, gaining this type of business experience is quite a boon for Google, as its an industry they have historically (dating back pre-YouTube days) not well-understood.
  4. The other massive obstacle that seems underreported is the complete lack of fit between M-STB hardware platforms and G-TV software architecture needs.  One of them will need a rewrite, and that’s costly.
  5. Without a major improvement to the platform itself, this acquisition does not change G-TV’s fate.  No cable company on the planet is simply going to allow technology into their boxes (yes, they buy em, they rent em to customers) without a) control and b) a clear path to revenue/profits.  Granted, there are indications those profits could come, but not with the current platform.

Ultimately, I think this is a fascinating topic.  The nuance of industries involved, the hugeness of capital in play, and the clearly disruptive horizon for the TV business is more exciting than virtually anything I can think of.

Chile Volcano Lightning

Well, almost anything.

The Handy Android Fanboy Detector

Posted on by

If you are unfamiliar with the term, read my friend Harry’s article for a great piece on “the fanboy“.  Now, onto the piece – which I anticipate bringing me tons of annoyed Android folks (much like my tablet rant did last year).

I started using Android last December with the HTC Droid Eris.  My decision came after watching a friend really enjoy the use, a small amount of personal hands-on time, and the excitement about the platform itself.  Eight months later, and other than the vision of an open platform for smartphones, I have nothing but disdain for the current Android phone landscape.  I find the devices crude and clunky, the product experience weak, and the overall state of the platform in “advanced beta” at best (if enough people clamor in the comments, I’ll write another post on just that topic).  Granted, I am a product purist and I have one of the weaker Android devices on the market, but I’ve had a chance to use every one of the current “state of the art” phones other than the Droid 2, and my opinions remain the same.

Yet they are selling them by the bucketful.  So I can’t possibly be right on this, as 20+ million other people are defying my belief that the phones themselves are lousy and barely usable.  Or can I?  After lots of discussions with Android users, I’ve divided up the Android world into the following buckets:

  • Android Newbies: This group is new to the Android experience, and are probably very happy with their experience, despite lots of frustrating glitches at times.  Why?  Most of them are upgrading from feature phones (the industry term for a non-smartphone), and this is likely their very first experience to having the magic of Interwebbing on their phones.  What’s not to love?  That part comes soon.
  • Android Haters: Having used their Android device for weeks-to-months, they have come to notice all its shortcomings, ranging from inconsistent back button use to awkward keyboards to erratic input sensitivity, all things they failed to really notice during the 30 day window to return the phone with no commitment.  Furthermore, they are likely annoyed that their phone became outdated in less than 90 days since purchase – a phenomenon not well appreciated by tens of millions of people, despite what the tech community thinks. They/we are trapped, waiting, hoping, watching…
  • Android Fanboys: The folks who think Android just freakin’ rocks, man.

What’s wrong with a Fanboy? Nothing at all.  I have nothing but good feelings for anyone who loves any product, platform, service, etc – it’s fun to love stuff.  However, I’m more than a little concerned about (1) more newbies buying products they shouldn’t, (2) building up the “Awesomeness” of the platform to the tech industry, when it’s not really at the same caliber as it could be (and indirectly letting device makers off the hook to build better products), and most importantly – (3) my phone sucks and I’m pissed, so this is my chance to vent.

Here’s some tips how to tell the Fanboys from the rest. Take it all with a grain of salt.

  • They preach about openness.  The Android fanboy will tell you multiple times about how the platform is open and how that’s a great benefit to everyone. Let’s be totally blunt for a second: the average technology user cares about “open” products roughly zero.  If they did, then companies like Microsoft, Apple, etc would never have become the behemoths they are.  Openness is great in theory, and in very specific instances can be a huge factor, but it is not, in and of itself, a “benefit”.  My “open” phone has a lousy app marketplace, requires third-party software to be regularly usable, has no inherent easy way to play media files, and actually shipped with not one, but two different native email applications (one of which actually disappeared on its own during the last software update).
  • They show you widgets. “Look ma, its the weather! On my Phone!” Android devices are capable of displaying widgets, which are unquestionably one of the coolest things about Android.  But there’s only a few really useful widgets, and they do not, in any way, make up for the rest of the Android experience.  I have a widget called “Agenda”.  When I view it, it takes up to 5 seconds to show me my agenda (during which it doesn’t say “loading agenda”, it says “NO agenda”.).  Ditto for my Stocks widget, Mail widget, etc.  Don’t get me wrong, I love the widgets, but they alone do not a good phone make.
  • They ignore the little details. My “send text message to my wife” shortcut on my home screen is very cool (shortcuts, after widgets, are a very cool element of Android).  But when I click on it, it brings me to a “send message” screen, with my cursor highlighting the “To” field, resulting in me starting to write my text in the wrong place (it should be the “message” field).  Not a big deal, right?  There’s tons of them. Now compound that little experience to all experiences and you’ll get a better picture.  It’s as if every edge possible could be the rough version.  But Fanboys don’t care, they’ll trivialize these nuances or tell you they’ll be fixed in an upcoming version (more on that in a moment).  Here’s the thing: it’s the little things that matter when it comes to product experience!  If every single time I send a text message I have to go through an inconvenience, how on earth can this be “awesome”?
  • They know the difference between Android versions and implementations. For those unaware, Android is a rapidly evolving platform, which at the surface sounds really great.  But it isn’t great to most consumers who are buying phones for their use now, and who don’t want to have to think about things getting fixed in the future.   I’d make the analogy to early days of Windows, except when you buy a Dell or an HP (or, shudder, a Vaio – wow, been a while since I went there!), you get a product that works consistently, with some extremely subtle nuance in specific applications.  In Android, a Froyo with Sense is different than an Eclair with Blur.  Yup, that was a technically accurate statement. The problem here is the very core, the baseline experience simply isn’t good enough, and Google is trying to fight the very upstream battle in mobile of getting manufacturers to not differentiate against each other.  Lastly, since there’s upgrades coming all the time, it’s impossible to know if the phone you buy today will do the things Android is promised to one day do.
  • They justify carrying huge phones. Have you seen the Evo or Droid X?  Massive.  Practically as big as my iPad (no, not really, calm down).  Maybe if the platform included a great video delivery experience (translated: or any video experience) this would make sense.  Instead, you get a huge brick and are left to figure out what to do with it on your own. Worst of all, the bigger phones are the “good” ones, leaving consumers with the awkward decision between buying something convenient versus a house phone. The moment a device isn’t pocket-sized, it’s competing against non-phones, but yet the Fanboys overlook this every time.  And if carnies can’t hold it, I don’t want it either.  And while I’m at it, can someone explain how 2-3 hours of use with a fully charged battery is considered acceptable??
  • They make a big deal out of commonplace stuff. Here’s a recent review of the HTC Hero, which used no fewer than three sentences to praise the headphone jack.  Yes, the headphone jack.  And so you don’t have to read it, just know – it’s just a headphone jack!  In the words of a fanboy: Woot!1!!
  • They get excited about hot-sounding but generally impractical features. Translating voice into text messages?  Sounds awesome.  Now use it.  This piece sums it all up nicely.  In all truth, you really can build some amazing things with Android, I don’t deny that at all.  But if you don’t have the basics working amazingly well, it doesn’t matter.  It’s like having sprinkles on your hot fudge sauce on your ice cream on your 7 layer cake only to find out the cake is liver-flavored.

And now for the clincher

They compare against the iPhone, all the time.  Greatness is defined by what you are, not by what something else is or isn’t.  I wrote this entire post without referencing the iPhone (until now), as I have no interest in comparing the two (I personally have never owned an iPhone, for the record).  I have no idea what Android does “better” than an iPhone, I don’t care, as it doesn’t improve my experience one bit.  But Fanboys do.  Fanboys can’t not bash the iPhone to make a point (here’s an article with 18 references to the iPhone alone). The iPhone being a closed system doesn’t help me decipher bizarre icons littering my experience.  The iPhone dropping calls doesn’t help me accidentally hang up on callers because the logic to process touch events handles them after rendering new activities (translation: I am clicking a button on the screen, a call comes in, and the place I had just clicked was “ignore call”, and the phone decides that my click was to ignore the call, not whatever I was doing before.  This is poor design).  The iPhone having a death grip doesn’t make my onscreen keyboard more usable.  So I’ll say it again: Greatness is defined by what you are, not by what something else is or isn’t.

How Google Can (and Must) Fix the Android Market Experience

Posted on by

The Android Market (droid’s equivalent to the iPhone App Store) is fundamentally broken. It’s a poor experience from start to finish, and exemplifies the grace with which Apple builds hardware and software products.  Unfortunately there’s no easy way to take screenshots directly on the device, so I’ve scraped around the ‘net to find images to reflect the issues I have.

Part 1: Finding Apps

Like most sites/services, finding apps works via Search and Browse.  You can Search for something by word/term, and see apps that match – it works “ok” but not super impressive.  Browse, on the other hand, is weak. The world is divided into Applications and Games.  Games has the following categories: “All”, “Arcade & Action”, “Brain & Puzzle”, “Cards & Casino”, and “Casual” – no sports, racing, music, RPG, strategy, or pretty much anything after the letter C. Once browsing, you must sort, either by Most Popular or Newest. This means that once popular, something will stay popular.  There’s no way to sort, or filter, or even view simple things like “most popular this week”, or “highest rated” or anything else. This dramatically impacts a user’s ability to find new good apps, since there’s just no view for that.  And this is from Google, the uber-kings of data.

Once you find an app that seems interesting, the next step is trying to decide if you want it / it will work.  Every app has a name, publisher, # of ratings, # of downloads, description, and comments.  NO SCREENSHOTS or anything, but a description.  The comments are sometimes useful, but typically not, as you’ll often see “crashed on my droid” or “new version seems unstable” or some other complaint.  The problem with these kinds of complaints is because of all the different Droid configurations, there’s no way to tell if the comments/ratings apply to your own device.

What Should Google do?

  • Explicitly add and require screenshots of all apps
  • Allow sorting by more fields (Recently popular, Highest Rated, Most Downloaded, etc)
  • Create more categories and/or sub-categories
  • Require developers, commentors, and all other data fields to be governed by device type (i.e. allow me to see top-rated apps specifically voted on by Droid Eris users, not all Android users)
  • Clean up the Featured Apps interface, as it is really poorly done
  • Make the Android Market Website have a “send to my Droid” button (as opposed to the current site, which is inherently worthless)

Part 2: Installing & Updating Apps

The installation process itself is fairly straightforward, once you find an app, you click the big Install button, then you are shown a cryptic screen with a bunch of warnings that you rapidly learn to ignore, then click OK.  My big complaint on this process is the aforementioned “car alarm” warnings.  I make the car alarm analogy because, much like the loud annoying car alarms we hear on random streets at random times, we pay them absolutely no attention anymore.  Which is inherently the opposite objective of a warning!  But with phrases like “Your personal information – read contact data” and “Phone calls – modify phone state”, there’s just no sense behind it.  It might as well show “PC Load Letter” and have the same amount of effectiveness.

My other gripe is on updating apps.  Since we’re still in the early stage of Droid application development, a lot of programmers are pushing frequent updates to their apps. This is great from a “shiny new toy” perspective, but getting annoying from a “stop showing me lots of alerts” perspective.  Also, there’s no way to update multiple apps simultaneously, nor auto-update an app.  And, since most developers at present are not displaying changelogs it’s hard to figure out if the update is worthwhile or not.  Further, it’s very unclear as to whether or not the comments/rating on an app are relative to the most current version or not. Lastly, and most dominant in the category of “how I know this is a Droid and not an iPhone experience,” every time I update an app, I see the warnings about that app. Every. Time.

What Should Google Do?

  • Make the warnings less technical sounding and more clear/comprehensible. “Modify phone state” is virtually meaningless to me, whereas “Make a phone call automatically” is pretty clear English.
  • Remove all the warnings that are “commonplace” – I inherently assume an app is capable of doing things like connect to the Internet, prevent my phone from sleeping, etc.
  • Allow users to “skip” an update, or enable auto-update for any given app.  Also allow users to update all apps.
  • Require that all upgrades/new releases of apps have explicit lists of what’s changed since prior version
  • Have ratings/comments be associated with both the “overall app” as well as the “current version”.
  • Only show the warnings screen when the new version of the app does (important) things that the previous version did not do.  In other words, if I’ve already installed Google Voice, which is capable of Making Phone Calls, and there’s an update to it, I don’t need to re-confirm that I want to allow it to Make More Phone Calls.

Part 3: Buying, Rating, and Uninstalling Apps

For the complaints I’d read, I was surprised at the overall seamlessness of purchasing an app through the Android Marketplace/Google Checkout process. Other than some confusing messaging, the step-by-step process worked the first time through it.  That said, I was disappointed it didn’t autofill any of my personal information (not even my name).  Also, there was a lack of clarity with regards to the fact that my credit card was “saved” by Google Checkout, with no clear way as to how to only do a one-time purchase.

Rating applications is easy, but per my aforementioned comments, needs more criteria.  My rating should get tied to the specific version of the app, and the platform I’m using as well.  Overall the rating/comment system is fairly thin, and could use improvement.

Uninstalling applications from an Android device is one of the more awkward experiences of the system.  There’s no “uninstaller”, instead you navigate back into the Market, find the app in My Downloads, then uninstall from there.  This is mostly awkward because everything else in Droid is either a click-and-drag or a long-click – so the navigation/usage paradigm you learn by using the system all of a sudden doesn’t come into play.  Now in reality I’m being a little dramatic, as once you’ve learned it, it’s easy, but it’s just another example of the kluge-like nature of the marketplace. Then again, if it’s so easy why does it take 9 steps on an eHow page (they don’t show the same path I use, but that’s also kind of the point)?

What Should Google Do?

  • Enable one-time payments that do not require saving credit card data!
  • Enable payments directly through mobile carriers (this should go straight to my Verizon bill) and/or third parties who work with carriers (for example BOKU, who is one of Stage Two‘s clients, but if anyone thinks I’d write this long a post just to reference a client in parentheses of another point, you clearly have too much time on your hands).
  • Moderate user interface “cleanup” and optimization for the checkout process
  • Again, fix the rating/comment system.  Include the “this comment was/wasn’t helpful” feature as well
  • Put an Uninstaller “app” inside Android, and let the user click-and-hold an app to invoke a menu (would make more sense than the current method anyway)

Conclusion

To be clear: There are some great apps in the Android market (current fave’s: Amazon, Evernote, Twidroid, wpToGo, Shazam, Robo Defense, Advanced Task Killer, Lookout) .  Droid is not a terrible platform. But there are some major user experience gaps today, and based on the seemingly endless list of new Droid devices slated to ship in 2010, improvement must happen soon.  I’m also not a fan of the numerous versions of Droid and the various enhancements built by Motorola, HTC, etc.

While Apple might get criticism for their closed-system nature, it most certainly allows them to build devices with consistently known experiences. Either Google or their manufacturers will need to do the same if they truly want to compete in the SuperDuperSmartyPantsPhone category.

Scoring my 2009 Tech Predictions

Posted on by

I hit about 50% on my 2008 predictions, time to size up my prognosticatory (not a word) skills again. And here’s the original post (though I’ve included all the predictive content again below).

Home Gadgets/Tech

  • Microsoft opens the Xbox 360 platform even further, enables an “app store for the home” that spans well beyond games. WRONG – while there are many new features and some openness, it’s not even close to my prediction.
  • Blu-ray sputters along, but not enough conclusive evidence (in other words, revenue) happens to either shut down the format altogether, nor to get consumers to adopt it. RIGHT – stats on Blu-ray for 2009 were unimpressive.  It’ll be physical media versus the newspaper industry to see who kicks the bucket first.
  • As the FCC-mandated digital TV transition approaches, the hype machine reaches full effect and very convincing pieces try to show the plight of the very few.  After it’s all over, virtually nobody complains loudly. RIGHT – oh yeah, there was a transition last year, wasn’t there…
  • One or both of Home Automation and/or Interactive TV returns to prominence in techie chatter, but neither make any additional inroads into actual homes. WRONG – the hype machine stays in neutral
  • Pasting from 2008 predictions: Google launches “Android for Set-Top Boxes” but gains little traction in the foreseeable future. WRONG – Droid came instead…  but I’m putting this back on the list (to-come) for ’10.

Computers

  • Netbook sales grow well, but not astoundingly so.  The majority of users ignore them due to a lack of actual value present in the device (especially those of us with big grubby fingers). UNKNOWN – I left this one too vague and could go either way on it.
  • One PC maker emerges from the trenches with a really well-designed laptop with great Vista drivers that actually can stand up against a Macbook enough to make people take notice. WRONG – MacBook sales just continued to climb relative to PC Laptops instead
  • A Linux-based computer powered with a really great GUI and OpenOffice comes to market from an established brand. WRONG – although Android netbooks are supposedly coming next year, but that’s definitely not a 2009 thing.
  • USB 3.0 launches, causing massive annoyance and confusion to consumers.  I still can’t believe they didn’t give it a different name than USB.  Terrible decision. WRONG – the format launched, but nobody really cared.

Mobile Gadgets/Tech

  • More lousy wannabe touchscreen phones ship, none compete 1:1 with the iPhone. RIGHT – so very very right.
  • A really good GPS+phone combo device comes to market. WRONG – I shouldn’t have said “really good”
  • The BlackBerry Storm is rapidly replaced with some better device from RIM. RIGHT – but then again they did name it Storm again…
  • Mobile commerce replaces location-based services as the hot mobile trend. MIXED – they’re both pretty hot, but FourSquare really did charm the pants off the tech bloggers.
  • US cellular companies wage a price war, making several features (ahem, texting?) cheaper, along with better priced packages across the board. WRONG – and oligopoly enjoys another year.
  • No truly impressive Android phones ship from anyone. WRONG – the Droid and Droid Eris are both impressive (though still no iPhones – and I *have* an Eris)

Events/News

  • CES 2009 is notably smaller than 2008, yet the important stuff that goes on at the show is business as usual.  It’s all the fringe people who are absent, and the same who complain about the lack of cool new stuff at CES.  Which won’t be a surprise due to the rarity of cool new stuff actually shown at CES! RIGHT – and ditto again in 2010
  • Macworld is just the first of many shows to also announce downsizing, including Streaming Media, Web 2.0 Expo, etc.  2009 will be a bad year for the tech conference industry. RIGHT – Macworld? Streaming Media West was a ghost town. Web what.point.oh?
  • Apple introduces only evolutionary products, nothing astounding or revolutionary. Let’s face it, sooner or later the well runs dry, and this is the time for the company to expand its market.  Yes, we’ll get a new phone, laptop, and ipod, but I doubt we see anything as profound as in the past 2 years. RIGHT – although I do very much like my 27″ iMac, it’s not revolutionary.  Maybe in 2010, we’ll see.
  • A largish black monolith with dimensions 1 by 4 by 9 is discovered. RIGHT – but I can’t tell you about it.

Web/Online

  • Facebook reaches a user base of 200 hundred million users.  It’s growth ratethen  slows and the alarm bells sound loudly throughout the media, regardless of actual success metrics. MIXED – bit off more than I should’ve with that one.
  • Twitter finally announces its business model, which underwhelms everyone.  Not that it won’t be a good model, just that it will have been (wow is that passive voice or what?) built up with far more hype than can possibly be delivered. MIXED – they didn’t really announce anything specific, but are making revenue, and the hype train is unquestionably fully loaded.
  • Many “web 2.0″ companies face major shrinkage as the funds simply don’t come back to them again.  Companies with huge traffic bases or, more importantly, solid revenue models will be fine, but the rest start fading away (and they take their weird names with them) RIGHT – look around, the air’s a lot thinner these days
  • Several “prominent” blogs/bloggers retire due to a lack of revenue, exhaustion, lack of interesting new content to write about, etc. WRONG – was really expecting this to happen, but I didn’t see much of it.
  • Web 3.0 does not arrive. RIGHT – duh.

Total count:

  • RIGHT: 10 (9 without the monolith)
  • WRONG: 10
  • OTHER: 4

Not too shabby, not too overwhelming.  I’m still writing the 2010 edition, so hopefully nothing monumental will happen before I can publish it!

Droid Users Expect Things the Google way: Unsupported and Free!

Posted on by

There’s an interesting analysis at VentureBeat hypothesizing that Google Checkout is to blame for poor Droid App sales. My theory on why Droid users aren’t purchasing apps is because we (I have an HTC Droid Eris) are simply not trained to spend money on things the way iPhone users are.  While there are a lot of things that can be done to improve the overall Droid Market experience (this warrants it’s own post), I think it’s more of a cultural issue.  Google has trained us all so well to expect everything to be free, that I think this culture extends to the Droid experience.

First, let’s take the opposite perspective, and start with the iPhone.  The iPhone operates in many ways as an extension of the iTunes/iPod experience.  iPod owners have been trained for years to expect to spend $0.99 per “thing”.  It’s actually quite amazing how much Apple has changed the value of a dollar (much as Starbucks has changed the value of three dollars by equating it with a latte).  As users became accustomed to getting something for a buck, the App Store simply ushered in a new category of what you can get for a buck.  This is actually bad for pretty much everyone in every established industry (especially gaming), and I think has created a highly unsustainable economic model (again, a topic for another post, but in a nutshell think “the visible hand” forcing in the price of a dollar).  At the end of the day, the model on the iPhone app store has an average price set at $.99, and free is not the “Default” way of getting an app out.

For a second example, I’ll point to all the dumbphones out there. People spend literally billions of dollars with add-ons to these phones.  These come in the form of ringtones, ring-back tones, wallpapers, and yes, Apps.  On my old Samsung Alias I had purchased several games (including the worst version of Stratego I’ve ever seen), and none of them were a mere $0.99.  Why? First, there’s a walled garden of content, the carriers highly control what apps get to what phones, and for how much.  Second, the carriers are taking a huge piece of that action, so they are highly incentivized to not let apps get cheap. This model is equally unsustainable, as supply is highly regulated and with unregulated options (Droid, iPhone, etc) now on the market, consumers will opt for those alternatives that have both better performance and cheaper apps.

Now, more poignantly, taking a specific look at the Android Market. The user interface is terrible. Searching sucks (especially considering it’s powered by Google of all people!). There’s no control whatsoever as to which apps get in. Apps are known to crash your phone. Further, there’s only a fraction of “big name” publishers involved. There’s no clarity as to how you actually buy something. And with the fracturing of Android as a platform, not all apps are even guaranteed to run on a given phone! It’s as if the entire experience was “in beta”, only nobody’s overseeing the process.

So now onto Google and Free Stuff.  On the Internet, most things are free. Even really really good things, like real-time traffic maps, multiplayer gaming, web site traffic statistics and analysis, email, etc.  While I view companies such as Yahoo and Wired as the pioneers in delivering consumers free things that they really ought to have paid for, Google is the all time world champion at making valuable things valueless.  So what happens when Team Free delivers a phone with an App Store? It becomes the Free App Store.

Now I trust that you don’t exactly need to be Michelangelo to paint the above picture.  Combine the backlash against the appearance of “unjust” economics around paid-for models with the poor experience of buying an app (which may or may not work) with a huge proponent of making everything free, and you’ve got the Droid Market as it stands today.  And I don’t see any “big picture” stuff that’s going to change this anytime soon.