Hacker News Reader

Comment by mdasen | Hacker News Reader

Would you want to play by Apple's rules? While I wouldn't want to be beholden to Google any more than Apple, Google doesn't own and control Android any more than Linus owns and controls Linux. Android avoids lock-in. Should Google move against you, screw them! You have their source code. Really, the manufacturers are the bigger obstacle and there are enough of them that they're unlikely to try as much as a monopoly would.

Apple's user-base is attractive, but it's also putting your eggs into a basket that can be taken away from you at any time. I love Apple, but I can understand why people would be hesitant to throw money in that direction.

View on HN

That and more: Apple's platform probably won't be adopted by anyone else, so even though the user base is attractive right now, down the road it would look diminutive compared with the user base for an open platform that could gain support of multiple vendors.

7-8 years ago I used to develop mobile apps in both Palm OS (closed platform, just one vendor) and J2ME (open, widely adopted). Palm had the more attractive installed base back then, but as their fortunes changed, that investment is now worthless. Compare with J2ME, which kept growing thanks to support by most vendors.

Android has already gained the support of Samsung, Motorola, LG Electronics, T-Mobile, Sprint, and some other well-known companies: http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/oha_members.html

So it's looking pretty good so far, even if no phones are running it just yet heh.

The most significant difference IMO is the distribution model. An iPhone user will have one place to look for new apps: the Apps Store. Whatever app s/he is looking for, it will be there or not be at all. That's a huge advantage for a software developer. An advantage the Palm didn't have.

Also: sure, in 8 years the iPhone may be dead and Apple bankrupt, but (1) do you really think so? and (2) do you really need to plan that far in advance?

Palm actually did have the distribution in place - through palmgear (interestingly, it still exist) which was THE go-to place for Palm apps.

Regarding advantages to the software developer, having just one place where you distribute, and that place being controlled by Apple, isn't a good thing at all. It may mean that it's easier to start selling, but also that you have no negotiating power if and when your app becomes a success.

The stupid music companies managed to hand over the keys to their distribution to Steve Jobs, but they're not exactly happy about the fact that he now has so much control over their fate. Apple's great at creating consumer electronics that actually appeals to people, but they don't seem to be a very nice company to deal with as a business.

This is it in a nutshell. The practical problems like ObjC aren't an issue for OS X, so there's no reason for them to be so for the iPhone. It's largely a similar environment.

And the more high-brow arguments about lock-in and freedom are true, but obscure the simpler point: sorry, but I'm just not interested in paying $99 and waiting on a list for months just to run a program on my own phone!

Android has the distinct and notable advantage of actually being a working target platform for the people who want to play with it. Apple will no doubt attract a few established developers to the iPhone, but all the cool stuff will be happening on Google's platform.

Right now the iPhone platform just looks a lot simpler than Android. One hardware, well known frameworks, centralized distribution. Development costs are lower. Android offers more freedom, but also more complexity.

In any case, both platforms are here to stay for quite some time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com