Android User Blues, a Developers Perspective!

Recently i had the opportunity of buying my brother a Samsung galaxy S2 for his birthday. The first thing he did was go to google play install some “FREE” top chart apps. Tried a few on his phone, left a few installed without even trying. In a few days his phone had many unwanted apps, the uninstallation process started. I distinctly remember he said “I spend more time installing and uninstalling apps than actually trying an app.”

He said something which was very useful too “The problem with the app process is that most of the times the user doesn’t know what he is looking for.He stumbles upon an app and looks at the number of downloads, reviews, screenshots, description and downloads the app.Especially with games this is the case, except with games like angry birds or fruit ninja.”

Analysing this statement app discovery to me looks like a chance, and we market our apps to give us a better chance thats it. The apps on the top lists just have a better chance of getting downloaded. So to move up the ladder in the snakes and ladder game is the only sole aim as a developer. In this scenario there is a big limitation that the apps on the top charts have greater visibility. And bluntly the app finding process is not really engaging and fun. Curiosity does actually kill, it kills itself! The apps on the top charts are downloaded not because they are the best apps its because they are good according to google and a bunch of reviews and easily accessible without much effort. (P.S I am not denying or challenging that the top rated apps are good. They are brilliant).

Putting down these points in perspective according to the user:

1. He wants a good app. This is the base requirement from the user’s perspective. Keeping this as abstract as possible, let us assume the app is good.

2. He wants an easily accessible app.

3. He wants the system to decide his need and prompt him with an appropriate choice.

The first point is more of a developer’s debate. It depends on user requirement, to user need, to user’s location etc. These parameters are infinite. Let us assume that the app is made as it should have been made. As i said keeping this as abstract as possible.

The second point is the key. The good app should be easily accessible. Right now for the user the top rated applications are good and easily accessible. How can we make apps more accessible is the key to solve the app discovery problem. Right now accessibility is associated strongly with top rated applications. How can we get accessibility into other channels? Or how can we get the app searching process more user engaging?

The third part is more of app marketing engines and how they can predict my needs and give me just what i want at the right time. More like user specific marketing. There are engines doing something like this.

Placing your bets on such tools would help you convert better and convert more as developers.

Samsung Vs Apple, The verdict goes against us, the consumers!

Maruti sues apple for steeling slide to unlock from Omni! Some jokes are on the radar nowadays criticising apple for suing Samsung on a few design infringement android phones. So all in all Samsung has really lost the case to apple in USA and are to pay apple a humongous 1.05 billion dollar compensation. My question is who is really the loser of the battle?

In a recent twitter update I read a statement “Apple increases its hit list, now goes after S3, Note, and Note 10.1, PLEASE MAKE APPLE STOP AND LETS GET BACK TO INNOVATING” That is when it struck me, all the jokes apart, all the fun apart, innovation is going to go for a toss after all of this. Quote Apple hates competition and they wont breathe until their competition is dumbed down to claim some soft and sticky victory Unqoute phandroid.com says.

Imagine a smart phone without pinch zoom, or a smart phone with a keyboard popup and no letters highlighted while typing, on an already shortened screen with miniscule letters. These are the ones i can recall, there are many more such patent violations. Observing closely, these features are subtle and make life so much easier for us as a consumer. Sadly there is no room for replacing such features with other options. And for apple to be the sole producer of such phones is anti consumer, anti business, anti innovation. As a consumer I always feel secure when I have freedom of choice. For apple to control this freedom is a loss of the consumer.

Some might say Samsung was not innovating at all it was just copying apple. But as mentioned before, smart phone features have very limited options. It is tough to replace these pinch to zoom and multitouch experiences. And in no way it indicates that Samsung might stop innovating. In fact Samsung has enough revenues now that it can invest into innovations.

Finally, who pays apple these 1 billion dollars. Samsung is just a representative, we as consumers are paying these 1 billion dollars. On an abstract level Samsung will look at it as a loss, and cover these losses from us as consumers. Another perspective is Samsung will put lesser money into innovations, yet we are the losers. In all if looked at this 1 billion dollars one way or the other we are at loss. Finally as of today we wont get phones as S3, S2.

Companies like apple challenged technology for us, and then make us technologically challenged again! :)

 

App Monetization as a Case Study : Omnidesk!

Image shown in GoogleIO’s app monetization seminar.

App Monetization as far as i have understood is more of an experimental process than a one time statistically calculated decision. The problem with experimentation is most of us fail to cover all the cases. Here is where Google’s wonderful chart helps us in keeping track of all the paths.

As a developer i remember when i launched our first app “Omnidesk” an RDP client at the start of 2011. We had no idea as to how to earn money out of it, in short monetize the app.

So we went about it the traditional way:

> We uploaded the app on the market.

> Made some promotions by posting on some forums(we never spent a dollar on promotion!)

> We adopted the now known freemium model for our app.

> We launched the lite version with all features but with a timed session of 5 minutes for our RDP client, and a paid version.

> We slashed our prices to 5$ as compared to our competitors whopping price of 20$.

With no success in paid downloads we realised that we lacked features that these premium clients had, such as customised mouse, customised key events.

With no conversions we started analysing our customer base. Our customer base was mostly inclusive of businessmen who needed remote desktop access to get hold of their files, documents, presentations. For them 2$ or 20$ was never a problem. The quality was their key aspect. Due to this we were not converting. Our lite version was gaining momentum we got 10k downloads while our paid version was stuck at 50 downloads.

Slowly our application achieved close to 500 paid downloads and 50k lite downloads, yet a failure. Now reflecting back and looking at this chart provided at Google IO we could have done so much better. We would not have wasted time in thinking of new strategies.

What we could have done better:

> The biggest mistake we made was confuse promotions with app monetization. We could have spent a dime in promotions which we did not.

> We could have experimented with so many app monetization models such as, in-app payments for new widgets such as customised mouse, keyboard and kept the app free.

> Advertisements was an obvious option, but our app had the whole screen as the touch area so it would have hampered user experience to a great extent.

> Subscription model would have been interesting, in different scenarios of accessing servers etc. We actually had a buy out offer from a European company, and it had planned to sell this app to his customers to access their rented company private servers on a subscription model, combined with the server subscription price.

The paid model is where we failed to generate enough revenue. But it was a learning experience at a very young age, from an undergraduate project and it did make us aware of the android market dynamics to some extent.

The key learnings : 

> In all app monetization is a continuous process, it requires a deep understanding of your app.

> It requires data collection and analysis from various app monetization strategies executed on the market.
> There could be cases where data may conflict depending on geographical locations, or age groups, or customer segments. In such cases the app monetization could vary from place to place and customer segment to segment.

In all app monetization is an ever evolving process. 

Try Omnidesk here. This widget is sponsored by Appsurfer.com Try Android Apps in the browser! To try more apps goto appsurfer.com.




Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Esquire by Matthew Buchanan.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter