Monthly Archives: February 2011

I’ve been a professional software developer for many years and I’ve followed the evolution of modern smartphone operating systems very closely, convinced that eventually they would become great development platforms with mass-market commercial potential.

Although Windows Mobile and PalmOS blazed a trail, they were still the preserve of the geek with a limited market size and difficult architectures hamstrung by the technological limitations of the day.  Some developers did great, polished work; Astraware, for instance (love the quality of their output), but it still felt like a precarious business to get into.

So thank heavens for Apple.  The iPhone, largely credited with reinventing mobile platforms, has successful mainstreamed the smartphone and created a mobile application ecosystem tied to a powerful architecture.  Suddenly everyone wants to talk ‘Apps’.

So, I’ve dipped my toe in the iOS water and it’s fine.  I’ve started to develop a game that I hope will be slick, pretty and fun to play.  “Word Inferno” is an arcade game that will test your vocabulary as much as your reflexes.   There’s just one problem, though – the iPhone is not the only platform out there.  Android is outselling iOS and maturing rapidly as a platform.  WebOS and Windows Phone show potential and have great development tools, too.  Blackberry, sadly, is a developer’s worst nightmare despite the wonderful utility of the handsets themselves.

As a small developer doing this at this in my spare time, I just don’t have the resources to learn, write, test and debug for all of these platforms, yet I want as many people out there to have access to my work to ensure that it at least covers the financial outlay required to get something on the App stores and marketplaces.

That’s why I was pleased as punch to find the cross-platform Corona SDK, from Ansca Mobile.  Available on both Windows and Mac, it enables mobile developers to rapidly develop games for both iOS and Android (at the moment), covering phones, tablet and all their different screen sizes.  Corona uses an easy to learn language called Lua that masks much of the native complexity that developing in Apple or Googles’s own toolkits bring.  It’ll literally save me weeks of effort.  I only hope that one day, the developers behind this ingenious software development kit will include support for Windows Phone and WebOS – now that would be really positive for the mobile industry, ensuring financial viability for projects that otherwise wouldn’t get off the ground.

I’ll check back once Word Inferno is nearly complete – maybe PDA247 users will be able to help with some beta testing on both iOS and Android.

Peter M.

Today’s comment of the day comes from Mr. Fatuous. I am not completely convinced by the argument, but see the point. “This iOS pricing bubble has got to burst some time. Developers will eventually realise that only a tiny fraction of them will make a living changing 79p an app.”

The debate continues to rage concerning Apple requiring that publishers offer in-app purchases for their content alongside the standard model of redirecting customers outside of an iOS app. What amazes me is how polarised some of the arguments have been concerning the implementation of a rule that has been written down for some time. If I look at this from the outside, I can see many aspects to it, but cannot come to a definite conclusion.

Some argue that Apple has no right to expect 30% for content that the publisher delivers direct from their own servers. I understand that, but Apple is providing the portal for the publisher to attract these customers in the first place and is this much different to eBay and many similar services? The fact is that these publishers need Apple, but the counter argument that they built a business on one model which has now been changed is also valid. They still have the right to sell their wares via their own portal, but the sad truth is that many customers will prefer to click one button in the app and have the content delivered to them. To its conclusion the figures could be worrying for some- let’s say that Amazon sells 1 million Kindle books a week and that half of those books end up going via in-app. That means that Amazon loses 15% overnight (30% of 50%). I don’t believe that companies like Amazon have 30% profit margins on eBooks and likely not 15% either so this does present a real problem.

It’s not just eBooks of course and with music, film and so many other areas affected this could be problematic. If I take a stance and decide not to blame Apple for asking developers to make this change, and I genuinely don’t blame Apple for this, and then also consider the potential issues presented to the content publishers now all I can see is a big problem ahead for both sides.

Apple is doing incredibly well at the moment and so is Google. However, Apple seems to have a view that everyone needs Apple to feed the family when in actual fact the iPhone, iPad and the rest would not be half the devices they are without eBooks, magazines and all of that great content that customers can use on their devices. If enough of the big publishers rebel, it is offering Google and Android a lucrative advantage. An advantage that Google has already jumped on by offering 10% instead of 30%…