Apps Don’t Matter

By Jake • June 22nd, 2011 • 10 Comments

Jason Grigsby (@grigs) put this seed in my head a couple weeks ago, and this post by DHH (@DHH) sums up the same essential point quite nicely, i.e. apps don’t matter.

Ten apps is all I need – (37signals)

Many pundits and bloggers like to point to apps as the main difference between iOS and any other mobile platform, usually Android.

The sheer number of apps or the number of “good” apps or the number of “designed for tablet” apps, the size of the developer ecosystem, the amount of money paid to app developers, blah blah blah.

Regardless, there are never enough apps of whichever bellwether to measure up to iOS. Apple has the biggest store, with the best and most profitable apps. You’ll get no argument from me on that.

Jason made the point (summarizing from memory here) that if apps mattered so much, Android would never have succeeded. His point is that cost matters more, and that Android phones have found success because they are cheaper than iPhones.

Sure, iPhones have more apps available to them, but Android phones do essentially the same tasks for less, which is what matters to most people.

DHH’s point is that the phone’s basics sell it, not the add-ons. Think about what you use your smartphone to do. Make calls, text, check email, browse the web, check your calendar.

Of the top five uses, maybe one or two requires a non-standard app. This is a very common usage pattern and has been since the App Store debuted in 2008.

Apps are fun to install and use for maybe a couple days, but over time, people don’t stick with them. I suppose games are a possible exception to this rule.

But what about tablets?

Removing carriers (mostly) from the equation changes the cost, and the iPad is affordable, excellent and competing on level ground.

I’ve read several posts lately declaring Android tablets DOA because of many reasons, and inevitably, one criterion for defeat is the lack of apps.

I have both an original iPad and a Galaxy Tab, and I can’t really say there’s that much difference, apps or otherwise. Apple has the edge with design of both hardware and software, but I’m not sure that would be enough to sway the average consumer.

The biggest thing going for the iPad is its first-mover status. Kleenex means facial tissue, iPod means portable digital music player, and now iPad means tablet to the average consumer. This will be more difficult to overcome than any other difference.

Thoughts?


Possibly Related Posts

  • http://blogs.oracle.com/userassistance/ uvox

    I am not a buyer of the apps as a key driver argument either. But I don’t think cost is as big a decider as you think either, especially when you consider the price points of the higher end Samsungs and so on (in some cases more expensive than iPhones where I come from). I think you need to factor in ease of use, branding, customer experience and so on. Unless there’s a massive price differential, cost isn’t to the fore.

    Sure, for us geeks, rootability and issues like openness of architecture  are important for Android, but for the average users, they’re non-starters in the decision-making process.

  • http://only4left.jpiwowar.com jpiwowar

    Heck, I’m one of those supposed geeks for whom openness and rootability matter, and I still gravitate toward the fruity brushed-aluminum monolith. I’m bought in/locked in to the ecosystem, I guess, and am still not finding compelling reasons to switch. App variety isn’t a big deal for me, either, though I’ve always assumed that I was in the minority there, given the dizzying array of apps that I see on others’ iWhatevers.

  • http://oracle-base.com oraclebase

    uvox: Regarding cost, I’m not sure Android competes all that well on high end. What I can tell you is in the UK Android has dominated the entry level phone. You can get a contract for less than 1/3 the price of an iPhone. You can get a pay-as-you-go phone on Android. I think this has had a very big impact on the uptake of Android in the UK. Can’t comment about other countries.

    Jake: Being pedantic here. Your text suggests that iPod was the first, but there were plenty of generic MP3 players around when the iPod was released. Trouble was, nobody was offering the end-to-end experience like Apple did with iTunes + iPod + Marketing Budget. Having said that, it certainly feels like Apple invented the MP3 player, and the smartphone and the tablet. History is written by the winners. :)

    Cheers

    Tim…

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Not just cost of the handset, cost of the data plan. Plus, the iPhone is generally limited to one or two (in some regions) carriers, which influences the cost of upgrading. Some carriers will bump your phone if you stay on their network. Those are always Android phones.

    Make no mistake, cost is *the* factor for the average consumer, who makes up the largest segment of the market.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    As with Mac, I’ve come to appreciate “it just works” in a phone. Apps are nice to haves, but ever since the OG iPhone, I’ve been enamored with having the internets on my phone. That’s the killer feature, not apps.

    I wouldn’t say you’re locked into the ecosystem anymore. I can only think of a couple apps that I use on iOS which aren’t in the Android Market, Reeder being the first one to mind. I guess you mean that you’ve spent your money on an app in iOS, so you’re locked in that way.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Sure, I did imply that, and yes, I’m aware that the iPod wasn’t the first MP3 player. I don’t really know if Kleenex was the first facial tissue, and it really doesn’t matter anymore. IPad wasn’t the first tablet either, if we’re being pedantic. Nokia released a few tablets a couple years before the iPad debuted. I suppose the Newton might count, and Microsoft had tablets back in the day.

  • http://www.kiranslog.com Kiran

    I remember earlier in the year or last year you guys did a survey on what apps we use regularly etc. I responded with about 6 or 7 apps. I try all the cool apps that come out but that does not really matter as they dont get used afterwards. Yup, apps don’t matter. However the ecosystem matters, with iCloud it will be even harder to move away from the i.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Waterman/1117581800 Jeff Waterman

    Does cost matter?  32G iPad:  $599   36G Galaxy Tab 10.1: $599   I think what matters most:  “it just works”   As long as that impression exists, that is the reason.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Yeah, the responses to that survey showed that the OS-deployed apps are the most highly used. Like you, I do try apps that I read about, but very few stick beyond a handful of uses.

    Ecosystem is a different argument. I agree that iCloud will help retain iOS users and convert some to Mac, but wrt to Android, Google already does OTA really well, making iCloud more a threat to Microsoft than Android.

  • http://theappslab.com Jake

    Like I said, cost matters for phones. The iPad’s first-mover status helps it immensely when competing w new entrants that are slightly cheaper or with slightly beefier specs.

    “It just works” only makes sense if you have something for comparison or someone to advise you. The vast majority of tablet buyers are first-timers (this will be true for many months), so brand recognition matters more than just working or not.