Google Android

[gato]

Nokia should have waited to announce until they have a product to release. It's still unclear when their first WIndows phone will hit the stores, but Symbian phones will take a nose dive now.

 

[mandu]

Well, now that Samsung has detailed the Galaxy S2, all the big Android builders have shown some 2011 high-end HW. HTC has done a pretty good job of keeping their phones up to date, and Motorola less so but maybe decent. Samsung has been somewhere between inconsistent and awful, and Sony simply execrable.

If I wanted a new phone, I could buy the HTC Pyramid confident of solid support at least into year two, but I would need to be a fool to purchase a Sony or Samsung device before Google starts calling the shots on updates. If recent history is any guide, my new Sony Arc or Galaxy S2 might never even see 2.4...

So much delightful HW hitting the market, but so much uncertainty over the lifespan! For someone like myself who hates waste, phones are frustrating for their brittle impermanent nature. It's bad enough that the HW will only function for 2-5 years, but for the manufacturers to cripple the software side of the device's working life...

Sad.

 

[gato]

If recent history is any guide, my new Sony Arc or Galaxy S2 might never even see 2.4...

Money grubbing capitalists.

 

[micahboland]

Hey, who killed this thread? Or does everyone know something I don't? :lol:
I have to say I am on total pins-and-needles waiting for any further news!

Anyway, thought I'd update a couple of things i hadnt responded to.

it would seem prudent if not advantageous to spend 2 weeks to get a basic dictionary only public beta out and gauge public response.

The problem with this plan is that we'd spend 2 weeks coding it and a month after that dealing with the fallout - as my constant presence on these forums should indicate, we're not big enough to have a whole dedicated support team ready to swing into action the second we release a big new attention-getting product, so all of the PR / requests for review copies / license transfer issues / feedback / bug reports / etc are ultimately eating up time that could go to programming / design / debugging / negotiating dictionary licenses / etc.
... But it has to be more than a quick-and-dirty thrown-together-in-2-weeks type thing or it won't be worth all the hubbub.

by mikelove » Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:04 am
Perfect timing, too - next week we begin a period of about 2 months of pretty much 100% Android coding, so it'll be nice to have this to play around with / test on / etc.

OK, I didn't realise the implications of releasing a basic-dictionary-only-public-beta would be so involved! my bad.

However, I would like to take this opportunity to offer myself and my devices as guinea pigs for a basic-dictionary-only-non-public-beta!

As I stated before, I have a Galaxy Tab running v2.2 on a 1024x600 resolution, and an HD2 (800x480) which I am testing various ports (v2.2,v2.3) on as we speak.
Also, in the next couple of weeks I am looking at getting a Motorola Defy (854x480) for my wife which will also be running on v2.2 (don't ask me why, but the asian versions are running v2.2 while other parts of the worlds' are running v2.1).

I would be more than happy to offer myself and these devices up on the altar of the Pleco Android Beta :wink:

If you have any up-to-the-minute recommendations (like: DONT BUY THE DEFY 'COS IT WON'T BE ABLE TO RUN PLECO) i would appreciate even a hint, connotation, insinuation, innuendo, implication, inference, inkling, intimation etc.
Also, any news on how the programming is coming along? If you started January 31, thats almost 4 weeks of programming!

Thanks again for your hard work, and active comments on the forums.

Regards,
Micah

OFF TOPIC:

off-topic... are you related / affiliated to the Boland English and Chinese school, in Suzhou, as well as the "What's On Suzhou" calendar]

No, no relation/relationship! Hope you aren't disappointed

 

[westmeadboy]

Well, the Motorola Xoom Android tablet was released in the US today.

Here is a review from the respected AnandTech website and it's generally extremely positive:

"...If you’re a die hard iOS user then I don’t think Honeycomb will tempt you, but if you’re undecided or you can appreciate both then Honeycomb may actually push you over towards Google.

I’m impressed with what Google has done with the UI. ..."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4191/moto ... arrives/15

 

[mikelove]

However, I would like to take this opportunity to offer myself and my devices as guinea pigs for a basic-dictionary-only-non-public-beta!

Thanks, but the problem is that almost everybody who's interested in a public beta would be interested in that non-public one. Also, coordinating anything outside of Pleco takes time away from development, and at the moment there just isn't enough potential benefit to a beta test to justify it - we're not looking for the sort of bugs that you need beta testers to find yet, we're pretty happy with our initial UI design (however spartan) and not inclined to change that for a few releases... it just doesn't make sense to give a few people early access to something at the cost of delaying it for everybody else.

Well, the Motorola Xoom Android tablet was released in the US today.

Here is a review from the respected AnandTech website and it's generally extremely positive:

Well the big question for Android tablets is still fragmentation fragmentation fragmentation - even more potential for different companies to mix up screen sizes and hardware configurations and the like, and the Xoom is about to have a lot of Honeycomb-powered competitors... whether it'll be possible to design a complicated app to run on a plurality of Android tablets without going completely insane remains to be seen.

 

[character]

Well the big question for Android tablets is still fragmentation fragmentation fragmentation - even more potential for different companies to mix up screen sizes and hardware configurations and the like, and the Xoom is about to have a lot of Honeycomb-powered competitors... whether it'll be possible to design a complicated app to run on a plurality of Android tablets without going completely insane remains to be seen.

I think in general you'd need to move to a design which could stand some resizing. Figure out how much screen space you have, and display the top n buttons which will fit, putting the rest into a menu.

 

[mikelove]

I think in general you'd need to move to a design which could stand some resizing. Figure out how much screen space you have, and display the top n buttons which will fit, putting the rest into a menu.

I'm not too worried about the UI end of this, actually, but the custom drivers / weird device-specific interface changes / etc are a major concern - bigger canvas = more room for manufacturers to screw things up.

Looks like my hopes of being able to release an Android Market version without paying Googke 30% of add-on sales are dashed:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/25/visu ... ccused-of/

So the question now is whether our app can really be successful without Android Market - we can theoretically go either way but certainly the total freedom of direct sales only is very appealing.

 

[ogami_ito]

...


Looks like my hopes of being able to release an Android Market version without paying Googke 30% of add-on sales are dashed:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/25/visu ... ccused-of/

So the question now is whether our app can really be successful without Android Market - we can theoretically go either way but certainly the total freedom of direct sales only is very appealing.

Hi Mike,

I'm a former mobile software Product Marketing Manager, but I have been living in China for the last 8 years. I follow these discussions and developments about mobile technology...and this site and discussion board fort of bring together my "China-life" interests and my technology interests. Thank you.

Now my comments.

First of all, with tablets, Android is now the big play to replace Windows, Macintosh, and the client-centric software model. I feel its like PC industry in the mid-90s. There is a lot of "clones" coming out that have non-standard (or should say not yet standardized) components. This will eventually sort itself out. And you need to be in this market segment. These cheap tablets are going to get popular in schools. And I think you need to those school professors to view your software as a best-in-class tool for Chinese language studies.

About your comment above... It seems like distributing on the market does not require exclusivity, right? I have seen many apps that are distributed on the market and off (although they may be different versions). I understand you make some money reselling the higher-end dictionaries, and you certainly would not want to give 30% of that to your "channel".

(side-point/) My new company produces board and card games in China for publishing in USA and Europe...so in the printed-product market we hand over 60% to the channel(/)

Anyway, it seems clear that you would want to distribute one version on the market, and another version direct. Furthermore, because your product is a niche educational product, unlike most apps on the market, direct sales makes sense. But it may require some extra work for you. I may mean you need to do a few banner ads in Chinese studies websites. As well as send mailings Chinese language studies departments at the top 50 schools for Chinese language.

Just all IMHO. And I'm excited about buying your Android product when it comes out.

 

[character]

Looks like my hopes of being able to release an Android Market version without paying Googke 30% of add-on sales are dashed:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/25/visu ... ccused-of/

IIRC, this policy has been in place since day one on Android -- not only a problem for the reasons outlined in all the recent discussion of Apple's policy, but also because Google payment processing was/is not that great around the world.

So the question now is whether our app can really be successful without Android Market - we can theoretically go either way but certainly the total freedom of direct sales only is very appealing.

You made direct sales work for you with Palm/WM. I guess the real issue is AT&T and other networks which prevent non-Market installs. Whichever route(s) you choose, I suggest getting QR code stickers printed up with a link to download Pleco. Encourage people to put them on the back of their phones so they can show people Pleco for Android and immediately get them to download it.

 

[westmeadboy]

What's the situation on iOS? I thought Apple takes 30% for in-app purchases?

 

[mikelove]

First of all, with tablets, Android is now the big play to replace Windows, Macintosh, and the client-centric software model. I feel its like PC industry in the mid-90s. There is a lot of "clones" coming out that have non-standard (or should say not yet standardized) components. This will eventually sort itself out. And you need to be in this market segment. These cheap tablets are going to get popular in schools. And I think you need to those school professors to view your software as a best-in-class tool for Chinese language studies.

This one I'm very much uncertain about - people seem to be assuming that just because Apple's computers cost more than generic ones from other vendors, Apple's tablets will as well. Thus far, the high-quality Android tablets have all cost at least as much as the iPad, and in many cases quite a bit more - the significantly cheaper ones tend to also be severely lacking in features or quality. Apple has bigger economies of scale than any other tablet vendor - they've spent billions of dollars tying up component supplies for years to come - and on top of that they control their own retail channels too. Vendors that are no-name enough to significantly undercut them are also going to be too small to sell effectively to large enterprises - nobody wants to buy a bunch of hardware from a company in China that they've never heard of which might not be around to support it in a year or two.

Basically, if the educational software offerings continue to be better on iPad then I don't think there'll be a significant cost incentive for schools to look elsewhere - the economics of building tablets in the 2010s are very different than those of building PCs in the 1980s.

About your comment above... It seems like distributing on the market does not require exclusivity, right? I have seen many apps that are distributed on the market and off (although they may be different versions). I understand you make some money reselling the higher-end dictionaries, and you certainly would not want to give 30% of that to your "channel".

Not at the moment, though I'm very wary this might be the next step, and as others have mentioned, on some devices the Market is the only option...

Anyway, it seems clear that you would want to distribute one version on the market, and another version direct. Furthermore, because your product is a niche educational product, unlike most apps on the market, direct sales makes sense. But it may require some extra work for you. I may mean you need to do a few banner ads in Chinese studies websites. As well as send mailings Chinese language studies departments at the top 50 schools for Chinese language.

Well the logical thing would be to charge whatever we'd normally want to charge through our own store, charge 43% more in the Market version (70% * 143% = 100%) and tell people in-app how to go about getting the other version if their phone supported it, but that's going to upset a) People who can't buy the non-Market version, b) People who accidentally buy the Market version, and c) Google, so I don't know that it's such a good idea.

Another option would be to distribute only our free app through the Market but direct people to our website for the premium version - that seems a bit less likely to upset anyone, though if Google continues moving in the direction they're moving now they might eventually take issue with that too.

IIRC, this policy has been in place since day one on Android -- not only a problem for the reasons outlined in all the recent discussion of Apple's policy, but also because Google payment processing was/is not that great around the world.

It has been, but it wasn't widely enforced, perhaps in part because Google wasn't offering an In-App Purchase system until recently, and the hope was that they'd continue to be relatively lax about enforcing it - it really takes away a lot of flexibility to have to do everything through their system.

You made direct sales work for you with Palm/WM. I guess the real issue is AT&T and other networks which prevent non-Market installs. Whichever route(s) you choose, I suggest getting QR code stickers printed up with a link to download Pleco. Encourage people to put them on the back of their phones so they can show people Pleco for Android and immediately get them to download it.

Perhaps an in-app button to flash the QR code on the screen... we have some statistical reasons to think that most of the people who are actually buying Pleco on iOS are finding out about it through word-of-mouth / PR rather than by randomly stumbling onto us in App Store, so there's cause for optimism in this, but the portion of phones that are locked-down raises some concerns.

What's the situation on iOS? I thought Apple takes 30% for in-app purchases?

They do, but they're not the platform that everybody insists is "open," and we were aware of the 30% situation when we made the decision to develop on iOS.

 

[ogami_ito]

This one I'm very much uncertain about - people seem to be assuming that just because Apple's computers cost more than generic ones from other vendors, Apple's tablets will as well. Thus far, the high-quality Android tablets have all cost at least as much as the iPad... [...] Apple has bigger economies of scale than any other tablet vendor - they've spent billions of dollars tying up component supplies for years to come - and on top of that they control their own retail channels too.

I'm assuming that Apple's strategy will continue to be to charge a large premium for the hardware, while Android tablets will be commodities, which means Android tablets will be much more prevalent and cheaper. If it had a regular premium like a notebook computer, iPad would sell unsubsidized retail for around $400 (assuming $280 cost, 20% profit, and 15%/15% disty/retail split...and that is a very generous assumption). On Taobao in China, iPad 8Mb are selling at 3500RMB+, while the Archos tablet...which has capacity 10inch screen and much less favorable economies of scale...sells for around 2500RMB. Right now, the Android tablets on the USA market are pricing at premium because their manufacturers think they can get away with that. Maybe Apple will go for a low-end mass-acceptance strategy in the future though.

I don't believe that Apple's contracts makes things difficult for other manufactures. I believe that Apple's supplier contracts are actually a negative factor; its tied them up with the likes of Foxconn and Wintek (the bastards that poisoned workers in Suzhou where I live), while their competitors either have their own on-the-ground facilities in China (Samsung, Moto, HTC), or have more flexible OEM strategies. But this is neither here nor there.

...- the significantly cheaper [Android tablets] tend to also be severely lacking in features or quality. .... Vendors that are no-name enough to significantly undercut them are also going to be too small to sell effectively to large enterprises - nobody wants to buy a bunch of hardware from a company in China that they've never heard of which might not be around to support it in a year or two. Basically, if the educational software offerings continue to be better on iPad then I don't think there'll be a significant cost incentive for schools to look elsewhere - the economics of building tablets in the 2010s are very different than those of building PCs in the 1980s.

This is the more interesting issue. In my opinion, the iPad is less suitable for education and ultimately has less potential because the nature of iOS. Its tied to iTunes. Which means its tied to a desktop computer. In the GLOBALmarket, the ideal device is cheap and would be PC - independent. A commodity. And in the commodity market, there is a place for low end up to high-end.

Yes. The problem with Android now is lack of quality software. But schools would buy no-name tablets. They buy them from value added resellers (VARs), which would supply after-sales service, as well as things like custom remote administration solutions, or custom education administration software...side-loaded onto the devices. And actually, all the 1st through 3rd tier PC brands will also offer tablets, and they will have service centers for USA. Many of those branded-computers will be low-end completely OEMed models from the no-name manufacturers. I *believe* the Archos tablets are made this way today.

On a personal note, I would not have much of a problem buying a $150 Android resistive-screen tablet for my small children which they don't need to plug into my desktop. They can now access the Google Market from a web-browser. And in the future, they can access my parental-approved market, like a Nickolodian Market...or a University of California: Chinese Studies Department market....from the device.

Another option would be to distribute only our free app through the Market but direct people to our website for the premium version - that seems a bit less likely to upset anyone, though if Google continues moving in the direction they're moving now they might eventually take issue with that too.

This is what I was suggesting. Or, sell a free app on the market, as well as an upgraded app on the market (that would have OCR, for example), and have the version which has multiple dictionary support for the more serious users sold on the website.

They do, but they're not the platform that everybody insists is "open," and we were aware of the 30% situation when we made the decision to develop on iOS.

Was the 30% charge for Market distribution added in after you started developing for Android OS?

 

[westmeadboy]

Another option would be to distribute only our free app through the Market but direct people to our website for the premium version - that seems a bit less likely to upset anyone, though if Google continues moving in the direction they're moving now they might eventually take issue with that too.

Sorry Mike, but that sounds like FUD. Simply linking to a website with a premium version - come on!

What's the situation on iOS? I thought Apple takes 30% for in-app purchases?

They do, but they're not the platform that everybody insists is "open," and we were aware of the 30% situation when we made the decision to develop on iOS.

You're confusing the platform with the Android Market. They are two different things. It's just that one sits on top of the other, which is open. The fact is you can download the platform and do whatever you like with it. That's why it's called open. The Android Market is not open and is not called open.

The fact is, you have options here. Options you don't have at all on iOS. I'd imagine that more than 90% of Android devices allow bypassing of any pre-installed market app (without the need to root/jailbreak). That's about 90%+ higher than iOS.

It would be nice to here some positive words about Android here. With that 90% figure, all we hear is complaints that it should be 100% because the platform is "open". That sounds glass-half-empty (or even 10% empty) to me.

About the in-app purchases being 30%: They never said it would be anything else and I remember you saying you thought they might end up charging that. So what's the problem?

 

[gato]

But schools would buy no-name tablets. They buy them from value added resellers (VARs), which would supply after-sales service, as well as things like custom remote administration solutions, or custom education administration software...side-loaded onto the devices. And actually, all the 1st through 3rd tier PC brands will also offer tablets, and they will have service centers for USA. Many of those branded-computers will be low-end completely OEMed models from the no-name manufacturers.

Is this based on past history? I'm skeptical. Schools aren't the most technically adept of buyers. I would think that they would be even more risk averse than the average business buyer and stick with brand names.

 

[westmeadboy]

Totally unrelated, but here are some interesting stats comparing developers on Android and iOS:

http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/16/lookou ... developers

 

[ogami_ito]

Is this based on past history? I'm skeptical. Schools aren't the most technically adept of buyers. I would think that they would be even more risk averse than the average business buyer and stick with brand names.

Hi, Yes its based on my past history. I worked at Acer in the United States. Which has a name now...but was basically tier 3 in terms of name recognition in the USA. I am making generalizations here and in my post. There are quite a few market segments (not to mention USA market versus other countries ) so maybe what I say is only relevant to the time and place I worked in this industry. But in the USA, the STATE level school administrations tended to have sophisticated IT departments which made recommendations and served as gate-keepers. They in-tern worked with VARs. Who are buddies, and wine and dine and give kick-backs and go whoring with the IT department managers...just like how it works in China (except I presume less whoring than in China). The VAR sales guy just needs to point to another big customer that uses the product, show that there is call center and repair support, and then show the lower price...which is a big issue in cash-starved education system in the USA.

What would you consider a no-name company? Archos? They mainly do OEM. Lenovo is huge, as is HTC. Are they known in the US outside of IT circles? HuaWei and ZTE, as you probably know, are both huge, and probably unkown in USA. My point is that there are a lot of manufacturers out there that will be competing in this segment. Most don't have big brand name, but are known to IT buyers. And really, it does not take much for one of the VARs to create their own brand name. Its difficult at first. But all they need to do is get one big sale and then they have a foot-hold in the market.

 

[gato]

Interesting. In any case, I don't think too many public schools in the US will be buying tablets any time soon. They don't even have enough money to pay for teachers.

 

[mikelove]

I'm assuming that Apple's strategy will continue to be to charge a large premium for the hardware, while Android tablets will be commodities, which means Android tablets will be much more prevalent and cheaper. If it had a regular premium like a notebook computer, iPad would sell unsubsidized retail for around $400 (assuming $280 cost, 20% profit, and 15%/15% disty/retail split...and that is a very generous assumption). On Taobao in China, iPad 8Mb are selling at 3500RMB+, while the Archos tablet...which has capacity 10inch screen and much less favorable economies of scale...sells for around 2500RMB. Right now, the Android tablets on the USA market are pricing at premium because their manufacturers think they can get away with that. Maybe Apple will go for a low-end mass-acceptance strategy in the future though.

That wasn't what they did with the iPod - once MP3 players became commodity items they were priced fairly aggressively. And in the US market at least, iPhones are priced pretty similarly to comparable Android phones. The long-term value to Apple of establishing iOS as the leading tablet platform is enormous.

You're also forgetting the nature of consumer electronics distribution in the US; Apple doesn't have to compete with Taobao's prices, they don't even really have to worry too much about the crappy $189 thing that Wal-Mart's selling on Black Friday, they just need to make sure the iPad is as cheap as whatever Android tablet Best Buy is pushing and they'll hold on to the interesting part of the market quite well.

I don't believe that Apple's contracts makes things difficult for other manufactures. I believe that Apple's supplier contracts are actually a negative factor; its tied them up with the likes of Foxconn and Wintek (the bastards that poisoned workers in Suzhou where I live), while their competitors either have their own on-the-ground facilities in China (Samsung, Moto, HTC), or have more flexible OEM strategies. But this is neither here nor there.

Right, because the electronics industry is just a model of worker rights and eco-friendliness outside of Apple... Foxconn and Wintek aren't the subject of those giant long-term contracts anyway, component makers like Samsung are; Apple can have their billions of dollars of flash memory shipped to whichever manufacturing partner they feel like.

This is the more interesting issue. In my opinion, the iPad is less suitable for education and ultimately has less potential because the nature of iOS. Its tied to iTunes. Which means its tied to a desktop computer. In the GLOBALmarket, the ideal device is cheap and would be PC - independent. A commodity. And in the commodity market, there is a place for low end up to high-end.

That's not going to last - what do you think that multi-billion-dollar data center in North Carolina is for? I'd wager at least even money that iOS 5 introduces PC-free operation for the iPad, and possibly the iPhone too.

Yes. The problem with Android now is lack of quality software. But schools would buy no-name tablets. They buy them from value added resellers (VARs), which would supply after-sales service, as well as things like custom remote administration solutions, or custom education administration software...side-loaded onto the devices. And actually, all the 1st through 3rd tier PC brands will also offer tablets, and they will have service centers for USA. Many of those branded-computers will be low-end completely OEMed models from the no-name manufacturers. I *believe* the Archos tablets are made this way today.

But those PC manufacturers are going to want some kind of a cut... I just don't see they being able to significantly undercut Apple. Remember too that fragmentation, even at the level of commodity PC hardware, brings additional support costs - it's much easier to train your support staff to deal with two models of tablet than 15.

On a personal note, I would not have much of a problem buying a $150 Android resistive-screen tablet for my small children which they don't need to plug into my desktop. They can now access the Google Market from a web-browser. And in the future, they can access my parental-approved market, like a Nickolodian Market...or a University of California: Chinese Studies Department market....from the device.

A resistive-screen Android tablet? That's the sort of thing that gives app developers nightmares - we're already juggling enough fragmentation questions without having to deal with more than one touchscreen technology.

Sorry Mike, but that sounds like FUD. Simply linking to a website with a premium version - come on!

Both PalmGear and Handango forbade that, back in the day - we never sold on Handango, but we actually had to have a separate version of Pleco on PalmGear that listed their URL in the About box instead of our own; weren't allowed to mention pleco.com anywhere in the app. (and yes, they did check this and banned a number of apps that violated their rules) The theoretical justification is that if the market is responsible for introducing people to your app they're entitled to a share of whatever you make from selling it, much like an affiliate program I suppose. Google's moving in this direction and I see no reason to assume they won't eventually introduce a similar policy.

You're confusing the platform with the Android Market. They are two different things. It's just that one sits on top of the other, which is open. The fact is you can download the platform and do whatever you like with it. That's why it's called open. The Android Market is not open and is not called open.

The fact is, you have options here. Options you don't have at all on iOS. I'd imagine that more than 90% of Android devices allow bypassing of any pre-installed market app (without the need to root/jailbreak). That's about 90%+ higher than iOS.

In the US I suspect the percentage is a lot lower thanks to the pervasive influence of AT&T. And may get even lower once Amazon introduces an Android-based Kindle which only runs apps from their store. And anyway, if you did a survey I suspect that at least half of the (already limited subset of) Android users who've actually downloaded apps are unaware that it's possible to install them outside of Android Market.

About the in-app purchases being 30%: They never said it would be anything else and I remember you saying you thought they might end up charging that. So what's the problem?

They weren't enforcing it - you pointed out yourself that lots of other developers were able to sell add-ons in app without any problems from Google. App stores are essentially common-law legal systems - the interpretation of the rules is as important as the rules themselves; I'm not saying Apple's blameless in this - far from it - but I view Google starting to ban apps that sell add-ons outside of the Market as entirely equivalent to Apple starting to ban apps that offer paid content without the option to purchase it through Apple's system; in both cases they're simply enforcing pre-existing rules, but in both cases the situation for developers is changing dramatically as a result of that new interpretation.

Interesting. In any case, I don't think too many public schools in the US will be buying tablets any time soon. They don't even have enough money to pay for teachers.

True that - a high-school principal I know did an iPad trial recently and concluded they didn't do nearly enough to justify their cost, and this was at an incredibly wealthy private school for which equipping every student with an iPad would amount to barely more than a rounding error in their annual budget. The whole PC-in-every-classroom thing in the '90s is almost universally agreed to have been a huge expensive blunder, and I don't imagine they're eager to repeat that mistake...

There's also still the question of why schools should buy every student a tablet instead of a low-end laptop when the costs are likely to remain pretty comparable (especially when you factor in lifetime setup / support costs); tablets are still content-consumption devices, you can't really do your homework on them or even take class notes. If anything I'd say that Chrome OS is a better bet to penetrate schools than Android, in fact... there's an awful lot to be said for giving every student a $200 netbook with a web browser, especially at schools where the students don't have much money.

 

[westmeadboy]

They weren't enforcing it - you pointed out yourself that lots of other developers were able to sell add-ons in app without any problems from Google. App stores are essentially common-law legal systems - the interpretation of the rules is as important as the rules themselves; I'm not saying Apple's blameless in this - far from it - but I view Google starting to ban apps that sell add-ons outside of the Market as entirely equivalent to Apple starting to ban apps that offer paid content without the option to purchase it through Apple's system; in both cases they're simply enforcing pre-existing rules, but in both cases the situation for developers is changing dramatically as a result of that new interpretation.

Epic post!

Well, if the T&Cs say one thing and they are not being enforced, then I would always assume they might be enforced later. If you ignore that then you are taking a risk - a pretty big risk at that. I think you are also confusing interpretation with enforcement. Clearly, if you do something wrong, then claiming everyone else used to do it and get away with it, is not the strongest defence.

I thought Apple changed the T&Cs to introduce their must-offer-all-purchases-through-our-great-value-30%-system?