Travel Technology - Discrimination against Android

Why is this that many Airlines/Hotels & other travel website only make apps for iOS and not for Android? I feel like a second class citizen....

For example jetBlue, SPG, SeatGuru, MTA (NYC), Lufthansa (Magazin), Lufthansa Systems, Jeppesen, etc.

- Higher average revenue per user for iOS than Android.

- A few years ago, there were more iOS users than Android users, though this is no longer true.

- Managers at these companies are more likely to have iOS devices than Android, so think about iOS more.

- Fundamentally, this all boils down to Apple's brand power among non-technical professionals. This is of course a result of Steve Jobs's genius for marketing.

Also, it's cheaper to develop application for iOS. Variety of Android devices makes especially the test phase quite complicated. To create polished product that will work on any Android handset is not an easy thing.

It is not going to change for a while - only if the application is a success on iOS, it would then be slowly ported to Android.

A lot of app developers 'cut their teeth' on iOS aswell. And I know a couple of friends in the app development field who won't consider developing for android, since essentially all android users (me included!) want apps for free, whereas apple users are so used to paying for everything extra (my take on the situation :D) that they feel happy to pay for an app. I think a friend quoted that you need to have 10-100k downloads of an app before it even approaches profitability.

Having said that, the examples you cite aren't wanting to make money from selling an app, so the other reasons above are probably just as valid.

tb

Variety of Android devices makes especially the test phase quite complicated. To create polished product that will work on any Android handset is not an easy thing.

As an Android developer with a couple of apps in the Android market, I don't really agree with this, at least for the type of apps that travel companies would produce. For simple user interfaces, developing an app using the simulator, then testing on one or two devices, is quite sufficient. It's what I've always done, and have had zero complaints from users on this.

Games are of course different due to their heavy user interface and GPU requirements, and yes the fragmentation of the Android platform may well be a problem for game developers.

Of course, we then need to differentiate between reality and perception among management of those companies commissioning apps. If they've heard that Android is fragmented they may well be less willing to comission an Android app, regardless of what the reality is. Such is business.

As an Android developer with a couple of apps in the Android market, I don't really agree with this, at least for the type of apps that travel companies would produce. For simple user interfaces, developing an app using the simulator, then testing on one or two devices, is quite sufficient. It's what I've always done, and have had zero complaints from users on this.
Would you care to share some example apps you've developed? I would really love to see if they are supported by all Android devices that I own...

Would you care to share some example apps you've developed? I would really love to see if they are supported by all Android devices that I own...

Try "Currency Exchange Rates" or "Enswitch Client" by Integrics. The Enswitch Client is probably not interesting unless you happen to have an account with a suitable telephony provider. I think you'll find they work well on all phones running Android 2.1 or later; I make no promises about tablets.

Ok, they work without problems. They offer very basic functionality.

It gets much trickier with more complex applications. Not only with games. But various screen resolution is only one of the problems. Offering a high quality, usable and friendly app is challenging. More for Android then iOS. And this is not so much a weakness of the OS itself, as the number of different versions out there. A lot of folks can not even update beyond 2.1. It will take some time to make use of new features of e.g. 4.0. It is much easier with Apple and iOS with couple devices and clear update process. You can easily QA your app on every Apple devices, it's virtually impossible to do so on Android.

I am sure you will get to realize it, when you obtain higher user base. Which I truly wish you will.

A friend runs a company that specializes in creating apps for businesses in Sweden. 95% of the time, these businesses request to only have the app made for iOS.

They don't want your (android phone owners) business. It is not a priority to them. I remember this when I spend my money. I love Android and the principles it supports.

The funny thing about this is that often I prefer the webpage of a company's site to the application.

They don't want your (android phone owners) business. It is not a priority to them. I remember this when I spend my money. I love Android and the principles it supports.

The funny thing about this is that often I prefer the webpage of a company's site to the application.

I think you have this backwards. You don't want to support their business, or you (the collective "you" of Android users) would be willing to pay for it. Apple users are willing to pay for a quality product (as evidenced by their hardware choices) and pay for a quality software product (as evidenced by where the money is in mobile app development). Why would developers want to support your desire for free apps when they can sell apps to a larger, more consistent group, of people using a common platform?

Iphones come in a standard size, android developers need to plan on all the different screen sizes, processors, etc.

There's like one iphone a year, new android devices come out all the time, that can drive a developer crazy.

Android users have way more free apps to choose from, which makes it harder for them to actually cough up money to buy something.

Pretty much most of the iphone users are on the same OS, android keeps updating, but not all their users update

- Managers at these companies are more likely to have iOS devices than Android, so think about iOS more.

- Fundamentally, this all boils down to Apple's brand power among non-technical professionals. This is of course a result of Steve Jobs's genius for marketing.Yup. They all tend to have MACs rather than Windows laptops, too! :cool:

Just returned from a trip to Italy. ATAF, the transport agency for Florence, has signs advertising their Android app.

Was surprised to find they didn't have an iPhone version (though their web site lets you calculate routes, as well as view routes).

But I think Android is huge in Italy, because they have a real competitive prepaid market where cheaper unlocked devices are very popular.

Starwood makes a blackberry app but not an android app. That says more about SPG than about android.

For all those that feel like Android is left out, try being a Blackberry user.

(Yes, there are still people like me who have needs that BB meets better than iOS/Droid.)

For all those that feel like Android is left out, try being a Blackberry user.

(Yes, there are still people like me who have needs that BB meets better than iOS/Droid.)
You might want to consider RIM's chances of survival and whether it makes sense to transition to ios/droid.

I've always thought the app phenomenon on iOS is sort of the definition of fragmentation. Having to open a separate app every time you want to do something else. And how on earth am I supposed to figure out which apps to download when there are 650,000 of them? Once I get my Galaxy S3 I'm hoping to use it more like a portable laptop. I probably have 15 apps on my iPhone that I can do away with once I have a nice large 4.8" screen to browse the web on.

I've always thought the app phenomenon on iOS is sort of the definition of fragmentation. Having to open a separate app every time you want to do something else. And how on earth am I supposed to figure out which apps to download when there are 650,000 of them? Once I get my Galaxy S3 I'm hoping to use it more like a portable laptop. I probably have 15 apps on my iPhone that I can do away with once I have a nice large 4.8" screen to browse the web on.

Good luck with that when you have no internet connection.

Iphones come in a standard size, android developers need to plan on all the different screen sizes, processors, etc.

There's like one iphone a year, new android devices come out all the time, that can drive a developer crazy.

Android users have way more free apps to choose from, which makes it harder for them to actually cough up money to buy something.

Pretty much most of the iphone users are on the same OS, android keeps updating, but not all their users update

Also, Android devices are not all the same and there can be variations in hardware that the software won't work with all hardware from different manufacturers. All phones can be fragmented, but Android more so. Apple supports devices usually back two models (e.g. iOS 5.1 works on iPhone 3GS, 4 and 4S.) There's no support for "Jelly Bean 4.1" even on recent devices. Apple is fragmented also in that the latest software leaves off features on older hardware, but other things continue to work.

As far as Android users not updating it's often not a choice they have to update when their device is not able to be updated with the most recent version of the OS software.

I think you have this backwards. You don't want to support their business, or you (the collective "you" of Android users) would be willing to pay for it. Apple users are willing to pay for a quality product (as evidenced by their hardware choices) and pay for a quality software product (as evidenced by where the money is in mobile app development). Why would developers want to support your desire for free apps when they can sell apps to a larger, more consistent group, of people using a common platform?

Uh....

If they want my/our business, they can cater to the tools that we use. Currently there are a whole lot of Android users. Those happy with the paid apps from businesses selling consumer products have just drunk too much kool aid.

Also, it's cheaper to develop application for iOS. Variety of Android devices makes especially the test phase quite complicated. To create polished product that will work on any Android handset is not an easy thing.

It is not going to change for a while - only if the application is a success on iOS, it would then be slowly ported to Android.

Your take is spot on. 5-6 devices, 4-6 variants of operating system vs 600+ devices and God knows how many OS forks.

Don't believe it? Check this out: http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/11/this-is-what-developing-for-android-looks-like/

Uh....

If they want my/our business, they can cater to the tools that we use. Currently there are a whole lot of Android users. Those happy with the paid apps from businesses selling consumer products have just drunk too much kool aid.

Uh.......

If you want to avail yourself of their products you should expect to PAY FOR IT. That you don't want to is the reason developers create iOS apps and not android apps. There just ain't no money in android apps compared to iOS. THAT was the point of my post. Pay up, or lose out. You seem to have made your choice, stop complaining about it.

Welcome to what it was like to be a Symbian user - for years the largest installed base of smartphones worldwide (and still number 2), but companies would build apps for Windows Phone before they did for Symbian. I guess that's what happens when you don't have any buzz in Silicon Valley.

(I have the SPG app for BB, and it's hopeless.)

Good luck with that when you have no internet connection.

The apps I'd be replacing with a web browser all access web content. The apps would be just as useless without an internet connection. Not that I expect to run into that problem on Verizon's network.

For all those that feel like Android is left out, try being a Blackberry user.

(Yes, there are still people like me who have needs that BB meets better than iOS/Droid.)

I feel your pain.

PS And I really enjoy my 32gb PlayBook.

Uh.......

If you want to avail yourself of their products you should expect to PAY FOR IT. That you don't want to is the reason developers create iOS apps and not android apps. There just ain't no money in android apps compared to iOS. THAT was the point of my post. Pay up, or lose out. You seem to have made your choice, stop complaining about it.
The OP listed ios apps that are free and mostly serve as ways to make it easier for people to buy a company's products. Why would anyone pay for those apps?

JetBlue, SPG, etc. are hiring developers to develop apps and are giving those apps away in order to increase the revenue and profitability of JetBlue, Starwood, etc. Users are not paying developers for these apps. Instead of using the apps, people could go to the companies' web sites, but that's not as convenient.

Uh.......

If you want to avail yourself of their products you should expect to PAY FOR IT. That you don't want to is the reason developers create iOS apps and not android apps. There just ain't no money in android apps compared to iOS. THAT was the point of my post. Pay up, or lose out. You seem to have made your choice, stop complaining about it.

I think you're missing the point.

If I want to play a funky game, then I can choose from free and paid ones. But, if I am buying goods and services, the company should be paying for the development of that App.

IF your assertion that Android developers can't make money is true, it is certainly not the consumers fault. It's the failure of both the developers and the companies who they cater their products to. If a company will generate a certain amount of revenue from an App, then the developer should be paid a fee for their work.

If Coca Cola wants me to buy soda, Levi's wants me to buy jeans, or Expedia wants me to buy airfare, they can pay for their own bloody application developments.

(I don't expect a reply, just making my point.)

I'm thinking this was a bigger problem in 2010 than 2012. Every single one of my 4-5 primary airlines and 3 hotel chains - with one notable exception - have an Android app. (Starwood being that notable exception.)

I don't think there's a grand conspiracy here. I think it's some of the simple reasons listed above: iOS had a head start, app developers started there, and now finally - for the most part - iOS and Android are the two biggies that get most apps.

The other systems like Windows Mobile, RIM, Palm's OS, etc....those are the guys that are hosed.

Although I do love this notion that iOS users are more gullible than the rest of the population... :p

Although I do love this notion that iOS users are more gullible than the rest of the population... :p

No more gullible than Mercedes or BMW owners, when Ford is just as available.

No more gullible than Mercedes or BMW owners, when Ford is just as available.

No, I'd argue that BMW and Mercedes have engineered a technically superior product to Ford. ;)

No, I'd argue that BMW and Mercedes have engineered a technically superior product to Ford. ;)

As has Apple.

^^

Some would argue the iPhone is the Toyota Camry of smartphones, not a BMW or Mercedes.

Some would argue the iPhone is the Toyota Camry of smartphones, not a BMW or Mercedes.

A Camry, as compared to the normal Tata Android phones?

The average build quality for iPhone's is far ahead of the average build quality of Android phones, both in hardware and software.

Summary of the last few posts: neener-neener

As has Apple.

^^

It has? When are they releasing it? :p

Summary of the last few posts: neener-neener

Okay, okay...I realize it's a religious discussion. I'm actually not that big of an Android evangelist. I'm just locked into Sprint so that's what I had to roll with for the first few years of iPhones. If the iPhone 5 is outperforming the Samsung and HTC available at the time by enough to justify a price premium, I'll actually consider it. I think the timing might work right for my next upgrade...

The Apple product where I give their engineers the greatest props for being ahead of their competitors for a few years: MacBook Air.

The average build quality for iPhone's is far ahead of the average build quality of Android phones

Build quality is not high on my list of priorities on a device I'm only going to keep for 2 years. Build quality on the high end Android phones that compete with the iPhone price-wise are quite good BTW.

iPhone apps = revenue potential

iPhone developers = huge market for competition, lower development costs

iPhone users = demographics match target demographic of company

I think you're missing the point.

If I want to play a funky game, then I can choose from free and paid ones. But, if I am buying goods and services, the company should be paying for the development of that App.

IF your assertion that Android developers can't make money is true, it is certainly not the consumers fault. It's the failure of both the developers and the companies who they cater their products to. If a company will generate a certain amount of revenue from an App, then the developer should be paid a fee for their work.


OK, think like a business for a moment. You have a finite amount of money to create revenue paths for potential customers. There is one path with a known collection of users who typically spend more money and have a taste for quality products (a known fact about Apple users, and can be seen by the recent revelation that Orbitz presents pricier hotel options to Mac users than Windows users). There is another group that does not tend to spend more, is unwilling to spend even small amounts for simple apps and is less likely to provide the profits you are looking for.

With these two target groups, and with limited funds to produce an app, which would you target? (remove all opinions about which device manufacturer, whether you think a particular group is stupid for spending more money, etc...) just a simple question. Path A leads to more revenue and higher profits (or you think it will) and Path B leads to less revenue and less profits, and requires more money to make the app available to a large user base.

Path A, or Path B. A very simple choice.

I will spell out my feelings.

Apple products, their MP3 players, phones, and tablets do little of what I need them to do, and all kinds of things I don't need. In fact, my Nokia, Samsung, and Acer products do all the things I need quite well. I don't need to pay more for a product that meets less of my needs.

Your opinions are not going to change Apple's company policy, and their products will still fail to match my needs. Android is the most popular operating system and, even if the spend per user is less, it still adds up to a lot of revenue.

Some of us technology users came here for a discussion. Not to WIN the discussion, just to participate in it. If you simply need to win the argument, then OMNI is the correct place to take that behaviour.

I also think that many here who live in America forget the different dynamics in the rest of the world. Your country has a high per person spend, but with only 6% of the worlds population, I think people sometimes forget the big picture. It's a global village and we all like different flavour of ice cream (and phones).

Don't get me wrong. If the company doesn't want to pay for an Andriod App, fine. It's their choice. But don't expect me to pay for it for them. I will choose their competition who have decided to provide Android users with the service.

Example. Kayak has a free android App. Some of their competition may not. Why would I pay for the app, when Kayak obviously wants my business enough to provide me with the tools that make it easy for me to choose them.

I will spell out my feelings.

Apple products, their MP3 players, phones, and tablets do little of what I need them to do, and all kinds of things I don't need. In fact, my Nokia, Samsung, and Acer products do all the things I need quite well. I don't need to pay more for a product that meets less of my needs.

Your opinions are not going to change Apple's company policy, and their products will still fail to match my needs. Android is the most popular operating system and, even if the spend per user is less, it still adds up to a lot of revenue.

Some of us technology users came here for a discussion. Not to WIN the discussion, just to participate in it. If you simply need to win the argument, then OMNI is the correct place to take that behaviour.


Sensitive much?

Please point out where I am trying to "win" the discussion. I simply pointed out very basic business facts about why a company would not be willing to spend sparse resources on an expense app with limited return potential. Explain your "feelings" all you want, how about "discussing" the actual post? Then you can rightly claim to be one of those "technology users" who is actually here for a discussion.

I use both an iPhone and an Android phone, both daily. I have experience with both, with the software and the app stores. All of which is much more than many here can say, many who have only touched either device in a casual way, but not as a daily user. I believe that gives me the perspective to discuss either device. I have a preference for one over the other, but that doesn't cloud my opinion of basic business sense.

Don't get me wrong. If the company doesn't want to pay for an Andriod App, fine. It's their choice. But don't expect me to pay for it for them. I will choose their competition who have decided to provide Android users with the service.

Example. Kayak has a free android App. Some of their competition may not. Why would I pay for the app, when Kayak obviously wants my business enough to provide me with the tools that make it easy for me to choose them.

You wouldn't, and you shouldn't, at least not as a savvy consumer. But that doesn't change the business model of many companies that decide to explore the Apple app business first. Many, if not most, will eventually get around to building an Android app. Eventually most companies will stop looking at apps as experiments and start building them for both platforms at the same time. We are not there yet, but we will be soon. None of that changes the current business model I described above.

I think Apple pretty much got the design right in the very beginning, while Google was more concerned about functionality over the look until 2.3 came out, and it shows. That’s why Apple is having to play catchup.

I think this is already on the upswing for Android and in the start of decline for iOS. As Steve's "Reality Distortion Field" wears off I think we are already seeing less hoopla about Apple. It is only a matter of time before Apple settles for being #2 in the tablet market just like they have been relegated to for computers and now phones. But hey - they'll still be #1 in standalone MP3 players, right? I'm sure that market isn't going to shrink....

Some of us technology users came here for a discussion. Not to WIN the discussion, just to participate in it. If you simply need to win the argument, then OMNI is the correct place to take that behaviour.

Don't go to this thread in OMNI, then...

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/omni/1060657-anyone-else-hate-apple.html

iOS is still the leader in app market share and probably will be for some time. As others have mentioned, they were first to market, and Apple is a marketing MACHINE.

The average build quality for iPhone's is far ahead of the average build quality of Android phones, both in hardware and software.

Perhaps in Hardware. Hon Hai does make a nice iPhone. But definitely not in software. Apple's iOS is still 3-4 generations behind Android. I had to laugh that it was iOS 4.0 (IIRC) before you could even add a background (and only on 3GS and higher phones). OTA sync in iOS 5. Android had both in 1.x.

I too have both devices. iPhone for work and Android on tablets at home. I bought my first Android device because of my morbid disgust with iTunes (perhaps the most over-bloated, worst written application of all time). iOS is great for kids, but useless for a tech-heavy user.

I too have both devices. iPhone for work and Android on tablets at home. I bought my first Android device because of my morbid disgust with iTunes (perhaps the most over-bloated, worst written application of all time). iOS is great for kids, but useless for a tech-heavy user.

Agreed. My first smartphone was an iPhone 3GS. I quickly became frustrated with how limited it was, mainly due to Apple's iron-fisted control. Upgrading to iOS 4 didn't improve matters, so I replaced it with a Samsung Galaxy S. What a breath of fresh air - it actually felt like I owned the device and could do whatever I liked with it. It was also a major improvement in terms of features. In the 2 years since then, Android has greatly improved, whereas iOS (with the exception of Siri which is nice but not essential) has added only minor features. Today, using an iOS device feels very limiting and old-fashioned when compared with the Galaxy S III or One X. Unless Apple make huge improvements in the iPhone 5, they're left in the dust as far as tech-savvy users are concerned.

[QUOTE=acunningham;18834615. This is of course a result of Steve Jobs's genius for marketing.[/QUOTE]

Do you not mean brain washing?? :p Better technology when a 17" MacBook Pro has the same innards as a Dell, Lenovo, Asus yet costs about $1,000 more for nothing different than an OS??? Wait, add 4GB of DDR3 memory for $200, when the same can be had in a Dell (or other PC based laptop for $50 or so)???

Sorry to dump on Apple but who wants an iPad where you are forced to rely exclusively on Apple's iCloud?? Das tut mir leid, but give me a tablet (who cares about a screen with 256,458,458 x 1,689,745 giga-resolution) with an SD/Micro SD card slot and/or a normal/mini USB to attach cards, thumb drives, 2.5" drives, etc...

As far as perceived discrimination, a very well known travel guru (AH) just released an app for Paris...iPad only for the "savvy sophisticated" traveler. I guess that that well known travel guru feels that anyone who does NOT use an iPad is not sophisticated enough for his Paris app....oh well, c'est la vie...

Cheers,

AH?

Your bimmer is more expensive than other marques with comparable capabilities. You're not immune to brainwashing yourself.

(who cares about a screen with 256,458,458 x 1,689,745 giga-resolution)

I'm actually frustrated with the lack of (i.e., zero) 14" 1080p laptops. If Sony can make one in a 13.3" form factor, then surely 14-ish" would also be easy (and slightly cheaper)?

Same frustrations they cannot make 21" monitors with the same resolution as the new 15" MacBook.

I'm actually frustrated with the lack of (i.e., zero) 14" 1080p laptops. If Sony can make one in a 13.3" form factor, then surely 14-ish" would also be easy (and slightly cheaper)?

Same frustrations they cannot make 21" monitors with the same resolution as the new 15" MacBook.

Wouldn't the new MBPwRD work for you? It has the screen resolution you are looking for, and then some.

Wouldn't the new MBPwRD work for you? It has the screen resolution you are looking for, and then some.

Sure. But I can save $850 and buy this 13.3" 1080p laptop (http://www.amazon.com/Zenbook-Prime-UX31A-AB71-13-3-Inch-Ultrabook/dp/B00863L3K4/ref=pd_cp_pc_1), which would suit my needs just as well.

Agreed. My first smartphone was an iPhone 3GS. I quickly became frustrated with how limited it was, mainly due to Apple's iron-fisted control. Upgrading to iOS 4 didn't improve matters, so I replaced it with a Samsung Galaxy S. What a breath of fresh air - it actually felt like I owned the device and could do whatever I liked with it. It was also a major improvement in terms of features. In the 2 years since then, Android has greatly improved, whereas iOS (with the exception of Siri which is nice but not essential) has added only minor features. Today, using an iOS device feels very limiting and old-fashioned when compared with the Galaxy S III or One X. Unless Apple make huge improvements in the iPhone 5, they're left in the dust as far as tech-savvy users are concerned.

i totally agree with this that's one of the reasons i prefer android over apple especially htc most can be software unlocked for any carrier for free where as apple you need to either pay 150.00 dollars or have been with att for 2 years i just dont like the locked down feeling of apple devices and i hate how they always force you to use itunes where as with android devices its plug and play and transfer

Going back to the thread title, why WOULDN'T you discriminate in favor of humans over Androids?