The iPhone had sold millions of units before the app store launched. A significant proportion of iPhone and iPad users have downloaded less than a handful of apps.<p>I'm very much of the opinion that apps were more effective as a viral marketing strategy than as a truly attractive feature. People talk about apps, people show their friends, but most of the non-geeks I know don't actually use anything but the built in apps, a Twitter or Facebook app and Angry Birds. A lot of people in the comments are generalising from their own experience and that of their peers, which is just a classic geek mistake.<p>I think Apple have been clever in perpetrating the myth that the App Store gives them an unassailable "ecosystem", but I think what really sold the iPhone was the fact that it's core features were so damned <i>useable</i>. Their rivals have been falling over each other to attract developers, when they should probably have been working on making the core features work better.<p>Look at the stats on mobile data usage - until the iPhone came along, nobody really bothered to use their smartphone's browser because the experience was so unpleasant. At one point 99% of all mobile data was being used by Mobile Safari. Android is catching up, but iPhone users still spend a disproportionate amount of time using their phone's browser. That has nothing to do with an "ecosystem".
I feel like he's missing the point of an ecosystem.<p>It's fine that he only uses a few apps on his phone, and that most other people probably do the same.<p>The problem is that those "few apps" that most other people use aren't the same "few apps" that he uses.
If "all you need is 10 apps", then the platform is relatively unimportant, and it doesn't matter if you're just distributing someone else's software.<p>Personally, I'd add a few apps to his "must have" list - Kindle, Netflix, Wunderlist, Rdio, Facebook, iTalk (Dropbox-enabled voice recorder), Dropbox, Instacast (high quality podcast app), Downloads, The Economist, VNC software, Audible, ComicZeal... Also, I expect a robust tablet ecosystem, strong syncing/backup capabilities and good accessories. The N9 isn't looking too attractive to me.
One can wonder if a platform becomes successful because of a rich ecosystem of apps or if rich ecosystem of apps follows success of a platform, but the undeniable fact of life is: every successful computing platform also has a rich ecosystem of apps. Be it Windows, Mac OS, web, iphone, playstation or Commodore 64.<p>So reality strongly hints that you cannot have successful computing platform without a rich ecosystem of apps.<p>If you've read reviews of Android tablets, there was one thing that every reviewer brought up: there are no tablet-specific appsh. Applying Ockham's razor, is it because:<p>a) reviewers are part of world-wide anti-Android tablet conspiracy that coordinates talking points in their reviews<p>b) we have a freak statistical event of reviewers being in sync in their out-of-touchiness wrt. what is important for potential tablet buyers<p>c) people actually do care about having lots of apps to choose from<p>Do we really have tens of thousands gullible developers who write hundreds of thousands of apps that nobody wants or buys, or maybe, just maybe, developers are following the money and writing apps because people are actually buying and using them?
It is worth pointing out that this is 37 Signals. Which means, just by dogfood-ing, they get rid of many of the major 3rd party app categories.<p>Productivity software make up a lot of the most useful 3rd party apps, and 37 Signals makes web productivity software that cover the same territory.<p>It doesn't mean their point isn't still interesting, it's just good to remember context.
I don't have a Smartphone, but I can relate to the basic notion very much. I mainly do desktop computing, and lots of it, but pretty much all I ever need are four "apps": the shell, a browser, an email client, and Emacs. That's what I use 95% of the time. Then a PDF viewer, OpenOffice.org, and every now and then the Gimp or Inkscape. So basically, 10 apps is all I need, too.<p>But at the same time, if I scroll through synaptics there are many, many packages that I have installed over the years. Most of them I probably used only once or twice, unless they're libraries. But for those couple of times, it was great having the "ecosystem" to get them with a simple click.<p>So I suppose it's always a mixture: the 10 apps you use 95% of the time should rock. But the remaining 5% should be painless, too.
Mostly agree with David’s points. I have at least 30 apps on my iPhone. Of those, I use 5-6 on a regular basis, half of which were developed by Apple and came pre-installed.<p>The endless variety of the app store is impressive, but there’s so much cruft in there it’s beginning to feel more like an app Walmart. A large fraction are either redundant or slapped together to make a quick buck.<p>I’d trade the majority of my apps just to have more seamless interaction with those aspects of this device I find most useful; the camera app in particular. It’s perplexing that Apple has just now decided to allow us to use a volume button as a shutter. I’ll forgive that on the basis of the brilliant decision to add a camera shortcut on the lock screen — that is an example of the type of improvements that really make a difference in the everyday utility of these incredible pocket machines.<p>Whoever masters the art of making it easy for a five-fingered hand to effortlessly soar through those fundamental functions it’s difficult to imagine being without (phone, messaging, browser and camera in particular) is who will ultimately earn my dollar. /raaant
I don't _need_ apps.<p>But why would I switch from a phone that has apps for Spotify, real time updates for local buses, Facebook and Twitter to one that doesn't?
The problem is everyone has a different 10 apps they "need" and even if you figure only 1% of apps fall into that category for someone, there's still a lot of value in a platform of 200k apps.
What monastic wrote:<p><i></i><i></i><i></i>*
I feel like he's missing the point of an ecosystem.
It's fine that he only uses a few apps on his phone, and that most other people probably do the same.
The problem is that those "few apps" that most other people use aren't the same "few apps" that he uses.
<i></i><i></i><i></i><i></i><i></i><i></i><i></i>*<p>All the arguments against this are arguments made by people not willing to step out of their own perspective.<p>1) The particular apps that are critical vary per person.
2) The number of such critical apps vary per person.
3) The weight given to these apps when valuing the iPhone varies per person.<p>Most importantly - in a system where iPhone is already as good or better (or if you have religion of openness, a little worse) than nearly every other phone - the apps become a huge advantage.
This is why Windows Phone is so much better than the competition. It integrates all of the most commonly used features in a smartphone into a simple, cohesive experience.
I'm taking a different read of this article, I guess. I view this not as a "who cares what phone I use, since I rarely use the 3rd party apps." I take this, and some other commenters do as well who have significant usage of some 3rd party apps (Netflix, Kindle, Instapaper, et al), as a challenge to build better apps that provide more functionality.
Every time I look down at that 4" screen and think about all the things I can do with it, I still look at it and think, "Good lord, there is SO MUCH MORE we haven't even seen yet!" And it makes me want a whiteboard so I can start mapping out ideas.<p>There is still a huge amount of opportunity to create incredible apps. Social Media apps have been done every which way from Sunday, content apps as well, To-Do lists are certainly overdone, and basic note apps as well (though there are some unique innovations that could be done on note apps IMO). But look at those categories, compared to all the incredible things these devices can do?
There are still big wins to be made in mobile app development, both native and browser-based.
DHH is probably right that most people only use a fraction of apps, and that should mean any phone could succeed versus the iPhone or Android phones. However, I doubt people are rational enough to realize this when they go out to buy their new smartphone.<p>Even though I only use ~10 apps on my iPhone and iPad, I'd be wary of buying into another platform that didn't offer the same breadth of choice.
Also the notion of using only a few apps doesn't apply to games, which is one of the killer features of smart phones. They are largely meant to be disposable, and you assume you'll be playing new ones periodically. I might keep 7 or 8 utility apps that I frequently use, but I've got a constantly rotating selection of about 1 or 2 games I'll play, and I'm not even much of a gamer.
I think the compass is great.
If you get out into the world sometimes and arent a gazzillionaire you can't use Google Maps even if you happen to have a signal. On my trip to Argentina for example a GB of roaming data was 15000 USD. In words fifteen thousand dollars. And if you didn't download an offline map back home, GPS is not going to help you much.
As many people have said the challenge is everyone's <i>10 apps</i> are a bit different and that's why you need a big software catalog. This is especially true of games. You can only play Angry Birds so many times. There are hundreds of other really great iOS games out there. The author says he can live without playing Civilization but when the price tag for the phone and service is basically the same that's a tough sell. We also cannot underestimate the simple joy of consumption people get from buying/sampling different apps. A device that lacks this experience is always going to feel limited even if you spend 95% of your time in the same 10 apps it does provide.
It is interesting. I guess yesterday an article which compared the % of users using addons on firefox vs those on chrome. Firefox had the higher number. But its probably more of an indicator that chrome is reaching out to mainstream user base.<p>I don't think that the mobile platform domination will be decided by how many apps the platform has in the app store.
Will it be dominated by the best platform that nails the core use cases best like iPhone as mentioned in above article ? Well maybe, it will.<p>But then it just might happen that the one with highest distribution channels will win the race.
The "few apps" he needs vary wildly person to person. Here are mine:<p>TweetBot, WakeMate, SimpleNote, Spotify, Meebo.<p>Additionally gaming is a primary category for platform growth, if you do not have a vast amount of good games you are stuffed.
Let's look at his 10 apps or more specifically what he didn't list. Would your phone/tablet experience be degraded without the following:<p>RSS<p>Skype<p>iBooks/Kindle<p>Netflix/Hulu<p>Pandora/radio<p>Video Calling<p>all games<p>Mine would be and there are many more that I use less but value highly. Barcode scanners, Fandango, White Noise, flight trackers, turn by turn, Word Lens, a whole suite of reference materials that work offline.<p>A browser can replace some of them, somewhat. Chrome's promise is to replace nearly all of them completely but that's not here yet and is really just moving the goalposts.<p>Today I may not <i>need</i> all of these apps but I love that I have them.
Reminds of that other saying about most users using only 10% of features in Microsoft Excel......it's just that every one uses a different 10% of features (or apps in this case) :)
I used to think I was this way about the iPhone too, but if I look at what apps I use constantly, it's more than 2: PCalc, Rdio, Remote, Instagram, RTM, Screens.
This is the exact argument I make to others about why the app long tail is less important than you think. In fact I made the argument here:<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2664559" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2664559</a><p>You nail the basics as listed above, and have a basic app ecosystem and you're fine. Much like how the web neutralized the desktop OS advantage -- we'll see it happen even faster in mobile.
I'm not sure what the name is for this, but this is the same incorrect reasoning that lead to the idea that the russians could compete against capitalism with a planned economy. Just make the ten tractors and chicken plucking machines that everyone needs!<p>The only way the next really amazing app comes along that EVERYONE wants is for a seething ocean of developers churn through ideas fighting for users.
I don't agree with the premise. If Apple had nailed the basics, why there are still many popular apps for camera, weather, clocks, photos and maps?<p>I also take issue with the fact that just because someone uses a few apps 95% of the time, they don't need other apps. Some apps are really valuable only in some circumstances like when you want to know how to go to an obscure place.
To be sure, most people just want facebook, pandora and most especially angry birds. But can I get every episode of Top Chef or the latest Golf Digest on the N9 (or even Android)? I think access to content within iTunes is more compelling than the 200k apps. And it seems to be what Apple is betting on.
Andorid's biggest failing to me is the lack of a coherent killer e-mail, calendar and integrated IM experience. Out of the box you have a carrier crippled experience or the google locked in experience. Even Win7 get's that right. Conversely you will pry my Incredible 2 from my cold dead hands.
I'm not sure I agree that the app ecosystem doesn't matter, but one thing is for sure, there are way too many app stores being launched and most of them suck.<p>Certainly it would make sense to focus on the core user experience first instead of some half-baked attempt to confront to out do Apple's whole platform.
But it's the same for non-mobile platforms. I only use 10 applications on my computer, too, and I try to avoid platforms that don't have these. Of course, one might argue that everyone needs the same apps on a smartphone (telephony, messaging, notes...) but why not use a regular phone, then?
Variety is also good. Just because you know you love these ten apps doesn't mean you want to be confined to them. I have 350 apps on my ipod, I only use five weekly, but if I had to stay entertained for a few days I'd play all 100+ games. I'd still prefer my Kindle.
The reason that 200,000 apps is huge is not because all 200,000 benefit a single user; rather it's because 200,000 apps enables millions of people to write this exact same post, but substitute Echofon and Bloomberg (his 2 daily use apps) with App X and App Y.
This reminds me very much of Navin R. Johnson. Not only just in phrasing, but also the attitude that he'll be "just fine" with his few apps.<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VbI5zcB8Ac" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VbI5zcB8Ac</a>
Nevertheless, the support for Alien Dalvik[1] might help.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.slashgear.com/nokia-n9-android-app-support-promised-with-alien-dalvik-22160809/" rel="nofollow">http://www.slashgear.com/nokia-n9-android-app-support-promis...</a>
I suspect that in a few years there'll only be two (native) apps: Making phonecalls + webbrowser. (yes the webbrowser will also play mp3s and talk to the camera to take pictures)
I liked my Palm IIIx (1999) better than my Android. That's not to say it <i>was</i> better, just that its simple, snappy, tightly integrated set of base apps helped me be more productive. My Android, which comes with nothing very useful, makes me unproductive.<p>PDAs were great time savers whereas 'smart' phones are great ways to get ads in front of people. :-)
N9 is fucked, not just because of the lack of third party devs developing for the MeeGo platform.<p>As per Engadget, Nokia plans to have N9 on sale on Sept 23, right after the iPhone5 launch and several Android, WebOS and Mango phones that will be released between now and then.<p>Sounds like bringing Knife to a Gunfight? The processor underneath the N9 is already dated and they think releasing end of third quarter was a sound idea? WTF?