Tag Archives: mobile

Appcelerator opens component marketplace for mobile developers

Appcelerator has launched its Mobile Marketplace, offering software components for mobile and web developers using Titanium, Appcelerator’s cross-platform toolkit for Apple iOS, Google Android, and others – though only iOS and Android seem to be supported in the Marketplace currently.

image

Developers create modules using the Titanium Module SDK, and get 70% of revenue.

I took a quick look and found it thought-provoking. I am a fan of user reviews, and one nice feature of the Mobile Marketplace is that it supports reviews and ratings. Finding out what other developers think of a particular component often involves trawling through Google searches, asking on forums and so on; a marketplace with authentic hands-on reviews has real value.

That said, when I checked out an example, LucidChart, which is a diagramming component with 5 star rating and four reviews, I was not impressed with the review quality, and puzzled that some of the reviews date from July, before the Marketplace opened. Still, developers can make their own judgment about the reliability of a particular review.

Many of the components are on a monthly subscription, on a per seat, per month basis. Some developers are uncomfortable with this model and the likely costs:

… charging such high monthly fees is a complete rip off. My entire Apple developer license only works out at $8.25, are you seriously thinking that a module is worth more than what Apple provide to developers for a fraction of the cost?

Another issue is that some of the products are not really code components, but developer services like TeamworkPM.

Some components are free though, and if the Marketplace attracts a reasonable level of traffic and interest then it could prove an excellent resource for Titanium developers.

Windows Phone 7 apps, stats and future

Justin Angel, a former Microsoft employee who worked on Silverlight, has posted his analysis of the 24,505 apps he found in the Windows Phone 7 marketplace, exploiting a loophole that lets you get the download links. A few highlights:

  • 97% of the apps are not obfuscated, meaning that it is trivial (with easily available tools) to decompile the source.
  • 90% are Silverlight vs 10% XNA. This is not so much an indicator of the popularity of the two frameworks, but more an indicator of how many apps are graphic-rich games rather than some other kind of utility. Of course if you are making a very simple app, Silverlight is easier than XNA, so that may be a factor too.
  • 99% are C# vs 1% Visual Basic and a smattering of F#. A fascinating stat that makes me wonder what is the future of Visual Basic.

There are more interesting stats about libraries and components used, for which I refer you to the original post.

Does it matter? Well, Windows Phone 7 has not been a big success so far, though the reasons for that are not so much the quality of the OS or the ease of developing apps, but rather its low profile at retail and the fact that most operators and manufacturers don’t really need it: Apple and Android between them pretty much have the market.

That said, there are a few reasons why Windows Phone or some evolution of it may yet be significant. Nokia is betting on it, and while Nokia is undoubtedly in difficulties, this must work in Microsoft’s favour. Further, fear uncertainty and doubt surrounding Android patent and copyright issues may persuade some industry players to give Windows Phone another look.

Perhaps more significantly, when Microsoft unveils its developer strategy at the BUILD conference next week, it is likely that the application model in Windows Phone, or some evolution of it, will integrate with what is planned for Windows 8. NVIDIA is already talking about how Windows 8 will run Windows Phone apps.

For these reasons I believe there is at least a glimmer of hope for Microsoft in the mobile world; certainly the developer story to be officially told next week will be an interesting one.

Hands on with Delphi XE2 for Apple iOS

Last week Embarcardero released RAD Studio XE2. RAD Studio is the suite of tools based on Delphi, a language – originally called Object Pascal – and visual development tool which still has a loyal following. XE2 is the most interesting new release for years, introducing a 64-bit compiler for Windows and cross-platform support for Apple’s OSX and iOS.

I have been trying the final release, paying particular attention to the iOS support, bearing in mind the importance of Apple’s mobile platform. The RAD Studio IDE only runs on Windows, so the most convenient way to target Apple’s platform is to install on a Windows virtual machine. I used a Parallels VM running Windows 7 64-bit, hosted on OS X Lion.

Setting up for iOS development with RAD Studio XE2 involves several steps. First, you have to use the new FireMonkey application framework in order to do cross-platform work. FireMonkey emerged after Embarcadero acquired the intellectual property of a company called KSDev early in 2011, along with its founder Eugene Kryukov:

KSDev’s intellectual property has been purchased by Embarcadero Technologies, the makers of Delphi and C++Builder Rapid App Development Tools. I am excited to announce that I have joined Embaracadero’s next gen frameworks team leading a very exciting project. As a result I will no longer operate the KSDev company and will not be accepting any further orders for KSDev products.

The products in question were Delphi frameworks called VGScene and DXScene, and these seem to have been melded with remarkable speed into what is now called FireMonkey. FireMonkey controls such as buttons and listboxes are all custom drawn, which is good for cross-platform consistency, but bad if you want your application to look and feel truly native. FireMonkey is not compatible with Delphi’s VCL (Visual Component Library), though the basic controls like TButton and TEdit are similar. FireMonkey applications can be either 3D, with the emphasis on Flash-like visual effects, or HD, used for more traditional user interfaces.

Support for Mac OSX is more fully integrated than for iOS. You can easily add an OSX target to a FireMonkey application, but for iOS you have to create a new application that only targets iOS. Another difference is that Embarcadero has its own Mac compiler, whereas the iOS support depends on the FreePascal open source compiler. If you are targetting OSX, you can code and debug entirely from the Delphi IDE, whereas for iOS you have to export your project and compile in Xcode.

In order to prepare for iOS development, you first need a Mac with XCode and the iOS SDK installed. Next, install RAD Studio XE2 on Windows. Then find the FireMonkey-iOS folder in the directory where RAD Studio XE2 is installed. This contains FireMonkey-iOS.dmg. Copy this to the Mac side, mount it and run the FireMonkey iOS installers to add FreePascal and the FireMonkey libraries to your XCode setup.

image

If you are also doing OSX development you will also need to install the Platform Assistant on the Mac, but for iOS this is not required.

Now you can go over to the Windows side, start a new application observing all the tasty new options, and choose a FireMonkey HD iOS application.

image

This creates a new form sized for an iPhone 4.0, though of course you can amend this. There is a tool palette which looks well-stocked with components, but note the following warning:

While you are designing your iOS application, you can only use components that are supported on iOS devices. However, the Tool Palette might contain components that are Windows-only or otherwise not supported on iOS.

That is an annoyance, and contributes to a feeling that iOS support is a little, dare I say, unfinished. Still, undaunted I built my sample app, following the path I have trodden before by creating a simple calculator.

image

You might wonder why all the buttons are green. I did, too, and played around a little trying to change it. This seems to involve creating a custom style. I started doing this, but decided it was not necessary for my simple test. It does make the point that the default appearance does not have the iOS look and feel.

There is what seems to me a small bug in the designer. If you select more than one control, the sizing tabs disappear and there is no visual evidence that the controls are selected, other than a heading in the Object Inspector that reads “n items selected.” At first I thought it was impossible to select more than one control, but this is not the case. However, there is no clipboard support in the visual designer. For example, if you want several buttons that are exactly the same, you need to add them individually, then multi-select and set the properties as needed.

While developing an iOS app, you can test it by running it on Windows within the IDE. When it is ready to test on iOS, you need to export the project. To do this, you need a command-line tool called dpr2xcode.exe, which is in the RAD Studio bin folder. Running this from the command-line is inconvenient, so the usual approach is to use Configure Tools from the Tools menu to add it to the IDE.

image

It is puzzling that Embarcadero has not included this by default.

Running the tool creates an xcode sub-folder in your project directory, with an .xcodeproj project file along with some default icons. I then copied the entire project folder to the Mac. It is also possible to use a shared folder accessed from both Windows and Mac, though I found this does not work if the folder is on the Windows side, so I simply copied it back and forth.

I opened the project in Xcode, and was prompted to “Modernize” it in Xcode jargon, to no ill effect. At this point I could successfully build it and run in the iPhone emulator.

Of course I wanted to test it on an actual device. I attached an iPhone 4 and did the Apple provisioning dance. After the usual messing around with certificates, it worked.

image

and here it is on the iPhone:

image

It works, and to that extent I am impressed. That said, I am disappointed with the performance. This is subjective, but I am talking about the responsiveness of the UI. There are perceptible pauses, which for such a simple app is surprising. I have created this same app numerous times using different development tools, and had expected that the Delphi version would be up there with the best, but while it is acceptable it is less responsive than some of the others.

Let me add though, a Delphi developer will find the process described above a easier than learning Objective C, and I was able to create this fully working app in an afternoon so I should not complain too much.

Maybe when Embarcadero comes up with its own iOS compiler there will be some improvement.

Adobe says role of Flex and Flash has changed, makes play for mobile

Adobe’s Andrew Shorten has posted on the future of Flex, the developer-oriented tool for building applications for the Flash runtime.

This is one of the clearest statements I have seen from Adobe that recognises that the role of Flash on the web is diminishing:

There are countless examples where, in the past, Flex was (rightly) selected as the only way to deliver a great user experience. Today, many of those could be built using HTML5-related technologies and delivered via the browser, and at Adobe, we will provide tooling to help designers and developers create those experiences – Edge and Muse are two such examples.

Adobe is not giving up on Flash, of course, and states that it is still the best for certain categories of application:

We firmly believe that Flex is already the best technology for building complex, high fidelity enterprise applications such as business dashboards, line of business tools, real time trading applications and desktop replacement applications.

I would add both statements are written from the perspective of application developers. The role of Flash as a video and multimedia player is a separate issue. Flash is also important in that context. There is some overlap, in that if your application includes multimedia content then Flash is correspondingly more attractive.

As an aside, it is interesting to note that this repositioning of Flash makes it not so different from Microsoft’s Silverlight: a runtime for business applications.

Adobe is focusing on a new market for Flex in mobile. This overcomes the Apple iOS problem, since you can compile a Flex application to iOS native code. Adobe promises “additional mobile development capabilities” later this year and says:

In our next major release timeframe we expect that the need to build a fully-native application will be reserved for a small number of use cases.

I agree that cross-platform mobile development is a key area and one where there is no clear winner yet. It is a good opportunity for Adobe, though there is increasing competition from the products like Appcelerator Titanium and PhoneGap.

I also think that Embarcadero’s new RAD Studio XE2 will attract interest. This tool which will be released soon does native code compilation across Windows, Mac and Apple iOS, with Android promised, using the Delphi IDE and language.

HP business breakdown and why a PC spin-off could backfire

I had a look at HP’s latest financials, following last night’s triple blast of news from the computer giant. It is ceasing webOS operations, acquiring enterprise knowledge management company Autonomy, and considering (though only considering) a spin-off or other major change to its PC division, the Personal Systems Group. Here is what HP said:

As part of the transformation, HP announced that its board of directors has authorized the exploration of strategic alternatives for the company’s Personal Systems Group. HP will consider a broad range of options that may include, among others, a full or partial separation of PSG from HP through a spin-off or other transaction. (See accompanying press release.)

Looking at the results for the second quarter 2011, here is how the main pieces break down:

$millions

Segment Percentage of revenue Earnings Percentage of total earnings
Services 9,089 28.5% 1225 33.8%
Servers, storage and networking 5396 16.9% 699 19.3%
HP Software 780 2.4% 151 4.2%
Personal systems group 9,592 30.1% 567 15.7%
Imaging and printing 6,087 19.1% 892 24.6%
Financial Services 932 2.9% 88 2.4%

Note that “Earnings” is earnings from operations; HP actually made less money than that, because various other corporate costs have to be deducted. But it gives an idea of where HP’s profit comes from.

So what do these groups do? PSG is notebooks, desktops, workstations and other, where “other” I’d guess will include the webOS mobile devices. In PSG, notebooks accounts for 54% of the total, with desktops taking 38% of the rest. Virtually all of these run Windows.

In servers, storage and networking, 61% is from what HP calls “Industry standard servers”. This is code for Windows server.

Under services, the three big businesses are Infrastructure Technology Outsourcing (42%), Technology Services (30%) and Application Services (19%). The first of these is clear-cut (have HP run your infrastructure), but the second two are both consulting services and on a brief look seem to have some overlap.

Autonomy, by the way, reported revenue of $million 247 in the three months ending June 30 2011 – pretty tiny relative to HP.

A few comments then. It’s worth noting that PSG is the biggest single segment for revenue, but not so for profit, though it is still making a useful contribution.

Imaging and Printing contributes most earnings as a proportion of revenue. I do not know how much of that comes from absurdly overpriced ink cartridges!

If you take PSG together with Industry Standard Servers, you find that around 40% of HP’s revenue comes from boxes running Windows. If you then consider what its printers, network and storage systems attach to, and that a proportion of HP’s consulting business concerns Windows systems and applications, it is obvious that HP’s fortunes are deeply entwined with Microsoft.

If HP removes PSG that will still be true, though less so. But why would HP want do remove PSG? I would guess two main reasons. One is that it is unprofitable relative to the other segments, and the other is that HP foresees the business declining under the force of various well-documented pressures: Apple, mobile, cloud.

It still makes little sense to me. I can understand why HP might want to get out of consumer desktops and laptops, but it seems to me that to supply corporate PCs fits snugly with the rest of HP’s business and has beneficial side-effects. After all, PCs, printers and servers do all plug together both physically and conceptually. Getting rid of PSG might have a negative effect on other parts of HPs business.

In the SMB market, by the way, resellers like HP because unlike Dell it does not mainly sell direct. HP boxes generally work as advertised in my experience, though I rate the laptops less highly than the servers and desktops.

HP discontinues WebOS, considers PC spin-off. Should have stuck with Microsoft

Oh yes, and buys Autonomy, a fast-growing specialist in enterprise knowledge management.

Here’s the news from HP’s announcement:

As part of the transformation, HP announced that its board of directors has authorized the exploration of strategic alternatives for the company’s Personal Systems Group. HP will consider a broad range of options that may include, among others, a full or partial separation of PSG from HP through a spin-off or other transaction. (See accompanying press release.)

HP will discontinue operations for webOS devices, specifically the TouchPad and webOS phones. The devices have not met internal milestones and financial targets. HP will continue to explore options to optimize the value of webOS software going forward.

In addition, HP announced the terms of a recommended transaction for all of the outstanding shares of Autonomy Corporation plc for £25.50 ($42.11) per share in cash.

A few quick comments. First, the failure of webOS does not surprise me. There is not much wrong with webOS as such; in pure technical terms it deserves better. Its focus on adapting web technologies for local mobile applications is far-sighted; it is a more interesting operating system than Android and in some ways it is surprising that it went to HP and not to Google, which is a web technology specialist.

The problem is that HP, despite its size, is not big enough to make a success of webOS on its own. This was my comment from just over a year ago:

Mobile platforms stand (or fall) on several pillars: hardware, software, mobile operator partners, and apps. Apple is powering ahead with all of these. Google Android is as well, and has become the obvious choice for vendors (other than HP) who want to ride the wave of a successful platform. Windows Phone 7 faces obvious challenges, but at least in theory Microsoft can make it work though integration with Windows and by offering developers a familiar set of tools, as I’ve noted here.

It is obvious that not all these platforms can succeed. If we accept that Apple and Android will occupy the top two rungs of the ladder when it comes to attracting app developers, that means HP webOS cannot do better than third; and I’d speculate that it will be some way lower down than that.

Frankly, if HP did not want to do Android, it should have stuck with Microsoft. But this is where the webOS news ties in with the announcement about he Personal Systems Group. HP fell out with Microsoft last year, as I noted in my 2010 retrospective. I said the two companies should make up; but it looks as if HP is more inclined to give up on PCs and pursue other lines that have better margins – like enterprise software.

I am puzzled though by the PSG announcement. It is always curious when a company announces that it might or might not do something, and the fact that HP says it is considering a spin-off of its PC division will be enough to makes its customers uncertain about the long-term future of HP PCs and some of them will buy elsewhere as a result. It would have paid HP either to say nothing, or to be more definite and aim for a speedy transition.

All this, on the eve of Microsoft’s detailed unveiling of Windows 8. What are the implications? More than I can put into a single post; but like Gartner’s reports of dramatically declining PC sales in Western Europe presented earlier this week, this is a sign of structural change in the industry.

Microsoft will be glad of one thing: it no longer has this major partner promoting a rival mobile and tablet operating system. Note that HP still is a major partner: even if it sells the Personal Systems Group, its server and services business will still be deeply entwined with Windows.

PhoneGap is at version 1.0

I’ve just spotted that PhoneGap has reached version 1.0. The release was announced at PhoneGap day in Portland, on Friday 29th July.

I have spent some time trying out various cross-platform mobile development tools. PhoneGap is among the most interesting and popular, and is also open source and free to use. If you believe that using the browser engine as an application runtime is the most sensible route to cross-platform mobile applications, then PhoneGap is the leading contender. It wraps your application to look like a native app, and also provides ways to call the native API when necessary.

PhoneGap received a boost when Adobe built it into Dreamweaver 5.5. I tried it out and was impressed with the design environment, but I am not sure how serious Adobe is about PhoneGap since there is no documentation on how to package your PhoneGap app for release, and my post has comments from puzzled users. My solution was to export the project to Eclipse and the standard PhoneGap tools, which misses part of the value of having it integrated into Dreamweaver.

Adobe installs PhoneGap into the Dreamweaver directory, so another issue is how to take advantage of the latest version if you are using Adobe’s tools. Overall I would suggest that using the PhoneGap SDK and Eclipse is a better option, though there is no problem with bringing in Dreamweaver for parts of the design.

I interviewed Nitobi president André Charland about PhoneGap earlier this year.

The strategy behind Mono has shifted: ten years of open source .NET

Yesterday, SUSE and Xamarin announced, in effect, the transfer of all things Mono to Xamarin.

The agreement grants Xamarin a broad, perpetual license to all intellectual property covering Mono, MonoTouch, Mono for Android and Mono Tools for Visual Studio. Xamarin will also provide technical support to SUSE customers using Mono-based products, and assume stewardship of the Mono open source community project.

Xamarin is a startup formed by Mono founder Miguel de Icaza following the acquisition of Novell and SUSE by Attachmate, which ceased Mono development.

Attachmate acquired Novell in November 2010. Mono has been plucked from the abyss with impressive speed.

That said, the strategy behind Mono has shifted. Mono exists because de Icaza liked what Microsoft announced back in 2000 when it introduced C# and the .NET Framework. Microsoft made a show of standardizing the .NET CLI (Common Language Infrastructure), which made PR sense at the time since there was controversy over Sun’s ownership of Java, though nobody really believed that Microsoft knew how to steward an open source development platform or indeed believed that it was really serious about it. History largely justifies that scepticism; but de Icaza called Microsoft’s bluff and forged ahead with Mono, implementing not only the CLI and C# but most of the .NET Framework as well.

The goal of Mono, as I recall, was to bring the benefits of C# and .NET to Linux developers, and to enable developers to move applications freely between Windows and Linux. Apple OS X was also on the radar, though it took longer to become much use. Recalling Mono’s early days, de Icaza said:

Mono to me is a means to an end: a technology to help Linux succeed on the desktop.

Mono worked remarkably well from quite early on, but never quite well enough to persuade mainstream developers it was a sensible choice for applications that would otherwise have run on Windows. It did emerge as a viable and productive toolset and platform for Linux and a number of Mono applications became popular, including Beagle search, Tomboy notes, and F-Spot photo management. Some ASP.NET applications run on Mono; I have one on this site. Another Mono success was its use as the scripting engine in Unity, a game development platform.

A big problem for Mono though was the lack of a business model. There was support and servicing of course, which must have generated some revenue for Novell, but most Mono use is free. Novell possibly had in mind that Mono could be significant as an application server, but it has never become a really trusted platform in the Enterprise. For example, as Alan Radding (Dancing Dinosaur) notes:

DancingDinosaur has not found any SUSE on z user that has successfully implemented .NET apps on the mainframe. A few have tried but reported that Mono on z wasn’t ready for prime time.

Even among the free software and open source community, Mono was hampered by suspicion of Microsoft. If Mono became successful enough to threaten Microsoft, would lawyers appear? Given the way Microsoft is currently behaving with Android, filing legal actions and signing up licensees, those fears might not be unwarranted.

So what is Mono today? The answer is that Mono is now primarily a mobile platform. The Xamarin home page makes this clear, as well as making it apparent that the Mono team has discovered the value of a business model:

image

Xamarin is tapping into two real business needs. One is the need for a cross-platform mobile development platform that works. The second is a way for Windows developers to use their existing C# skills for mobile development, given that they might not be happy with the tiny market share currently achieved by Windows Phone 7.

When I had a quick try with Monotouch I was impressed, and I would like to spend some more time with it and with Mono for Android.

Mono has touch competition though. In particular, PhoneGap, Appcelerator’s Titanium, and Adobe AIR. I was interested to see that Adobe is coming up with a packager for AIR on Android, which may significantly improve it as a cross-platform mobile toolkit.

Still, Xamarin is small and nimble and I expect it to succeed. It has also has Visual Studio integration, which is an advantage. One of the pieces Xamarin has now licensed from SUSE is Mono for Visual Studio.

The downside of these latest developments is that if you depend on Mono for the desktop or for ASP.NET, you may find these parts of the Mono project getting little attention from the new company. But Mobile is all that matters now, right?

I write this on July 19 2011. According to Wikipedia:

Recognizing that their small team could not expect to build and support a full product, they launched the Mono open source project, on July 19, 2001 at the O’Reilly conference.

Well, if there was a launch there it was low-key. It is not mentioned in this report. But de Icaza does recall:

We planned the announcement to come by July 19th 2001, so we could announce this at the O’Reilly conference, as Tim O’Reilly had been very supportive of this effort, and had offered his help since the early stages, when it was still a very young idea. When we announced the project launch we had our team in place, and we were shipping our metadata framework and our C# compiler as well as a few initial classes So officially the Mono project was launched on that date, but it had been brewing for a very long time.

Happy Anniversary!

Embarcadero promises Delphi everywhere: Mac, iOS this year, Android, Blackberry, Windows Phone to follow

I noticed the following remark from Embarcadero’s David Intersimone regarding Delphi, its application builder based on Pascal.

We are putting Delphi (and C++Builder) everywhere this year and over the next 5 years. Today you can use Delphi for Desktop, Client/Server, Multi-Tier, Cloud, Web, Web Services (REST and SOAP). This year you will also be able to build for Macintosh and iOS. Linux is also on the roadmap for the coming years along with Android, Blackberry and Windows Phone 7.

Welcome news; though Delphi enthusiasts are all too familiar with bold promises. Two years ago I interviewed Embarcadero’s CEO Wayne Williams and he promised cross-platform Delphi in 2010; but when Delphi XE appeared last year neither Mac nor 64-bit (another longstanding request) was included.

That said, I am still a big Delphi fan. Mobile is a particularly interesting prospect. I have tried numerous cross-platform mobile toolkits and they all have problems; on the other hand they are improving fast and in a couple of years things like Appcelerator’s Titanium and  Nitobi’s PhoneGap may be hard to catch.

Update: what will Delphi’s Android support look like? I would be interested to know whether Embarcadero is working on its own compiler, or whether it is partnering with RemObjects and that what Intersimone is referring to is Project Cooper:

“Cooper” is a new and exciting research project going on in the RemObjects Software Labs, to bring the Oxygene language to the Java and Android platforms. The original Oxygene for .NET set out to bring a modern and “next generation” Object Pascal to the .NET world; Project “Cooper” is taking this endeavor to the next level, expanding the reach of Oxygene to the second big managed platform.

In other words, Project Cooper will compile Delphi code to Java.

Note that Embarcadero officially adopted Oxygene and offers it as its own product called Prism. It seems plausible that the same will happen with Project Cooper. Since Windows Phone is a .NET platform, there is also potential for Oxygene/Prism to target Microsoft’s mobile platform:

Windows Phone 7 – Microsoft’s new Windows Phone 7 uses Silverlight for application development,  and did I mention Delphi Prism does Silverlight?

says Jim McKeeth at RemObjects.

What about Delphi on the Mac and on iOS? There is also a possible Oxygene/Prism route here, via MonoMac: Delphi to .NET/Mono to Mac. However, I suspect Delphi developers would be disappointed if this turned out to be Embarcadero’s approach to Mac and iOS support. Programmers choose Delphi because they like compilation to native code.

Mobile development research shows complex picture

Vision Mobile has published its report on mobile development. It is a detailed report and worth reading, though I would be wary about taking it too seriously since some of the results are puzzling. This is what the report is based on:

We spent the last few months quizzing developers and industry executives about the future of mobile. Our research included 20+ industry executives, along with 900+ developers from 75+ countries working on 8+ major platforms.

There are a few surprises. Android fragmentation is generally regarded as a problem, particularly since operators are slow or reluctant to release updates, but according to the report Android is the least fragmented platform after Apple iOS; the worst is Java ME.

Here are a couple of charts I found interesting. What kinds of apps are people paying for?

image

Source: Developer Economics 2011

It is games that dominate, but at 45% they are still less than half of the whole. Note that these stats are based on iOS sales tracked by App Annie.

In terms of monetisation, iOS is the most revenue-generating platform according to the report, and Android well down.

image

Source: Developer Economics 2011

Windows Phone is too small to make this list, but the report notes:

Windows Marketplace offers a trial version for applications, which doesn’t help developers monetise from impulse purchases – a
naive differentiation move on the part of Microsoft.

There is a fascinating section on winners and losers in the mobile platform race. There is almost no correlation between number of devices shipped and the number of apps published.

image

Source: Developer Economics 2011

Java ME is way ahead on devices shipped; but these are feature phones for a market that buys relatively few apps.

Finally, a look at the platforms developers are planning to use, and the ones that plan to abandon. Here is the first:

image

Source: Developer Economics 2011

I am not sure what to  make of this one. 621 developers were surveyed, and placed Android top, Windows Phone 2nd, Chrome OS third, and iOS level pegging with MeeGo in fourth place. I could almost believe it if it means which additional platforms, since many will already be developing for iOS. I wonder if the question was clearly put?

Next comes a chart of platforms developers are planning to abandon:

image

Source: Developer Economics 2011

Bad news for Symbian and Java ME, and also uncomfortable reading for HP with webOS and Adobe with Flash. However, only 285 respondents for this part of the survey.

There are harsh words for Adobe. The report gives several reasons why Flash is losing the battle for developer mindshare, including the abandonment of Flash Lite and the perception that “by focusing on large business partners, Adobe has been unable to cultivate momentum among developers in the long-tail.”

Microsoft is praised for its developer tools, but the decline of Windows Mobile and “lacklustre sales” for Windows Phone raise questions over whether it can create a viable market for mobile developer. The report is not always clear about when it means Windows phones of all kinds, and when it means the new Windows Phone 7+ platform.

The report shows that actual usage of Windows Mobile and Windows Phone by developers has gone down from 39% to 36% between 2010 and 2011, while Flash/Flash Lite has increased from 22% to 34%. It is rather hard to make sense of this alongside the other figures showing platform intent and abandonment intent and again it makes me wary of the report’s accuracy.

Frankly, it is hard to discern any safe bets in such a complex market, though Apple seems to be a consistent platform from a developer perspective – provide that the company does not decide to absorb the functionality of your app into iOS itself.