MS software architect: Apps don't make the phone

actually, there have always been the basic applications for mac os, and apple actually pioneered some of them. what the mac didn't have, in my experience, were the business applications, and that's where msft became dominant, was through owning the workstation market where corporations were buying in quantity and deploying industry- and company-specific apps.

as an individual mac user for about 20 years, there have been very few instances where i couldn't find an app to do what i needed to do. at times some software companies have discontinued their mac versions (i.e. intuit), but it's rare that the only option for doing something doesn't exist on the mac.

msft's old argument about quantity of apps always bugged me, too. maybe there were 50+ different ftp apps for windows, but in my experience, the three i could get on the mac were all better than the majority of the windows apps.

so my point was that even when all the mobile platforms have the basic apps available, there is a still a big gap. it's a gap in user experience *and* developer experience. if it's easier and more enjoyable to build an app in apple's dev environment, and it's easier to make it great because of things like core image, core data, etc., then you're going to get both more choices *and* better quality apps.

that is leaving aside all the other factors like itunes and hardware performance, which apple also leads in. the bottom line is that msft is not talking sense.

It is funny. Once upon a time, msoft ruled the app ecosystem by careful garden maintenance; They owned the saffron market, and were wise enough to allow (at least mostly) neat ideas to trickle up. Not that Apple doesn't play this - they've killed their share of developers, too. But nothing like the 8 digit legal settlements MS has considered a cost of doing business.

Now, they have (at least temporarily) lost the phone market, have had to play catch-up on OS after Vista (and, to be fair, 7 isn't bad), and is in a pitched battle with Google on the future of apps.

Apple keeps doing interesting things, which sucks for them - back in the day, man, one-upping a spreadsheet was easy. Apple is demonstrating what controlling hardware can do for software. Google is demonstrating what efficient operations management can do to a software company.

Monkeyboy should be sweating, I think.

I do agree with him. Apps don't make the phone.
But the point is, even before Native Third-Party Apps were available, before it had 3G network connectivity, before the CPU and GPU upgrades and optimisations…
The First Generation iPhone completely blew Windows Mobile 6.1 out-of-the-water.
An virginal iPhone 3G with no third-party apps is still more useful to the typical businessman, power-user or even low-end consumer than anything currently running Windows Mobile or Android with every single App in their respective stores.
Even without the App Store, WebApps for iPhone are almost as powerful as Palm's WebOS WebApps, and much more varied and numerous.

Yes. Apps don't make the Phone. The OS doesn't make the Phone. The Hardware doesn't make the Phone. The price (TCO) doesn't make the Phone but when you find the right combination of great hardware, great OS and great apps, at an accessible price, you have an unbeatable combination.

Cant agree, Jaak http://www.iphonesayagain.com/

hmmm. Sounds like a stretch. Isn't this the exact opposite of one of the major arguements pc people used to make (and still sometimes do) about macs versus pcs? more apps and games therefore they wanted a pc?

what's funny about these arguments is that it's a complete role reversal from traditional mac vs. pc arguments. each side is taking up the opposite stance over what the larger (or smaller) pool of available apps means for their platform of choice. very amusing.

The main reason I bought the iPhone was for the apps. My reasoning was if WinMo didn't start from the ground up, why would their devs bother creating finger-friendly innovative software?

All I have to say about this is that on an iPhone, it's pleasant to use out of the box, and can be enhanced by apps.

When I bought a Windows Mobile phone, I had to spend at least $100 on apps just to make basic tasks like opening an app, email, tasks, and calendar bearable. The vast majority of the WM apps I ever bought were to replace or place a shell over the crappy default software.

"The biggest apps, he says, will eventually be available on every platform" ... that's until one of these companies starts putting up cash for app exclusivity.

The one major thing they haven't thought about - but the consumer does very much so - is that even IF you can tweet (or whatever verb you want to insert for any given app) from any phone in the future, the problem for the consumer is that once they have purchased an app on one platform (i.e.- the iphone), are they really going to want to have to pay for that app again on another platform? They aren't free...

I've spent easily $300-$400 on apps for our 3 iphone household and that alone is a huge barrier to entry for any new phone platform in our household.

Much like MS built their empire on the desktop through the availability of apps and the investments (both $$ and work behaviors...) - think about the major reasons why people didn't/wouldn't/won't switch from a PC to a Mac and you get the idea - I believe they have allowed Apple to get so far ahead on the app/software front on the mobile platform that they only way they catch them is if Apple missteps.