So in an article mainly criticizing the historical decision of developers to release on iOS first, this guy publishes a graph showing that historically considerably more than double the money has been spent on iOS apps than Android apps. Then he calls developer's tendency to release on iOS first over that period irrational.
The article is poor. Market share? How about spending some time trying to make sense of that market share. Or trying to understand, why web usage stats don't show the same numbers the market does.
And in some countries you still can only distribute Android apps or free with no option to sell.
We’re so focused on revenue from the app store, that we ignore some facts: lots of apps support other platforms, and generate revenue on other ways. My phone has a great SalesForce CRM app on it – it’s free. But of course our company pays for the CRM! Apps also often drive revenue on other platforms. In Android apps, you can freely send users to another platform to do a transaction – how much revenue is generated that way? iOS blocks this, by the way, and insists on a 30% cut.
Other apps are ad based, and that revenue can come from any one of hundreds of ad exchanges. Again, none of that revenue is part of this graph.
If iOS didn't have apps that generate revenue in those ways you might have a point, but it does.
The question you need to answer is why you think the platform with the lower user engagement stats, lower online purchasing metrics and lower app revenue stats is likely to benefit from them more than the leader in all those other metrics.
I didn't make any point. I was merely pointing out that the article covered non-app-store revenue generation (at least a little).
I don't make apps, so I don't really care either way, though to add anecdotal evidence to the mix: where I am there seems to be a pretty even split between Android and iOS users.
OK