WACky App Development

Hello again from cyberspace!


Today's post is dedicated to a case study on the differences in creating apps for the iOS and Android operating systems. Sorry kiddies - no link to the article this time. This is a pay-to-play study downloaded from the Harvard Business Library, so you'll just have to take my word for it. Don't worry - this post will summarize and analyze the points made in the article. Please note that the case is fictional and for instructional purposes only.


The case study tells the story of Sonnja Huot, the director of online services development team for Thorsen Bank, as she and her team embark on developing a mobile banking app. The big question facing Sonnja is "Do we develop this app for Android or iOS?".  Much like the Betamax vs VHS wars of the 1980's, we are seeing a similar format war between Apple's iOS and Google's Android mobile operating systems.


While other mobile developers like Windows, RiM, and Nokia all have mobile platforms, Sonnja's decision between iOS and Android is based on long-term potential for the app. Each has its own challenges and opportunities that need to be weighed carefully, and advantages and disadvantages of developing for each platform are outlined below.

The Apple Path

 

From a marketing and customer perspective, iOS is more attractive because the user base is younger and wealthier, and iPhone users intend to continue purchasing Apple products. In addition to that, a third of all mobile phone users wanted their next phone to be a iPhone, and the iTunes store leads other app markets which makes it an attractive place to sell third-party apps.


However, developing for iOS can be a double-edged sword, as Apple reviews the code for each app and either approves or denies the app for sale in the iTunes store. Apple also retains the right to remove apps already on their store at their discretion. There are several examples of Apple butting heads with other companies over their review process, like the dispute with Adobe over placing Flash on iOS. While the Adobe example is not an everyday occurrence, this remains a risk to placing an app on iTunes. It can also be difficult to set a launch time since Apple offers no 'pre-approval' process for apps, and a company cannot predict whether their app will 'cut the mustard'. Fortunately, Thorsen Bank is not without recourse, and there are several things they can do to help expedite the app approval process, including:

Submit simple, bug-free code

This sounds easy, but giving the apple development team less to review and reject will help get the app to market faster.

 

Play by the rules

It will also help to familiarize the team with Apple's licensing requirements. Keeping the app compliant with Apple's rules will give the reviewers less reason to reject the app.

 

Request Expedited Review

According to Apple, developers can request expedited reviews for approval, but Apple notes that there is no guarantee that the requests will be granted.

Based on the pros and cons, iOS is not the clear-cut winner. The 'cool' factor of having an iPhone app shouldn't be underestimated, both in terms of market perception as well as winning younger, wealthier clients. On the other hand, your app's existence is reliant on the whims of Apple, and Thorsen Bank will be left with little recourse if met with app store challenges.

The Android Path

 

On the other hand, Sonnja could develop the app for the Android operating system. Android exists on the opposite end of the app development spectrum from Apple in many ways. Android runs on no less than 60 different devices, some of which are not even phones. The Android marketplace has none of the rigors that the iTunes store has. In fact, unless your app is causing problems, it is likely that Google will never see the code in your app. This can make a definitive release date possible by putting Thorsen Bank back in the driver's seat.


But the same diversity that frees an Android developer from the hoops set up by Apple are also the biggest challenge in making an Android app. With so many different versions of the operating system, different devices with different screen sizes, proprietary changes made by companies and wireless service providers, just releasing an update could be an even bigger endeavor than the initial release. In fact, this fragmentation is one of the biggest hurdles facing Android in the not-so-distant future. Just maintaining the app across all supported devices and operating systems may become a full-time job of the department, rather than upgrading and improving the product.


Then there is the lack of app security review for the Android marketplace. Being in the banking industry, Thorsen is held to a higher standard of security for their software, and Android devices are a more likely target for security breaches. In fact, a recent study shows that nearly 1/4 of all Android apps are a security risk. A toxic combination of apps on one user's phone may be enough to bring about a media smear campaign that could ruin Throsen's reputation. Apple is the clear winner in this arena with their rigorous review process, but that doesn't mean that Apple is immune to security threats. However, any blame for a breach in security could be aimed at the gatekeepers rather than the victims.


Again, we don't have a clear-cut victor. Android offers a chance to put your app on a huge number of devices, is programmed in the near-universal Java code, and there are no hurdles to releasing the app on schedule. However, the number of devices and versions of operating systems can make maintaining an app, much less releasing updates, a staggering proposition.



Finally, there is the business question behind all of the tech-talk: will this app create profit for Thorsen? The article proposes that Sonnja has a game-changing idea for the app which can set Thorsen Bank apart from the competition, regardless of the platform for which it is released. But just the idea is not enough to securely place Thorsen at the top of the pyramid, as the competition won't give up and go home. They must continue to innovate to keep their app in ahead of the competition, or risk their hard fought position in the market. Other companies have fallen into this trap, most notably (and topically) RiM, which failed to address the iPhone threat in time. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, RiM was a victim of its own hubris:

"According to interviews with more than a dozen former RIM executives and industry executives who worked closely with the company, it was a blinding confidence in the basic BlackBerry product that was at the root of RIM's current troubles." 

To say that RiM was brought down only by ignoring outside threats most certainly oversimplifies the situation, but the point remains that first place is not only won - it must also be maintained.