I agree with all this until I get to talk with the average iPhone owner, you know, that big 80% of all buyer that make the difference between a couple thousand sales and several millions sales.

That big chunk of buyers, most of them don't even know they can install apps, and the rest don't care, or will install a couple out of a fad or something.

In any case what will re-shape the market are the OS phones are running, like it happened with PCs.

And the G1? I still have to meet someone who has one as his/her main phone…

Seriously guys, I support apps, but let's not create a bubble here.

Fortunately Apple learned its lesson and allowed developers to create apps for iPhone not limiting it to themselves to think about, develop and market apps on the platform. It is this platform effect that has made iPhone so much more valuable and this might be one reason why MSFT wont be able to catch up with Apple this time… By the time MSFT would come out with a phone, iPhone would be an established platform.

The article is not about giving anyone credit. The title of the piece is not “developers have more power” either but “applications are reshaping mobile industry competition”. In the piece I explicitly say that all that has little effect on developers trying to earn their buck – “Of course, profit-orientated mobile application companies continue to adapt their applications to run across a variety of platforms. For them, it’s about the number of users they can reach, and so the largest platforms — Symbian and Windows Mobile — still may be considered the most important.” What I see, though, is that Android's winning a lot of sympathy points in the developer community as developers start to toy around with the platform and find there is strong difference between it and other platforms, including the iPhone platform (and Windows Mobile, too). Search for some G1 developer mailing lists if you need further proof besides the links I included in the piece. If you need further info I wrote about why Android is powerful vis-a-vis the iPhone platform before: http://venturebeat.com/2008/09/10/carriers-begi...

Where's my opinion in the piece ? In the piece I predict that we will see more favourable blog coverage of Android applications in the next weeks. I also try to indicate for non-developers why that it is so. Who will benefit from all that ? We'll see.

The carrier can drive or destroy an application or a feature (esp. in the US where they wield a disproportionate amount of power), as they need to deem it necessary and beneficial to their bottom line. The form-factor (e.g. battery life, UI, etc.) limits the types of applications that can be run. So if the phone hardware is poorly built or if the carrier happens to hate your application (think about the numerous complaints about the iPhone App Store's policies — some of which are probably motivated by AT&T), your application will still suffer, regardless of the quality and openness of the underlying operating system.

While I'm not willing to bet on the iPhone as the mobile device winner of the future, I am willing to put it out there that perhaps Apple has outdone itself this time on its business model — its staked out the perfect space where its maniacal need to control every aspect of a device (carrier relation, form-factor, software) is beneficial to both users and developers.

And I also agree with you that there is a big distinction between open source and open to developers.

“Android appears to give developers more rights and, therefore, the ability to create more powerful and exciting apps than we’ve seen on other platforms”

Too many people are confusing the fact that Android is an open source OS for meaning it is completely open to developers. From the end developer standpoint there is little diference between Android and Windows Mobile. Each of these OS's are controlled by the carriers and handset providers by the time it gets into a consumers hands.

Root access IS a security issue. People will always find ways to hack everything but this doesnt mean that its a valid/valuable solution for developers to rely on when trying to get their app out there. Also there is a good chance the user is in violation of their contract by hacking their phones to be used in manner not intended by the provider.

That’s where a company like mine, Dexterra, comes in. Dexterra’s Concert is a mobile application development platform that mobilizes enterprise software to smartphones.
To us, it’s largely unimportant whether the operating system is Linux, BlackBerry, Windows Mobile or Symbian. What’s more important is that the OS supports industry standards for running software and accessing networks. Today we can mobilize an application and quickly have it running on multiple operating systems and device platforms. Don’t get me wrong, in the enterprise, applications will still drive mobility. But the decision won’t be about which phone but more about which application is purchased, as a long list of phones and operating systems will support mobilized enterprise applications.

At Dexterra we see an enterprise mobility market where enterprise software functions equally well on all devices where industry standards define the development environment. In the enterprise market, price and support will probably be the most important drivers of phone purchase decisions. But it’s equally possible that enterprises may elect to let employees make their own choices from a broad list of supported devices. In that scenario usability features that are uniquely important to the end user such as battery life, screen size, navigation, input and so on – even the ability to open garage doors –will drive smartphone choices.