Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Mar 2012 21:01 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Because I've been spending days browsing through XDA, reading CM changelogs, and flashing nightly builds, I'm still in an Android state of mind, so excuse me for more talk on the subject. An interesting study has been performed which found that advertisements in Android applications are a huge battery drain - they account for up to 75% of an application's battery usage.
E-mail Print r 1   · Read More · 55 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 511275
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thorny situation
by Moredhas on Tue 20th Mar 2012 21:43 UTC
Member since:

If a paid version also offers more features over an ad-supported version, I will normally go with the paid version of an app, but I find it hard to justify the couple of dollars when I can get the same for free, unless the app proves to be something I use every day, and not so buggy as to render it more a chore to use (I'm looking at you, IM+!). If it's just a matter of battery life, then I'm willing to take the hit to power use. If those same ad supported apps start infecting me with malware, this shows a complete lack of respect for the user, and I don't see why I should give the developer any respect, in return.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Thorny situation
by WorknMan on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:16 in reply to "Thorny situation"
WorknMan Member since:

but I find it hard to justify the couple of dollars when I can get the same for free ... If it's just a matter of battery life, then I'm willing to take the hit to power use.

It amazes me that people would rather put up with the ads and battery drain than to pay the pittance that developers are asking in return for building these phone apps. And we're not even talking about $40 apps here, as most of them are less than 3 bucks. People are so f**king cheap these days. No wonder most of our electronics are cheap, Chinese crap that breaks down in a year or two.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Thorny situation
by gus3 on Tue 20th Mar 2012 22:53 in reply to "RE: Thorny situation"
gus3 Member since:

I won't argue the point about being cheap, at least for myself, but I can reduce it to something that's a little less insulting:

If one spends N quatloos to get rid of the ads in an app, does that mean one will save at least N quatloos on the electric bill?

(Bandwidth isn't a concern for me; I'm one of the lucky ones on a flat data rate.)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Thorny situation
by bouhko on Wed 21st Mar 2012 10:03 in reply to "RE: Thorny situation"
bouhko Member since:

It's even more amazing if you put the price of apps in perspective. Most (android) apps/games are 1-3$. It's the price of a coffee and yet a lot of people aren't willing to pay even if they use the app a lot.

The ad-supported business model has created a "software should be free (as in beer)" environment. Because of this, software vendors need to find new ways to monetize their software which are :
a) more ads
b) user data analysis

I think it's kind of sad. I would be the first one to pay a monthly fee to remove ads (and personal data mining) from Google and their services.

My hope is that the advance of easy micro-payment will allow for more services to propose ads removal for a small fee. The Android market is a good step in this direction because it's usually very easy to buy the full version without having to enter credit card information each time. (This raise some security concerns as well though)

Reply Parent Score: 2