Since my first post and foray into the world of Museums and Android, there has been considerable interest, and no doubt my tag-team efforts with Mister Museums2go, Charles Outhier, are going to generate further interest and shed more light on the whole ‘scenario’.

A Recap on the App Gap

So in response to my initial article, Charles made the following points:

• 5 times as many iPhone apps as for Android
• 15 like for like, and 3 on Android not on iPhone
• No bias, just reflection of ‘serious’ impediments
• Obstacles to potential revenue streams
• Obstacles to development
• Lack of parity in installed user base, even for very popular apps
• Real questions regarding preparedness to devote time/resources to Android

Charles of course re-iterates a number of times, that he has no vested interest in pushing any single OS over another, and that there is no agenda other than to understand the hurdles to accessibility on the burgeoning smartphone platform, and I of course would like to enforce the same perspective. So how about a response? Is it even possible to come back?

My Response

There’s no doubt there are clear and present issues in both the supply and the demand for the Android apps from museums. As Seb Chan of the Powerhouse Museum clearly pointed out in the comments to Charles’ reply, when you look at the dominant mobile OS in the visitor analytics to their website, it is overwhelmingly iOS;  and with the previously outlined hurdles that Android Market places on app developers supplying to it, why else would one want to bother developing for any other platform than iOS?

The Chicken or the Egg?

The Android market share stats continue to clearly still speak for themselves, Visualized: US smartphone market share, as do those regarding museum apps, but I still keep coming back to the same question, why, if there is an audience, if not a willing audience, do the numbers not stack up, and perhaps more importantly, who should lead the way? Whose obligation is it? A point alluded to by Stéphane Bezombes in his comment on my original post.

My perception was always that museums should lead the way, and that, rather than merely pandering to the majority of demand, they should, with available resources, optimise for universal access.  The idea of leading the way is nothing more than community outreach, if indeed anyone using a museum app can be considered part of the audience and a museums community.  This device agnostic & universal access approach, brings a traditional approach to a whole new paradigm. Blog posts such as Jasper Visser’s Guidelines for Mobile and Heritage provide outline for this technological concept, one where the product trumps the technology and where the experience is universal.

Given that Engadget’s stats, as linked above, pointing to Android meeting a younger market, this would behoove cultural institutions to be more proactive in reaching out to an audience less connected with the world of culture, as defined by the museum space.  Is it not the role and goal of museums and institutions to create demand in areas where it doesn’t exist?  Maybe, as a casual onlooker, my view is miss-guided, but it seems like missed opportunities.

Create More App for Less

As mentioned repeatedly, the mobile platform is more than just iOS and of course it is also more than simply an installed application base. Given Apple’s shouting from the ramparts regarding HTML5 and associated technologies, and the barriers to entry when it comes to application development, I still don’t quite understand the real desire and “apparent need” to develop for a singular platform.

If I demonstrated that you could develop a cross-platform “application” at an Nth of the cost of an iPhone app, with the ability to monetize it both online, and via Apple’s App Store and Android Market why wouldn’t you say yes?  If monetisation is key to your objective, and it can clearly be achieved, then where is the block, besides the lack of funding for development?

Who Is Doing What?

With all this talk, seemingly bashing museums for their anti-Android stance you would be forgiven for thinking that cultural institutions are doing little, but blog posts, and released web apps out there prove otherwise:

• Going Mobile – The IMA’s web app developed for ‘webkit’ enabled smartphones.
• A follow up with 5 reasons why you should use IMA’s open-source TAP mobile platform.
• The Dusable is Mobile – African American history in the palm of most hands.
• Brooklyn Museum Website on Mobile – Taking the BM website offline.

There are of course countless others, some of which I have documented in the past, from Ted Forbes work at Dallas Museum of Art and others at the Walker Art Center.  Feel free to let me know if you want to be added to this list!

Where To Next?

As I mentioned in my previous article, and will reiterate here.  I think the future is outside of the canister that is a single operating system.  The tools exist to help drive that, and the discussion is most certainly going on.  It is only a matter of time before we see serious in-roads taken into the device agnostic, universal access approach, and I look forward to seeing the net result.

According the figures released this February (2011) by Gartner, Google Android OS retains 22.7% of the mobile OS market share worldwide whilst Apple’s iOS retains only some 15.7%.  As a result, and given the existing clamour to develop for iOS, you would imagine that cultural institutions and their developers might have rushed in to mine the pot of gold at the end of yet another rainbow, but alas no. When searching for museums’ official mobile apps for Android you find that they are barely scratching at the surface.

In fact, in the last few days I have had visitors to this blog looking for such terms as “Why museums prefer iPhone for developing mobile apps“.  And so it seems clear, not just to me, that the current state of Android in our cultural institution’s repertoires, is more than  a little lacking. So where do the problems lie, and how can we ensure this rather large omission on the part of institutions is plugged?

So why are there so few museum apps for Android?

Most obviously, the first part of the problem is that the iPhone and iPad have been tech industry game changers.  They break ground first and won the hearts and minds of people.  Clearly they don’t rule the marketplace, but most importantly they are the devices that dominate with the individuals and professionals that count in cultural institutions.

The old adage that, Apple Macs are for those in the creative space, is coming to bite the rest of the world in the arse.  That’s to say that it is those very content producers and providers that are now buying in to the iOS and its related devices.  Further more, once they that tied themselves into that device, both physically and mentally, the advantage to Apple, if not the rest of the world, is that they keep upgrading to the latest and greatest every year or more, so the grip on the audience is never lost.

IOS has been out a while now, and no doubt many an institution has toyed with the idea of a developing an app, thus it is probably clear to any or all of them, that there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  A recent, and rather succinct blog post over at Audio Connexus, Debunking the Myths …, points this out well and compels institutions to aim for loftier goals in their development of apps.

With finite resources, hefty costs, and impending cuts to finances, it’s clear that there are more effective and rewarding means by which to build audiences and possibly drive new revenue streams.  Obviously the initial foray into app development has put the skids on future development, which, with Android being late to the party, means it has ultimately been the loser in this equation.

As I have pointed out in the past, in my blog post about app versus web app, the benefits of mobile web development, that of being cheaper and more accessible, are also likely driving resources away from app development in favor of a perceived higher ground of delivery of services and products.

High profile projects like Google’s Art Project, despite being blind for iPad and iPhone users, due to its use of flash, bring more visibility to museums, as does social media, bring them new audiences while they sleep.  They can continue to create buzz forever more, whilst apps cannot necessarily achieve the same results.  Just looking at the reviews and install apps on the Android Market is enough to make any museum professional weep!

In reality, the problem isn’t necessarily just the actual development of these apps, and the associated barriers to entry, but the issues of making them useful, making them “pay”, and ultimately, actually making them interesting and relevant in the context of the institution’s space to end users, and Android has lost out in the initial ‘hit’.  Countless articles abound on the topic from the likes of the New York Times to this one on the Boca Raton Museum of Art blog, Pros and Cons of Smartphone Apps in the Museum.

Improving User Experience Without Much Effort?

From what I can see, cultural professionals are already heading off the potential revolt of wayward consumers, by collaborating to create standards that add a layer of simplicity to the development of apps and tours.  So it is certainly not for a lack of trying, developing TourML and frequent conferences and industry get-togethers on the topic of #mtogo.

Recent changes in perception of HTML and the availability of new development tools and frameworks will only help to bridge the gaps.  Just yesterday Apple was lauding a PhoneGap/Sencha developed app Just One More as ‘New and Noteworthy’.  This kind of “App” development makes it easy to roll out applications to multiple operating systems with a single code base, so long as Apple and others do not restrict this kind of development in their terms of service, as they did with the Flash/CS5 wrapper for iOS apps. So the future definitely looks brighter in this respect.

But above and beyond this?  How can institutions improve the experience of their end users, even if they do not wish to develop any form of app?

Even if, as an institution, you decide not to develop for multiple operating systems or devices, then you need to communicate that.  Having spent time looking around, few museum web sites include pages that outline their app offerings.  As an end user this is frustrating.  Institutions need to own that search space, even if it means creating a page that says “Sorry! We do not offer any android apps.”  At least then, when searching for a phrase such as Tate Android App one will be provided with more relevant information, rather than being faced with a barrage of data on a multiplicity of websites that do nothing more than simply aggregate data about apps.

Better Times Ahead?

Personally I feel like the options are opening up, understanding is broadening, and the accessibility, both in terms of mobile browsing of institution websites and the homogeny of apps across multiple devices is getting closer on the horizon.  Things will never be perfect, and adoption rates will vary over time, but, most importantly, things are heading in the right direction, and in the mean time we can carry on playing Angry Birds!