[Quin 2013]

Would love see a lyft app.
I hate the fact that standard taxy take a hell of a long time to arrive, vs you actually know when lyft driver will be there to pick you up.

Unfortunately lyft does not service those Windows Phone, so we're S.O.L.

I sent them an email, and I ki da hoping those of you who know about lyft will also join me and send them emails asking for an app.

[Eddie Mendoza]

Id love to have one too ahh

[Laura Knotek]

Moved to Windows Phone Apps forum.

[freshair]

Lyft and Uber is needed.

[Quin 2013]

To date, I haven't received a reply back from them. I guess they hate Windows for some weird unreasonable reason.

[Quin 2013]

This has to be the ****tiest reply ever:

Thanks for writing in! I am sorry you feel that we were dismissing the fact that you have a windows phone. At the moment, Lyft is focusing on streamlining the application on Android and iPhone operating systems. Other platforms may be introduced somewhere down the line; however, there are no immediate plans to roll out any new additions to platform.

If you are curious and want to take a ride with the pink mustache, it is more than all right to have a friend or family member request a Lyft for you!

Best,
Megan L.
Lyft Experience Representative

Help Desk -- help.lyft.com
Lyft Blog -- blog.lyft.com
Lyft Twitter -- twitter.com/lyft

[Daniel Holguin]

Really expect and need an app for Windows Phones.

[petteriusa]

I also wrote in and requested a Windows Phone version. The reply I got was the same:

Thanks for writing in! At the moment, Lyft is focusing on streamlining the application on Android and iPhone operating systems. Other platforms may be introduced somewhere down the line; however, there are no immediate plans to roll out any new additions to platform.

Keep up the pressure!

[btbam91]

Really want Lyft and/or Uber! Anybody have emails so that I can voice my concerns?

[Simba_P]

If you use Uber, you can use their website m.uber.com to request rides just fine.

[dalydose]

Are people emailing and Tweeting and Facebooking Lyft and Uber or is it just me? :) They need to KNOW and HEAR the demand.

[seita]

I contacted them about getting it for WP. Here's a little snippet of their response~

"Mostly due to engineering constraints and limited marketshare of Windows Phone. Kind of a bummer, I know. That may change if you keep evangelizing for WP though and we get enough demand."

demand demand demand!! The GF was really bummed out when she found out there was no Lyft app, so she's thinking about switching platforms after constantly being denied an app she wants. It doesn't help our cause, lets get on this!

[dalydose]

If you use Uber, you can use their website m.uber.com to request rides just fine.

Not good enough. If it was, every platform would be using the mobile site. Request the real app.

[Rakeeshj]

Are people emailing and Tweeting and Facebooking Lyft and Uber or is it just me? :) They need to KNOW and HEAR the demand.

It would probably be wiser to focus on getting demand for Windows Phone up first. When you face a chicken and egg problem like this, it only makes sense to have more eggs so they can mature. Android users faced the same problem and it wasn't resolved until it saw massive adoption, which Windows Phone hasn't seen yet (it grew quickly a year ago but has been stagnant for a while.)

Alternatively you push developers towards a platform that after supporting they find that the demand was more noise than substance, and after having a bad taste in their mouth they never look at the platform again.

[dalydose]

It would probably be wiser to focus on getting demand for Windows Phone up first. When you face a chicken and egg problem like this, it only makes sense to have more eggs so they can mature. Android users faced the same problem and it wasn't resolved until it saw massive adoption, which Windows Phone hasn't seen yet (it grew quickly a year ago but has been stagnant for a while.)

Alternatively you push developers towards a platform that after supporting they find that the demand was more noise than substance, and after having a bad taste in their mouth they never look at the platform again.

I disagree. I remember Mac users doing the same thing and their market share is still significantly below Windows. Developers make plenty of money on Mac. Regardless of market share percentage, they're are still millions on Windows phone users and it is easier to reach a higher percentage of that pool. There is profit to be made. If not, we would have no apps at all.

The problem with your analysis is that the eggs aren't coming without the chickens. I have had ridiculous conversations with people interested in Nokia camera technology, buy they were convinced that there were no apps on the platform. One person was even under the impression that Windows phone didn't even have ships available and that it was a fancy feature phone. No, lobbying seems the more prudent approach, to me.

Wouldn't the "bad taste" you speak of pertain to users too? What is they come over here and can't get a ride like they can on Android and iPhone??

[Rakeeshj]

I disagree. I remember Mac users doing the same thing and their market share is still significantly below Windows. Developers make plenty of money on Mac. Regardless of market share percentage, they're are still millions on Windows phone users and it is easier to reach a higher percentage of that pool. There is profit to be made. If not, we would have no apps at all.

That's not really an apple's to apple's comparison (no pun intended.) It's all about the user demographic. Apple users tend to be very "spendy," i.e. they're the most likely of most tech demographics to actually pay money towards anything that their applications do. Whether that comes in the form of paying for the apps themselves, or shopping the most (notably, in spite of Apple's comparatively small market share to Android, they still spend more via their phones, and not necessarily even on anything related to the phone itself.)

Windows Phone, good or bad, does not offer that. In fact most of those "millions" you speak of actually buy low end Windows Phones, and barely spend anything on the apps, let alone the services. Furthermore, Lyft is a US company that operates in the US. Most of these "millions" of Windows Phone users you speak of are in developing countries and wouldn't use Lyft's services. Lyft is talking about expanding internationally, but I don't think any of the markets they're expanding into are popular markets for Windows Phone.

But, don't take my word for it. http://news.yahoo.com/windows-phone-...213021720.html

This is the only driver in why, for example, in spite of Apple not being anywhere close to the top in market share (that is, they're a distant second) they still get market exclusives without the need for Apple to pay off the developer to stay exclusive.

I have had ridiculous conversations with people interested in Nokia camera technology, buy they were convinced that there were no apps on the platform. One person was even under the impression that Windows phone didn't even have ships available and that it was a fancy feature phone. No, lobbying seems the more prudent approach, to me.

That really depends on what their intended use for the phone is. It ultimately isn't about the number of apps available (Google and Apple stopped counting apps a long time ago for this reason; countless apps duplicate the functionality of one another so badly that it's just utterly pointless.) Windows Phone suffers from another problem entirely that I'll get to in a minute, but it begins with this: What matters is whether YOUR apps are available. Musicians can pretty much forget about Windows Phone, as even a Microsoft developer once pointed out:

Low-latency audio on Windows Phone 8 (hint: forget it for now...)

If you're a network engineer like I am and you need apps to help troubleshoot networks, you can forget about it as well:

http://forums.windowscentral.com/win...sible-wp8.html

That, and apps like Fing, aren't even possible on Windows Phone. Windows Phone also has nothing in the way of native printing and scanning capabilities, and a ton of other issues related to missing functionality, which stem from this:

The biggest problem Windows Phone suffers from is its limited UI back end. Basically, if Microsoft hasn't already thought of the use case, then the app developer can't implement it. Android and iOS don't really have this limitation however. Go browse the Windows Phone app store and look for technical applications (as in apps that do more than provide information) that are ports/clones of applications from iOS or Android. A ton of them don't have feature parity, and the reason stated is typically "windows phone doesn't support this feature" rather than something to the effect of the developer is being too lazy to add it (which is a common accusation I see around here.)

Wouldn't the "bad taste" you speak of pertain to users too? What is they come over here and can't get a ride like they can on Android and iPhone??

What I mean by this is that you can't have the attitude that Windows Phone is for everybody, have them try it, and then complain that the whole platform sucks when they find out it isn't for them, just like your friend with the app complaint did. In fact really no platform is for everybody. I am mostly an Android user because I'm very much a power user (which mainly has to do with what I described earlier) and my Android can do a lot of things iDevices can't.

However the reverse is also true as my iDevices can do certain things with apps that by their nature have to make very rigid assumptions about the microphone and camera (which isn't at all practical on Android and Windows Phone because both of them are made by various OEMs. It doesn't matter how good of a quality the mic or camera is, rather in certain cases its necessary to know the EXACT specifications and quirks that APIs don't typically make available.)

I'm not quite sure what Windows Phone's niche is, maybe cameras, but I think that would only apply if you own a Nokia brand phone.

[dalydose]

@Rakeeshj - You type a lot, but ignore the basic facts. You have an Android, so I'm not sure why this topic even interests you except that it has given you a platform to air what you believe to be Windows Phone shortcomings.

My example was, in fact, a perfect "apples to apples" response to your original point about market share. The Mac computers have always had low market share and they used to not get any new programs. When you went to forums, Mac people always said "what about Mac?". They displayed their demand. Today we have a fledgling operating system called Windows Phone which by your previous response, you have no use for, thus I'm assuming that you've never used. They have similar market share as Mac had in the computer realm. We need to display our demand for apps and such. Contrary to your belief, Windows Phone users DO spend. You like links...read this one: Evernote sees Windows Phone users spending more on average than Android users do. Again, that's not really the point. People, regardless of phone choice require transportation. I know that Lyft has lost hundreds of dollars of business from me alone. What does an app port cost these days? A few thousand. If your economics educated like I am, you know that ROI (return on investment) isn't that far off in this scenario.

You are dragging the conversation all over the place and I'm not going to get into what the camera access is or the relevance of a app called Fing is. This is about Lyft and thus other consumer applications. There is no technical barrier to that prevents Lyft from being a viable app in the Windows Phone Store. The only barrier is that they don't realize the demand. Period.

I don't have time to respond to each and every one of your off-topic points, so I'm going to end it here.

[digity]

I forgot where I read this, but there was a developer who successfully performed and completed a lyft (request to rating) by hacking together a Lyft API (or something). He did this because he had an Android and Lyft hadn't released an Android app at the time. Maybe someone can follow his steps for Windows Phone.

[Rakeeshj]

@Rakeeshj - You type a lot, but ignore the basic facts. You have an Android, so I'm not sure why this topic even interests you except that it has given you a platform to air what you believe to be Windows Phone shortcomings.

I work in the IT field, it is somewhat my business to be familiar with as many platforms as possible. I own at least one device of the current top 3 mobile platforms. I will also admit I am perhaps the least impressed by Microsoft over the last two years (but prior to that they were doing quite good.)

My example was, in fact, a perfect "apples to apples" response to your original point about market share. The Mac computers have always had low market share and they used to not get any new programs. When you went to forums, Mac people always said "what about Mac?". They displayed their demand. Today we have a fledgling operating system called Windows Phone which by your previous response, you have no use for, thus I'm assuming that you've never used.

And you assume wrong. The reason why I have little use for it is due to its inherent limitations, as I outlined earlier. Quite simply, there are many things that no matter how much an app developer was interested in doing, they absolutely cannot accomplish it. Don't take my word for it, read this very forum via the links I posted. This is why it isn't an apples to apples comparison. On the mac, at least if somebody wanted to do it...they could...but on WP very often they simply cannot.

It is not my daily driver primarily because it is simply incapable of doing what I need it to do.

Contrary to your belief, Windows Phone users DO spend. You like links...read this one: Evernote sees Windows Phone users spending more on average than Android users do.

That may be the case in that particular anecdote, but it is not the case across the ecosystem as a whole.

Again, that's not really the point. People, regardless of phone choice require transportation. I know that Lyft has lost hundreds of dollars of business from me alone. What does an app port cost these days? A few thousand. If your economics educated like I am, you know that ROI (return on investment) isn't that far off in this scenario.

I'm not going to get into my educational background, but I will say this: What people say, compared to what they do, is two different things. I can think of many examples of where I could demonstrate this, but the easiest to compare example is this one: I remember during the noughties, Linux users frequently made demands about bringing more applications to their platforms, insisting that they would spend if they came. They did come, many times in fact, but there were no buying customers. Customers like yourself who insisted that they would pay were either far too few in between most of the actual users who would not, or else they claimed they would pay, and very LOUDLY, but they never actually ended up doing so.

Besides, porting the application is only part of the equation (and some apps cost a LOT more than that to port.) You'll also need a support team dedicated to the other platform, its maintenance, and other issues related to it. That is an ongoing cost that must be justified by the spending habits of the ongoing users. Otherwise you'll see your brand image tarnished when one group of customers who speaks loudly (as you claim they should) is then speaking loudly about why you aren't supporting them.

You are dragging the conversation all over the place and I'm not going to get into what the camera access is or the relevance of a app called Fing is. This is about Lyft and thus other consumer applications. There is no technical barrier to that prevents Lyft from being a viable app in the Windows Phone Store. The only barrier is that they don't realize the demand. Period.

It was an answer to your point about the person who complained about there being no apps available, and I'm demonstrating how important it is for YOUR applications to be available rather than a simple number on a spreadsheet about available apps being "relatively" high.

[MikeSo]

Excellent points, Rakeeshj. Especially about spending on apps - how many times do we see people here ***** about the apps costing $0.99 cents or $1.99, and that they refuse to get them unless they are free? Hell, I buy apps all the time just to support the ecosystem. I could buy an app a day for a year and it would cost less than my phone, but for the future of the ecosystem it would be more important than me getting a new phone.

The truth is that WP will never succeed unless there are apps. And owners of WP have shown themselves reluctant to buy apps. Unless you niche your app to WP only and can become a big fish in a small pond, there seems to be little reason to develop apps for WP. And as someone that is on my third WP phone and really like it, and hate Google and find iOS to be crap... that saddens me.

[dalydose]

I work in the IT field, it is somewhat my business to be familiar with as many platforms as possible. I own at least one device of the current top 3 mobile platforms. I will also admit I am perhaps the least impressed by Microsoft over the last two years (but prior to that they were doing quite good.)



And you assume wrong. The reason why I have little use for it is due to its inherent limitations, as I outlined earlier. Quite simply, there are many things that no matter how much an app developer was interested in doing, they absolutely cannot accomplish it. Don't take my word for it, read this very forum via the links I posted. This is why it isn't an apples to apples comparison. On the mac, at least if somebody wanted to do it...they could...but on WP very often they simply cannot.

It is not my daily driver primarily because it is simply incapable of doing what I need it to do.



That may be the case in that particular anecdote, but it is not the case across the ecosystem as a whole.



I'm not going to get into my educational background, but I will say this: What people say, compared to what they do, is two different things. I can think of many examples of where I could demonstrate this, but the easiest to compare example is this one: I remember during the noughties, Linux users frequently made demands about bringing more applications to their platforms, insisting that they would spend if they came. They did come, many times in fact, but there were no buying customers. Customers like yourself who insisted that they would pay were either far too few in between most of the actual users who would not, or else they claimed they would pay, and very LOUDLY, but they never actually ended up doing so.

Besides, porting the application is only part of the equation (and some apps cost a LOT more than that to port.) You'll also need a support team dedicated to the other platform, its maintenance, and other issues related to it. That is an ongoing cost that must be justified by the spending habits of the ongoing users. Otherwise you'll see your brand image tarnished when one group of customers who speaks loudly (as you claim they should) is then speaking loudly about why you aren't supporting them.



It was an answer to your point about the person who complained about there being no apps available, and I'm demonstrating how important it is for YOUR applications to be available rather than a simple number on a spreadsheet about available apps being "relatively" high.

Again you type a LOT and drag the conversation to all of your personal beefs with the platform. THIS thread is about the Lyft app. There is NO technical barrier in the platform preventing them from building the app. There is no "app fee" to worry about. The people who already take cabs would gladly shift their spending to this model.

For the record, I have been in IT and technology consulting and I'm sure my education compares nicely with yours. I also have post-graduate work in entrepreneurship and have been in business. I have a nice combo perspective combining business acumen and tech savvy. Let's not get into a ******* match about credentials and just discuss the topic at hand, please.

As for your perspective about the chicken and egg dilemma and how it pertains to Windows Phone, I think your Linux comparison is off base. Linux never had a singular code base for anyone to optimize for. There were/are so many builds and distros that it is impossible to code for "Linux". Also, that crowd is notorious for going the freebie route. I think Windows Phone also has a vocal contingent that feel entitled to have things "free", but as a customer base, I think we spend as freely as any other comparative group. Evernote noticed it...

Evernote sees Windows Phone users spending more on average than Android users do

I don't have time to search for other examples or raw data, because it is not the point. The developers for these services are clear in that they don't know about demand. My ORIGINAL point before you got on your anti-Windows Phone soapbox, was that we have an opportunity to tell them that we are out here and would use their services. I'm specifically speaking about Lyft...the POINT of this thread. You've gone off on network monitoring apps and other things that have zero to do with the topic, but for Lyft, it can be easily done and should be easily done and the owners of Windows Phone that would use their service can make their voices heard. It doesn't matter that YOU don't think the platform is worthy. You are free to think that and please, don't feel compelled to participate. That does not mean that I won't counter that negative voice.

[dalydose]

Excellent points, Rakeeshj. Especially about spending on apps - how many times do we see people here ***** about the apps costing $0.99 cents or $1.99, and that they refuse to get them unless they are free? Hell, I buy apps all the time just to support the ecosystem. I could buy an app a day for a year and it would cost less than my phone, but for the future of the ecosystem it would be more important than me getting a new phone.

The truth is that WP will never succeed unless there are apps. And owners of WP have shown themselves reluctant to buy apps. Unless you niche your app to WP only and can become a big fish in a small pond, there seems to be little reason to develop apps for WP. And as someone that is on my third WP phone and really like it, and hate Google and find iOS to be crap... that saddens me.

Don't confuse the vocal morons with the userbase at large:

Windows Phone users are more willing to pay for apps compared to those on Android | WinBeta

Besides, this app, Lyft, isn't about spending money on the app, but rather getting people to shift their spending habit away from cabs and toward their service. This is a way to redirect what someone is ALREADY spending in a more convenient and cost saving manner.

[Rakeeshj]

Again you type a LOT and drag the conversation to all of your personal beefs with the platform. THIS thread is about the Lyft app. There is NO technical barrier in the platform preventing them from building the app. There is no "app fee" to worry about. The people who already take cabs would gladly shift their spending to this model.

You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I didn't make any inferences about there being a technical barrier for Lyft (although there is a marginal cost increase for WP.)

As for your perspective about the chicken and egg dilemma and how it pertains to Windows Phone, I think your Linux comparison is off base. Linux never had a singular code base for anyone to optimize for. There were/are so many builds and distros that it is impossible to code for "Linux". Also, that crowd is notorious for going the freebie route. I think Windows Phone also has a vocal contingent that feel entitled to have things "free", but as a customer base, I think we spend as freely as any other comparative group. Evernote noticed it...

This is incorrect on both counts. With Linux, beyond the kernel you largely have a combination of X11 combined with GTK or QT. If anything is missing, it is generally easy to either add it or statically compile it. Windows has the same problem (perhaps worse in some respects because it cannot be statically compiled in many cases due to license restrictions) when it comes to this, namely all of the different frameworks involved (the base system doesn't always include directx, vc, vb, .net, and all of the different years and service packs of each of those, many of which can be mutually exclusive.) Developers usually work around this problem by including redistributable packages, but I've had plenty of cases where they can't install correctly, and since static linking isn't an option in many cases, you're left with a pretty hefty support burden.

Linux users also have higher spending habits in that area.

Humble Bundle shows Windows gamers are cheap, Linux users aren't - TechSpot

Also you already linked evernote.

I don't have time to search for other examples or raw data, because it is not the point. The developers for these services are clear in that they don't know about demand. My ORIGINAL point before you got on your anti-Windows Phone soapbox, was that we have an opportunity to tell them that we are out here and would use their services. I'm specifically speaking about Lyft...the POINT of this thread.

All I'm doing here is offering you food for thought about bringing a developer and then keeping that developer. Simply speaking loudly isn't going to work. I've already seen the result of that more than once.

[dalydose]

You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I didn't make any inferences about there being a technical barrier for Lyft (although there is a marginal cost increase for WP.)



This is incorrect on both counts. With Linux, beyond the kernel you largely have a combination of X11 combined with GTK or QT. If anything is missing, it is generally easy to either add it or statically compile it. Windows has the same problem (perhaps worse in some respects because it cannot be statically compiled in many cases due to license restrictions) when it comes to this, namely all of the different frameworks involved (the base system doesn't always include directx, vc, vb, .net, and all of the different years and service packs of each of those, many of which can be mutually exclusive.) Developers usually work around this problem by including redistributable packages, but I've had plenty of cases where they can't install correctly, and since static linking isn't an option in many cases, you're left with a pretty hefty support burden.

Linux users also have higher spending habits in that area.

Humble Bundle shows Windows gamers are cheap, Linux users aren't - TechSpot

Also you already linked evernote.



All I'm doing here is offering you food for thought about bringing a developer and then keeping that developer. Simply speaking loudly isn't going to work. I've already seen the result of that more than once.

None of that matters. The chicken and the egg thing for what the masses want is more important. The masses are using transportation services. Windows phone users would also use them. Therefore, if we let THIS developer know that there is demand for their product, everyone in this scenario wins. Then we lose a barrier of entry for more users.

I'm not sure why you are against that? Under your thinking, no developer should ever develop for the platform and then there will be no users. You are advocating for the failure of the platform. If you hate the platform so much, why bother coming to comment. These failure advocating posts in this thread are your only posted on the site, which makes me additionally suspicious of your intent. suspect

[Rakeeshj]

I'm not sure why you are against that? Under your thinking, no developer should ever develop for the platform and then there will be no users. You are advocating for the failure of the platform. If you hate the platform so much, why bother coming to comment. These failure advocating posts in this thread are your only posted on the site, which makes me additionally suspicious of your intent. suspect

I think you're reading into my posts for content that isn't there. (Reminds me of a south park episode where the masses read between the lines in allegories that the writer never intended.)