Only if you're working from the theory that a lower cut would've translated to lower prices, and users aren't buying Android software because prices are too high.
As users generally don't even think about, let alone make buying decisions about, who's getting what cut of the $2 price of a video game or the $7 price of some ebook, I don't think it would have mattered.
You don't think Google taking a lower cut on the Market wouldn't incentivize more of the successful iOS developers to take Android more seriously? You don't think anyone would say, "hmm, if I develop this for Android, they are only taking 10% rather than 30%, maybe I should give it a shot."
With higher quality apps on the Market, Android owners might be more willing to fork over money for them.
This was my thought. Currently, as an indie dev, I see absolutely no reason to focus on Android rather than iOS. If anything there are a number of reasons not to (inconsistent OS versions, screen sizes, etc). A chance to up my per app revenue would definitely be a plus in the android column.
> "You don't think Google taking a lower cut on the Market wouldn't incentivize more of the successful iOS developers to take Android more seriously"
Not really. I think the teams that were going to branch out largely did and still do. And from the results we keep hearing, I don't think a smaller cut is going to change any minds of those who decided against it.
As to more good for-pay apps leading to more purchasing, I don't know that would necessarily follow. Particularly not after the Angry Birds experience seemed to suggest direct sales weren't even that great for a game at the level of a cultural phenomenon.
If Android Market lowered its cut to 15-20%, iFlowReader could live again on Android tablets. I consider it very shortsighted of Google to not try to compete with Apple on this point.
What experience would that be? To my knowledge, Rovio still has not released a paid version of Angry Birds although it has been planned since February at least.
