An App Store For iPhone Software

Steve Jobs demonstrated a new "App Store" that will be pushed out to all iPhones in June. It's available now in beta. This will be the exclusive avenue developers will use to get their iPhone apps, written to the newly released SDK, to customers. Developers will get 70% of the proceeds from sales of their goods on the App store, with no further charges for hosting, credit-card processing, etc. Jobs called this "the best deal going to distribute applications in the mobile space."

Comments

iPhone SDK, Enterprise Support Announced

[revscat]

Meh. My submission was better.

Apple revealed details of the iPhone SDK today. Apps will be developed using XCode and the new Cocoa Touch framework, and will be distributed by Apple either via an application on the phone or through iTunes. Developers set the cost of their applications and keep 70%, although "free" is also an option. (Not all applications will be distributed: "Porn, malicious apps, ones that invade privacy.") When asked about VOIP, Jobs replied: "We will only stop VOIP over cell networks, but not WiFi." Corporations can also privately distribute applications to their employees. AOL demoed an AIM client, and an iPhone version of the upcoming game Spore was also demoed. The iPhone is also gaining enhanced enterprise capabilities, including Exchange and Cisco VPN support, remote wiping, as well as certificates and identities.

Yes, free apps allowed

[SuperKendall]

Yep, free apps are allowed and even encouraged. You have to pay a $99 developer fee to get assigned a cert, so you have to sign your apps - but you can set any price, including free.

You are notified of new versions.

[SuperKendall]

When you get an app from the app store, you'll automatically be advised when new versions can be had and also what new features are offered.

FYI

[Lally Singh]

Comparison pricing:

    I used to develop & sell software for PalmOS.

    The IDE was $500, plus $150/year to upgrade.
    The major reseller I used wanted 40%, for a lower percentage they'd shove you in the back of the bus. I had my own web store set up separately, but literally got zero (nil, nada) sales from it. Mobile users tend to shop at specific sites. Without their own reputation, the little guys have to lean on the reputation of resellers (i.e. it's credible b/c it's being sold by them).

30% off the top isn't great, but it also doesn't require hosting, fulfillment, or anything else. Just ship them a binary and they send you a check in the mail each month until people stop buying (or an ABI change breaks your binary). I don't know how refunds are handled (or allowed at all), or documentation or support either, really.

Still, any info on what we can put on our own devices? I'm not interested in going back into mobile space anytime soon, just looking for a phone I can hack on personally. The SDK here is nice, but I'm still leaning towards the new openmoko when it comes out.

You couldn't be more wrong

[SuperKendall]

Just because there is a simulator, does not mean you cannot also load the app onto the phone directly - they showed a demo of an app being pushed to the phone and then also being debugged (from the Mac side) while it ran, including gathering profiling data.

It's basically the best scenario you could have hoped for as a developer.

Suspicions are worng

[SuperKendall]

IT sounds like the limitations on the SDK are not as drastic as I feared, but I strongly suspect that apple will limit ichat type clients though. Those would kill the golden goose that is SMS.

They demoed AIM on stage for goodness sakes! They are even allowing VOIP apps (though admittedly only over WiFi, not EDGE).

Re:Suspicions are worng

[ickoonite]

They are even allowing VOIP apps (though admittedly only over WiFi, not EDGE).

Though that is doubtless a revenue protection measure, VOIP would never work over EDGE anyway. In my experience (using VOIP on my Nokia), even 3.5G isn't really quick enough and latencies are so high as to render it practically unusable. Limited processing power doubtless also plays a part.

:|

It's an accounting thing

[blueZ3]

My understanding (and IANAA) is that because Apple realizes the revenue from iPhone purchases over the course of two years, they can make changes to the product and it's no big deal. With the touch, they've already accounted for your purchase, so there's some arcane rule that says they can't give you additional functionality without charging you for it. I'm betting the "nominal" fee really will be nominal--like $2 or something.

Re:It's an accounting thing

[AresTheImpaler]

wrong, the sdk is free. Getting a certificate so you can sell (or give away) your app on the app store is $99

Re:It's an accounting thing

[Sparks23]

They said in the talk that if you choose to make your app free on the App Store, there's no charge to either the end user or to the developer. (Other than the initial one-time $99 free to get on board with the App Store and get your application signing certificate.) So they already addressed that.

Re:It's an accounting thing

[Firehed]

It's not exactly an obscure accounting rule (Sarbanes-Oxley), but certainly one that's a pain in the ass. Citing iTunes isn't quite valid, since it's a free product. They've never claimed that the upgrade to Quicktime Pro was because of this - you get limited features if you pay nothing, and get all the features if you pay $20. That's just licensing. The reason that you don't see that kind of thing in smaller devs is that it only applies to publicly held companies (per the Wiki article).

The amount of revenue that Apple sees from third-party software sales will translate into probably very little if any profit when you figure in the bandwidth and them eating the credit card fees, though that remains to be seen. In any case, third party software (free or otherwise) adds value to the iPod Touch and as such it's in Apple's best interest to make it available to as many of their customers as possible. The $20 or whatever it will be per iPod Touch would probably be outweighed by the small amount of profit they'd see. You can be certain that the negative feelings they get from charging are outweighed by the money they see - that kind of thing is certain to put off potential buyers thinking they'll get nickeled and dimed.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending Apple here. But I don't think it's some conspiracy to milk a few more bucks out of people either. To my understanding of SOX combined with the grade I got in accounting, it seems to be a legitimate requirement.

Re:It's an accounting thing

[Ilgaz]

That's not a material feature upgrade. I have a feeling firmware updates count as minor bug fixes or something like that. Sony PSP added these via firmware updates (these are things I could follow as outsider)

1) Web browser
2) Flash (real one)
3) Windows Media
4) Skype/IM (thin ones)
5) Live, streaming radio
6) Photo capability (yes, with USB)
7) GPS (in Japan)
8) Digital TV

They were all free of charge. As you know, PSP (like all consoles) is way expensive than it is sold to you. It is very similar to iPhone on that purpose. They expect you to buy games/movies etc. to cover the real cost later.

Of course with a consumer majority like this (not you, in general), they can even sell the update for $50 and actually succeed.

Re:Marginally sweet...

[Reality Master 101]

A Calculator that doesn't suck: RPN and trig functions etc. No more Dollar store Calc.

Reason enough to own an iPhone: Pick your poison.

Re:Why I won't be getting an iPhone

[BitZtream]

You should actually go read the web page that tells you what the details are.

You have to pay and go through apple to distribute your applications. The SDK is a free download (registration required).

http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/

Re:What about free apps?

[Stuart Gibson]

Also covers credit card charges so you don't need to worry about those either.

Re:Why is that a problem?

[Knight2K]

Steve's keynote slides explicitly show that Xcode can publish the code to your personal iPhone for testing purposes. This image from Engadget's coverage (see the 10:30am post for context) shows an iMac remote debugging on the phone using an iPod dock. Whether that means an end user can load an app without going through the store is hard to say.

Still the same

[SuperKendall]

Even on Atari 800XL my excited developer friends knocked my door with a cassette tape, diskette to show their programs.

That's because the 800XL was too bulky to carry. I can knock on the door of my friends, iPhone in hand, and show them my cool application.

I'm perfectly OK with the 70/30 thing because the Palm model sucked. It was easy to write apps but very hard to get anyone to look at them. Now you have an AppStore - right on the phone itself! Is it worth 30% of your gross profits to have 1000% greater sales, along with someone else managing ALL of the infrastructure related to hosting and delivery? Hell yes!