iPhone App Pricing Limits Developers

HardYakka writes "According to this post in the Fortune blog, the iTunes app store has been a boon for users but some developers are saying the number of free and 99 cent apps make it difficult for developers to create complex, higher priced apps. Craig Hockenberry of Iconfactory says the iPhone may never get its killer app like the spreadsheet was for the Mac. If Apple does not do something, the store will be left with only ring tones and simple games. Some are suggesting that overpaid developers are the problem and the recession will soon lower the wages and costs for complex apps."

Comments

Spreadsheet

[penguinboy]

Visicalc was an app for the Apple II, not the Mac.

Re:Spreadsheet

[truthsearch]

Isn't this advantage almost exclusively for those entirely new to each respective OS?

No. My company switched from all linux desktops to all Mac desktops and laptops about 3 years ago. We're all software developers and very experienced on linux desktops. Our productivity is way up because we spend so little time fussing with the Macs compared to how much time we spent maintaining the linux desktops.

I'm not saying the case will be identical in every situation. But sometimes linux just takes more time to maintain.

Re:Spreadsheet

[morgan_greywolf]

As others pointed out to you, what Pixar and other movie studios do with Linux is CGI, not graphic design or DTP. Those are completely different and unrelated concepts.

Additionally, I'd like to point out that while you can certainly do professional graphic design on Linux these days (I do, personally. Surprise! I don't even own a Mac!), there isn't much depth in terms of software choice, and the software that does work is still immature.

You have two good illustration programs -- Inkscape and Xara. Inkscape isn't too bad and it's gotten lots better, but is still missing key features like automatic drop shadows. Xara is okayish, but uses a non-standard file format, is limited in some ways and is pretty unstable.

You have one good photo editing application -- the GIMP. And it lacks a lot of Photoshops really slick 3rd party plugins and the ability to modify photos in CMYK mode. -- But note that it does do CMYK seps, which is really all you need.

There's only one good DTP layout package, and that's Scribus. Scribus is still lacking in some areas compared to major closed-source apps like QuarkXPress and PageMaker -- mostly in the prepress area. It's also less stable than I would like. It does output to PDF, which is good enough for many service bureaus, however.

Now let's compare with the Mac: You have industry standards like Adobe Illustrator and Macromedia Freehand on the illustration front. Plus, you can run Inkscape on OS X. You have Photoshop, you have QuarkXpress, you have PageMaker. And you have Scribus and GIMP.

And that just touches the surface. There are so many more applications on the Mac. Plus, Macintosh fonts tend to be rather better than their Windows/Linux equivalents -- the font designers pay much more attention to kerning details and such on the Mac than they do on Windows for some reason.

After having said all that....I don't own a Mac, though I have used one in the course of my professional graphic design work. I use Linux because I prefer the concepts free and open source software over closed-source, proprietary stuff ripe with vendor lock-in, etc.

Re:Spreadsheet

[binarylarry]

No, Macs are designed by programmers like every other OS.

The difference is: Mac OSX programmers have a very angry man in a black turtle neck furiously yelling at them as they develop new features. This "turtle necked fire," so to speak, is what drives the high quality components of the modern Mac operating environment.

It's a bit like a Katana forged by a master craftsman.

Re:Spreadsheet

[profplump]

There are lots of things linux is great for, and depending on your usage it might even be a decent desktop OS. But that's certainly not the case for every desktop user, even with releases from the "last X years" (though I agree they are getting better).

I've run and used daily both an OS X and an Ubuntu workstation for several years, and in that time I've essentially given up on trying to make A/V playback, browser plugins, or even multiple-screen use work on the linux box. 95% of the stuff works fine -- I can play back most codecs, use most browser plugins, and display video on both screens. But that last 5% takes hours to fix, if it can be fixed at all. There are still some codecs I just can't make work, some plugins that won't run, and my cursor is either displayed incorrectly or slightly mis-aligned on my second and third monitors, even after hours of tweaking.

I'm not saying my Mac never annoys me, but when it does the answer is almost always cut and dry -- "it can't be done". Compare that to the linux machine, where "it works for me", or "you just have to do to get it going, unless you have GPU X, then you need to do ". Now sometimes those extra 28 steps are worthwhile, because I can do things that aren't possible on my Mac. But sometimes those extra 28 steps just eat 30 minutes of my life, and if I was using my Mac I wouldn't have wasted the time.

If I were just doing basic computing tasks, and didn't care to muck with the configuration, a linux desktop would be perfectly acceptable and would require little maintenance. But as someone who wants to play with things, and who isn't willing to accept that it works for others but not for me, a linux desktop can be a huge distraction and time sink.

/ Would give my grandmother linux on the desktop

// Still has a linux desktop in daily use

/// Just also needs a unix-like computer that works well enough to keep me from getting distracted by administrative tasks

Re:Spreadsheet

[andrewbutts]

I am sitting at my desk at Pixar right now. Our graphic designers use macs.

Add Top Apps for more price ranges

[justcauseisjustthat]

Simply add Top Apps categories for more price ranges...
$1-$5
$5-$10
$10-$50
$50- ??

Re:Add Top Apps for more price ranges

[Anthony_Cargile]

I'm more worried about the usage of the oxymoron "overpaid developer".

Re:Add Top Apps for more price ranges

[Anthony_Cargile]

And if thats not bad enough, Apple may at any time remove an app designed by us "overpaid developers" just because it may conflict with an existing (or to be existing) Apple app, or if it just pisses Apple off (IAmRich).

I've joked ever since I found out about this that Opera, the Mozilla Foundation and Sun should release their software for the jailbroken iPhones only, in addition to an Android port.

Mobile platforms are the new platform wars: Android (representing Linux), iPhone (Mac), and Windows Mobile (Win). The next generation developers will have to port apps painfully across these platforms, or pick and choose at the cost of some customers. Not to mention other platforms like Blackberry and the like that don't fall into those categories, save Sun's JavaME portability.

If I were ever asked to write a mobile client for any application of mine by anybody, public or not, I would probably shoot myself at the first thought of "But I have this phone". You can have it, spare me until the dust settles.
</rant>

Re:Add Top Apps for more price ranges

[tapehands]

oy. Seriously...if I were a developer that was considering writing an app that could be construed as "killer", the #1 turnoff would be Apple's ability to cannibalize my work.

What recourse, if any, would there be if Apple decided to yank my $XX app off the store, only to have the same functionality trumpeted in a new firmware release? (like they already have done)

Futhermore, Apple chooses when and where to enforce their store rules. Google is allowed to break rules. Would a small development firm be so lucky?

There just isn't enough incentive or security to develop something much more useful than a game, ringtone, or eggtimer.

What a whiner.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Iâ(TM)ve been thinking about whatâ(TM)s causing this rush to the 99Â price point. From what I can tell, itâ(TM)s because people are buying our products sight unseen. I see customers complaining about how âoeexpensiveâ a $4.99 app is and that it should cost less. (Do they do the same thing when they walk into Starbucks?) The only justification I can find for these attitudes is that you only have a screenshot to evaluate the quality of a product. A buck is easy to waste on an app that looks great in iTunes but works poorly once you install it.

Why not release a free, crippled version of your app that allows people to look at it, evaluate it & decide if it's worth $2.99? Now where have I heard of that business model before?

Honestly, there's so many development restrictions on iPhone apps, why bother publicizing this non-story.

Like spreadsheets for the MAC?

[way2trivial]

What the Hell? spreedsheets were the killer app for PC's period.

it was not mac-specific-- it was a much earlier dawn of the PC age.

"VisiCalc was the first spreadsheet program available for personal computers. It may well be the application that turned the microcomputer from a hobby for computer enthusiasts into a serious business tool.[1] VisiCalc sold over 700,000 copies in six years.[2]"

Re:Like spreadsheets for the MAC?

[_Sprocket_]

VisiCalc was first released for the Apple (not Mac), and sales skyrocketed. Apple's were the original business desktop computer.

And not only that, they were a key part of getting IBM to consider the microcomputer more than a toy. Enter the IBM PC.

Right

[Junior J. Junior III]

Some are suggesting that overpaid developers are the problem and the recession will soon lower the wages and costs for complex apps."

Because in the Shitty New Economy, people will be blowing all kinds of money on applications for their overpriced smartphones.

competition?

[arbiter1]

Another limiting factor on iphone app's is fact apple will kill off any app that competes with their's or anything they are about to put out.

It's a stupid rant

[tkrotchko]

It's a stupid rant. Look at the market for PC software.

There are a lot of *free* applications. Lots. More than I can every use.

Then there are inexpensive shareware stuff. $5-15

Then there are the mainstream shareware apps. $40-60

From there, applications go as high as you want to pay.... $100-500 $1000, $5000

All are available on the internet. Do free applications limit the abilities of developers to churn out $50 software? Or $100 software? No. People will pay what the software is worth.

This guy seems to be making the argument that somehow a low price sets the expectation of low prices. It's a dumb argument. If developers come up with an application that's worth $500 guess what... they will pay $500.

What he's really saying that the $1 applications are so good that he can't compete. And that's probably true. What he needs to do is make his applications worth more than $1. It's not the platform that's holding him back. It's not the price of cheap software holding him back, it's his own inability to write valuable software that commands a premium price. Seriously. Does he even understand that you can't write a general purpose iPhone app and expect to get $50 for it? He's going to have to hit some vertical market software (highly specialized) to command premium dollars. How about a full-blown VST/Softsynth app that will accept plugins for the iPhone? I'd pay $200 for that. How about working with a high-end electronics company to write apps to control lighting/music for home-automation? He could probably get $300-500 for that.

Just being a good programmer isn't good enough. He should know better.

Seriously, he's all wet.

Half truth

[cpct0]

I'm an iPhone developer. My company have been in the top sellers in US and Canada. And I agree, with some reserve, to what is being written.

If you look at the games that are produced on the iPhone, they are very good, frankly, many of them have many hours of replay value, many of the apps are top notch, and compared to other phones, they are of insane quality. And for a game that we sell more than $20 on any PC, and even more on consoles, we can only barely nudge a $5 on the iPhone, for nearly the same production quality. That's thousands and thousands of man-hour of work, sold at $5. Think about that. Even then, we got average results: either the comments were raving on our game, either people were giving one star and saying it was way too expensive. That's total bull. And that's what's pissing off people creating solid applications.

When the iPhone started, some games (like Monkey Ball) were $10. Some productivity apps were $10 to $15. I paid for a few $10 software, and they were with ample merit. Omnifocus is such a tool, real great, well made, even the v1 was excellent. Then, the top sellers became $5 software. Now it's mostly $1 software.

And that's where I put my grumpy developer shell on the shelf. Frankly, I congratulate $1 games and free games and $1 leisure and productivity tools. They make sure we are not paying $5 like on other phones to get a total piece of crap snorted out by a subcontract firm in 2 weeks. They make sure if we want to pay $5, it's for a good reason. That a software becomes a meme and gets sold by the thousands for 2 weeks and then get replaced by the following meme, I congratulate them. The only reason we are noticing these is because the way the ITMS works "free" and "pay" tops, and nothing else.

Many good applications cost much more, and hopefully they are getting their own crowd and their own push, with their own publicity. Like on PC with freewares and sharewares and commercial software, you pay mostly by merit.

Re:Cry me a river...

[Red Flayer]

The iPhone is the first and foremost platform for cellphones these days.

[citation needed]. Truth is, Symbian still dominates the mobile platform market, with RiM in second (though Apple is closing in on Rim).

Apple's market share is about 1/4 that of Symbian.

Please, don't talk out your ass about market share without doing your homework.

It's UNIX! I Know This!

[SuperKendall]

Jeez, when will people accept that Macs are designed by people who themselves are designers and the OS is built around the typical workflow of designers and not that of code geeks and techies?

If you knew anything of the internals you'd know just how wrong you actually were. Who among the code geeks and "techies" would not appreciate a mainstream computer that comes with Bash, Apache, Perl, PHP and Ruby built right in? Or can appreciate upcoming things like OpenCL?

It's true there are ALSO a lot of great design oriented features added atop the very nice technical layer - but the technical innards are very much aimed squarely at the people you think have no interest.