6 ms·

The app boom is over

105 points by taylorbuley 10y ago

epeus 10y ago
I've been pointing out the bursting of the app bubble for a while now, this is a trailing indicator. Progressive Web Apps make way more sense.
- abritinthebay 10y ago
  jfc... not everything is a bubble. This was just an initial boom phase of growth which was to be expected.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- Zombieball 10y ago
  A few months ago I might have agreed with you. However given the growing power of React Native and the recent announcement of Android Instant Apps, I think there is going to be a surge in app "downloads".
- king_magic 10y ago
  ...and are way, way more limited in terms of leveraging device functionality. I'm not hating on mobile-optimized web apps, just making the point that they aren't a one-size fits all solution, and as such, I don't think a blanket statement like "Progressive Web Apps make way more sense" really works.
  - palakchokshi 10y ago
    There are only a few apps that leverage device functionality e.g. gyrometer, fingerprint, etc. Even location and camera are now available for web apps. So for a majority of native apps a web app makes more sense.
    - millstone 10y ago
      Fingerprint sensor for authentication is a big hole. Mint integrates with TouchID, and it's great. But my bank's webview-wrapping "app" requires a login and password every launch, and it's very annoying.
      - palakchokshi 10y ago
        Agreed it is a big hole for a specific set of apps where you don't want the browser to save the credentials.
      - palakchokshi 10y ago
        Apple might be making fingerprint sensing available for the web soon https://stripe.com/apple-pay https://stripe.com/apple-pay
    - rimantas 10y ago
      Except is much easier to build nice app with native SDK instead of dancing shamanic dances around web tech which was never intended for the apps in the first place. If people advocating web apps would spend just a half of that time educating themselves what's really offered by SDKs…
      - palakchokshi 10y ago
        "much easier" is very relative. Someone proficient in web dev technologies isn't necessarily going to find Objective C development or Android Development much easier. If you want to see an example of a nice web app try www.hoteltonight.com from your phone's browser.
    - king_magic 10y ago
      Your definition of "device functionality" is pretty different from mine then - consider local storage on a device. Many enterprise applications can end up storing massive amounts of data on devices; that data often needs to be encrypted. Not gonna fly with a web app. Web apps don't support push notifications on devices. Again, a hugely important example of extremely common device functionality. Web apps require constant connectivity. Device goes into a tunnel, app quickly stops working. Or even more realistic, user drives 20km to the middle of nowhere, has no cell service, but still needs to do their job without worrying about web site connectivity. And those are just the extremely common use cases. Again, I'm not hating on mobile-optimized web. There are many use cases where it makes perfect sense. But you really can't make a blanket statement like "So for a majority of native apps a web app makes more sense"; it's just not the case.
- wvenable 10y ago
  Do they make more sense? Mobile-accessible web applications just have different delivery method, they are otherwise pretty much just "apps" and the same forces are at work. If your flappy bird clone is HTML5 that doesn't make anyone more likely to find and use it. This isn't a technological issue at all.
- millstone 10y ago
  Some of the iOS apps I use have been "updated" from native to something wrapping a web view, and the experience is noticeably worse. I hope you're mistaken.
abritinthebay 10y ago
Yup, basically it's now a mature market rather than a gold rush. This is actually a good thing but not if you were looking for a quick buck.
- ido 10y ago
  It has not been a gold rush since maybe a year or 2 after the App Store became available (July 2008, so it's been over for a log while now).
  - wvenable 10y ago
    Flappy Bird came out in 2013. So not a gold rush but still a lottery.
  - abritinthebay 10y ago
    I'd disagree. It's not the massive gold rush of those early days but it's still been in that cycle up until maybe a year or two ago.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  I mean, is it? We have about 6 apps that are almost exactly clash of clans. They advertise on prime time TV with celebrities. Not that exciting...
  - abritinthebay 10y ago
    At about 20 Call Of Duty clones are out every year for regular gaming. It's normal.
rangera 10y ago
I think the app boom is in decline, but I really don't see how illustrating lower growth for the 20 most well known apps demonstrates this. Less people downloading Facebook, WhatsApp, or Instagram? Account for how many people already have it! There could be a saturation of those very well-known apps. There's a lot more to consider once you look at how the entire app market is changing, rather than just the very top.
- Declanomous 10y ago
  Anecdotal, but I don't use an app for any service that offers substantially similar service on their website. For instance, Facebook and Amazon have horribly bloated apps. They run in the background and eat up my battery. Their apps ask for permissions for unfathomable reasons. I place a link to the website on my desktop instead, since I can at least trust my browser won't eat up all my battery after I thought I closed it. While I'm more tech savvy than most people I know, a lot of my friends have uninstalled the Facebook app as well, for a variety of similar reasons. Several have noticed what a battery hog it is, others got pissed off when Facebook added the messenger app, and others did it for privacy reasons. Interestingly, I've noticed I use Facebook a lot less since deleting the app. I should see how my friends usage trends compare. I wonder if the friends who deleted the app have noticed a decrease in their Facebook usage, or if all my friends have decreased their usage and it's just a function of us being older/in different stages of life.
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    I'm relentlessly unwilling to use banking or shopping apps for similar reasons. Not only are they bloated and wasteful, they're typically pretty opaque, with a totally unknown attack surface. My bank is barely competent to use HTTPS with valid certificates - why on Earth would I chance using their new-and-untested app when I can't see if it's worse than their website?
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      For banks specifically.. I can use an app to deposit checks via picture. I cannot do this via the website. So of my 20 apps I have installed, something like 3 are banks, 10 are games, and 7 are utilities...
douglance 10y ago
Providing value to people will never be over.
- swalsh 10y ago
  There's just a lot less low hanging fruit...
  - allsystemsgo 10y ago
    Right, which is totally understandable given that the app market has been going for about 8 years now. There's obviously a shift towards apps that provide more longer term and reoccurring value to customers which is great for consumers and for the businesses that build/ship these apps.
thesimpsons1022 10y ago
how can you say anything about a market when all you are looking at is the top 15 apps? Seems absurd. Maybe the bottom 50 pct have seen increased adoption? We don't know.
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  An extremely strong app market would actually produce the same results as a weak one for the top few products. If people are eager to download apps, high-profile products like Instagram hit saturation quickly and a drop-off in downloads even though their user base is massive. If people are hesitant, they get some downloads and slow-but-steady growth. If people are unwilling, they don't get users at all (but we know what hasn't happened). There's really no value for anyone else in a top-apps evaluation - the rest of the world isn't plastering Times Square in ads.
Zombieball 10y ago
I am not in the loop for latest in Android development. Can someone, who is, comment towards whether they think the recently announced Android Instant Apps will reverse this trend significantly?
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  It should be a good thing. As is, there are lots of one-off use cases for apps where people simply choose to do without. As an example, if I'm buying a product online (and not from Amazon), there's probably an app for the marketplace that's more mobile-friendly than the website. But right now, I still choose the website because it's not worth actually downloading something. With Instant, I can pick the better one without the hassle and commitment of adding something to my phone.
- notatoad 10y ago
  I think if anything it will only increase this trend. We might use a few more apps, but install less. And instant apps is only a solution for free apps that don't require a sign-in.
vthallam 10y ago
The download of new apps may decline, but with Google Instant Apps arriving, more users will use apps without installing.
- ProxCoques 10y ago
  Google Instant Apps will fade away after a couple of years because nobody gets it and it's a solution looking for a problem again. They specialise in auto-failing ideas like that.
  - alttab 10y ago
    I disagree its a solution looking for a problem. The problem is most internet/computing usage is done on mobile. Increasingly, this information is inside of Apps. This makes Google's search results less and less effective overtime. That is, unless I can click on a google search result and end up in the middle of an app I've never downloaded. I think a better criticism is that Instant Apps is attempting to rebuild internet, using apps. A destination I can go to, and only download what I need to run the experience in that view? And I can still click on other things and load those when I need it? It's called surfing the web, dude.
    - bluedino 10y ago
      >> The problem is most internet/computing usage is done on mobile. Increasingly, this information is inside of Apps. This makes Google's search results less and less effective overtime Google's problem, not users.
  - vthallam 10y ago
    You don't have to get it to use it. I see LinkedIn is now supporting Google Instant Apps and when i searched for a name on the Google app, clicked on the linked link, it opened the profile in an app, though i don't have the app installed. It was seamless with the feel of native app. Don't see what problems it would create.
  - dave2000 10y ago
noer 10y ago
Shouldn't this article have focused on number of downloads per person per month or year or whatever? It seems like that would tell a better story about the app boom being over.
- palakchokshi 10y ago
  I think they did provide a link at the top of the article that said Most US Smartphone users download zero apps per month [0] http://qz.com/253618/most-smartphone-users-download-zero-apps-per-month/ http://qz.com/253618/most-smartphone-users-download-zero-app...
allsystemsgo 10y ago
You could also title this article "The App Economy Has Matured", but that wouldn't get as many clicks.
emitstop 10y ago
So all they determined was everyone already has the top installed (and often pre-installed) apps already installed? What a surprise. Also I would love to install more apps but to do so I have to clear space on my phone, and the apps I already have are slowing my phone down and eating my battery. For me it's always a matter of resources.
leroy_masochist 10y ago
I am surprised that Tinder didn't crack the top 20.
- jonlucc 10y ago
  Only so many people are single and looking, and of them, only so many want what the app offers to single people. Even if the second number is 100% of the first, it's limited.
  - leroy_masochist 10y ago
    I get that, I'm just surprised that it got beaten by something like Watch ABC. Doesn't Tinder have close to a hundred million users?
    - bluedino 10y ago
      >> Doesn't Tinder have close to a hundred million users? Active users, or total accounts? Tinder seems like something you'd use for a few months and either hook up or give up and not use it again.
Kinnard 10y ago
Is it just me or is it obvious that "the app boom is over" . . . until another great app worth downloading comes out . . .
- adrusi 10y ago
  Yeah but your app didn't used to have to be any good for people to download it.
  - jasonsync 10y ago
    Yeah, it just had to make fart sounds.
draw_down 10y ago
I certainly have no interest in accumulating more of them. It's actually nice to delete one whenever I realize I don't need it. Why do I even have so many to begin with? I hate these damn things.
sehugg 10y ago
I think "interest in apps" (i.e. people experimenting with, talking about, and sharing apps) plateaued in 2012. You can see this effect on Google Trends.
kin 10y ago
The data in the article doesn't really show anything people didn't already know. There's no surprise that the download rate of the top 20 apps will eventually decline. I mean, look at their saturation amongst users, it's still ridiculous. What's interesting is going to be the new subscription model incentive that gives publishers an extra 15% for subscription retention after the first year. Don't forget, App Store 2.0 is just around the corner and it could change the game. Not saying that it will, but it could.
- 0x6c6f6c 10y ago
  Honestly interested in reading some good content on App Store 2.0 if anyone has a quality read.
  - kin 10y ago
    I think it was top of HN yesterday: http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-subscription-update-phil-schiller-interview http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-su...
greglindahl 10y ago
Many of the ads that ad-supported apps use to monetize are ads for other apps. That's not sustainable, and the end of that will be the end of the boom in ad-supported apps.
anysz 10y ago
Such clickbait. Sure the gold rush, get-rich-quick-cause-there-are-two-of-you era for mobile apps is over. But the boom for mobile apps will never be over, much like web apps will never be over. How many billion dollar websites emerged a decade after everyone said the web boom was over? Apps are merely a distribution platform for services. As the world evolves, we will never run out of needs for services. As long as you're solving a need and you're capable of communicating it to your target market, you will make lots of money. Apps and software in general will forever be more efficient than their predecessors, and thus, IMHO, the app boom has only begun.
- notatoad 10y ago
  >But the boom for mobile apps will never be over that is, by definition, not a boom. A boom is a period of unusual, unsustainable growth. The boom is over and the app market is shifting into a normal sustainable market where good products and services are valued and low-effort or less useful apps have a hard time succeeding. The headline wasn't "apps are dead" - just because you misunderstood it doesn't make it clickbait.
  - Touche 10y ago
    I'm not sure that the app economy wasn't a temporarily bubble. We've yet to see many apps reach the sustainable part. Very few apps are successful charging the customer. A few games are successful selling in-app purchases, but even those almost never last. Social apps some times get popular but rarely find a way to monetize, they wind up selling themselves to larger businesses who use them as a loss-leader. Compared to desktop and the web, the number of sustainable businesses on mobile apps is depressingly small.
- jamescostian 10y ago
  > But the boom for mobile apps will never be over, much like web apps will never be over. How many billion dollar websites emerged a decade after everyone said the web boom was over? I don't think the author was arguing that there can never be "billion dollar" apps, just that the "boom" is over. Similarly, people still say that the "web boom" ended a very long time ago, but they aren't saying "You cannot make billion dollar websites now that the web boom is over", they are just saying that the boom is over. Just look at a definition of the word boom to understand it better: "of a business or industry : to grow or expand suddenly" [0] [0] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boom http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boom
biztos 10y ago
This article's primary source is a ComScore report purporting to show a decline in mobile app downloads per user. Is there any reason -- really, any at all -- to believe that ComScore has accurate data on this? I can't think of one. (And I did want to read about their methodology but spam is the price of the "Whitepaper" download, so I didn't get there yet.) Does Apple give them this information on their customers' habits? I don't think so. Does Google? That wouldn't be as exotic as Apple doing it, but still -- I don't think so. Facebook? So what exactly is this data based on? I'm not even arguing that the conclusion isn't true. I'm arguing that ComScore, and Quartz, and Recode, and Peter Kafka too have NO IDEA what they're talking about here. They are pulling numbers out of thin air, waving their hands, and declaring their suppositions confirmed. Oh wait, as a secondary source they have "Ad Intelligence" from "SensorTower." So, self-reporting by ad-focused app companies that don't crunch their stats internally? And nothing at all about every other app in the world? OK, to be fair maybe it's not just "thin air." Maybe it's more like hot air. Anyway, as a programmer who has several times almost-but-not-quite gotten into the app world, it strikes me that you'd be crazy to do an indie app as a means to financial glory, but if you have a Big Idea these days in the consumer space you probably have to have a good app for it. Maybe several. Which means the "boom" or lack thereof depends a lot on what you think the "app business" is. My source: anecdotes and extrapolation. Which admittedly may not be more accurate than dodgy pseudo-statistics, but I'm sticking with it.
tn13 10y ago
The best of Web came after the dot com burst. In fact to gain maximum from a platform it is not enough if the platform got popular what matters is how many people trained to write software for that platform are available and how cheaply. Both Android and iOS developers are expensive compared to PHP developers. I think the best of Mobile is yet to come.
mtgx 10y ago
It doesn't help that Apple has been strangling users with 16GB of storage for the base iPhone for years.
KateBone 10y ago
New "must have" apps are always coming out. Snapchat is only 4 years old and took awhile to gain popularity. Tinder is 3 years old and wasn't popular until a couple of years ago. Stupid stories like these will always be written and always pop in a couple new apps that are exceptions but they aren't exceptions. The reason new apps are constantly trending is because people will and do always try new apps.
jpeg_hero 10y ago
If apps are $1 per download, you need 100,000 downloads a month to have $100k a month in revenue. That's what you need for an office space and a few people working full time. How many apps have 100,000 downloads a month. Apps need subscriptions to survive, that App Store change can't happen soon enough.
TheAceOfHearts 10y ago
I'm tired of all these useless (for me, I'm sure they're probably useful for others) apps. Recently I uninstalled most of the third-party apps from my phone, and it's been great. I've noticed my battery life has improved, and it reduces the number of companies that track and nag at me. I'm down to ten non-Google apps, and three of em are work-related. This means that, excluding Google (which I've already accepted tracks my every move), only seven apps are solving some problem of mine. And out of those seven, I only use two on a daily basis. The most important app I have on my phone is Firefox. You can install addons for uBlock Origin and HTTPS Everywhere, which makes mobile web very pleasant. My biggest problem with native apps is that they often show a total lack of respect for my time and attention. I don't want useless notifications that try to increase my engagement (looking at you Twitter and Instagram). I don't want you running in the background for ANY REASON at all unless I've given you explicit permission. There's too much focus on trying to jam more and more features into apps. I want very fast and highly stable applications without any bullshit, and I'm willing to pay a high price tag if that's what it takes.
- scarface74 10y ago
  Don't blame the apps, blame the OS. iOS can block apps from running in the background and can stop them from using notifications.
  - gman99 10y ago
    > blame the OS. iOS can block apps [...] Well, to be fair, you can disable notifications from apps since android 4.0 (which is a long time back) And Android 6.0 and up should automatically disable background running apps (https://developer.android.com/training/monitoring-device-state/doze-standby.html#understand_app_standby https://developer.android.com/training/monitoring-device-sta...) unless there is a good reason for them to be running But apps can still work around these restrictions (even on iOS; for eg the facebook app was caught "accidentally" playing silent audio.) Even if that was truly a bug, the point remains that it's better to use the website unless you want something specific (offline access, push notifications, etc...)
matt_wulfeck 10y ago
A big part of preferring a website over an app for me is sandboxing. A website via safari can't access and email all of my contacts, or record my location via GPS, or any other nefarious thing I'm constantly on my guard against. By forcing everything through Safari I have reasonable protections against these privacy violations, as well as good blocking of ads and trackers.

105 points by taylorbuley 10y ago

epeus 10y ago

I've been pointing out the bursting of the app bubble for a while now, this is a trailing indicator. Progressive Web Apps make way more sense.

abritinthebay 10y ago
jfc... not everything is a bubble. This was just an initial boom phase of growth which was to be expected.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Zombieball 10y ago
A few months ago I might have agreed with you. However given the growing power of React Native and the recent announcement of Android Instant Apps, I think there is going to be a surge in app "downloads".
king_magic 10y ago
...and are way, way more limited in terms of leveraging device functionality. I'm not hating on mobile-optimized web apps, just making the point that they aren't a one-size fits all solution, and as such, I don't think a blanket statement like "Progressive Web Apps make way more sense" really works.
- palakchokshi 10y ago
  There are only a few apps that leverage device functionality e.g. gyrometer, fingerprint, etc. Even location and camera are now available for web apps. So for a majority of native apps a web app makes more sense.
  - millstone 10y ago
    Fingerprint sensor for authentication is a big hole. Mint integrates with TouchID, and it's great. But my bank's webview-wrapping "app" requires a login and password every launch, and it's very annoying.
    - palakchokshi 10y ago
      Agreed it is a big hole for a specific set of apps where you don't want the browser to save the credentials.
    - palakchokshi 10y ago
      Apple might be making fingerprint sensing available for the web soon https://stripe.com/apple-pay https://stripe.com/apple-pay
  - rimantas 10y ago
    Except is much easier to build nice app with native SDK instead of dancing shamanic dances around web tech which was never intended for the apps in the first place. If people advocating web apps would spend just a half of that time educating themselves what's really offered by SDKs…
    - palakchokshi 10y ago
      "much easier" is very relative. Someone proficient in web dev technologies isn't necessarily going to find Objective C development or Android Development much easier. If you want to see an example of a nice web app try www.hoteltonight.com from your phone's browser.
  - king_magic 10y ago
    Your definition of "device functionality" is pretty different from mine then - consider local storage on a device. Many enterprise applications can end up storing massive amounts of data on devices; that data often needs to be encrypted. Not gonna fly with a web app. Web apps don't support push notifications on devices. Again, a hugely important example of extremely common device functionality. Web apps require constant connectivity. Device goes into a tunnel, app quickly stops working. Or even more realistic, user drives 20km to the middle of nowhere, has no cell service, but still needs to do their job without worrying about web site connectivity. And those are just the extremely common use cases. Again, I'm not hating on mobile-optimized web. There are many use cases where it makes perfect sense. But you really can't make a blanket statement like "So for a majority of native apps a web app makes more sense"; it's just not the case.
wvenable 10y ago
Do they make more sense? Mobile-accessible web applications just have different delivery method, they are otherwise pretty much just "apps" and the same forces are at work. If your flappy bird clone is HTML5 that doesn't make anyone more likely to find and use it. This isn't a technological issue at all.
millstone 10y ago
Some of the iOS apps I use have been "updated" from native to something wrapping a web view, and the experience is noticeably worse. I hope you're mistaken.

abritinthebay 10y ago

Yup, basically it's now a mature market rather than a gold rush. This is actually a good thing but not if you were looking for a quick buck.

ido 10y ago
It has not been a gold rush since maybe a year or 2 after the App Store became available (July 2008, so it's been over for a log while now).
- wvenable 10y ago
  Flappy Bird came out in 2013. So not a gold rush but still a lottery.
- abritinthebay 10y ago
  I'd disagree. It's not the massive gold rush of those early days but it's still been in that cycle up until maybe a year or two ago.
brianwawok 10y ago
I mean, is it? We have about 6 apps that are almost exactly clash of clans. They advertise on prime time TV with celebrities. Not that exciting...
- abritinthebay 10y ago
  At about 20 Call Of Duty clones are out every year for regular gaming. It's normal.

rangera 10y ago

I think the app boom is in decline, but I really don't see how illustrating lower growth for the 20 most well known apps demonstrates this. Less people downloading Facebook, WhatsApp, or Instagram? Account for how many people already have it! There could be a saturation of those very well-known apps. There's a lot more to consider once you look at how the entire app market is changing, rather than just the very top.

Declanomous 10y ago
Anecdotal, but I don't use an app for any service that offers substantially similar service on their website. For instance, Facebook and Amazon have horribly bloated apps. They run in the background and eat up my battery. Their apps ask for permissions for unfathomable reasons. I place a link to the website on my desktop instead, since I can at least trust my browser won't eat up all my battery after I thought I closed it. While I'm more tech savvy than most people I know, a lot of my friends have uninstalled the Facebook app as well, for a variety of similar reasons. Several have noticed what a battery hog it is, others got pissed off when Facebook added the messenger app, and others did it for privacy reasons. Interestingly, I've noticed I use Facebook a lot less since deleting the app. I should see how my friends usage trends compare. I wonder if the friends who deleted the app have noticed a decrease in their Facebook usage, or if all my friends have decreased their usage and it's just a function of us being older/in different stages of life.
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  I'm relentlessly unwilling to use banking or shopping apps for similar reasons. Not only are they bloated and wasteful, they're typically pretty opaque, with a totally unknown attack surface. My bank is barely competent to use HTTPS with valid certificates - why on Earth would I chance using their new-and-untested app when I can't see if it's worse than their website?
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    For banks specifically.. I can use an app to deposit checks via picture. I cannot do this via the website. So of my 20 apps I have installed, something like 3 are banks, 10 are games, and 7 are utilities...

douglance 10y ago

Providing value to people will never be over.

swalsh 10y ago
There's just a lot less low hanging fruit...
- allsystemsgo 10y ago
  Right, which is totally understandable given that the app market has been going for about 8 years now. There's obviously a shift towards apps that provide more longer term and reoccurring value to customers which is great for consumers and for the businesses that build/ship these apps.

thesimpsons1022 10y ago

how can you say anything about a market when all you are looking at is the top 15 apps? Seems absurd. Maybe the bottom 50 pct have seen increased adoption? We don't know.

Bartweiss 10y ago
An extremely strong app market would actually produce the same results as a weak one for the top few products. If people are eager to download apps, high-profile products like Instagram hit saturation quickly and a drop-off in downloads even though their user base is massive. If people are hesitant, they get some downloads and slow-but-steady growth. If people are unwilling, they don't get users at all (but we know what hasn't happened). There's really no value for anyone else in a top-apps evaluation - the rest of the world isn't plastering Times Square in ads.

Zombieball 10y ago

I am not in the loop for latest in Android development. Can someone, who is, comment towards whether they think the recently announced Android Instant Apps will reverse this trend significantly?

Bartweiss 10y ago
It should be a good thing. As is, there are lots of one-off use cases for apps where people simply choose to do without. As an example, if I'm buying a product online (and not from Amazon), there's probably an app for the marketplace that's more mobile-friendly than the website. But right now, I still choose the website because it's not worth actually downloading something. With Instant, I can pick the better one without the hassle and commitment of adding something to my phone.
notatoad 10y ago
I think if anything it will only increase this trend. We might use a few more apps, but install less. And instant apps is only a solution for free apps that don't require a sign-in.

vthallam 10y ago

The download of new apps may decline, but with Google Instant Apps arriving, more users will use apps without installing.

ProxCoques 10y ago
Google Instant Apps will fade away after a couple of years because nobody gets it and it's a solution looking for a problem again. They specialise in auto-failing ideas like that.
- alttab 10y ago
  I disagree its a solution looking for a problem. The problem is most internet/computing usage is done on mobile. Increasingly, this information is inside of Apps. This makes Google's search results less and less effective overtime. That is, unless I can click on a google search result and end up in the middle of an app I've never downloaded. I think a better criticism is that Instant Apps is attempting to rebuild internet, using apps. A destination I can go to, and only download what I need to run the experience in that view? And I can still click on other things and load those when I need it? It's called surfing the web, dude.
  - bluedino 10y ago
    >> The problem is most internet/computing usage is done on mobile. Increasingly, this information is inside of Apps. This makes Google's search results less and less effective overtime Google's problem, not users.
- vthallam 10y ago
  You don't have to get it to use it. I see LinkedIn is now supporting Google Instant Apps and when i searched for a name on the Google app, clicked on the linked link, it opened the profile in an app, though i don't have the app installed. It was seamless with the feel of native app. Don't see what problems it would create.
- dave2000 10y ago

noer 10y ago

Shouldn't this article have focused on number of downloads per person per month or year or whatever? It seems like that would tell a better story about the app boom being over.

palakchokshi 10y ago
I think they did provide a link at the top of the article that said Most US Smartphone users download zero apps per month [0] http://qz.com/253618/most-smartphone-users-download-zero-apps-per-month/ http://qz.com/253618/most-smartphone-users-download-zero-app...

allsystemsgo 10y ago

You could also title this article "The App Economy Has Matured", but that wouldn't get as many clicks.

emitstop 10y ago

So all they determined was everyone already has the top installed (and often pre-installed) apps already installed? What a surprise. Also I would love to install more apps but to do so I have to clear space on my phone, and the apps I already have are slowing my phone down and eating my battery. For me it's always a matter of resources.

leroy_masochist 10y ago

I am surprised that Tinder didn't crack the top 20.

jonlucc 10y ago
Only so many people are single and looking, and of them, only so many want what the app offers to single people. Even if the second number is 100% of the first, it's limited.
- leroy_masochist 10y ago
  I get that, I'm just surprised that it got beaten by something like Watch ABC. Doesn't Tinder have close to a hundred million users?
  - bluedino 10y ago
    >> Doesn't Tinder have close to a hundred million users? Active users, or total accounts? Tinder seems like something you'd use for a few months and either hook up or give up and not use it again.

Kinnard 10y ago

Is it just me or is it obvious that "the app boom is over" . . . until another great app worth downloading comes out . . .

adrusi 10y ago
Yeah but your app didn't used to have to be any good for people to download it.
- jasonsync 10y ago
  Yeah, it just had to make fart sounds.

draw_down 10y ago

I certainly have no interest in accumulating more of them. It's actually nice to delete one whenever I realize I don't need it. Why do I even have so many to begin with? I hate these damn things.

sehugg 10y ago

I think "interest in apps" (i.e. people experimenting with, talking about, and sharing apps) plateaued in 2012. You can see this effect on Google Trends.

kin 10y ago

The data in the article doesn't really show anything people didn't already know. There's no surprise that the download rate of the top 20 apps will eventually decline. I mean, look at their saturation amongst users, it's still ridiculous. What's interesting is going to be the new subscription model incentive that gives publishers an extra 15% for subscription retention after the first year. Don't forget, App Store 2.0 is just around the corner and it could change the game. Not saying that it will, but it could.

0x6c6f6c 10y ago
Honestly interested in reading some good content on App Store 2.0 if anyone has a quality read.
- kin 10y ago
  I think it was top of HN yesterday: http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-subscription-update-phil-schiller-interview http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-su...

greglindahl 10y ago

Many of the ads that ad-supported apps use to monetize are ads for other apps. That's not sustainable, and the end of that will be the end of the boom in ad-supported apps.

anysz 10y ago

Such clickbait. Sure the gold rush, get-rich-quick-cause-there-are-two-of-you era for mobile apps is over. But the boom for mobile apps will never be over, much like web apps will never be over. How many billion dollar websites emerged a decade after everyone said the web boom was over? Apps are merely a distribution platform for services. As the world evolves, we will never run out of needs for services. As long as you're solving a need and you're capable of communicating it to your target market, you will make lots of money. Apps and software in general will forever be more efficient than their predecessors, and thus, IMHO, the app boom has only begun.

notatoad 10y ago
>But the boom for mobile apps will never be over that is, by definition, not a boom. A boom is a period of unusual, unsustainable growth. The boom is over and the app market is shifting into a normal sustainable market where good products and services are valued and low-effort or less useful apps have a hard time succeeding. The headline wasn't "apps are dead" - just because you misunderstood it doesn't make it clickbait.
- Touche 10y ago
  I'm not sure that the app economy wasn't a temporarily bubble. We've yet to see many apps reach the sustainable part. Very few apps are successful charging the customer. A few games are successful selling in-app purchases, but even those almost never last. Social apps some times get popular but rarely find a way to monetize, they wind up selling themselves to larger businesses who use them as a loss-leader. Compared to desktop and the web, the number of sustainable businesses on mobile apps is depressingly small.
jamescostian 10y ago
> But the boom for mobile apps will never be over, much like web apps will never be over. How many billion dollar websites emerged a decade after everyone said the web boom was over? I don't think the author was arguing that there can never be "billion dollar" apps, just that the "boom" is over. Similarly, people still say that the "web boom" ended a very long time ago, but they aren't saying "You cannot make billion dollar websites now that the web boom is over", they are just saying that the boom is over. Just look at a definition of the word boom to understand it better: "of a business or industry : to grow or expand suddenly" [0] [0] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boom http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boom

biztos 10y ago

This article's primary source is a ComScore report purporting to show a decline in mobile app downloads per user. Is there any reason -- really, any at all -- to believe that ComScore has accurate data on this? I can't think of one. (And I did want to read about their methodology but spam is the price of the "Whitepaper" download, so I didn't get there yet.) Does Apple give them this information on their customers' habits? I don't think so. Does Google? That wouldn't be as exotic as Apple doing it, but still -- I don't think so. Facebook? So what exactly is this data based on? I'm not even arguing that the conclusion isn't true. I'm arguing that ComScore, and Quartz, and Recode, and Peter Kafka too have NO IDEA what they're talking about here. They are pulling numbers out of thin air, waving their hands, and declaring their suppositions confirmed. Oh wait, as a secondary source they have "Ad Intelligence" from "SensorTower." So, self-reporting by ad-focused app companies that don't crunch their stats internally? And nothing at all about every other app in the world? OK, to be fair maybe it's not just "thin air." Maybe it's more like hot air. Anyway, as a programmer who has several times almost-but-not-quite gotten into the app world, it strikes me that you'd be crazy to do an indie app as a means to financial glory, but if you have a Big Idea these days in the consumer space you probably have to have a good app for it. Maybe several. Which means the "boom" or lack thereof depends a lot on what you think the "app business" is. My source: anecdotes and extrapolation. Which admittedly may not be more accurate than dodgy pseudo-statistics, but I'm sticking with it.

tn13 10y ago

The best of Web came after the dot com burst. In fact to gain maximum from a platform it is not enough if the platform got popular what matters is how many people trained to write software for that platform are available and how cheaply. Both Android and iOS developers are expensive compared to PHP developers. I think the best of Mobile is yet to come.

mtgx 10y ago

It doesn't help that Apple has been strangling users with 16GB of storage for the base iPhone for years.

KateBone 10y ago

New "must have" apps are always coming out. Snapchat is only 4 years old and took awhile to gain popularity. Tinder is 3 years old and wasn't popular until a couple of years ago. Stupid stories like these will always be written and always pop in a couple new apps that are exceptions but they aren't exceptions. The reason new apps are constantly trending is because people will and do always try new apps.

jpeg_hero 10y ago

If apps are $1 per download, you need 100,000 downloads a month to have $100k a month in revenue. That's what you need for an office space and a few people working full time. How many apps have 100,000 downloads a month. Apps need subscriptions to survive, that App Store change can't happen soon enough.

TheAceOfHearts 10y ago

I'm tired of all these useless (for me, I'm sure they're probably useful for others) apps. Recently I uninstalled most of the third-party apps from my phone, and it's been great. I've noticed my battery life has improved, and it reduces the number of companies that track and nag at me. I'm down to ten non-Google apps, and three of em are work-related. This means that, excluding Google (which I've already accepted tracks my every move), only seven apps are solving some problem of mine. And out of those seven, I only use two on a daily basis. The most important app I have on my phone is Firefox. You can install addons for uBlock Origin and HTTPS Everywhere, which makes mobile web very pleasant. My biggest problem with native apps is that they often show a total lack of respect for my time and attention. I don't want useless notifications that try to increase my engagement (looking at you Twitter and Instagram). I don't want you running in the background for ANY REASON at all unless I've given you explicit permission. There's too much focus on trying to jam more and more features into apps. I want very fast and highly stable applications without any bullshit, and I'm willing to pay a high price tag if that's what it takes.

scarface74 10y ago
Don't blame the apps, blame the OS. iOS can block apps from running in the background and can stop them from using notifications.
- gman99 10y ago
  > blame the OS. iOS can block apps [...] Well, to be fair, you can disable notifications from apps since android 4.0 (which is a long time back) And Android 6.0 and up should automatically disable background running apps (https://developer.android.com/training/monitoring-device-state/doze-standby.html#understand_app_standby https://developer.android.com/training/monitoring-device-sta...) unless there is a good reason for them to be running But apps can still work around these restrictions (even on iOS; for eg the facebook app was caught "accidentally" playing silent audio.) Even if that was truly a bug, the point remains that it's better to use the website unless you want something specific (offline access, push notifications, etc...)

matt_wulfeck 10y ago

A big part of preferring a website over an app for me is sandboxing. A website via safari can't access and email all of my contacts, or record my location via GPS, or any other nefarious thing I'm constantly on my guard against. By forcing everything through Safari I have reasonable protections against these privacy violations, as well as good blocking of ads and trackers.