6 ms·

Equally, a built-in, one-tap-to-install app store with frictionless payment led to an explosion of software creation and developer revenue. Trust was a huge pr

Equally, a built-in, one-tap-to-install app store with frictionless payment led to an explosion of software creation and developer revenue. Trust was a huge problem, distribution was a huge problem, and Apple solved both. It's important to keep in mind that this "explosion" of developer revenue is mostly in scammy pay to play games. Apple's app store rules have made it very difficult to build the kind of software business that flourished in the older model where users paid for significant feature upgrades. Apple's answer to this is pushing everything into a subscription model or awkward bundles of in-app purchases which I argue has not been to the benefit of users or most developers.

fshbbdssbbgdd 5y ago
Is it true empirically that independent developer software sales are lower on mobile than desktop? I definitely spend more on mobile apps, and I’m a software engineer who spends a lot of time on desktop. My impression is that the mobile app ecosystem has massively grown the market. Subscriptions are lucrative, so platform support for that only helps developers.
- frosted-flakes 5y ago
  I've spent no more than $50 on mobile software in the last decade, but more than $1000 for desktop software. The difference is that mobile apps are cheap and single-function, but desktop software is feature-rich and expensive. So even if I buy a lot of apps, I still spend more on desktop software. That is an anecdote, but I expect it's broadly true for the wider population. Even for games, I wouldn't blink at spending $50 on a PC or Nintendo Switch game, but for some reason I would never spend more than $5 for a mobile game.
pedalpete 5y ago
I don't believe the subscription model was "Apple's answer", it was probably coming along anyway. It made it somewhat easier with th app store, and perhaps gave it a push, but running a business with a subscription model, particularly in consumer software, has huge benefits to the business. It lets you charge a smaller amount up front, to get more people trying, and paying for your software, but keeps an ongoing revenue stream to keep the business going as well.
- kalleboo 5y ago
  As an iOS developer, Apple developer relations has been HEAVILY courting us to adopt subscriptions for our app. With long Keynote presentations extolling all the virtues and showing sample case studies and everything. We would prefer the traditional model of "pay for major feature updates every years" but the app store does not support that.
- cageface 5y ago
  Subscriptions are great if you can get your users to sign up for one. But most people are very reluctant to add another subscription to the list of monthly bills they have to pay. For example I might pay $10 every year or two to upgrade a nice photo editing app on my phone and I might even buy several of these but I'm extremely reluctant to sign up for a monthly charge for an app like this and if I do it will only be one.
  - iscrewyou 5y ago
    I’ve abandoned many apps because of subscription push. Subscriptions are somewhat like credit cards. I wonder if people realize the monthly increase in prices to their bills is like signing up for cable back in the day. Sometimes the simplest app having a subscription seems like pure greed from the developer. The excuses are generally that of increase in development costs. But maybe that is equivalent to increasing the cost of development like increasing the cost of living when there is extra money coming in.
    - chihuahua 5y ago
      Yeah I decided a long time ago that I'm not playing that game, adding subscriptions for all kinds of things. The only recurring charge I pay for is Amazon Prime, because I don't want to think about shipping costs and I like Prime Video (replaces Netflix) and Fresh (free grocery delivery, no need for Instacart) Other than that, anything that requires a subscription, I can do without. I've bought one mobile app in my life: Backcountry Navigator. It lets me download detailed maps for hiking and then use them where there's no cellphone towers. The free version was good enough, but it was so useful that it felt better to pay the developer his $7 for lifetime usage (no recurring charge)
zepto 5y ago
> Apple's app store rules have made it very difficult to build the kind of software business that flourished in the older model where users paid for significant feature upgrades. This era was remembered with fondness, but there were hardly any of these businesses compared to the number of software companies that exist today.
- lupinglade 5y ago
  Quantity != Quality, though.
  - zepto 5y ago
    Agreed. But the quantity of good software is higher too.
- cageface 5y ago
  Software is now deeply integrated into every aspect of our lives. It's expected that there's a lot more of it. What we don't know is how many and what variety of software companies would exist if the app store wasn't so obviously designed to commodify the complement of Apple's iPhone cash cow.
  - zepto 5y ago
    > wasn't so obviously designed to commodify the complement of Apple's iPhone cash cow This makes no sense whatsoever. High quality apps are in Apple’s interest because they need to compete against Android and the web. The reason the app business model is hard, is that there is a lot of money, enormous competition now, and no intellectual property protection. Nothing more. If anything the App Store has slowed the commodification.
    - cageface 5y ago
      Compare what kinds of music making tools are available inside the app store and outside the app store and you'll see this is completely not the case. There is tremendous competition outside the app store in this market but devs can still charge $200+ for a single very high quality product and make a good living selling paid upgrades. Users will crucify you for trying to charge $200 for anything in the app store. It's digital serfdom for devs.

fshbbdssbbgdd 5y ago

Is it true empirically that independent developer software sales are lower on mobile than desktop? I definitely spend more on mobile apps, and I’m a software engineer who spends a lot of time on desktop. My impression is that the mobile app ecosystem has massively grown the market. Subscriptions are lucrative, so platform support for that only helps developers.

frosted-flakes 5y ago
I've spent no more than $50 on mobile software in the last decade, but more than $1000 for desktop software. The difference is that mobile apps are cheap and single-function, but desktop software is feature-rich and expensive. So even if I buy a lot of apps, I still spend more on desktop software. That is an anecdote, but I expect it's broadly true for the wider population. Even for games, I wouldn't blink at spending $50 on a PC or Nintendo Switch game, but for some reason I would never spend more than $5 for a mobile game.

pedalpete 5y ago

I don't believe the subscription model was "Apple's answer", it was probably coming along anyway. It made it somewhat easier with th app store, and perhaps gave it a push, but running a business with a subscription model, particularly in consumer software, has huge benefits to the business. It lets you charge a smaller amount up front, to get more people trying, and paying for your software, but keeps an ongoing revenue stream to keep the business going as well.

kalleboo 5y ago
As an iOS developer, Apple developer relations has been HEAVILY courting us to adopt subscriptions for our app. With long Keynote presentations extolling all the virtues and showing sample case studies and everything. We would prefer the traditional model of "pay for major feature updates every years" but the app store does not support that.
cageface 5y ago
Subscriptions are great if you can get your users to sign up for one. But most people are very reluctant to add another subscription to the list of monthly bills they have to pay. For example I might pay $10 every year or two to upgrade a nice photo editing app on my phone and I might even buy several of these but I'm extremely reluctant to sign up for a monthly charge for an app like this and if I do it will only be one.
- iscrewyou 5y ago
  I’ve abandoned many apps because of subscription push. Subscriptions are somewhat like credit cards. I wonder if people realize the monthly increase in prices to their bills is like signing up for cable back in the day. Sometimes the simplest app having a subscription seems like pure greed from the developer. The excuses are generally that of increase in development costs. But maybe that is equivalent to increasing the cost of development like increasing the cost of living when there is extra money coming in.
  - chihuahua 5y ago
    Yeah I decided a long time ago that I'm not playing that game, adding subscriptions for all kinds of things. The only recurring charge I pay for is Amazon Prime, because I don't want to think about shipping costs and I like Prime Video (replaces Netflix) and Fresh (free grocery delivery, no need for Instacart) Other than that, anything that requires a subscription, I can do without. I've bought one mobile app in my life: Backcountry Navigator. It lets me download detailed maps for hiking and then use them where there's no cellphone towers. The free version was good enough, but it was so useful that it felt better to pay the developer his $7 for lifetime usage (no recurring charge)

zepto 5y ago

> Apple's app store rules have made it very difficult to build the kind of software business that flourished in the older model where users paid for significant feature upgrades. This era was remembered with fondness, but there were hardly any of these businesses compared to the number of software companies that exist today.

lupinglade 5y ago
Quantity != Quality, though.
- zepto 5y ago
  Agreed. But the quantity of good software is higher too.
cageface 5y ago
Software is now deeply integrated into every aspect of our lives. It's expected that there's a lot more of it. What we don't know is how many and what variety of software companies would exist if the app store wasn't so obviously designed to commodify the complement of Apple's iPhone cash cow.
- zepto 5y ago
  > wasn't so obviously designed to commodify the complement of Apple's iPhone cash cow This makes no sense whatsoever. High quality apps are in Apple’s interest because they need to compete against Android and the web. The reason the app business model is hard, is that there is a lot of money, enormous competition now, and no intellectual property protection. Nothing more. If anything the App Store has slowed the commodification.
  - cageface 5y ago
    Compare what kinds of music making tools are available inside the app store and outside the app store and you'll see this is completely not the case. There is tremendous competition outside the app store in this market but devs can still charge $200+ for a single very high quality product and make a good living selling paid upgrades. Users will crucify you for trying to charge $200 for anything in the app store. It's digital serfdom for devs.