5 ms·

Talk is cheap. What actions has Apple taken to demonstrate that they care about facilitating the businesses of developers using the App Stores? They've added AP

by lukifer 12y ago

Talk is cheap. What actions has Apple taken to demonstrate that they care about facilitating the businesses of developers using the App Stores? They've added APIs, tools, even a new language, but the only improvement I can think of for the App Stores is video preview. While it's not Apple's job to enable every possible business model under the sun, they ultimately hurt both themselves and users by trying to force everything into the "game vending machine" model, not to mention the app types which are forever excluded due to sandbox restrictions (see Panic's experience with the MAS, for example [1]). [1]: http://www.panic.com/blog/coda-2-5-and-the-mac-app-store/ http://www.panic.com/blog/coda-2-5-and-the-mac-app-store/

vitd 12y ago
Well one thing they’ve done is ensure that all apps are sandboxed so that I can be sure when my mother downloads an app, it’s not going to be a vector to infest her computer.
- lukifer 12y ago
  Sandboxing is an excellent default, but the lack of permanent, specific exceptions when they're genuinely needed is what blocks whole categories of apps needlessly. (Your mother is probably not likely to download a pro FTP client.)
gress 12y ago
What suggestion for raising app revenue do you have that wouldn't put them at a disadvantage Google?
- lukifer 12y ago
  It's not just about revenue, but about process. For instance, the delay on bug fix releases could still use a lot of improvement. (Disclaimer: I work in web-land, where a deploy time of more than 10 seconds is laughable.) But even just on the revenue metric, as mentioned in the article: - Trial periods (especially relevant for softare over 5-10 bucks). - Paid upgrades (many producers of high-end software can't be sustained with new purchases alone, and faking it with in-app purchases or "MyApp 2" is a terrible experience for everybody). - Permanent sandbox exceptions for apps that genuinely need them. - Lower the ridiculous, quasi-usurious 30% tax. I don't expect Apple to do this, but in the Mac realm where developers have other distribution options, the buying convenience and visibility may not be worth the revenue hit. If Apple has the cash to make iCloud a loss-leader for selling shiny gadgets (and they do), they can afford to make App Stores revenue-neutral or even a cost center. Note that every one of these deficiencies is a loss for developers and users alike.
  - gress 12y ago
    So you chose to ignore the 'not putting them at a disadvantage' point. Repeating the points from the linked article is not a contribution.
    - lukifer 12y ago
      I fail to see how any of the things I suggested put them at a disadvantage to Google, other than maybe lowering the 30% (and given that that the vast majority of Apple's revenue comes from hardware, I strongly doubt that it would be significant.)
      - gress 12y ago
        All of those things make the average price of software go up. I realize that's desirable to developers (me included), but it would also tilt the overall market towards platforms where software is cheaper.
        lukifer 12y ago
        I think that's debatable. Trials could result in more software getting purchased (and fewer instances of feeling burned, meaning more likelihood of future MAS purchases). Lowering the 30% would trickle savings down to customers, as producers could price more aggressively for the same marginal revenue and try to drive up volume. The only change I see that could affect the price of sofware is paid upgrades, which does fundamentally alter the pricing dynamic by incentivizing an unpleasant upgrade treadmill in the worst cases. But the problem is, companies whose revenue is dependent on upgrades will still do so, only badly: either using "MyApp 3" (which is awkward, and doesn't allow upgrade pricing for existing users); or, using in-app purchases, which is a weird experience, and has a huge drag co-efficient by requiring developers to support all old functionality in the same app, forever. (Imagine if Pixelmator 4 had to encapsulate every last bit of Pixelmators 1-3, bug-free, within version 4. It's a recipe for disaster for both users and developers, making it cost-prohibitive to do under-the-hood improvements instead of just Features Features Features, meaning more technical debt.) If there's another way in which my suggestions alter the price of software as commodity, or alter consumer pricing psychology, please point it out.

by lukifer 12y ago

vitd 12y ago

Well one thing they’ve done is ensure that all apps are sandboxed so that I can be sure when my mother downloads an app, it’s not going to be a vector to infest her computer.

lukifer 12y ago
Sandboxing is an excellent default, but the lack of permanent, specific exceptions when they're genuinely needed is what blocks whole categories of apps needlessly. (Your mother is probably not likely to download a pro FTP client.)

gress 12y ago

What suggestion for raising app revenue do you have that wouldn't put them at a disadvantage Google?

lukifer 12y ago
It's not just about revenue, but about process. For instance, the delay on bug fix releases could still use a lot of improvement. (Disclaimer: I work in web-land, where a deploy time of more than 10 seconds is laughable.) But even just on the revenue metric, as mentioned in the article: - Trial periods (especially relevant for softare over 5-10 bucks). - Paid upgrades (many producers of high-end software can't be sustained with new purchases alone, and faking it with in-app purchases or "MyApp 2" is a terrible experience for everybody). - Permanent sandbox exceptions for apps that genuinely need them. - Lower the ridiculous, quasi-usurious 30% tax. I don't expect Apple to do this, but in the Mac realm where developers have other distribution options, the buying convenience and visibility may not be worth the revenue hit. If Apple has the cash to make iCloud a loss-leader for selling shiny gadgets (and they do), they can afford to make App Stores revenue-neutral or even a cost center. Note that every one of these deficiencies is a loss for developers and users alike.
- gress 12y ago
  So you chose to ignore the 'not putting them at a disadvantage' point. Repeating the points from the linked article is not a contribution.
  - lukifer 12y ago
    I fail to see how any of the things I suggested put them at a disadvantage to Google, other than maybe lowering the 30% (and given that that the vast majority of Apple's revenue comes from hardware, I strongly doubt that it would be significant.)
    - gress 12y ago
      All of those things make the average price of software go up. I realize that's desirable to developers (me included), but it would also tilt the overall market towards platforms where software is cheaper.
      - lukifer 12y ago
        I think that's debatable. Trials could result in more software getting purchased (and fewer instances of feeling burned, meaning more likelihood of future MAS purchases). Lowering the 30% would trickle savings down to customers, as producers could price more aggressively for the same marginal revenue and try to drive up volume. The only change I see that could affect the price of sofware is paid upgrades, which does fundamentally alter the pricing dynamic by incentivizing an unpleasant upgrade treadmill in the worst cases. But the problem is, companies whose revenue is dependent on upgrades will still do so, only badly: either using "MyApp 3" (which is awkward, and doesn't allow upgrade pricing for existing users); or, using in-app purchases, which is a weird experience, and has a huge drag co-efficient by requiring developers to support all old functionality in the same app, forever. (Imagine if Pixelmator 4 had to encapsulate every last bit of Pixelmators 1-3, bug-free, within version 4. It's a recipe for disaster for both users and developers, making it cost-prohibitive to do under-the-hood improvements instead of just Features Features Features, meaning more technical debt.) If there's another way in which my suggestions alter the price of software as commodity, or alter consumer pricing psychology, please point it out.