4 ms·

Another point to add is that applications sold outside the App Store can avoid the sandboxing restrictions of the Store, and consequently contain functionality

Another point to add is that applications sold outside the App Store can avoid the sandboxing restrictions of the Store, and consequently contain functionality that would be not permitted by Apple on the Store (file access, deeper system access, etc.). That said, for my side project ( http://artfulmac.com http://artfulmac.com ) it is absolutely worth it to me as a solo developer to pay Apple their 30% to have them handle fulfillment (including system-integrated update notifications), payment processing (with currency conversion), tax form creation, and refunds. It's a trade of financial overhead for time. The App Store also conveys a sense of trust to consumers.

milen 12y ago
it is absolutely worth it to me as a solo developer to pay Apple their 30% to have them handle fulfillment I think one aspect that gets easily lost in the debate is the long-term impact of having your app on the MAS (exclusively or not). You need to consider the value of being able to provide trials (i.e., do not force potential customers to spend money upfront on software that might not fulfil their requirements), discounts for your long term repeat customers, the ability to communicate directly with them and resolve their problems. If you want to run a sustainable business, whether the MAS is a net positive becomes a question mark. I have not seen much supporting data to suggest that the MAS is a net positive if we compare exclusive direct vs exclusive MAS over a long period of time. Anecdotally, from the data I have on hand (conversations with customers and friends), almost no one discovered their Mac apps from the MAS (there's some bias in my sample, of course). If they needed the software, they would have bought it - whether it's outside or not doesn't matter. If you need a tool for your job (the type of software I'm interesting in making), you're not going pass on it just cause you have to enter your credit card. For other types of software, the more disposable ones, convenience plays a much bigger role. And most importantly of all, it will all depend on the particular type of software that you're selling. In my experience, the MAS works great for type of software that's mostly consumable - cheap, disposable, no long term plan to keep it updated. For other types, where you plan to run a sustainable business over many years - I'm not convinced. While you'll probably do less units selling directly, you'll be getting a significantly higher proportion of the sale price. It's important to consider all aspects, not just raw revenue over a short period of time and make a decision from there - for some apps, the MAS would be the right way, for others - not so much. Now, deciding which way to go is a much, much harder question and I'm afraid there's no easy way to come up with a definitive answer.
- cageface 12y ago
  This is a critical flaw in Apple's handling of both app stores, IMO. The rules of the app store incentivize simple, one-off apps with minimal functionality. As a distribution mechanism it offers a lot of benefits for users but unless they take some relatively easy steps to make it a better place for serious developers those benefits will be moot. Their handling of iOS and Mac apps seems indifferent at best and downright incompetent at best. In any case I've left their proprietary ghetto and gone back to coding for the web.
TillE 12y ago
Taxes are a huge deal for solo developers and tiny companies. Selling direct can be extremely complicated, especially if you want to properly follow every possible sales tax law which applies to you. Putting your software on the App Store or Steam or similar (notably not Google Play[1]) means you're just getting paid royalties, not selling a product to individual customers. [1] https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribution-agreement.html https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu... "You are the merchant of record for Products you sell through the Store." I'd bet that 95% of smaller Android app developers have not hired an accountant to review every last detail, and therefore have failed to pay every cent of tax they owe. Unless you're very serious about starting a real business, it's a total nightmare.
- milen 12y ago
  Indeed you are correct and that's why it's generally simpler to use a service that acts as a reseller - i.e., they are the vendor of record. This means you shift all of the responsibility to them and you don't have to deal with it. Using the likes of PayPal / Stripe is not a good idea because you will be responsible for VAT compliance and with the newly introduced EU legislation, it can be a huge hassle - you need to deal with the MOSS at least. If you're selling software, I can recommend FastSpring - it's what the majority of Mac software houses use, it's highly customisable and they've been around for years. Furthermore, if you're UK based and use a non-UK marketplace / reseller, then the revenue you receive from the reseller lies outside the scope of UK VAT and you don't have to do anything [1] The reason why most EU developers on the App Stores don't deal with VAT is because the vendor of record is Apple Luxembourg, thus lies outside the scope. And that's precisely why Apple requires VAT invoices from Luxembourg-based developers. [1] https://www.gov.uk/vat-how-to-work-out-your-place-of-supply-of-services https://www.gov.uk/vat-how-to-work-out-your-place-of-supply-...
  - SyneRyder 12y ago
    Another +1 for FastSpring, they've been fantastic to me. But there are other companies who do this too: Kagi & Avangate spring to mind, and Digital River bought & consolidated several companies that used to do this.
niels_olson 12y ago
Can artfulmac work with the screensaver too? Then I could quickly and passively get a sense of what I want on my wallpaper for an extended period of time.
rtpg 12y ago
>That said, for my side project ( http://artfulmac.com http://artfulmac.com ) it is absolutely worth it to me as a solo developer to pay Apple their 30% to have them handle fulfillment (including system-integrated update notifications), payment processing (with currency conversion), tax form creation, and refunds. It's a trade of financial overhead for time. The App Store also conveys a sense of trust to consumers. There's also the fact being on the App Store is a form of advertising. I think this is more obvious in Steam, which basically creates markets for games that had none before (usually because indie game developers are not necessarily good marketers). I know I've "browsed" the App store to look at things. In these sales, it's not getting only 70% of revenue you would have otherwise, it's getting money you would not have gotten at all if you weren't present on the store.

milen 12y ago

it is absolutely worth it to me as a solo developer to pay Apple their 30% to have them handle fulfillment I think one aspect that gets easily lost in the debate is the long-term impact of having your app on the MAS (exclusively or not). You need to consider the value of being able to provide trials (i.e., do not force potential customers to spend money upfront on software that might not fulfil their requirements), discounts for your long term repeat customers, the ability to communicate directly with them and resolve their problems. If you want to run a sustainable business, whether the MAS is a net positive becomes a question mark. I have not seen much supporting data to suggest that the MAS is a net positive if we compare exclusive direct vs exclusive MAS over a long period of time. Anecdotally, from the data I have on hand (conversations with customers and friends), almost no one discovered their Mac apps from the MAS (there's some bias in my sample, of course). If they needed the software, they would have bought it - whether it's outside or not doesn't matter. If you need a tool for your job (the type of software I'm interesting in making), you're not going pass on it just cause you have to enter your credit card. For other types of software, the more disposable ones, convenience plays a much bigger role. And most importantly of all, it will all depend on the particular type of software that you're selling. In my experience, the MAS works great for type of software that's mostly consumable - cheap, disposable, no long term plan to keep it updated. For other types, where you plan to run a sustainable business over many years - I'm not convinced. While you'll probably do less units selling directly, you'll be getting a significantly higher proportion of the sale price. It's important to consider all aspects, not just raw revenue over a short period of time and make a decision from there - for some apps, the MAS would be the right way, for others - not so much. Now, deciding which way to go is a much, much harder question and I'm afraid there's no easy way to come up with a definitive answer.

cageface 12y ago
This is a critical flaw in Apple's handling of both app stores, IMO. The rules of the app store incentivize simple, one-off apps with minimal functionality. As a distribution mechanism it offers a lot of benefits for users but unless they take some relatively easy steps to make it a better place for serious developers those benefits will be moot. Their handling of iOS and Mac apps seems indifferent at best and downright incompetent at best. In any case I've left their proprietary ghetto and gone back to coding for the web.

TillE 12y ago

Taxes are a huge deal for solo developers and tiny companies. Selling direct can be extremely complicated, especially if you want to properly follow every possible sales tax law which applies to you. Putting your software on the App Store or Steam or similar (notably not Google Play[1]) means you're just getting paid royalties, not selling a product to individual customers. [1] https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribution-agreement.html https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu... "You are the merchant of record for Products you sell through the Store." I'd bet that 95% of smaller Android app developers have not hired an accountant to review every last detail, and therefore have failed to pay every cent of tax they owe. Unless you're very serious about starting a real business, it's a total nightmare.

milen 12y ago
Indeed you are correct and that's why it's generally simpler to use a service that acts as a reseller - i.e., they are the vendor of record. This means you shift all of the responsibility to them and you don't have to deal with it. Using the likes of PayPal / Stripe is not a good idea because you will be responsible for VAT compliance and with the newly introduced EU legislation, it can be a huge hassle - you need to deal with the MOSS at least. If you're selling software, I can recommend FastSpring - it's what the majority of Mac software houses use, it's highly customisable and they've been around for years. Furthermore, if you're UK based and use a non-UK marketplace / reseller, then the revenue you receive from the reseller lies outside the scope of UK VAT and you don't have to do anything [1] The reason why most EU developers on the App Stores don't deal with VAT is because the vendor of record is Apple Luxembourg, thus lies outside the scope. And that's precisely why Apple requires VAT invoices from Luxembourg-based developers. [1] https://www.gov.uk/vat-how-to-work-out-your-place-of-supply-of-services https://www.gov.uk/vat-how-to-work-out-your-place-of-supply-...
- SyneRyder 12y ago
  Another +1 for FastSpring, they've been fantastic to me. But there are other companies who do this too: Kagi & Avangate spring to mind, and Digital River bought & consolidated several companies that used to do this.

niels_olson 12y ago

Can artfulmac work with the screensaver too? Then I could quickly and passively get a sense of what I want on my wallpaper for an extended period of time.

rtpg 12y ago

>That said, for my side project ( http://artfulmac.com http://artfulmac.com ) it is absolutely worth it to me as a solo developer to pay Apple their 30% to have them handle fulfillment (including system-integrated update notifications), payment processing (with currency conversion), tax form creation, and refunds. It's a trade of financial overhead for time. The App Store also conveys a sense of trust to consumers. There's also the fact being on the App Store is a form of advertising. I think this is more obvious in Steam, which basically creates markets for games that had none before (usually because indie game developers are not necessarily good marketers). I know I've "browsed" the App store to look at things. In these sales, it's not getting only 70% of revenue you would have otherwise, it's getting money you would not have gotten at all if you weren't present on the store.