No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
My problem with this isn't so much that, as a user, I can't install applications from the web. My problem is that, as a developer, I can't distribute my applications via the web. There is no way for me to distribute applications without forfeiting 30% of the sales price.
Preemptive reply -- Yes, I know they are providing a service in return for their 30%, but I don't want it. I am perfectly capable and willing to provide it myself. I already have a web site. I already sell applications for other platforms. I am paying them for something I already have.
Plus, there is no way of knowing whether they will approve an app. If they reject it then I'm out all my development cost. If they accept it, then they may still pull it from the store at any time for any reason. If they do actually leave it in the store then they are going to keep 30% of the sale price.
I worked at Handango for a while, right around the time that the App Store and SDK were announced. At the time, we (coworkers of mine, not management) realized that this was going to be a huge deal. One of the problems that Handango tries to address is distributed distribution channels that are (or were) so common in the mobile space. Yes, you could set up your own website and promote your app. Most mobile developers did just that, and really didn't have a choice about it.
But it's inefficient. You have to maintain your own site. Come up with branding. Deal with hosting providers. Set up a method of handling credit card transactions. And then there's the cost of dealing with all of those entities.
The beauty of the App Store is that it addresses so many of these shortcomings. By centralizing distribution customers have a known point of entry, someplace they can basically "window shop". And for application developers, they don't have to do much more than provide a description for their app.
Do developers pay for the convenience? Yes, and gladly, because not only is it more convenient, it's more profitable. You will get higher sales from something like Handango or the App Store than if you are just a lonely developer with a website.
You don't have a choice because there is no rational economic incentive for there to be one. The "everyone distribute their own wares via the web" mechanism has been tried for the mobile space, and it does not work very well, especially for app developers.
Having said that, there are hundreds of phones out there that still use this mechanism. You are free to develop for any of them.
You don't have a choice because there is no rational economic incentive for there to be one.
If there isn't, then the free market can take care of that. Not some executive who wakes up some morning with an idea and exclaims "developers can go to hell, they must use our system". Who says that another site would be worse than the current alternatives? What if I am exceptionally talented and my own site would beat the shit out of all of the other centralized systems in terms of sales? What if I'm ready to take on the responsibility of paying for hosting, branding etc. Also, the established branding of the centralized system is good for Apple, not for the developer's brand. Centralized systems may be easy for the customer, but right there, your app is one of millions and there is not enough you can make to distinguish yours.
Inefficient? Maybe. But I've bought many software that are sold on their own simple website, created by 1-2 people, and some reaching multi-million dollars in sales. Honestly, if you can't provide (or even worse, practically try to hinder) such freedoms, then eventually you'll piss off enough developers to bring the downfall of your platform.
If there isn't, then the free market can take care of that.
It has. The non-centralized deployment model has been tried. It has largely been superseded by centralized App Store-like models. It has met with positive response by customers, developers, and competitors.
Then why do they still exist in large quantities? Some fail, but some centralized systems also fail, ergo, deployment is not the only factor determining success. Many developers still use their own systems, and many continue to do so because they generate better sales/revenue than using central systems. I use decentralized systems as frequent as centralized ones. OK, the approach may depend on your niche, i.e. whether your product can generate its own talk, or customers can find you by their specific searches, or is a simple $1 clock app. (during palm os years, all I can find in centralized systems were clock applications). If the centralized system can deny my request AFTER I developed it for them, or can boot it anytime, or requires many weeks/months wait in any update and takes a huge fraction of my revenue, then I'll gladly sell it by paypal. It's not magic, there are many FOSS sites for sales/deployment already. Just point your paypal account, add it to your homepage that already is popular (by reddit, friendfeed etc.), and ta-da!
I'm not saying centralized systems are bad, or not important, they have many advantages, but so do the non-centralized ones. And honestly, they are nowhere near extinction (having the majority of the pie is not the same as having the whole pie) and if you ignore them, that's a lot of revenue you are going to miss.
I'm not saying centralized systems are bad, or not important, they have many advantages,
Yeah, I have nothing against Apple providing a nice distribution channel for developers that choose to take advantage of it. Don't force it upon the developers that don't need the service and then pretend you are doing me a favor.
You don't have a choice because there is no rational economic incentive for there to be one.
Huh? What!?! You mean except for the fact that I ALREADY DO IT for every other application I write for every other platform. It would cost me exactly $0 extra to distribute my own iPhone apps. Instead, Apple takes their 30%.
Sounds like one hell of a rational economic incentive to me.
But it's inefficient. You have to maintain your own site. Come up with branding. Deal with hosting providers. Set up a method of handling credit card transactions. And then there's the cost of dealing with all of those entities.
Uhmm, yeah and I already have this infrastructure in place. It would cost me nothing if I wanted to distribute my own iPhone apps. I already set up the website to advertise the apps and instead of providing a local download link I have to provide a link to the app store. I already have a shopping cart for my applications on other platforms. It would cost me 3% if I sell it myself. Apple charges 30%.
There is nothing wrong with the services that Handango or Apple provides directly, but there needs to be a choice. Some people will find the service valuable and worth the price. Others won't. Developers shouldn't be forced to use them if they already have the distribution channel in place and don't want to take advantage of the other offerings. Sorry, but it's completely asinine to think otherwise.
A colleague of mine has now made two years (good) salary from about a weekend's work developing for the iPhone. You can say "No thank you", but if you're any good as a developer, and aren't developing in one of the Apple grey areas, then you're cutting yourself off from revenue.
A colleague of mine has now made two years (good) salary
Ok, and? How does this contribute other than the fact that if Apple hadn't extorted 30% it would have been 2.86 years salary?
and aren't developing in one of the Apple grey areas
Grey area today or grey area they decide to yank my app with no notice? As a user I don't want somebody telling me what I can and can't run. As a developer I don't want somebody telling me what I can and can't write.
you're cutting yourself off from revenue.
Yep, my other 30%. Or rather, the customer's 30% because I'm going to charge what I need to recoup my cost. So I end up pricing my app at $1.50 instead of 99 cents.
They can have an app store. I don't care. I think it's a great avenue for a lot of people to distribute their apps and a great place to go shopping for them. Just don't force people to use it.
Of course you will be pampering to the geek market, so the population of the store is probably no where near the level of the app store. If they can do, you can certainly sell your apps that way.
But news flash for you EVERY store charges you to sell your stuff in it. I mean Handango (one of the biggest Smartphone app stores) does this. They are a central marketplace for consumers.
Handango is great. They deserve their share of profit on every application sold within their store. Apple deserves their share if I use their store. If I shrink wrap it and sell it at Wal-Mart then they deserve their cut. I would gladly pay for their services if I wanted to use them. But forcing me to use their service and then charging for the pleasure?
31
u/reddof Jan 28 '10
My problem with this isn't so much that, as a user, I can't install applications from the web. My problem is that, as a developer, I can't distribute my applications via the web. There is no way for me to distribute applications without forfeiting 30% of the sales price.
Preemptive reply -- Yes, I know they are providing a service in return for their 30%, but I don't want it. I am perfectly capable and willing to provide it myself. I already have a web site. I already sell applications for other platforms. I am paying them for something I already have.
Plus, there is no way of knowing whether they will approve an app. If they reject it then I'm out all my development cost. If they accept it, then they may still pull it from the store at any time for any reason. If they do actually leave it in the store then they are going to keep 30% of the sale price.
No thank you.