Back in June, a few weeks before the App Store opened, I posted a list of open questions for the App Store. Now, almost five months since the store opened, we've seen some answers. Let's look over those questions from June:
What exactly does Fairplay for apps mean?
Thus far, FairPlay has not appeared to be much of an issue for users. Applications are not tied to a single device, just to one store account. As well, applications can be re-downloaded freely from the App Store (unlike music and movies), so there's no concerns about losing software.
How will developers get customer information?
In short, we don't. iTunes handles notifications of all updates, so it's not essential that developers have this information in order to alert users to updates. However, this does make it very difficult to do additional marketing, such as alerting your users to new products they in which they may be interested.
How will support be handled?
Users are provided with a website address for support in the App Store itself, and that seems to work well enough. However, I wonder how many users are having difficulty finding the proper venue for requesting support, as it's relatively hidden away in the App Store. As well, I'd wager that Apple is getting many support emails for third party products, because users simply don't realize that the software is not made by Apple.
What about trials?
Trials are not currently possible. After several months of dealing with the App Store, I feel this is the single most-needed change to improve the long-term viability of iPhone development. This has been discussed in many places around the web, including previous post I wrote. Hopefully, Apple hears the growing demand for trials from developers and users alike.
How will refunds be handled?
Thus far, refunds have been relatively hidden from users, as noted in a previous post. This hasn't been the issue for developers I feared it might be. However, with the combination of no trials and difficult-to-recieve refunds, users have often been left with sub-par software.
How do we give out review copies?
As of last week, it's finally possible for developers to provide free copies of the software to reporters and other reviewers. This is an excellent change for third-party developers, who previously needed to either rely on the Ad Hoc system or use iTunes gift cards (thereby paying for 30% of the price) in order to give reviewers free copies.
What about other pricing concerns?
Coupons, volume discounts, and discounted upgrades still aren't possible, which is bothersome for developers. With the addition of review copies, however, it's certainly possible that Apple may consider these changes for the future.
Changes have been relatively slow to come to the App Store. However, with the addition of review copies, as well as limiting ratings to those who've purchased applications, Apple has made changes that have been welcomed by developers. I'm hopeful that the App Store will continue to improve over time and address additional issues.
©2009, O'Reilly Media, Inc. (707) 827-7000 / (800) 998-9938 All trademarks and registered trademarks appearing on oreilly.com are the property of their respective owners. |
About O'Reilly
Academic Solutions Authors Contacts Customer Service Jobs Newsletters O'Reilly Labs Press Room Privacy Policy RSS Feeds Terms of Service User Groups Writing for O'Reilly |
Content Archive Business Technology Computer Technology Microsoft Mobile Network Operating System Digital Photography Programming Software Web Web Design |
More O'Reilly Sites
O'Reilly Radar Ignite Tools of Change for Publishing Digital Media Inside iPhone O'Reilly FYI makezine.com craftzine.com hackszine.com perl.com xml.com Partner Sites InsideRIA java.net O'Reilly Insights on Forbes.com |
Users are provided with a website address for support in the App Store itself, and that seems to work well enough. However, I wonder how many users are having difficulty finding the proper venue for requesting support, as it's relatively hidden away in the App Store. As well, I'd wager that Apple is getting many support emails for third party products, because users simply don't realize that the software is not made by Apple.
Ars' writer (and jailbreaker famours) Erica Sadun has a nice article on the subject:
App Store Lessons: Design for Contact
This is an excellent change for third-party developers, who previously needed to either rely on the Ad Hoc system or use iTunes gift cards (thereby paying for 30% of the price) in order to give reviewers free copies.
Must Apple pay for your own marketing? (Just a thought!)
Hi,
There is an error in the following post:
Some App Store Answers - Inside iPhone Blog
http://blogs.oreilly.com/iphone/2008/12/some-app-store-answers.html
It contains the text:
"Back in June, a few weeks before the App Store opened, a posted a list of"
You probably meant to say:
"Back in June, a few weeks before the App Store opened, I posted a list of"
Bye.
So, Paul, are you now using the App Store to distribute products or is this still third-hand writing? It is not clear from your post.
So Bob, are you disputing whether anything Paul says is factually accurate? Because if not, your comment is nothing more than a personal, irrelevant jibe. It's not clear from your comment.
FairPlay should not be applied to iPod software updates. Software updates should be tied to the device, not account. What good is a software update I bought fo an iPod Touch 1st gen to a 2nd gen.
That means that if you ever pass your iPod to a family member with different iTunes account (or heck, just resell it), you have no use for the update you payed money for anymore, which you are not allowed to pass along with the iPod, and the new user has to buy it again in order for the very same iPod not to be downgraded.
elmimmo,
If it's a family member you should give him of her your iTunes password. Remember, one account can be shared across 5 computers.
Luis Alejandro Masanti: Erica's also a writer for this very blog. And indeed, making it easy for users to contact the developer through the app is probably a good move for most developers.
"Must Apple pay for your own marketing? (Just a thought!)"
Certainly not, and I'm not asking them to. The question is, must -I- pay -Apple- for the ability to market? The cost of the bandwidth for a download so close to zero as to be meaningless. But previously, someone had to cover the cost of any paid app to be reviewed, either the reviewer (by buying it directly) or the developer (by providing an iTunes gift card to be used to buy the application).
In this second scenario, the developer of a $10 application would give Apple $10 (for the gift card), the reviewer would use that $10 gift card to buy that application, and then Apple would pay the developer $7 (his cut of the sale). In the end, the developer wound up paying Apple 30% ($3 here) on purchase he had made himself.
In other words, every review unit a developer gave out cost him 30% of the price of the software. Giving out free review copies is standard procedure on the Mac and Windows platforms, so paying this kind of overhead was both unexpected and completely unnecessary, as there was no basis for this cost.
December 8, 2008 6:14 AM
Simon Evans: Obliged, all fixed!
Bob: I'm not sure why any of this would be "third-hand" writing, or even second-hand. None of the above requires having a product shipped. Since July, I've been a customer of the App Store and a developer with access to the inner workings of the Store from the developer side.
While not really relevant that I can see, Rogue Amoeba has our first application in the App Store pipeline now.
Ian Betteridge: And a hat-tip in your direction.
elmimmo: Have you had an actual problematic experience with the firmware? As far as I can see, the firmware is unrelated to what I was talking about with third-party apps.
If you pass the device off, the firmware just stays with the device (right on it). It's not as if switching the user account the iPod is using will suddenly downgrade the device. As far as I can see, a firmware upgrade will be a one-time, permanent change (as firmware tends to be). Have I missed something though?
One "pricing concern" that's been talked about lately is the relationship between price and popularity, with the obvious connection to being able to make a living.
For the most part, price and popularity follow a Zipf curve, with popularity dropping off quickly with price. There are outliers, though, that are interesting: apps that are much more popular than similarly priced apps exist in every category. This data makes a plausible argument that people will pay more for very good applications.
I also did some looking at multiplying price and popularity to generate a ranking of who's making the most, the second most, etc. for each category.
We're turning this into a series of articles for Mobile Orchard. First one is up at:
http://www.mobileorchard.com/price-and-popularity-the-iphone-app-stores-data-shows-whos-making-the-big-money/
FairPlay is done exactly right from a user’s perspective (though some developers may not find it ideal); if I have several iPhone OS devices, I want to be able to load the same apps on all of them. Taking it further, we have a shared iTunes library in this flat—my wife and I both sync our iPods from it. While I would understand some developers not liking the fact that both of us get the same apps for the same price as one of us alone getting them, I'd be pretty unhappy if FairPlay’s mode of operation was changed now we’ve all got used to it.
Maybe I'm greedy, or maybe I'd just not relish a change which left me worse off having come this far :)
Exellent breakdown of the State of the iPhone, and I largely agree.
Support issues, I think, should be handled via the app. There should be an obvious place where, if you're having problems, you could tap one simple thing to either send an e-mail to the devs, or open a website.
The huge thing missing, as noted, is demos, which I think Apple could (relatively!) easily solve by just revoking a user's license after a certain amount of time. They've done it with movies, and while it's completely different, they should definitely do it with apps.
It would also be nice if a developer could make two different versions of their app (demo + full) and users could seamlessly upgrade from one to another.
Here are some other issues it would be nice to see Apple address:
-- Paid updates. Currently all upgrades are free. At some point developers will want to be paid for significant enhancements. The iTunes UI seems to foresee this possibility, but as far as I can tell there is no way for developers to put a price on an update.
-- Paid upgrades. This is similar to trial versions. You want to be able to go from the simple version to the pro version. Less crucial than paid updates, but still part of a complete pricing and sales system.
-- Selling under multiple company names. As a contract developer, we want to be able to sell under several brands. Currently we have to open separate Developer accounts for each brand. It should be possible to have several brands under one company account.