App Stores in detail [Archive]

jayducharme

Apr 2, 2009, 10:56 AM

While Apple and Android offer development teams the ability to spin out as many new applications as they see fit, Microsoft and RIM charge on a per app basis (US$99 per app at Microsoft, US$200 per ten apps at RIM). And to make matters worse, both count an update to an existing app as a new one for the purposes of these fees.

RIM may also face challenges if it insists on its users only being able to pay for apps on Blackberry App World via PayPal.

I can't see how MS and RIM expect to attract many developers with that model. Apple might have a peculiar screening process, but at least it's really easy to submit your apps to them, and it doesn't cost a lot. If you want to offer free apps via MS or RIM, you'd be bleeding money. Also, having to pay for updates might mean that fewer app improvements would be released through MS and RIM.

"Additionally, Android has no privileged framework APIs, and all apps are created equal: applications can interact with each other and even replace the system default apps."

Once developers have registered as a publisher, they do not need anyone's permission to deploy applications and can self-sign their own applications without being stung with an application registration fee.

This sounds like a disaster in the making. Anyone wishing to make a malicious app apparently could do an enormous amount of damage. This is one reason I'm glad that Apple rides herd over their App Store.