Apple Surpasses 2 Billion App Store Downloads

[rdowns]

Link (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/28appstore.html)

More Than 85,000 Apps Now Available for iPhone & iPod touch

CUPERTINO, California—September 28, 2009—Apple® today announced that more than two billion apps have been downloaded from its revolutionary App Store, the largest applications store in the world. There are now more than 85,000 apps available to the more than 50 million iPhone™ and iPod touch® customers worldwide and over 125,000 developers in Apple’s iPhone Developer Program.

“The rate of App Store downloads continues to accelerate with users downloading a staggering two billion apps in just over a year, including more than half a billion apps this quarter alone,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “The App Store has reinvented what you can do with a mobile handheld device, and our users are clearly loving it.”

Today, iPhone and iPod touch customers in 77 countries worldwide can choose from an incredible range of apps in 20 categories, including games, business, news, sports, health, reference and travel. With the recently introduced iTunes® 9, it’s now easier than ever to organize and sync your apps right in iTunes and they will automatically appear on your iPhone or iPod touch with the same layout.

[balamw]

http://gizmodo.com/5369268/itunes-apps-reaches-2-billion-downloads

Congratulations to Apple and all App Store developers!

EDIT: rdowns beat me to it! :)

B

[talkingfuture]

Fantastic news, looks like the rate is still accelerating. Surely 3 billion will be reached by Christmas at this rate!

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/28/apple-surpasses-2-billion-app-store-downloads/)

Apple today announced (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/28appstore.html) that its App Store has surpassed two billion downloads. The company also noted that there are now over 50 million iPhone and iPod touch customers, 85,000 applications on the App Store, and 125,000 registered iPhone developers."The rate of App Store downloads continues to accelerate with users downloading a staggering two billion apps in just over a year, including more than half a billion apps this quarter alone," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "The App Store has reinvented what you can do with a mobile handheld device, and our users are clearly loving it."

Jobs announced at Apple's "It's Only Rock and Roll" media event (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/09/live-coverage-of-its-only-rock-and-roll-media-event/) earlier this month that the App Store had seen more than 1.8 billion downloads, and clarified that that number does not include updates.


http://images.macrumors.com/article/2009/09/28/094417-app_store_growth_sep09.png

App Store Growth
Finally, Apple reminds users that the App Store is available in 77 countries, with over 20 categories of applications to choose from, and promotes the new ability of iTunes 9 to organize iPhone and iPod touch home screens.

Article Link: Apple Surpasses 2 Billion App Store Downloads (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/28/apple-surpasses-2-billion-app-store-downloads/)

[mattwolfmatt]

I'd like to know how many are paid apps.

[faragher6]

yea it would be sweet to know how much money both apple and developers have made all together there in the store

[*LTD*]

Impressive . . . is an understatement.

The competition is still essentially nowhere in this area.

[bytethese]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

[masterapple04]

Congratulations to the devs, I guess. I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.

And I'm sure about 2/3 of those 2 billion were free apps.

[*LTD*]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

That's actually quite clever. Patent the idea immediately. ;)

[talkingfuture]

The latest two points on the graph show a steep increase recently, wonder what caused that?

ETA Just realised its probably new iPod touch owners.

[windowpain]

Seems like only yesterday they has the 1billionth app sold promotion..
Probably won't take long at all to make 3 billion.

Even if 2/3 were free..it still leaves 600 million paid apps, all of which apple gets a slice of. Not a bad little earner.

[rdowns]

Interesting (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090928/apples-apps-flying-off-the-virtual-shelves-6-6-million-downloads-per-day/?reflink=ATD_yahoo_ticker)


For starters, let’s note that the velocity of apps Apple (AAPL) is delivering is increasing: It took Steve Jobs and co a little more than a year to serve up the first 1.5 billion apps, which averages out at 4.1 million downloads per day.

But it moved the next 500 million apps within 76 days. That’s a 6.6 milllion per day average.

Next, let’s acknowledge that while the money Apple makes from the app store is secondary to its core hardware business, it’s still a sizeable amount.
Even if you assume that the majority of apps are downloaded for free, the remainder may still be generating sales of $200 million a month, mobile ad network AdMob guesstimates. Apple keeps 30% of that, which works out to be $720 million a year. Not bad for a side business.

[Mew2468]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

Clever. :)

Already 2 billion? It won't be long before we hit 3 billion...

[kevinws]

I still have not jumped to the iphone or touch. I still use an iPod 5.5

That is about 40 apps or so per user. That basically continues the last app download to device average i read about. My question is how many people actually have found 40 apps that are truly useful on regular basis. Meaning use them at least once every week or so. I am not including bodily function or game apps.

thanks

[LagunaSol]

The competition is still essentially nowhere in this area.

Don't worry - I'm sure the photocopiers in Redmond are overheating from overuse right now...

(Cue the MacRumors' MS apologists' counterassault.)

[guzhogi]

Something I'd like to know is how many of those are people just updating apps they already have & how many of those downloads are 1st time downloads. I know I've updated several of my 3rd party apps, some multiple times.

[gnasher729]

Congratulations to the devs, I guess. I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.

It would have been a mistake to delay the launch of the iPhone until third-party apps were available. It would also have been a mistake to delay the launch of the iPhone until an SDK for third-party application development was available. It would also have been a mistake to delay the release of Leopard (MacOS X 10.5) further in order to accelerate development of the SDK. It would also have been a mistake to hire a few hundred new developers to speed things up, because hiring a few hundred new developers tends to slow things down.

So what mistake is it that Apple made?

[rdowns]

I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.


I disagree. They weren't ready with a SDK and (especially in hindsight), it was a successful launch.

[Project]

2BN not including updates? Christ.

[LagunaSol]

My question is how many people actually have found 40 apps that are truly useful on regular basis.

*Checks my phone*

Things
Byline
Evernote
Fit Builder
Facebook
MyWeather
Inquisitor
Shazam
Slacker Radio
eBay
Deliveries
Skype
Wikipanion
ScoreMobile
Speed Test
Yelp
Pandora
Twitterriffic
Paper Toss
Urbanspoon
Now Playing
Save Benjis
CameraBag
i.TV
USA Today
Last.fm
Peggle
Fieldrunners
Ambiance
Eliss
iEmoji
CReports
Amazon.com
AP Mobile
IGN
INCHcalc+
WhatTheFont
MotionX GPS
InfinityGene
NPR News
Comcast
Yahoo! Fantasy Football '09

That makes 42 for me. I have many more apps on my iPhone than that, but these 42 get used frequently. Note there are no fart apps on my list, despite the Apple haters' oft-repeated chestnut that all the iPhone has is fart apps. ;)

[*LTD*]

2BN not including updates? Christ.

And *this* is what is most impressive.

However, it's worth noting that many iPhone apps aren't meant to be used every day. Both the USopen and the Wimbledon, for example, have iPhone apps that are excellent and will be used for less than two weeks and then downloaded again next year. Similarly, there are specific applications, like TripIt, that are used only when traveling. If you don't travel every week, the app will go unused for an extended period. That doesn't mean the app isn't worthwhile or even that it has been removed, it just serves a specific purpose and is used only when needed.

[iChan]

Congratulations to the devs, I guess. I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.

And I'm sure about 2/3 of those 2 billion were free apps.

I HATE HATE HATE this point of view. It wasn't a "mistake" not to have 3rd party app at launch. The SDK simply wasn't ready.

[iChan]

I disagree. They weren't ready with a SDK and (especially in hindsight), it was a successful launch.

This.

I doubt anyone in Apple considers the lack of 3rd party apps at launch to be a "mistake". Or even the lack of 3G as a mistake. All decisions were made with strong strategic consideration and turned out to be far from the "mistake" that people were arguing to be the case.

[Stigma]

Seems like only yesterday they has the 1billionth app sold promotion..
Probably won't take long at all to make 3 billion.

Even if 2/3 were free..it still leaves 600 million paid apps, all of which apple gets a slice of. Not a bad little earner.

And every developer has to pay 99$ just to get their app in the store. So with over 125,000 developers, there's a pretty penny for Apple there too. The iPhone's a cash cow and a half.

[Project]

Never understood the argument about not using the apps everyday. Just how many applications on your PC/Mac do you use everyday? For me, its just a handful. Yet I have over 150 in my apps folder. The key thing is that that one time I may need to use a particular app, I have it with me at all times.

[LagunaSol]

I HATE HATE HATE this point of view. It wasn't a "mistake" not to have 3rd party app at launch. The SDK simply wasn't ready.

+1. People who don't realize/can't admit it was Apple's plan from the moment the iPhone concept was conceived to turn it into a huge software ecosystem are terribly naive.

[QCassidy352]

That is about 40 apps or so per user. That basically continues the last app download to device average i read about. My question is how many people actually have found 40 apps that are truly useful on regular basis. Meaning use them at least once every week or so. I am not including bodily function or game apps.

I've downloaded well over 40 apps, but no, I don't still have all of them on my phone or use them all on a regular basis. So what? One of the beauties of the iphone ecosystem is that it's so easy to browse, install, and delete apps, so it's no big deal to try a lot of apps to find the best ones.

Ok, I just checked - I have 35 3rd party apps installed, and I use them all regularly; I delete apps I don't use regularly. That does include games, but I have absolutely no idea why you'd think games "don't count." They're applications... I use them... they enhance the functionality of the phone and my enjoyment of it... so why would they not "count" like any other app? Without games, I still have 24 3rd party apps that I use regularly.

Something I'd like to know is how many of those are people just updating apps they already have & how many of those downloads are 1st time downloads. I know I've updated several of my 3rd party apps, some multiple times.

Apple said this number does not include updates. 2 billion first time downloads.

[uaecasher]

no 2 billion contest :(

[ouimetnick]

Congrats Apple. 85,000 Apps. I only have 184 Apps on my iPhone and iPod touch. 50 million iPhone OS devices sold. No wonder some have build quality issues. With 125,00 developers, The iPhone platform is the biggest mobile platform in the world

[stellarceltic]

...and promotes the new ability of iTunes 9 to organize iPhone and iPod touch home screens.

...while breaking the sorting of TV shows on your iPods.

Seriously, anyone else with that issue? Annoying as hell.

[idiosyncratic i]

+1. People who don't realize/can't admit it was Apple's plan from the moment the iPhone concept was conceived to turn it into a huge software ecosystem are terribly naive.

While I agree that apple intended to release the SDK all along and that it just wasn't ready yet, Apple clearly had no idea just how big the apps would turn out to be, just like they had no way of knowing that iTunes would eventually become the number one music retailer. They built the best products they could, did what they were able to increase market share, and generally played their cards right, but they've said a couple of times that their own success has astounded them. The app store, and its accompanying review process would almost certainly have been designed differently if they'd known from the beginning they'd have to organize 85,000 apps in it.

[nagromme]

The number of apps available must be exponential too--I'd be interested to see a graph. I swear if was 50k pretty recently, and 70k in an ad they're still airing! Now 85k.

[ouimetnick]

Clever. :)

Already 2 billion? It won't be long before we hit 3 billion...

I think the extra billion has to do with iPhone OS 3.0! It introduced 1000+ APIs for devs to create different and better Apps, so users downloaded them. If iPhone OS 3.0 never came olong, it would be a while before we hit 2 billion downloads

[LagunaSol]

While I agree that apple intended to release the SDK all along and that it just wasn't ready yet, Apple clearly had no idea just how big the apps would turn out to be, just like they had no way of knowing that iTunes would eventually become the number one music retailer. They built the best products they could, did what they were able to increase market share, and generally played their cards right, but they've said a couple of times that their own success has astounded them. The app store, and its accompanying review process would almost certainly have been designed differently if they'd known from the beginning they'd have to organize 85,000 apps in it.

If you build it, they will come. :)

[Shivetya]

I wonder how many of those 2 billion downloads are even used beyond the first time?

[BongoBanger]

Good numbers and quite clear that the App store is the model to follow. It should still embarrass the other providers that they didn't see this coming and still haven't issued solutions that are as easy to use as the App store after two years.

In saying that I have well over 50 apps on my 5800 although the process of downloading them is in no way as easy as it is for the iPhone - Ovi is still a bit of a pig - so I'm not sure that's going to be a typical number for S60 users.

EDIT:

In fact it's not - Ovi only reported 10 million downloads in the first three months. I suspect that's due to the shambolic launch, not having the client pre-loaded and the repurchasing difficulties. Obviously it'll get better (July to August downloads were up 50%) but, like I said, this is embarrassing for Nokia.

[KnightWRX]

Wow, look at all the delusional fans that think the SDK was "part of the plan" all along.

Apple can't make mistakes right ? :rolleyes:

Seriously people, Apple didn't intend to release a SDK at first. If they did, they would've said so and they would've said it was on its way. It's only when they saw the potential of it through the homebrew scene that they changed their minds.

And there's nothing wrong with that. They made a mistake, corrected it and now they're rolling in dough.

[*LTD*]

I wonder how many of those 2 billion downloads are even used beyond the first time?

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=8559731&postcount=19

[ghostface147]

*Checks my phone*

Things
Byline
Evernote
Fit Builder
Facebook
MyWeather
Inquisitor
Shazam
Slacker Radio
eBay
Deliveries
Skype
Wikipanion
ScoreMobile
Speed Test
Yelp
Pandora
Twitterriffic
Paper Toss
Urbanspoon
Now Playing
Save Benjis
CameraBag
i.TV
USA Today
Last.fm
Peggle
Fieldrunners
Ambiance
Eliss
iEmoji
CReports
Amazon.com
AP Mobile
IGN
INCHcalc+
WhatTheFont
MotionX GPS
InfinityGene
NPR News
Comcast
Yahoo! Fantasy Football '09


Wow. I only have 10, with only one being used frequently. I feel so inadequate.

[LagunaSol]

Seriously people, Apple didn't intend to release a SDK at first. If they did, they would've said so and they would've said it was on its way. It's only when they saw the potential of it through the homebrew scene that they changed their minds.

Are you serious???

[bytethese]

That's actually quite clever. Patent the idea immediately. ;)

Clever. :)

Already 2 billion? It won't be long before we hit 3 billion...

Thanks. Well, I can't patent the idea, but if we see an Apple commercial with my idea, you heard it here first. :)

[kdarling]

I HATE HATE HATE this point of view. It wasn't a "mistake" not to have 3rd party app at launch. The SDK simply wasn't ready.

Typical Apple fan rewriting of history. The SDK wasn't even planned at the time.

Jobs was pushing web apps (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/11iphone.html?sr=hotnews.rss)as the "sweet" way to do iPhone programming.

It wasn't until almost four months later, after an incredible amount of complaining, that Jobs posted the surprise announcement (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/17/apple-we-plan-to-have-an-iphone-sdk-in-developers-hands-in-fe/) that yes, Apple would create an SDK.

What was clear to any experienced developer from the announcement (http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/10/17/applesIphoneSdkAnnouncemen.html), with its waffling about having to come up with security and signature methods, was that it had not been worked on yet.

[*LTD*]

All this "mistake" talk revolving around the SDK makes no difference. "If Apple hadn't done this or that", etc. And if my mother had wheels I'd be a wagon. The point is, the SDK was released, and here we are now. Some mistake. There's no sense in discussing mistakes when so much success ensued afterward.

[BongoBanger]

Actually a thought occurrs to me...

When you buy a new iPhone or iPod Touch then do the apps you've downloaded to use on your previous iPhone/iPod Touch transfer automatically or do you have to re-download them?

Because if it's the former then that's REALLY impressive.

[Project]

Typical Apple fan rewriting of history. The SDK wasn't even planned at the time.

Jobs was pushing web apps (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/11iphone.html?sr=hotnews.rss)as the "sweet" way to do iPhone programming.

It wasn't until almost four months later, after an incredible amount of complaining, that Jobs posted the surprise announcement (http://www.tuaw.com/2007/10/17/apple-we-plan-to-have-an-iphone-sdk-in-developers-hands-in-fe/) that yes, Apple would create an SDK.

What was clear to any experienced developer from the announcement (http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/10/17/applesIphoneSdkAnnouncemen.html), with its waffling about having to come up with security and signature methods, was that it had not been worked on yet.

We all know that Apple consistently deny working on anything that they haven't officially announced. So the fact they pushed web apps is neither here nor there - at that point in time that was the best solution they had available, so that's what they went with.

The idea that Apple were able to conceive, devise and execute not just the SDK but the AppStore to accompany it in the space of a few months is quite frankly laughable, when you see just how robust and polished the platform is.

[*LTD*]

Actually a thought occurrs to me...

When you buy a new iPhone or iPod Touch then do the apps you've downloaded to use on your previous iPhone/iPod Touch transfer automatically or do you have to re-download them?

Because if it's the former then that's REALLY impressive.

They transfer. They're all synced on iTunes. They're on the Cloud. At least for me they are.

Off-topic:

This is amusing . . .

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/apple_iphone_knocks_aston_martin_off_top_of_uks_coolest_brand_list/

Cooler than an Aston Martin? Hmmm . . .

[LagunaSol]

Typical Apple fan rewriting of history. The SDK wasn't even planned at the time.

Yeah, I'm sure you sat in on the executive planning meetings and you know exactly what was on the mind (and lips) of Steve Jobs back in 2007. :rolleyes:

What was clear to any experienced developer from the announcement (http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/10/17/applesIphoneSdkAnnouncemen.html), with its waffling about having to come up with security and signature methods, was that it had not been worked on yet.

What was clear was that it was not ready yet. You see, unlike Microsoft, Apple tends not to throw out half-baked products or company plans a year (or more) in advance to sew the seeds of FUD for its competition.

This belief that the SDK was not part of the master plan is blind ignorance at its finest.

In the haters' fantasy world, Jobs and Co. (you know, the actual creators and programmers of the device and the software) had no idea what could be done with the iPhone/iPod touch platform until a few hackers started creating apps of their own. Uh uh.

Comedy gold.

[kdarling]

Yeah, I'm sure you sat in on the executive planning meetings and you know exactly what was on the mind (and lips) of Steve Jobs back in 2007. :rolleyes:

Well, obviously you sat in on it, since you seem to know what happened. You simply must've missed me back in the corner. :rolleyes:

What was clear was that it was not ready yet. You see, unlike Microsoft, Apple tends not to throw out half-baked products or company plans a year (or more) in advance to sew the seeds of FUD for its competition.

lol Which way is it? Does Apple keep things secret until they're ready, or not?

If, as a few of you have said, Apple doesn't say anything until their product is ready, then how do you explain announcing an unfinished concept six months ahead of time? (And even saying it wasn't designed yet.)

You can't have it both ways.

This belief that the SDK was not part of the master plan is blind ignorance at its finest.

It's the way the historical evidence points. They clearly had an SDK for themselves, but had no plans for how to deploy it for third parties.

[QCassidy352]

I wonder how many of those 2 billion downloads are even used beyond the first time?

So what? As I said before, part of the beauty of this is that it's so easy to find, install, and delete apps that people have no qualms about trying out apps that they may not like. The very fact that it's so easy to do is a success in and of itself because that enables people to get to the apps they really want.

[kernkraft]

I haven't found reliable source to this, but I roughly remember that Apple only made a few tens of millions of dollars from App Store. I think the proportion of free apps is closer to 90 percent. The most recent quarterly company accounts don't specify the numbers, but we have to consider that 2 billion apps generate huge infrastructural costs. just to maintain the system without any expansion would be a mammoth task for even the largest IT corporations. In this sense, I can imagine that the net profit from the App Store is relatively minor.

I know that I downloaded well over a thousand apps within a few weeks of getting my first iPhone. Most of them were useless to me, so I deleted them. Now I only use about 20-30 on a daily or weekly basis. Meanwhile, I spent less than 35 USD. On me, Apple did not get much of an income. I bet that there are tens of thousands like me - enthusiastic first, getting dozens of the freebies, but eventually settling for only a few.

You know, what's missing from the App Store? Google Voice, a non-premium version of Spotify, a Tesco and an Amazon UK app. I would happily exchange tens of thousands of App Store's offerings for any of them. Meanwhile, I just hope that fart generators and sexy Japanese girl apps will kind of wear out.




Actually, I found this: "Net sales of other music-related products and services increased $139 million or 17% and $510 million or 20% during the third quarter of 2009 and first nine months of 2009, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008." That includes the whole iTunes for music and other content; US and global, respectively.

[RichTF]

Actually a thought occurrs to me...

When you buy a new iPhone or iPod Touch then do the apps you've downloaded to use on your previous iPhone/iPod Touch transfer automatically or do you have to re-download them?

Because if it's the former then that's REALLY impressive.
Yeah, some of my apps have followed me from my iPod Touch, to my iPhone 3G, and then to my iPhone 3GS. It's awesome, and surprised me at first too.

[rdowns]

I haven't found reliable source to this, but I roughly remember that Apple only made a few tens of millions of dollars from App Store.



Actually, I found this: "Net sales of other music-related products and services increased $139 million or 17% and $510 million or 20% during the third quarter of 2009 and first nine months of 2009, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2008." That includes the whole iTunes for music and other content; US and global, respectively.


Not sure where you are getting these numbers but in Apple's last quarter (Q3 2009) they reported revenue of $958 million which encompasses the iTS and iPod accessories.

http://images.apple.com/pr/pdf/q309data_sum.pdf

[OutSpoken]

Serious question to you all, does it really matter that the App store has had 2 billion downloads?

[*LTD*]

Serious question to you all, does it really matter that the App store has had 2 billion downloads?

It matters in terms of spurring iPhone and iPod Touch sales. Features like the App Store are what drives sales, and the more robust it is in content the better.

[anubis]

Arn,

The derivative of this graph (dDownloads/dt) would be an infinitely more useful chart than total sales vs date. Then you could see the rate of sales.

[rdowns]

Serious question to you all, does it really matter that the App store has had 2 billion downloads?


As an APPL stockholder, yes.
An an Apple enthusiast, yes.

[iMJustAGuy]

Congratulations to the devs, I guess. I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.

And I'm sure about 2/3 of those 2 billion were free apps.

Still. That leaves about SIX HUNDRED SIXTY SIX MILLION paid apps. (666,000,000) That my friend... is amazing.

[emulator]

The competition is still essentially nowhere in this area.
no wonder apple can play god what to approve and what not. A.D.D. is in the limbo for how many months? 5? FU apple!

[Bevz]

Good Grief! If the iPhone is remembered for nothing else, it'll be remembered for this! :)

[KnightWRX]

Are you serious???

Yes I am. Steve said so himself. No, there was no secret master plan where Apple had everything under control. They decided something, market forces pulled to the other side, Apple reacted and adjusted their strategy.

Why do you guys think is negative ? It's very positive to see a corporation making a mistake and then being able to adjust quickly and efficiently. It's positive, so no need to try to sweep it under the rug.

[aluren]

I wonder how much of that consist of free downloads...

[QCassidy352]

As an APPL stockholder, yes.
An an Apple enthusiast, yes.

Same to both. I do not, however, care whether apple planned the app store from the start or not - nor do we or will we ever know the truth on that one.

[ivladster]

I wonder how many of those 2 billion downloads are even used beyond the first time?

Who cares. What matters is that no other phone or company have this. Not even Crackberry with its "REVOLUTIONARY" keyboard.

[ivladster]

Serious question to you all, does it really matter that the App store has had 2 billion downloads?

Show me a company that has something like this. Of course it does. It says that iPhone OS is an amazing success.

[*LTD*]

Who cares. What matters is that no other phone or company have this. Not even Crackberry with its "REVOLUTIONARY" keyboard.

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/research_in_slow_motion_the_worst_is_yet_to_come/

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stock-market-dragged-down-by-tech-2009-09-25

So far, it's a one-trick pony being buttressed by the business sector. RIM's long-term strategy needs to change. As it stands now, it's not a question of whether the iPhone will surpass RIM, but when.

It's beginning to look like RIM is vulnerable even in the corporate smartphone market. On the one hand, new phones like the iPhone and Pre are diluting its share of the corporate side of the smartphone sector, long RIM’s strong suit, at the same time as new RIM offerings like the Storm are failing to make inroads in the consumer smartphone sector. The big winner so far? You don't even need to ask. The iPhone is growing as a corporate tool, not just a consumer product. There are a huge number of business apps available from theApp Store, while simultaneously Apple continues to maintain its lead in consumer smartphones, and even to increase that lead. If RIM's nto careful, they'll find themselves in a dead heat with Apple in the smartphone marketplace.

[BongoBanger]

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/research_in_slow_motion_the_worst_is_yet_to_come/

So far, it's a one-trick pony being buttressed by the business sector. RIM's long-term strategy needs to change. As it stands now, it's not a question of whether the iPhone will surpass RIM, but when.

Not unless Apple diversify the product line. RIM - like Nokia - succeed because they have a mass model approach.

[deconstruct60]

but we have to consider that 2 billion apps generate huge infrastructural costs. just to maintain the system without any expansion would be a mammoth task for even the largest IT corporations..

Errr...
Firefox had 500 million downloads a while back
http://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2008/02/21/500-million-firefox-downloads-complete-500-million-grains-in-progress/

If it was soooooooooooo mega huge expensive how does Mozilla do it???
[ and farming it out to mirror sites only distributes the costs; not make it cheaper. Each of these individual sites would have to be some expensive undertaking based on the above premise. ]

Throw in the fact that already have infrastructure to run the iTunes store and this is incremental additional workload.

If Apple got on average $0.005 (a half cent) per download for every billion downloads that is $5 million dollars. At $8,000 per server ( server, bandwidth , consumables/power/etc. ), that is about 625 download servers. At 25 1U servers per rack, that is about 30 racks. Not going to fit in someone's garage, but lots of folks run setups bigger than that. If wanted to dense pack them, that is about two of these : http://www.sun.com/products/sunmd/s20/


If think a half cent is a large amount per download then a few more quick numbers. Let's say only 10% of the billion are for pay: 100 million. Also that the average price is $0.99. So about 5% of that money, $99M, is for a server tax. Remember that Apple is taking 30%, so that is only 1/6 of the overhead charge.

P.S. pretty sure that the average selling price is higher. Also suspect the pay/free percentage is a tad higher than 10%. The $8K per server is pretty expensive bandwidth/power cost too.

[tabasco70]

talk about exponential growth.

[kdarling]

It matters in terms of spurring iPhone and iPod Touch sales. Features like the App Store are what drives sales, and the more robust it is in content the better.

Not sure it drives most sales, but certainly a lot.

I'd be interested if someone did an analysis of the apps and determined how many individual developers submitted them. For instance, out of 65,000 apps, did they come from 5,000 developers? 30,000? 15,000? And out of those, how many made enough money for a decent living?

The ability to put your app where people can see it, and to then actually make money, is something to draw longterm development.

Why do you guys think is negative ? It's very positive to see a corporation making a mistake and then being able to adjust quickly and efficiently. It's positive, so no need to try to sweep it under the rug.

Exactly. Apple has had a lot of misteps with the iPhone, from choosing a plastic screen at first, to initial price gouging, to ignoring unlocking at first, to underestimating the interest in push notification. Their ability to change with market pressure has helped contribute to its success.

As we've always said, the only "iPhone killer" would be Apple themselves if they failed to match consumer desires. They counted on lots of newbies, but as months go by, the users get more sophisticated all the time.

[LagunaSol]

lol Which way is it? Does Apple keep things secret until they're ready, or not?

If, as a few of you have said, Apple doesn't say anything until their product is ready, then how do you explain announcing an unfinished concept six months ahead of time? (And even saying it wasn't designed yet.)

You can't have it both ways.

The iPhone was an obvious aberration for Apple, probably due to 2 factors:

1) they wanted to announce the product on their own terms, not through some FCC leak

2) the stock was getting brutalized every time Jobs spoke and didn't mention the iPhone. They weren't going to let one more Macworld go by without unveiling it.

As for "unfinished concept" - Jobs actually demoed the working iPhone in his keynote (perhaps you didn't see it). Not a 3D rendering and fabricated multimedia demo (like the new Microsoft tablet) - but an actual working model he held in his hand and demonstrated for the world to see.

As for the SDK, that's something you obviously have to pre-announce for developers' sake. And to squelch the public outcry as well.

Again, the belief that Apple didn't envision the iPhone as a mini Mac (with native apps) in your pocket from Day One is delusional.

Just because a company doesn't pre-announce their every move 18 months in advance (*cough Microsoft*) doesn't mean they aren't hard at work concocting exactly the thing you may be hoping for.

[CQd44]

I remember reading a post on this forum where an iPhone user had over 100 apps on his phone.

The 42 app guy says he uses all 42 regularly. But over 100? :I

[LagunaSol]

Apple has had a lot of misteps with the iPhone, from choosing a plastic screen at first,

How can it be a "misstep" if they never shipped an iPhone with a plastic screen? It's all part of the design and development process. Heck, they had iPhones made out of paper, cardboard, and clay during the process. I suppose those were missteps too? :rolleyes:

to initial price gouging,

I have a conspiracy theory that says this was part of Apple's diabolical plan. With the amount of hype flying around, Apple knew they could charge whatever they wanted to and the thing would still sell out. So why not: 1) squeeze every penny out of the early adopters, then 2) cut the price early, setting off another buying (and media) frenzy. Sure, you anger all the early adopters, but you can (mostly) soothe them with a $100 credit to the Apple Store (with which they buy more Apple stuff) - and more positive PR. I mean, who can fault the company that gives you some of your money back after they cut the price on a product, right? Brilliant.

to underestimating the interest in push notification.

Apple has plenty of head-scratchers. The lack of copy/paste for 2 years was beyond belief. Ditto push. And why not enable multitasking (which the iPhone can obviously handle) and let the consumer decide on the battery life tradeoffs? And slightly off-topic, why not offer an iTunes subscription service for people who want it? It would instantly kill the only real advantage the Zune has over the iPod. Why not just flip that switch? Baffling.

They counted on lots of newbies, but as months go by, the users get more sophisticated all the time.

Ah, the old "only idiots buy iPhones" chestnut. I assume all the tech sophisticates are buying...Windows Mobile devices? Hilarious.

I think Apple is targeting the consumer almost-perfectly with their iPhone/iPod touch strategy. Would I like to see more? Of course. But you certainly can't fault their business strategy thus far (except for the AT&T exclusivity - perhaps a good move at launch, but that ball and chain needs to be cut loose and pronto).

[DipDog3]

Paid vs Free?

No breakdown, how sad!

[KnightWRX]

As for the SDK, that's something you obviously have to pre-announce for developers' sake. And to squelch the public outcry as well.

Again, the belief that Apple didn't envision the iPhone as a mini Mac (with native apps) in your pocket from Day One is delusional.

Just because a company doesn't pre-announce their every move 18 months in advance (*cough Microsoft*) doesn't mean they aren't hard at work concocting exactly the thing you may be hoping for.

Except in this very case you did get an announcement, one that said "Web apps, Web apps, Web apps". It's not like they were silent about the whole thing. If they really had a public SDK in the pipeline, Steve wouldn't have said a thing about Web apps.

I think it's you who is delusional. Again, look at the initial annoucement for the iPhone. Steve Jobs clearly presents it as a Phone, an iPod, an Internet device. He says it about 40 times. That's what the original iPhone was, a platform meant for Web Apps with Mobile Safari at its core. The Internet device part of the whole plan. iPod and Phone don't exactly scream homebrew apps so those weren't part of any plan as far as apps go.

If Apple had a public SDK in the pipeline at that time, Jobs would have simply said nothing and evaded the questions about developping homebrew apps. That is what Apple does when they don't want to confirm rumors, they shut up and don't comment.

This is why everyone who is sane knows that the SDK wasn't being planned at all initially. Because that's Apple MO. They announced something so that was their plan.

And no it doesn't take years to release an SDK. They already had much of it ready simply for their own internal apps. The emulator was probably already in a working state to in order to develop and test the different stock apps. It was a matter of polishing and releasing. And that is probably what they did and why it did take a while until the SDK showed up after the announcement.

Ah, the old "only idiots buy iPhones" chestnut. I assume all the tech sophisticates are buying...Windows Mobile devices? Hilarious.

Obviously, you have no understanding of what he said. It's the old "early adopters buy and then compare the specs and features". And they often get burned. After your initial rush of early adopters, you next consumers are more informed and have more specific needs. That's what he meant. Nothing about idiots at all.

But you're too stuck in the black or white mentality. Try to realise there are shades of grey here.

[kernkraft]

Errr...
Firefox had 500 million downloads a while back


If it was soooooooooooo mega huge expensive how does Mozilla does it???


Mozilla does three items - Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux. For free, for anybody. Through mirror sites, as a Foundation. With no duty to comply with company rules, with no shareholders.

Unlike Apple, that has millions of account holders with purchase history, credit and debit card details, personal information like address, etc. With tens of thousands of different applications from thousands of developers. With money involved.

The parallel is like comparing a promotional magazine's distribution to Amazon's book and media department.

[newyorksole]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

Seriously that's a REALLY good idea. If I were you I would send the idea to Apple. It amazes me house average people can be 100x more creative than the folks at big corporations like Apple.

[LagunaSol]

If Apple had a public SDK in the pipeline at that time, Jobs would have simply said nothing and evaded the questions about developping homebrew apps. That is what Apple does when they don't want to confirm rumors, they shut up and don't comment.

Or they make a comment to conceal secret project plans ("Who watches video on an iPod?" "Nobody reads books any more." "AppleTV is a hobby." "Web Apps are great.").

Again, all companies don't leak their every brain fart - and actual product plan - publicly like Microsoft does.

This is why everyone who is sane knows that the SDK wasn't being planned at all initially. Because that's Apple MO. They announced something so that was their plan.

Uh huh. You are obviously not familiar with Apple's MO.

[deconstruct60]

at the same time as new RIM offerings like the Storm are failing to make inroads in the consumer smartphone sector.


Errr...

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/05/04/blackberry-overtakes-iphone-as-bestselling-u-s-smartphone-in-q1/

So having the #3 selling smartphone on the market ( Storm) and the biggest share earlier this year is "failing to make inroads". The only managed to sell a measly 8.3 million phones last quarter. What kind of non-"road" is that??? What world are you talking about???

RIM got killed in part because the average selling price is dropping and the expectations were not matched with reality. (like the market doesn't ever go off and overprice/overestimate a stock/market. *cough*. ).

Apple's average selling price is also going to drop; with the 3G now being the more economical choice.

RIM has more competition now but they sold



The iPhone is growing as a corporate tool, not just a consumer product. .

Wonder how much so now that the bug that falsely reported it was a secure Exchange device has been finally fixed.... well ... if you buy new hardware. Apple has burned a whole slew of IT folks at this point. That growth will be tempered short term.

[KnightWRX]

Or they make a comment to conceal secret project plans ("Who watches video on an iPod?" "Nobody reads books any more." "AppleTV is a hobby." "Web Apps are great.").

No, that's what fanboys want to believe, that all mighty Apple never makes mistakes. When Apple says : " Who watches video on an iPod ?", they mean it. When they turn around and release a video iPod, it's not because it's been planned all along, it's because that's what consumers demanded and they simply changed their plans.

It's like Coke did in the 80s. If you ask any of the executives at Coke if New coke and Coca-cola classic was all planned and perfectly executed to revitalize the brand, they'll tell you you're delusional. They made a mistake, and they turned around and fixed it. That's all there is to it.

Again, I don't see why you feel the need to turn red in the face and scream that Apple always planned on releasing their SDK. That isn't positive. However, the opposite, being able to react swiftly to market demand is. So either you're trying to paint Apple in a negative light or you're just naive in believing Steve Jobs isn't perfect.

[LagunaSol]

No, that's what fanboys want to believe, that all mighty Apple never makes mistakes.

Who the 'ell said that? I didn't.

When they turn around and release a video iPod, it's not because it's been planned all along, it's because that's what consumers demanded and they simply changed their plans.

Per...you???

The bottom line is the SDK is a huge success and competitors (including Microsoft) will have a hard time dealing with Apple's momentum.

But the contention that Apple is merely a reactive company that doesn't know what it's doing 6 months ahead of time (or until its customers tell it what to do) is absurd.

Reactive is Microsoft and the Zune and Windows Mobile 7.0.

But enjoy the delusion - it doesn't effect me.

[MacFly123]

Impressive . . . is an understatement.

The competition is still essentially nowhere in this area.

Congratulations to the devs, I guess. I think by now Apple has realized what a mistake it was not to have third-party apps with the launch of the iPhone.

And I'm sure about 2/3 of those 2 billion were free apps.

Yes. I think this has been wonderful for Apple's perspective and us as consumers.

Now they just need to keep improving the dev relations and application process and get better and better apps! Keep going strong Apple :)

iWork Mobile to debut with the Tablet??? :eek:

[deconstruct60]

Mozilla does three items - Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux. For free, for anybody. Through mirror sites, as a Foundation. With no duty to comply with company rules, with no shareholders.


First, Mozilla does/hosts several projects. Firefox is just the biggest.

http://www.mozilla.org/

Bugzilla and others are still part of the Foundation's work.

[technically thunderbird is spun out now but download network is similar. ]

Secondly, what does having stockholders or not have to do with downloading issues? You're throwing up tons of tangential issues to the cost and complexity of downloading software costs/infrastructure.



Unlike Apple, that has millions of account holders with purchase history, credit and debit card details, personal information like address, etc. With tens of thousands of different applications from thousands of developers. With money involved.


And pragmatically none of that has to do with costs of downloading free apps. For paid for apps you have a precursor of paying and then can be handling off to infrastructure that basically is exactly the same as the free download infrastructure.

It would be goofy for Apple to put that secure information on the download servers.

For Apple the login/credit card/secure database stuff can all be shared with the rest of the iTunes store. That gives you another billion "download sales" to amortize your infrastructure costs against and drive the individual sales overhead costs even lower.




The parallel is like comparing a promotional magazine's distribution to Amazon's book and media department.

The parallel is along the costs/complexity of downloading. If the magazine and Amazon are both shipping items out to customers then the comparison is on the similar shipping logistics, not the differences in the companies.

There are many basically free items of software that are downloaded in the 10's to 100's of millions. This isn't super-duper prohibitively expensive to provide, nor require the most complex of IT operations.

[pubwvj]

Oh my god! It's an exponential growth curve! Pretty soon the downloading of Apps will suck the entire Internet down a black hole with the resulting energy destroying all life on Earth! Its Al Gore's fault. :)

[Shivetya]

So what? As I said before, part of the beauty of this is that it's so easy to find, install, and delete apps that people have no qualms about trying out apps that they may not like. The very fact that it's so easy to do is a success in and of itself because that enables people to get to the apps they really want.

I have to disagree here.

Its nearly impossible to find the "right" app. Plus after the halo effect of being new to the store most apps just disappear from the radar. Now once I have a an app its easy to do as you say, but getting the best app for a particular task isn't simple. There is so much chaff it can be discouraging

[*LTD*]

Errr...

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/05/04/blackberry-overtakes-iphone-as-bestselling-u-s-smartphone-in-q1/

So having the #3 selling smartphone on the market ( Storm) and the biggest share earlier this year is "failing to make inroads". The only managed to sell a measly 8.3 million phones last quarter. What kind of non-"road" is that??? What world are you talking about???

RIM got killed in part because the average selling price is dropping and the expectations were not matched with reality. (like the market doesn't ever go off and overprice/overestimate a stock/market. *cough*. ).

Apple's average selling price is also going to drop; with the 3G now being the more economical choice.

RIM has more competition now but they sold




Wonder how much so now that the bug that falsely reported it was a secure Exchange device has been finally fixed.... well ... if you buy new hardware. Apple has burned a whole slew of IT folks at this point. That growth will be tempered short term.

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/4127/picture31e.png

THAT is what makes the iPhone so dangerous. And that explosive growth, based on Apple's current projections, doesn't look like it'll slow anytime soon. It's RIM that needs to change up their strategy, and fast. The iPhone is all about content and multimedia, and consumers are all about content. The focus has shifted. The writing is on the wall.

[MLS]

Wow that market share chart is crazy. 375%? RIM has got to get its act together, or else the iPhone is going to blow them away

[KnightWRX]

But the contention that Apple is merely a reactive company that doesn't know what it's doing 6 months ahead of time (or until its customers tell it what to do) is absurd.

But enjoy the delusion - it doesn't effect me.

Here you go again with the black or white. It didn't occur to you that maybe, just maybe, sometimes Apple gets it right their first try and sometimes, well, they just make a mistake and readjust ?

It's almost like you're trying to argue they are perfect and all seeing.

Everything is a shade of grey. Sometimes they deliver exactly what the market wants, sometimes they deliver complete crap and sometimes, they deliver something that's just not quite right and a V2 makes it good.

The iPhone SDK is that last one. They missed it on their first go and then made amends and released it when the community asked for it and showed genuine interest.

[captincroc]

These app download counts are getting to tedious.

[kernkraft]

First, Mozilla does/hosts several projects. Firefox is just the biggest.


The parallel is along the costs/complexity of downloading. If the magazine and Amazon are both shipping items out to customers then the comparison is on the similar shipping logistics, not the differences in the companies.



Yes, yes, the point was that you cannot compare providing a free software with running the App Store. It requires more sophistication, once security issues, sensitive personal information and a large number of different services, parties are involved.

For the sake of modeling the operation, 20 full-time employees dedicated to the App Store would cost millions of dollars. If we seriously take the whole extra ectivity into account - including PR, marketing, legal tasks, network infrastructure, Apple developers, mid-managers, accounting; overall, 20 'full timer' seem unrealistically few. Add the cost of increased infrastructure to that, and suddenly you get several-several millions of dollars as 'overheads'. If that tens of millions as revenue is true, the whole App Store is still not that great.

[deconstruct60]

THAT is what makes the iPhone so dangerous.


Please. the Palm Pre is going to have stratospheric growth quarter over quarter. The percentage growth year over year is always large when you are first starting off. RIM has a more mature product offering and their growth rates are smaller. The sky is blue too. Apple's will be lower too eventually. When Apple finally stops introducing the iPhone into new countries the growth will drop off (if they don't radically change price points.)

iPhone has very large growth year over year in part because it keeps getting introduced into new markets. That says very little about RIM directly. [ other that perhaps focus attention on why they haven't expanded their global presence more over the years. They may or may not want to go more global. Although a "soft" keyboard allows one to do that slightly more easier. However, there are anti-sentiments to RIMs central server strategy on push mail. ]



And that explosive growth, based on Apple's current projections, doesn't look like it'll slow anytime soon. It's RIM that needs to change up their strategy, and fast.


Only if RIM's strategy is purely based on numbers. Just as folks wax on about Apple not having to chase the PC vendors into the maximum units shipped space, neither does RIM necessarily have to chase Apple into the hand held entertainment market.



The iPhone is all about content and multimedia, and consumers are all about content. The focus has shifted. The writing is on the wall.

What business have focused its employees on consuming multimedia content , games, and entertainment?????? Bluntly, Apple's increased focusing on games and comparisons between iPhone OS apps and PSP and DS will in part help RIM in more serious contexts.


However, no doubt that years of competing mainly with Microsoft (win mobile) and a misfiring Palm have lulled RIM into some complacency. RIM should be far more concerned with hooking into Sharepoint and next gen web Office access though than keeping up with Apple in fart and Madden 2010 games.

[Rot'nApple]

Congrats to Apple. However, when I read "2 Billion App Store Downloads", I think, Apple... the McDonald's of the Electronics Industry! :eek:

[xIGmanIx]

its good to have that many downloads, that just justifies the need for the support, however personally my app's list is limited and day to day use in frequent. It would be interesting to know what apple considers a download, meaning, that might skew the numbers a bit, but still impressive none the least

[LagunaSol]

Here you go again with the black or white. It didn't occur to you that maybe, just maybe, sometimes Apple gets it right their first try and sometimes, well, they just make a mistake and readjust ?

Of course they do. See my earlier comment about the copy/paste issue, multitasking and push. Also AppleTV (a half-hearted effort from Apple if ever I've seen one), the puck mouse, the Mighty Mouse (that thing has to go), the Apple-branded printer and camera debacle - the list goes on and on.

Apparently I'm not the fanboy you're looking for.

It's almost like you're trying to argue they are perfect and all seeing.

Um, it's almost like I'm not arguing that at all. I never said anything of the sort. That's simply your silly strawman argument. "Since you think Apple was right on this one you must think they are right on everything! Fanboy!!!"

Fail.

My argument is that the SDK was not a knee-jerk reaction but a well-formulated plan from the beginning. Arguments to the contrary just don't hold water. Do you really think Apple was naive enough to believe that Web Apps were going to power the platform forever? Ludicrous.

[saltcured]

Of course they do. See my earlier comment about the copy/paste issue, multitasking and push. Also AppleTV (a half-hearted effort from Apple if ever I've seen one), the puck mouse, the Mighty Mouse (that thing has to go), the Apple-branded printer and camera debacle - the list goes on and on.

Apparently I'm not the fanboy you're looking for.



Um, it's almost like I'm not arguing that at all. I never said anything of the sort. That's simply your silly strawman argument. "Since you think Apple was right on this one you must think they are right on everything! Fanboy!!!"

Fail.

My argument is that the SDK was not a knee-jerk reaction but a well-formulated plan from the beginning. Arguments to the contrary just don't hold water. Do you really think Apple was naive enough to believe that Web Apps were going to power the platform forever? Ludicrous.





You're making your point quite clearly, I think KnightWRX is purposely not getting it.

[deconstruct60]

Yes, yes, the point was that you cannot compare providing a free software with running the App Store. It requires more sophistication, once security issues, sensitive personal information and a large number of different services, parties are involved.


Your point is misguided. First as I outlined should decouple downloading from this more secure infrastructure you seemed to be fixated on. Second, if you do have secure infrastructure you want to keep that as small as possible.

To do millions of transactions per day shouldn't, at its core, take more than 3-4 servers. 6-8 if running a DR backup in mirror mode. To illustrate.

http://tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_price_perf_results.asp

Notably the last one, the 639,253 tpmC, at the bottom. That one server, Oracle Standard Edition DB, is doing 600K transactions per minute. Not day; per minute. The super "high" rate App store is doing 6.3 million per day. Scaled up to a day rate that one server is doing 864 million transactions per day. Sure, the store transactions aren't going to be the same as the tpc benchmark transactions, but even if 10 times more complicated/slower still 10 times more than the throughput rate. (**) So back of the envelope, where is the huge infrastructure here????? Somewhat expensive (compared to common stuff in the Apple Store. Will probably need enterprise edition, partitioning , RAC , and data guard Oracle DB software) ... yes, but huge (in terms of servers required) ... no

Since a decent modern DB server with decent software can do 100K's of transactions per minute, where is this huge infrastructure you are talking about? Sure there are larger number of store fan-in app servers, but there are clones of each other and store no sensitive data (just like the download farm). More than likely, there is one Oracle RAC cluster that has the secure stuff and another running in Data Guard mode as a backup.





For the sake of modeling the operation, 20 full-time employees dedicated to the App Store would cost millions of dollars.


We've now gone from 'largest IT operations' down to about 20 folks. I'll spot you double that: 40 folks. That's not even in the ballpark of the 'largest IT operations".





If we seriously take the whole extra ectivity into account - including PR, marketing, legal tasks, network infrastructure, Apple developers, mid-managers, accounting; overall, 20 'full timer' seem unrealistically few.


So take another 1/2 cent out of each download. Up to a whole penny now ($0.01) and pay for these folks. Once get into the "billions served" can take very small amounts and add modest amounts expensive overhead with little problem. However, 700 Million versus 2 billion downloads themselves isn't where the huge increase in costs to scale are.



Add the cost of increased infrastructure to that, and suddenly you get several-several millions of dollars as 'overheads'. If that tens of millions as revenue is true, the whole App Store is still not that great.

Your comments suggest a mental model that puts the secure data onto 100's servers. That is a fundamentally flawed design. For what Apple is doing a 1/2 dozen is plenty. Similarly large numbers of "worker" clones don't really require low ratios of servers to admins. When they are similar, limited function clones can have higher than average server/admin ratios.




(**) The tpc benchmark as a limited write rate (more reads than writes.). However, for the store there pragmatically is not limitation on inventory. You produces copies of the software upon request. So there is no need to see if the software is in stock or not. If deployed to the download servers it is there. So all tracking is a log of what got bought/downloaded. ( in contrast to amazon where selling a physical book and have to reduce the number in inventory by 1. ) So with independent writes can't see what is blocking much here. The bottleneck of writing to the DB log is probably a more major limitation here.

[Little HZ]

The latest two points on the graph show a steep increase recently, wonder what caused that?

ETA Just realised its probably new iPod touch owners.


I think it was ME! ;)

I just bought an iPod Touch a week ago, and have installed 46 apps so far--about half of them free.

Two were travel apps for a city I will be visiting soon. I'll use them a lot for a week, and then not again until I travel there again, which may be a long time, but still worth buying to me.

About eight are games. Again, some in this thread seem to think they should not count, but the games add alot of value to me--just the thing for killing a few minutes in the dentist's waiting room, or wherever. I fully expect to eventually download 20, 30, or 40 more apps, which I fully expect to use regularly.

Love how I can arrange the apps by category in iTunes!

[BongoBanger]

THAT is what makes the iPhone so dangerous. And that explosive growth, based on Apple's current projections, doesn't look like it'll slow anytime soon. It's RIM that needs to change up their strategy, and fast. The iPhone is all about content and multimedia, and consumers are all about content. The focus has shifted. The writing is on the wall.

Actual Sales by Quarter as follows:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/IPhone_sales_per_quarter.svg

Quarter by quarter growth is a poor indicator. As you can see the iPhone's growth pattern is cyclical according to release schedule. Also the market availability is much higher with the launch of the 3G.

The iPhone will remain a successful but niche product unless it diversifies its product range in which case it'll sell a lot more. At the moment it's in no way threatening Nokia though - remember half of those sales are in the US where Nokia has no presence. Every other market - Japan excepted - is dominated by Nokia.

[KnightWRX]

My argument is that the SDK was not a knee-jerk reaction but a well-formulated plan from the beginning. Arguments to the contrary just don't hold water. Do you really think Apple was naive enough to believe that Web Apps were going to power the platform forever? Ludicrous.

So you're saying that you know more than even Steve Jobs himself ? The facts are Steve himself said Web Apps were going to power to the iPhone, and that was going to be it as far as 3rd parties were concerned. The Phone was introduced as a : "Phone, iPod, Internet device".

Also a fact is they had the SDK internally is of course a given, what with the native apps Apple wrote for the initial launch (Safari, Maps, Calendar, Mail).

And finally, the fact they announced the SDK quite a bit after the homebrew scene had started reverse engineering the platform and making apps for it, outside the scope of Web Apps.

You'll deny all those facts, just because you can't believe that's how it happened ? I'm sorry, but ignoring fact shows well who's being delusional here. As far as what's in the media and in keynotes, it's clear Apple didn't intend on an app store or a native SDK with the iPhone and market pressure changed their strategy (for the better).

[*LTD*]

Actual Sales by Quarter as follows:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/IPhone_sales_per_quarter.svg

Quarter by quarter growth is a poor indicator. As you can see the iPhone's growth pattern is cyclical according to release schedule. Also the market availability is much higher with the launch of the 3G.

The iPhone will remain a successful but niche product unless it diversifies its product range in which case it'll sell a lot more. At the moment it's in no way threatening Nokia though - remember half of those sales are in the US where Nokia has no presence. Every other market - Japan excepted - is dominated by Nokia.

Yes, Nokia is way out ahead. Sheer force of numbers, even though we're talking Symbian here. Yikes.

[BongoBanger]

Yes, Nokia is way out ahead. Sheer force of numbers, even though we're talking Symbian here. Yikes.

Symbian itself isn't bad - in fact it's very good. S60 - which is the UI layer - needs a total rewrite though.

[deconstruct60]

. At the moment it's in no way threatening Nokia though - remember half of those sales are in the US where Nokia has no presence.

No presence? Both AT&T and Verzion have long sold Nokia phones (some with keyboard and limited web ) . Not a dominating player for sure... but no presence is a stretch. The higher end "smarter" phones, yes (no takers from the larger phone service providers) ... those haven't hit the US with any substantive push.

[twoodcc]

wow, great for apple and the iphone! now how many of those are free apps?

[BongoBanger]

No presence? Both AT&T and Verzion have long sold Nokia phones (some with keyboard and limited web ) . Not a dominating player for sure... but no presence is a stretch. The higher end "smarter" phones, yes (no takers from the larger phone service providers) ... those haven't hit the US with any substantive push.

Sorry - I should have been clear I was talking about the smartphone market which is the one Apple competes with Nokia in.

[DMann]

No, that's what fanboys want to believe, that all mighty Apple never makes mistakes. When Apple says : "Who watches video on an iPod ?", they mean it. When they turn around and release a video iPod, it's not because it's been planned all along, it's because that's what consumers demanded and they simply changed their plans.Are you implying, then, that when SJ made this statement in 4/04, he was unaware of the development which lead to the release of the first video iPod in 10/05? Seems the intent of his statement was more about subterfuge than anything else.

So you're saying that you know more than even Steve Jobs himself ? The facts are Steve himself said Web Apps were going to power to the iPhone, and that was going to be it as far as 3rd parties were concerned. The Phone was introduced as a : "Phone, iPod, Internet device".

Also a fact is they had the SDK internally is of course a given, what with the native apps Apple wrote for the initial launch (Safari, Maps, Calendar, Mail).

And finally, the fact they announced the SDK quite a bit after the homebrew scene had started reverse engineering the platform and making apps for it, outside the scope of Web Apps.

You'll deny all those facts, just because you can't believe that's how it happened ? I'm sorry, but ignoring fact shows well who's being delusional here. As far as what's in the media and in keynotes, it's clear Apple didn't intend on an app store or a native SDK with the iPhone and market pressure changed their strategy (for the better).However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset? The truth is, we really do not know, for sure, what their long term plan was, and the past mistake in judgement made by Coke does not prove that an App Store was not originally intended as a stage of this process. Attempting to proclaim that a company is flawless would be one thing, but vying to point out errors based on conjecture is quite another.

[*LTD*]

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it. Currently, RIM is ahead. Aside from the iPhone's explosive growth, there's another thing to consider.

Sure, +8M phones sold is good. 3.8M new customers is good too.

But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors. Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.

Top Line Sales down, Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down, Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

[KnightWRX]

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

Or could it just be that a new market segment has emerged ? Look at what RIM is doing, it's doing entreprise phones, for business type people doing business type things.

iPhone is a smartphone, but it's aimed at a different demographic, people who just want to have access to information for entertainment (be it music, videos, games or a night out on the town).

So perhaps, it's not so much that RIM is getting rejected, but more that RIM hasn't yet produced a product for the new segment and demographic that is now purchasing smartphones instead of dumb phones.

However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset? The truth is, we really do not know, for sure, what their long term plan was, and the past mistake in judgement made by Coke does not prove that an App Store was not originally intended as a stage of this process. Attempting to proclaim that a company is flawless would be one thing, but vying to point out errors based on conjecture is quite another.

If you want to remove all conjecture from the discussion, then only the facts remain. And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

[LagunaSol]

The facts are Steve himself said Web Apps were going to power to the iPhone, and that was going to be it as far as 3rd parties were concerned.

History has shown that what Steve Jobs says publicly does not always reveal his true intentions. Again, to think that Apple originally planned to rely on Web Apps to power this significant new platform (possibly the most important platform Apple has ever created) is absurd. It makes no sense for a commoner like you and I, and it certainly makes no sense for a long-term-vision company like Apple who knows exactly where they want to go 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years from now.

Hey, he fooled you I guess.

I bet there will never be an Apple tablet either, since Steve has said there is no market for them. :rolleyes:

[xIGmanIx]

To me, until apple makes their business portion of the iPhone OS, it will continue to be what i call a multimedia phone and not a smart phone. Nothing wrong with that, and with the rapid public adoption and now expectation of these devices - music/video, camera, applications, strong web browser, that possibly another category will open up all together. However, i have a work BB, and i never think i am being short changed at work because i can't load apps or that the web browser doesn't cut it. Its a smart phone that allows me to do most work away from my workstation. To me, i think the way the iphone is engineered right now, RIM and Apple aren't really competing for the business users, consumers? yes

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it. Currently, RIM is ahead. Aside from the iPhone's explosive growth, there's another thing to consider.

Sure, +8M phones sold is good. 3.8M new customers is good too.

But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors. Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.

Top Line Sales down, Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down, Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

Or could it just be that a new market segment has emerged ? Look at what RIM is doing, it's doing entreprise phones, for business type people doing business type things.

iPhone is a smartphone, but it's aimed at a different demographic, people who just want to have access to information for entertainment (be it music, videos, games or a night out on the town).

So perhaps, it's not so much that RIM is getting rejected, but more that RIM hasn't yet produced a product for the new segment and demographic that is now purchasing smartphones instead of dumb phones.



If you want to remove all conjecture from the discussion, then only the facts remain. And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

[KnightWRX]

History has shown that what Steve Jobs says publicly does not always reveal his true intentions. Again, to think that Apple originally planned to rely on Web Apps to power this significant new platform (possibly the most important platform Apple has ever created) is absurd. It makes no sense for a commoner like you and I, and it certainly makes no sense for a long-term-vision company like Apple who knows exactly where they want to go 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years from now.

Actually, the Web apps comment makes a lot more sense than you might want to let on. Back in 2007, Web apps were a big buzz. Things like Gmail, Google docs and other "In the Cloud" services were just picking up and were promising to be the next best thing (and still are today).

A device that would be cloud enabled and connect to the cloud was just what analysts were pointing to. All computing was to be done in the cloud, as was storage of data.

So the Web apps comment, in that vision of things, isn't so far fetched at all. However, a lot of people aren't ready for the cloud just yet, which led to what we have now. A cloud connected device that can also execute local apps.

So the "Internet device" thing makes a lot of sense if you believed in the marketing/industry hype of cloud computing. I personally don't think I would ever be comfortable in such a scenario, but it's nothing new and the industry has been wanting to move to things like software as a service, network computers (a new breed of thin clients) for close to a decade now.

So it's not as clear cut as you let on.

[DMann]

...And the fact is, straight from the horse's mouth, that the iPhone never was to have a 3rd party developer culture built around it.

Anything else is conjecture and speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.Statement's such as this might have been intended to merely spur WebApp development, for all we know, being that Apple had initially "claimed" that an SDK would not be made available. Statements made "straight from the horse's mouth" have, in the past, been intentionally deceptive i.e. "Who watches video on an iPod?" It is inconceivable that the iPhone OS, designed to run full capacity apps, would have been relegated to WebApps only, supplemented by a few in-house apps. Taking into account the relative speed at which the App Store emerged, it is more difficult to imagine that it had not been in development all along.

[silentnite]

Hats off to apple & all the creative developers, we salute you. I have a few request, may I have a camera in my next Ipod Touch please. I'd also like a little more power and perhaps wifi N. Thank You! that will be all. :D

[deconstruct60]

Back to RIM. It really depends how you look at it.
....
But, this is exactly how uninformed investors get clobbered in the market.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that. That means the market is moving away from the Blackberry in favor of its competitors.


As others have pointed out, your hidden assumption here is that the smartphone market didn't expand in scope. You try to assert both. One that there is a 'new' major subsegment in the smartphone market where it is "play" rather than "work" is the focus. Second, that RIM is being rejected in something they aren't perusing. (exactly when did it become RIM's objective to be a great video iPod? )




Further, the only way RIM increased earnings was from massive cost cutting efforts. They did not come from increasing top line sales or by increasing gross margins.


Just like vast majority of other suppliers into the business equipment market. The major forcing component to that is the jacked up world economy. Not Apple nor the iPhone.





Top Line Sales down,
[quote]

Like every other major business equipment supplier.

[quote]
Gross Margin Percent down, Average Sales Price down,


just Like Macs huh? Who have thought? *cough*



Unit Sales Growth did not match Industry Unit Growth.


Year over year same targeted market sales?
This is the same hocus pocus that retailers play when you don't track year-over-year same store sales.



These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings,


Except for perhaps the last... not really. If you want to spin doctor it that way perhaps. However, you have completely thrown away all the macroeconomic context in which these results are being reported in. As if that was a non factor.



and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.

So RIM's answer is to compete most heavily in a sub market segment where Apple has a decided advantage. Yeah, brilliant strategy. *cough*




if there was a margin shifting thing to copy from Apple it would be to start charging folks more money for OS software updates. That's where Apple's margin differences primarily are. They are selling more system software than RIM is.

Clean up the models proliferation a bit. [ e.g., fewer models. Like flip phones... why (unless it was a large screen) ? ]


Not so much of an issue with the app store. That isn't the huge margin differentiator.

[kdarling]

How can it be a "misstep" if they never shipped an iPhone with a plastic screen?

If you were around, you'd know that Apple intended to ship it with a plastic screen. But so many people complained that the screen, especially a touch one, would get very scratched, that Apple changed to glass just before sales launch.

Ah, the old "only idiots buy iPhones" chestnut. I assume all the tech sophisticates are buying...Windows Mobile devices? Hilarious.

I never said that, you did. Please don't put words in other people's mouths. You only reveal your own mindset.

I meant that people were willing to let a lot of missing items go at first, but over time they will demand more features. What works in the beginning, does not work forever.

I think Apple is targeting the consumer almost-perfectly with their iPhone/iPod touch strategy. Would I like to see more? Of course. But you certainly can't fault their business strategy thus far (except for the AT&T exclusivity - perhaps a good move at launch, but that ball and chain needs to be cut loose and pronto).

No one disagrees with that. What we find ridiculous, is the childish concept that Apple always planned for things to go the way they did. A lot of experienced people on this forum have spent too many decades in similar circumstances, not to be able to instantly spot an unplanned switch in direction.

Are you implying, then, that when SJ made this statement in 4/04, he was unaware of the development which lead to the release of the first video iPod in 10/05? Seems the intent of his statement was more about subterfuge than anything else.

There are definitely cases where Jobs misdirects. For example, he never said that video was a bad idea. In fact, he said that they could be working on it at the moment. What he DID say, was that he didn't believe that viewing full length feature movies on a tiny screen would sell well. So they came out with one intended mostly for TV shows and music clips.

However, this viewpoint also goes both ways - as Apple was keenly tuned-into the "Jailbreak App" culture, do you really believe that they had no intention of building upon this, from the outset?

If you recall from interviews, Jobs originally winked at the jailbreakers. I think he was just happy at first that people were paying so much attention to the iPhone.

You could hear and see this attitude change dramatically when Apple had to admit at the 4Q07 earnings call that something like 18% of sales were being unlocked. Not just jailbroken, mind you, but unlocked to other carriers with no revenue sharing agreement.

The smart phone market grew 27% year over year, the Blackberry didn't come close to that.

The smartphone market grew 27% in TOTAL. It is a sum of the gains of all the companies involved.

RIM's part of the smartphone world in 2008 was 17.3%, so they needed only to grow that much of the total 127% to meet their part of the increase, or just under 5% growth. They did better than that, with 8%.

[kdarling]

It is inconceivable that the iPhone OS, designed to run full capacity apps, would have been relegated to WebApps only, supplemented by a few in-house apps.

Inconceivable? "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means." :) (The Princess Bride)

Have you ever developed a vertical application? It's quite common to use a powerful OS simply to allow for in-house native apps.

Especially so in this case, where Jobs originally pointed out to the New York Times in Jan 2007 that he felt the iPhone was "more like an iPod than a computer" (an attitude that visibly changed later on).

“We define everything that is on the phone,” Jobs said. “You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore. These are more like iPods than they are like computers.”

Taking into account the relative speed at which the App Store emerged, it is more difficult to imagine that it had not been in development all along.

You're right, it was. Just not for mass third party apps.

Jobs originally stated that they intended to sell at least some new software apps (from them, or Google, or a select few partners). So they would've developed at least the basis of such a store.

Still, it didn't open until nine months after he announced it, which isn't that quick.

[inkswamp]

Niiice. I can see the next Apple commercial:

"2B (shows iPhone, iPod Touch and some apps) or not 2B (shows Zune, other phones), that is the question. Apple, now with over 2 Billion apps downloaded."

Meh... I think it's very bad form to poke fun at a smaller competitor in an ad. I don't mind Apple doing it with the Mac (since the Mac's numbers are dwarfed by Windows PCs) but it would be tacky if they poked fun at the Zune or some other smart phone in an ad.

That, btw, is why I think the laptop hunter ads are so pathetic.

[LagunaSol]

If you were around, you'd know that Apple intended to ship it with a plastic screen. But so many people complained that the screen, especially a touch one, would get very scratched, that Apple changed to glass just before sales launch.

Or perhaps Apple found during the development process that glass was better than plastic? Perhaps the change to glass wasn't a last minute haphazard decision based on the whims of the punditry?

I love how Apple is even criticized for what the naysayers theorize they might have done wrong. "They would have screwed this up, but then they didn't." Uh huh. Unbelievable.

[KnightWRX]

You're right, it was. Just not for mass third party apps.

Jobs originally stated that they intended to sell at least some new software apps (from them, or Google, or a select few partners). So they would've developed at least the basis of such a store.

Still, it didn't open until nine months after he announced it, which isn't that quick.

Not to mention it's basically using the same infrastructure as the iTunes Music store which was all readily available. It's not like they had to build the thing from the ground up, they already had a very solid foundation for an online store in place, they already had an internal SDK for their in-house apps.

All in all, 9 months is a short time to market if you have nothing to build on. If everything is just ready, 9 months to polish and ship is a pretty long time.

I don't see why people are still arguing this point. The facts are Apple had a Web app strategy at first. Everything else is speculation on what was going on behind the scenes.

And again I say to all those arguing that Apple had a master plan : the fact they didn't have a master plan and still pulled off this reversal is pretty postive and shows the corporate culture at Apple is very able to adjust to market pressure effectively. This is a good thing. We're not Apple naysayers, on the contrary, we're praising them on a job well done.

[jonnysods]

Wow, that's a lot of bandwidth. I wonder if that's what the huge server farm in North Carolina is for - Mobile Me, and billions of iTunes downloads.

[DMann]

These are all clear signs that the market is rejecting RIM's offerings, and that portends a very disagreeable future for RIMM Unless they make a shift toward a content-rich experience the likes of which is offered by the iPhone.Your observations are insightful - one might surmise, then, that the outlook for RIMM seems to be becoming increasingly (G)RIMM.

[*LTD*]

The writing's on the wall.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/320245/lloyds_international_banking_iphone?fp=16&fpid=1

[BongoBanger]

While the rollout is dependent on policy development and approval from head office in the UK

That'll be tough. I work for LTSB - or LBG as we are now - and it's a Blackberry shop through and through. That said, International is a small arm of the core business so you never know.

[KnightWRX]

The writing's on the wall.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/320245/lloyds_international_banking_iphone?fp=16&fpid=1

If your only proof for the "writing on the wall" is this, then I got news for you. Linux is the big winner for desktop entreprise use :

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39171380,00.htm

According to your own graphics, RIM is still gaining market share :

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/images/stories/2009/08/121423-gartner_smartphone_2q09.png

And iPhone recently got a big negative hit in the entreprise market, when it was discovered the device was lying about it's encryption capabilities in order to connect to Exchange in a secured installation :

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10354209-37.html.

So seriously, you might just want to tone it down a bit.