2011 Apple Design Awards for Both iOS and Mac OS X, App Store Only

[Winni]

Good. I'm all in favor of Apple adding more incentives for devs to embrace the Mac App store. As a consumer I really like the idea of an App Store that makes buying and installing as easy as one click as well as fostering competition between comparable apps.

Yes, the AppStore makes it (too) easy to comfortably spend money.

But as a consumer, I HATE the fact that I cannot sell the software that I purchased in the AppStore once I don't need or want it anymore. You know, this is my LEGAL RIGHT here in Germany, and with stuff bought from the AppStore, I don't have the possibility to execute this right because the AppStore does not have an option to transfer licenses to a new owner.

Valve's Steam platform has the same limitation, so sadly this is not unique to Apple's store.

This is why DRMed content should always be boycotted. DRM is not about granting the customer certain rights, it is exclusively about restricting his rights. In this case even to the extent to deny a customer his legal rights.

I don't have a problem with traditional license keys. That's a copy protection mechanism that I can tolerate. Activation procedures are already problematic (they are unreliable at best), but to dongle software to a specific user account in an online store without enabling the user to transfer that software to a different account should be prohibited by law.

It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.

1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...

2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.

 

[mmcc]

It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.

Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.

In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...

As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?

 

[Popeye206]

1. You intentionally ignored the point that referred to Apple's Terms of Service. For example, applications like VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or even SuperDuper! could never be distributed through the Mac AppStore because they belong in a category that Apple does not ALLOW in their AppStore. As a matter of fact, even their own Xcode violates their TOS. But they wouldn't be Apple if the same rules also applied to themselves...

2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons. Anti-trust lawsuits, anyone? Microsoft would only get away with that if they implemented a "choose your AppStore" program that would let the people choose which online store they want to use - just like they had to do it for the web browsers. I think that Apple should also be forced to do the same. After all, there is at least one other "AppStore" for the Mac out there that is even OLDER than Apple's own AppStore, and Apple misuses their power to drive those guys out of business. People stopped using Netscape when Internet Explorer came pre-installed on the operating system. Now people will not even try to look for another online store when the AppStore and iTunes are pre-installed on their computers. The same thing. The same rules should apply to Apple as they obviously apply to Microsoft.

Winni.... you're obviously playing lawyer and have no idea what you're talking about. Microsoft could do what Apple is doing. There is nothing illegal or anti trust about distributing software. They just have to play by the same rules as everyone else. If Apple was to give away the distribution, that would be more in line with anti-trust because then they would be using their power to give something that others pay for. As long as Microsoft would keep their rules within the boundaries of the industry practice, they would be fine to do the same.

Things change and companies with the better idea's thrive while others go away. Music stores are dying. Video stores are dying. Book stores are dying and software distribution stores are dying. But not because of just Apple.... because with the digital age many companies are by-passing channel completely and going direct. What Apple does would be no different than Ford or Mercedes distributing 3rd party accessories through their dealerships to their customers.

Also.... your rights on software depends on what's in the license when you buy it. If it's non-transerable, it's non-transferable. That's why you can get away with buying some of this software for $5. But it's not your legal right to resell. That depends on the license you agree to.

Whoa! The jury is still out as to whether the Mac App Store is a success. While a few apps at the top have trumpeted their success, I dare say there is a far greater mass of apps that are doing less business than before the Mac App Store opened.

In my own market segment the Mac App Store has reduced the cash flow for everyone due largely, among other factors, to the increased and sustained visibility of the freebies. It is crazy for Apple to court developers and then throw up a list of freebies alongside my own paid offering. Thanks so much -- for nothing! Where are the free alternatives to Garage Band, Keynote, or Numbers? You can be sure they are not on the same page in the Mac App Store...

As far as I am concerned as a developer, the Mac App Store is a waste of time unless we can all go write $1.99 apps that get downloaded by a million people (good luck!). Anything that requires significant development time is a loss. Plus, anything that costs real money can't be tried first from the Mac App Store. Developers still have to maintain websites, demos, and bandwidth but then pay Apple 30% for the sale in an environment that depresses prices. Success? By what measure and for whom?

I hear your point, but disagree. Putting your software in the App store will not guarantee success or failure. People buy what's worth it to them. They will pay for what meets their needs. Also, they have to know you exist too. Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.

However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced. And as you point out... that is hard to compete in too.... back to my first point.

Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.

 

[mmcc]

Yes, the App Store can give you exposure, but you still have to market and sell your solution for people to find you or want you. Plus, the AppStore is one outlet and your other outlets should never be abandoned.

Yes, but you can't have it both ways. A successful Mac App Store from your perspective means more Apple customers use it to find apps. In my experience to date, this means those other "outlets" become less and less profitable. Marketing is a numbers game and a major disruption like the Mac App Store can quickly shift those numbers to the negative. In my case it is no longer profitable to maintain some of those "other outlets".

Here's a specific example: Google AdWords. Before the Mac App Store opened, many customers gravitated first to Google search to find an app. I would pay for AdWords placement and if I got a click-through I could be assured that my website exclusively captured the attention. Yes, my app still had to be good enough to capture a sale but at least there were no other competitors there -- and no freebie alternatives (except for demos/trials).

The same strategy no longer works with the Mac App Store. First, the traffic in Google search is reduced as more Apple customers gravitate to the Mac App Store first. My conversions costs showed a clear trend upward as soon as the Mac App Store opened (other competitors in my app space have also dropped away from AdWords indicating similar escalating conversion costs). Furthermore, if I try to drive customers to the Mac App Store to buy, to increase my exposure therein, I incur the AdWord conversion costs, plus the 30% to Apple and a reduced price in the Mac App Store to compete in the race to the bottom. Clearly AdWords is a losing strategy in this case.

However... you're point on price is one to be considered. If you want to get impulse buys, you have to be impulsed priced.

That's fine if the volume was worthwhile. What I am saying is that impulse buy volume is NOT there at any price to even approach what I was making in my market space before. I've been in the #1 spot for my category and it was not a windfall.

I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive. The Mac App Store has crushed that IMO and I am not sure it will return unless Apple makes huge percentage gains in the traditional PC market (and recent trends show it is leveling off).

Please don't take me wrong... I'm not saying you're wrong... just pointing out that the AppStore does not guarantee anything if you don't have good sales and marketing behind it. Also, you have to have software people want.

How exactly would you suggest to market in the Mac App Store? I can't buy ad placement. Lowering my price to 99 cents hasn't given me exposure. I need some (ethical) ideas.

 

[mmcc]

I wrote:

I say again, the Mac App Store has depressed the sales volume and gross in my category for everyone. This is not a success in the sense of encouraging a vibrant and growing Mac software market. I felt that before the Mac App Store opened that the Mac software market was reaching a critical mass and that developers found it increasingly attractive.

Part of the previous appeal of the Mac software market to developers was the fact that Apple customers would accept increased costs for Mac software titles just as Apple charges a premium for its hardware because "it is worth it." Developers could coattail onto this and therefore ask higher prices for Mac software as compared to equivalent titles on other OS's.

Once the Mac App Store opened, that premium pricing advantage was wiped out overnight. Apple customers now expect to pay less just as the mobile App Store has reduced app pricing -- and in many cases expecting equivalent prices from the iPhone to the Mac desktop.

Do not underestimate this effect on developer's bottom lines.

 

[slb]

Welcome to 1984.

This has nothing to do with 1984.

 

[roadbloc]

2. There won't be a Microsoft AppStore for Windows INTEGRATED INTO WINDOWS. EVER. Why? Because they can't for LEGAL reasons...

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Windows Live Marketplace in Windows Vista a integrated (badly integrated but still integrated), App Store before it was discontinued due to lack of consumers and made to redirect to a Microsoft website that sold some products?

 

[Bubba Satori]

This has nothing to do with 1984.

See that streaking object overhead?

It's a metaphor.

 

[mmcc]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the Windows Live Marketplace in Windows Vista a integrated (badly integrated but still integrated), App Store before it was discontinued due to lack of consumers and made to redirect to a Microsoft website that sold some products?

I believe Microsoft did partner with Digital River to bring 3rd party products to such a store. However it was badly organized, poorly promoted and ultimately drew little business as you indicate since it offered customers little or no benefit over direct purchases from the developer. Developers lost interest. It morphed into the current MS/DR relationship where DR handles much of the on-line sales of MS products.

I sort of hope developers lose interest in the Mac App Store as well. Unfortunately, consumers love the basement pricing.

 

[marksman]

This will be a real boon the Mac Developers... First it makes it easy for Apple to determine who is eligible, if you are in the App Store, you are in.

Secondly when they announce the awards, the benefit to the developers will be more significant as people will be able to link right to them in the Apple App Store and download/install them.

I think it will end up being a real good thing for those developers partake in it.

I don't have much confidence in developers who eschew the App Store for their applications anyways, as in almost all cases it is a bad business move. I appreciate the business savvy of developers and companies who realize what a real advantage the app store model is, especially if you have a strong product.


MMCC, excuse me if I don't buy that gross and volume of your niche has gone down with the introduction of the app store. It seems pretty much impossible that volume sold for products in your niche went down... Perhaps your volume went down, but what that most likely tells me is before you were better at marketing your product than competitors, but now given equal footing as others, people are choosing some competitors over you instead.

The idea that your whole segment was moving 100000 units before the App store and now are moving 50000 units just seems impossible, unless something else effecting the segment happened. It is not because of the Apple App Store. Again though with your own words you used to capture a lot of volume off google adwords. Which means you were likely much more successful at marketing than your competitors because being successful on PPC is not easy for any product. I would focus on your product and its features and place in the market and see what you can do to improve your offering. Feedback from the users and the rest.

Someone else is getting the sales you are not getting and the new sales as well. Figure out how and why.

 

[fxtech]

I don't have much confidence in developers who eschew the App Store for their applications anyways, as in almost all cases it is a bad business move. I appreciate the business savvy of developers and companies who realize what a real advantage the app store model is, especially if you have a strong product.

That's pretty narrow minded of you. We sell a successful product for $1000 that uses an advanced licensing system for large facilities to "float" licenses between machines. The "App Store model" would be a horrible move for both us and our customers. Fortunately, since the people who need our tools already know about them (and would likely never turn to the app store to find such tools anyway), this isn't a big deal.

 

[mmcc]

MMCC, excuse me if I don't buy that gross and volume of your niche has gone down with the introduction of the app store. It seems pretty much impossible that volume sold for products in your niche went down...

Impossible? How so? I've already said that the freebies are dominating my category. What is hard to understand about that? Before in the Apple Download pages, for example, all apps were listed first in each category by release date. Free or paid, each app enjoyed the top of the listing for a while.

In the Mac App Store the freebies are staring you in the face on the Category page and you cannot escape it. They have their own top list. They are always there taking possible sales.

Perhaps your volume went down, but what that most likely tells me is before you were better at marketing your product than competitors, but now given equal footing as others, people are choosing some competitors over you instead.

Really? I already said I was #1 in the Category for a time. I was #1 for a week back in January. Guess what? No big windfall (year over year comparison it was still well below last year at the same time) and that was within a month of the opening of the Mac App Store when interest is usually highest (at opening of a new store).

The idea that your whole segment was moving 100000 units before the App store and now are moving 50000 units just seems impossible, unless something else effecting the segment happened. It is not because of the Apple App Store.

Given my experience in the #1 slot and watching how my app moves up and down the charts with paltry sales, as well as talking with other developers in my same space who say the same, the sales volume for paid apps is clearly down.

The gross is also down for everyone because of the price depression. You really think that the Mac App Store all of the sudden increased the installed OS X base by any huge amount? The number of OS X users is the same, the prices have been cut in half or more, and you really find it hard to believe the gross is unaffected?

Someone else is getting the sales you are not getting and the new sales as well. Figure out how and why.

Yeah, the freebies are getting the "sales".

 

[snowmentality]

I'm not surprised, but I don't like it.

One of the things I like most about the Mac is the amount of well-designed, affordable third-party applications available. On Windows my choices seemed to be either a) crappy and free or b) usable and expensive ($100+). I've bought a ton of software for the Mac that cost $20-30 and is beautiful.

The Mac App Store is fine as an option -- there really are users who would otherwise never even know about apps that didn't come with their machine, for whom a curated, controlled list of easily-installed apps opens up their world. It's a great way to do a list of recommended or highlighted apps -- sort of a nicer http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/. But it can't be the only option, not with the restrictions and fees it entails.

I'm okay with a "walled garden" for my phone. I don't want to tinker with my phone, I just want to use it. But I do sometimes need and want to tinker with things on my MBP, in order to do the real, heavy-duty work I need to do. And Apple has a lot of OS X users like me -- professionals in creative, scientific, or engineering fields whose work requires them to tinker. Hell, how would anyone even develop applications if OS X became an iOS-style walled garden?

For these reasons, I think it's awfully short-sighted of Apple to restrict design awards to apps in the App Store. Some applications with great design just won't be suitable for the App Store, because they're more niche or developer-oriented. Apple should still recognize good design and development for those applications.

I get that this might be a temporary thing to promote the App Store, since it's new. I hope that's all it's about.

 

[Gugulino]

What kept me often from buying apps was the too complicated paying system: You have to register, give them the number of your credit card, remember the password of the login and so on. The MAS makes this a lot easier and safer. Apple's decision to only allow MAS apps for the Design Award is to push developers to publish their apps on the MAS. What's wrong with that?

 

[fxtech]

What kept me often from buying apps was the too complicated paying system: You have to register, give them the number of your credit card, remember the password of the login and so on. The MAS makes this a lot easier and safer. Apple's decision to only allow MAS apps for the Design Award is to push developers to publish their apps on the MAS. What's wrong with that?

What's wrong with it is it expressly denies potentially stellar Mac apps from possibly winning the award, due to Apple's arguably arbitrary "rules" as to what apps are allowed in said store.

Rather lame considering Apple's own apps seem to be except from the same rules.

 

[Gugulino]

I think, there is a way to get this app in the MAS, too. Needs a bit of tweaking by the developers.