Because Apple is after subscriptions... is the better way to milk customers... and for Apple this means a recurring 30% provision.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple-Sponsored Study Highlights Success of Small Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Totally. It would be nice if people actually read the story and went to the link that is included in the story
Since Home Office it's harder for CEO's like Tim Cook to perform public self-adulation, and distract people from realizing how negligible such positions are.
Well, seems like releasing fictitious studies is the new way to overcome this issue.
I look forward to the results of unbiased studies in ten years, when free installation of software is possible on iOS devices as it is on the Mac.
I hope that never happens. Whilst I will personally never sideload onto the device that has all my bank information, I will just enjoy the relative security that the Wall Garden continues to provide. But that's me. I know a lot of others want to put whatever they want on their phone.
And there will never be unbiased studies when they have to actually get the data used, directly from Apple, or any company for that matter.
Possibly. But that seems like significant effort to go through for a one time thing. It still proves that they can and do have different assembly lines with different plans for different countries.
Thing is though if you actually look at Android malware, the only reason it doesn’t apply on iOS is the permission system and overall system design, not the actual app store itself. Epic famously proved that you can indeed put one past App Store review.
Which is why I’m not terribly enthusiastic about sideloading either, because it won’t actually solve the problem most of us have with Apple being too restrictive. Seems like it will result in the worst of both worlds.
Back in the day, a small developer hitting it big would become a big name developer. Today, a small developer hitting it big means they get bought out by a big developer eg Minecraft being sold to MicroSoft, Dark Sky gobbled up by Apple.
Nothing to see, just Apple flexing. No different than Farmer Brown bragging about this year's bountiful harvest. Apple is just waiting for the right time to gobble up another small time indy developer.
You will still be able to do this by not going outside the Apple App Store when free installation of apps is possible.
Who can possibly forget Tiny Wings who made one guy go from nothing to rich. I still play that game after all these years.
Tiny Wings - Wikipedia
The problem of this study, is that it says very little.
How many developers make more than $10k/year ?
How much effort is behind an App that makes $100k/y ? Effort to make it and then to support it ?
What is the proportion of developers making >$100/y, >$1k/y, >$10k/y, >$100k/y ?
How many developers make more than $10k/year ?
How much effort is behind an App that makes $100k/y ? Effort to make it and then to support it ?
What is the proportion of developers making >$100/y, >$1k/y, >$10k/y, >$100k/y ?
It depends on the developer. Not all sell out for the quick bucks. I own numerous apps by small developers who have very popular apps but (at least at this point) haven't sold. I think on the Mac side BBEdit is one of the best independent apps of all time. Many back in the day hoped Apple would buy them to replace their editor.
Gotta get that revenue back after the EU declared the charging port and App Store public utilities.
People want to make apps for the iPhone. Tim doesn’t have to go the route of forced coercion.
So, with all the negativity about this study, can I assume those doing this think small developers are a miserable lot suffering under the yoke of evil Apple. And why would small developers even think of submitting to the App Store if they are losing money, being miserably treated, etc.?
The virulent hatred of Apple expressed these forums makes me wonder whether many are here just to spew hate at the company and don't own or use its products. Just asking.
The virulent hatred of Apple expressed these forums makes me wonder whether many are here just to spew hate at the company and don't own or use its products. Just asking.
Hehe:
"Analysis Group defines small developers as those who have fewer than a million annual downloads and who earn up to $1 million per year, and this group accounts for more than 90 percent of developers on the App Store."
Any entrepreneur would call this group the "startup or failure group", and that would be kind considering we have startups already with more than 4 million in revenue year. On another note, more than 90%, does this mean 99%?
"According to the study, revenue growth for small developers outpaced revenue growth for large developers, with earnings improving across all app categories."
Well if you earn $1 in a year and in the next you earn $7 that is 700% growth. So we can see where these averaged percentages come from.
"Developers have seen success over time, with the study suggesting that many apps earning over $1 million in 2022 started out as apps from small developers."
I would expect so. But many can be 2, 10 ... 100 out of millions. How many really?
Service providers will want to reach their customers in the devices they use, whatever they might be. Of course if not enough users use a specific device brand or type, it is not a priority.
What I've read is that 1% of the apps provide 94% of the US App Store revenue (commissions). TikTok being one of them.
Which kind of suggests to me that this all situation could have been avoided and Apple could if it wanted come out extremely positive instead of a bully. I mean, given the data maybe Apple could have written out 4% of its revenue and focus on the 1% ... say through commission based on tier ... say tear 0 (between 0 and X millions) just pay a transaction commission (say 2%), tier 1 (between X minions and Y ...) 10%, 30% (Y millions and X billions)... so on and so forth. Instead they opted for the contrary in some countries, making payment optional and reduce the commission to 28% or so for the services that opt out of its payment system. Crazy stuff. If they proceeded more rationally they would probably be able to keep everyone including the top 1% on the boat at 30% in the EU courts. The way I see it the drop that took all thing overboard was actually demanding commissions on the sale of indirect goods, goods that aren't software, even though software is the only thing that the App Store distributes. Which basically lead to the only possible conclusion, the revenue share is the price to pay for the service of distribution of software irrespective of the goods that are actually being sold.
Will see how this pans out.
Cheers.
"Analysis Group defines small developers as those who have fewer than a million annual downloads and who earn up to $1 million per year, and this group accounts for more than 90 percent of developers on the App Store."
Any entrepreneur would call this group the "startup or failure group", and that would be kind considering we have startups already with more than 4 million in revenue year. On another note, more than 90%, does this mean 99%?
"According to the study, revenue growth for small developers outpaced revenue growth for large developers, with earnings improving across all app categories."
Well if you earn $1 in a year and in the next you earn $7 that is 700% growth. So we can see where these averaged percentages come from.
"Developers have seen success over time, with the study suggesting that many apps earning over $1 million in 2022 started out as apps from small developers."
I would expect so. But many can be 2, 10 ... 100 out of millions. How many really?
Service providers will want to reach their customers in the devices they use, whatever they might be. Of course if not enough users use a specific device brand or type, it is not a priority.
What I've read is that 1% of the apps provide 94% of the US App Store revenue (commissions). TikTok being one of them.
Which kind of suggests to me that this all situation could have been avoided and Apple could if it wanted come out extremely positive instead of a bully. I mean, given the data maybe Apple could have written out 4% of its revenue and focus on the 1% ... say through commission based on tier ... say tear 0 (between 0 and X millions) just pay a transaction commission (say 2%), tier 1 (between X minions and Y ...) 10%, 30% (Y millions and X billions)... so on and so forth. Instead they opted for the contrary in some countries, making payment optional and reduce the commission to 28% or so for the services that opt out of its payment system. Crazy stuff. If they proceeded more rationally they would probably be able to keep everyone including the top 1% on the boat at 30% in the EU courts. The way I see it the drop that took all thing overboard was actually demanding commissions on the sale of indirect goods, goods that aren't software, even though software is the only thing that the App Store distributes. Which basically lead to the only possible conclusion, the revenue share is the price to pay for the service of distribution of software irrespective of the goods that are actually being sold.
Will see how this pans out.
Cheers.
Last edited:
I need to play this again! I have also had this game since it first appeared and still have it installed, but I haven't opened it in a long time and I think I am going to play it later today now!Who can possibly forget Tiny Wings who made one guy go from nothing to rich. I still play that game after all these years.
Tiny Wings - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I think Apple would tell you the problem is that you’re not spending enough money on search ads in the App Store!
Yeah, nothing new, it’s well known that Apple Leads likes to stuff their faces with ethically incorrect grabbed money.
Hopefully non union jobs, if their current sentiment towards their employees is any guide.