Find me one app out of a million in appstore that do a simple in-phone call/sms/data tracking and alert.
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's App Store Hits One Million Apps in the United States
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Find me one app out of a million in appstore that do a simple in-phone call/sms/data tracking and alert.
First, I've never believed in "love it or leave it". If you like something, then you can still want it to be better.
--
Secondly, we're not talking about selling apps, where the $100 a year to be in the store might be justified.
We're talking about FREE apps with no revenue, and/or giving one-off versions to friends without having to pay Apple.
Imagine if you gave one friend a custom app in 2008. By now, it would've cost you $600 freaking dollars just to keep it running. Ridiculous.
As for free apps in the store, Apple has hugely benefited from having those to help sell hardware.
Sure, you know.... because you have tried the entire 1 million to come to this conclusion!
In other news
Android malware reached 1 million:http://www.thinkdigit.com/Mobiles-PDAs/Android-malware-to-hit-1-million-by_18697.html
Android malware reached 1 million:http://www.thinkdigit.com/Mobiles-PDAs/Android-malware-to-hit-1-million-by_18697.html
Come A Long Way
I remember checking out the App Store when it was about 3 weeks old and saying to my friend "I haven't browsed through all the apps in the store yet". I had browsed through 90% of them and thought inevitably I'd finish having a look at the last 10% in the next couple days... but it became harder and harder to reach that goal, which quickly was abandoned!
I remember checking out the App Store when it was about 3 weeks old and saying to my friend "I haven't browsed through all the apps in the store yet". I had browsed through 90% of them and thought inevitably I'd finish having a look at the last 10% in the next couple days... but it became harder and harder to reach that goal, which quickly was abandoned!
Customers are forcing the free app/in-app purchase configuration by not buying apps. They just don't do it (in mass), unless it is a spur-of-the-moment (some might say drug crazed) purchase when they get frustrated by not getting to the next level. Now certainly this opinion does not apply to the people on this list or those of us who use apps for business purposes. But nonetheless, you want to make serious money from the masses, then it is in-app purchase.
But yes, I think every listing should let you know if it will offer in-app purchase and the in-app purchase options should be described in the description.
LOL! Please tell me you are kidding. There's so much wrong with your statement. Overhead? 100+ billion dollars in the bank says your concern for Apple's financial stability is severely misplaced. The yearly fee is not necessary. I have the same issue with MS and their yearly XB Live toll.
On topic: If Apple did some house cleaning and reduced the apps by half I think the Appstore would be a better place to shop. Right now it's like a flea market.
$1,300,000,000 developer payouts / 1,000,000 apps = $1,300 per app average.
Standard deviation being whatever it is, most apps make next to nothing. Then again, annual membership cost being $99 (or free with limits), lots 'o people whip up something, submit it, and it goes nowhere because of no advertising.
Just because it's available doesn't mean it will be profitable. All
does is make the app available; it's up to you to give enough people a reason to get it.
Standard deviation being whatever it is, most apps make next to nothing. Then again, annual membership cost being $99 (or free with limits), lots 'o people whip up something, submit it, and it goes nowhere because of no advertising.
Just because it's available doesn't mean it will be profitable. All
does is make the app available; it's up to you to give enough people a reason to get it.Agreed, and as I posted before I think Apple should link app availability to ranking and sales. Say a system whereby time for sale is a factor, so devs get fair exposure. Then a time limit kicks in.
If something doesn't sell after 1 year (pick a number) purge!
In sales anything that does not move (gets sold) should eventually be closed out.
Traditionally product that is obsolete goes through all kinds of retail channels and will eventually land on flea markets.
True to form I can see somebody opening up a website for obsolete apps and even making money with it offering them at bargain prices.
I do like the sound of app fleamarket!
All depends on the case I guess. I can see where an Otterbox user might have issues swiping. Whereas with my covered case (KAVAJ Dallas - a tad pricey but holding up well after six months) it's not a problem since the screen isn't covered when in use.
Agreed about the million apps. I'm hoping with their latest acquisitions that Apple can finally provide a better way to search.
1 million apps
I got about 25 , there is not even an apple idevice that can take it all -
please make a 128GB iPhone :roll eyes: - it will be one step closer
I got about 25 , there is not even an apple idevice that can take it all -
please make a 128GB iPhone :roll eyes: - it will be one step closer
I am being serious. Apple does not like being a loss leader. Loosing money on one product or service to make it up somewhere else. They want the iTunes store to at least break even. Which it is and even making a slight profit. Most probably due to selling its popular professional software.
Your thinking as a consumer rather then thinking it as a business.
Actually, they are, as processors are becoming more powerful they are becoming more capable, and like Stella nicely elaborated, the new W3C standards are allowing many cool things that we only thought were possible using a native app. Needless to say that for developers it saves a lot of headache.
A closed system like Apple's btw is the one threatened the most by such trend, you can't control web apps, and if they are well written they are usually responsive, meaning they work on all form factors and screens.
Yup, even enterprise systems are moving towards that direction, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.
Just like PCs, there will be a point where your phone will function as a 'web terminal' more than anything else.
I thought at the iPad event Cook said developer payouts are now up to $14 billion.$1,300,000,000 developer payouts / 1,000,000 apps = $1,300 per app average.
Standard deviation being whatever it is, most apps make next to nothing. Then again, annual membership cost being $99 (or free with limits), lots 'o people whip up something, submit it, and it goes nowhere because of no advertising.
Just because it's available doesn't mean it will be profitable. All
$1,300,000,000 developer payouts / 1,000,000 apps = $1,300 per app average.
Standard deviation being whatever it is, most apps make next to nothing. Then again, annual membership cost being $99 (or free with limits), lots 'o people whip up something, submit it, and it goes nowhere because of no advertising.
Just because it's available doesn't mean it will be profitable. All
Exactly.
A developer needs to do more than just put their app in the App Store and wait around for the check to come in.
Getting the word out with marketing... sending their app to be reviewed by someone... there are lots of things to do after the app is created.
OK, they're becoming less trashy every day, but what exactly is better about their potential? Again ignoring that they'd use more battery power regardless of how powerful the new CPUs are. By the way, if they wish to limit it, all Apple has to do is not give Safari support for all these advanced things used in web apps.
I thought at the iPad event Cook said developer payouts are now up to $14 billion.
You're right. My bad.
Point remains: average payout is $14,000 per app. That's about equal to two month's pay for one developer.
Given standard deviation skewed by a few gargantuan winners, there's little left. A couple thousand dollars return per app makes most development a hobby (which most apps may very well be).
Every platform has pros and cons, you listed the cons of web apps (battery, processor, ram,limits), but here are the pros:
1. Cross platform compatibility - you are no longer limited, you chose whatever platform you prefer (iOS, android, windows, etc..) and your apps are available . This is huge, as it gives applications virtually unlimited audience
2. Zero footprint: you don't need to give up gigs and gigs of space on your device to store someone's bloated metadata
3. No need to update apps, ever!
4. Higher quality apps: developers can focus energy on enhancing one universal app rather than work on two or three different languages.
Maybe we are nowhere near web apps being the standard, but I gave personally replaced some lightweight apps with web apps, like tv listings, weather, even gmail
1. Just make different apps. If your app really matters, how much extra does it cost to program in two languages? Or just use C so most of it is cross-platform. I'll admit this is an advantage for some, but like I said, it's easy to block this as Apple has already done with Java.
2. Gigabytes of space for metadata? First of all, that's extreme. Secondly, with a web app, that will have to be downloaded anyway. Waste of 3G/4G data, and it has to be stored in a temporary location.
3. This is just a matter of setup. If Apple wanted App Store apps to update constantly, they could do that. But I like to have the power to say "no" to the update that "brings a fresh new iOS 7 look and Google Plus integration".
4. Kinda the same thing as (1), but is an app that requires a constant Internet connection really high-quality?
Web apps are really nothing but script code that you download on the spot instead of compiled code that you download beforehand. In fact, there's nothing impossible about a C or Objective-C "web app" that runs straight out of the browser, just needs Apple's approval.
