iPad App Store Reveals Launch Apps, Top Seller Lists, App Details

[CrackedButter]

Sorry for my preach/rant but,

This expected race to the bottom has a parallel to the reason why real manufactured goods are made in China. Nobody wants to pay for stuff. So in turn companies have to cut the manufacturing costs to cut the price to the supposed 'market reality'.

All everybody is focused on is price price price, nothing else ever matters anymore. People should be focused on value, value and value. Spend less and spend wisely instead of just hoarding everything, even if they are small apps. Don't forget your place in the world where you have these choices available to you, some people can barely eat or they simply value a roof over their head, never mind bitch about the value of Flight Control.

 

[ckorhonen]

FlightControl seems very fairly priced, I honest was expecting it to be more.

Not sure why so many people are upset at some of the pricing - if you had a PSP, would you expect to be able to upgrade all your games for free on your new PS3? No!

All the existing apps you have bought on the iPhone will still work. These are new versions of the apps that we are talking about, with extra functionality.

The only pricing point I saw which raises an eyebrow is OmniGraffle - $49.99 seems a little too much, especially since Apple have set the price of each of the iWork apps at $9.99 each. I feel it would probably do better at the $9.99-19.99 price point. At the moment its a detractor to all but the really hardcore users.

 

[drjsway]

1. HD is a consumer video term, not a computing term. There was never a SD (standard definition) when it came to computer resolutions so there cannot be an HD. HD is used outside of consumer video only as a marketing gimmick. It really means nothing.

2. How much time and money a developer spends and whether they can make a living is irrelevant. An app is only worth what people are willing to pay. And the reason people are willing to pay only 99 cents is because of competition, not because they are cheapskates. There are so many apps out there, if you price yours too high, another developer will step in.

The size of pie is the same. If there are 20 million customers and each one is willing to spend an average of $50, that's a $100 million pie. The more developers there are, the smaller each slice of the pie gets. If developers are unable to make a living, then develop for another platform where the slice is bigger.

 

[NakedPaulToast]

Explain to me how developing Flight Control for the ipad costs more than developing Flight Control for the iphone (or any game for that matter)?

Explain to me how an iPad market with what, 500,000 - 1,000,000 (pure guess) units could possibly enjoy the same volume of sales as the iPhone/touch market with over 50,000,000 units sold?

You do understand that pricing is based on not just development costs?

Don't you????

 

[drjsway]

This expected race to the bottom has a parallel to the reason why real manufactured goods are made in China. Nobody wants to pay for stuff. So in turn companies have to cut the manufacturing costs to cut the price to the supposed 'market reality'.

Are you arguing that is a bad thing? That has increased the quality of life by making goods more affordable with minimal loss in quality. Macs are made in China but its quality is outstanding.

All everybody is focused on is price price price, nothing else ever matters anymore. People should be focused on value, value and value. Spend less and spend wisely instead of just hoarding everything, even if they are small apps. Don't forget your place in the world where you have these choices available to you, some people can barely eat or they simply value a roof over their head, never mind bitch about the value of Flight Control.

I'm confused by what you're trying to say here. Are you saying people should buy less apps but pay more for them? Whether I buy 50 apps for $1 each or 5 apps for $10 each, I'm still spending $50. Developers are still making the same amount of money. But in one case, I have 50 apps to enjoy and in the other, I only have 5.

 

[BWhaler]

I'm not made of money, but I hope the prices go up for the iPad.

As customers, sooner or later, we will get what we pay for. Once the gold rush mentality wears off, developers are going to make hard economic decisions on how much to invest in the platform.

If prices remain at 99 cents, we're going to get crappy apps. It just won't be worth it for developers. Or, even worse, we will get smarmy "promotion" apps like the ones on FaceBook.

The screen size,CPU/GPU, and battery of the iPad provides for a more powerful platform to run apps. I have no problem with developers building bigger and better apps and charging more for it.

With that said, if the iPad version is just a "bigger" edition of the same iPhone app, then the price should be the same.

I think Apple is trying to lead the way with iWork costing 30 bucks ($10 per App) for the iPad. And I think the bigger screen and better apps will lend itself to a willingness by customers to pay higher prices.

Phones and their apps feel like "single serving sized" products. But their nature, they are going to be limited. I am not surprised to see low prices–although I think 99 cents is too low for SOME of the apps.

But an iPad is more of a full computing experience. I expect the apps to be much, much better, and I am willing–and happy–to pay more accordingly.

To the Developers: Make kick butt apps for iPads. Ignore the cheap kiddos who complain if an app is 99 cents instead of free. There are tons of people like me who have no problem spending $5, $10, $20, even more, for killer apps–especially if they are beautiful, have killer functionality and experiences, and improve productivity.

 

[BWhaler]

Explain to me how developing Flight Control for the ipad costs more than developing Flight Control for the iphone (or any game for that matter)?

I don't see how it could. I think developers are just trying to be sneaky/greedy and trick purchasers.

uh, how about the iPad version has more features and is more robust?


You can't judge the price until you know more about the game.

 

[drjsway]

I'm not made of money, but I hope the prices go up for the iPad.

As customers, sooner or later, we will get what we pay for. Once the gold rush mentality wears off, developers are going to make hard economic decisions on how much to invest in the platform.

If prices remain at 99 cents, we're going to get crappy apps. It just won't be worth it for developers. Or, even worse, we will get smarmy "promotion" apps like the ones on FaceBook.

Everything will balance out on its own. If good developers leave and most of the apps are crap, a developer can charge much higher for a good app because it's more rare and therefore, more valuable. That'll persuade other good developers to come back until there is too much competition and they are forced to lower prices again.

 

[sinsin07]

Its about time - the iPhone pricing structure is not sustainable. I don't know how anyone things that most apps pay a decent living wage for 99 cents a pop. Sure there are those that do because of volume, but most don't. Some of the high profile successes at 99 cents a pop barely pay the salaries of the people who make them.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that?

The general public does not care, they want the best value for the lowest price. It's in people's nature to look for the best deal.

 

[bickbum]

it's about time for app prices to come up... these software take a lot of effort to develop, and they are not made by quasi slave labor in 3rd world countries

those of you who are complaining, why don't you write a similar program and sell it cheaper?

 

[bickbum]

The general public does not care, they want the best value for the lowest price. It's in people's nature to look for the best deal.

but the public seems to have a knack for complaining when someone does THEIR work elsewhere in the world for half their salary, don't they?

 

[Stella]

I played Flight Control in Apple Stores and I thought it was a great game. When I bought my Touch, F.C was the first App I bought, I was amazed it was $.99 ( or $1.99 ) - because I thought it would be more expensive. The quality of that game doesn't justify the cheap price IMO. Its a bargain.

FlightControl seems very fairly priced, I honest was expecting it to be more.

Not sure why so many people are upset at some of the pricing - if you had a PSP, would you expect to be able to upgrade all your games for free on your new PS3? No!

All the existing apps you have bought on the iPhone will still work. These are new versions of the apps that we are talking about, with extra functionality.

The only pricing point I saw which raises an eyebrow is OmniGraffle - $49.99 seems a little too much, especially since Apple have set the price of each of the iWork apps at $9.99 each. I feel it would probably do better at the $9.99-19.99 price point. At the moment its a detractor to all but the really hardcore users.

 

[drjsway]

but the public seems to have a knack for complaining when someone does THEIR work elsewhere in the world for half their salary, don't they?

Those are just the entitled few.

It is a luxury to make a living developing iPhone apps. I wish I could quit my job and develop apps but I don't expect to make a decent living from it. I HOPE I do, but I don't EXPECT it.

 

[CrackedButter]

Are you arguing that is a bad thing? That has increased the quality of life by making goods more affordable with minimal loss in quality. Macs are made in China but its quality is outstanding.

I'm confused by what you're trying to say here. Are you saying people should buy less apps but pay more for them? Whether I buy 50 apps for $1 each or 5 apps for $10 each, I'm still spending $50. Developers are still making the same amount of money. But in one case, I have 50 apps to enjoy and in the other, I only have 5.

So you don't keep up on the news where people in the East make products for Western markets for pennies a day, basically a slave wage? Apple is one of a few exceptions and I was generalising anyway.

I'm also basically saying quality vs quantity, such cheap prices cause people to act like pigs in a trough and just spend spend spend, losing that sense of value that comes with a purchase. If I spend 59p on an app and it doesn't work then I might be ambivalent about it which isn't a good thing btw. If it was £50 then I'll consider and act carefully before making a purchase because it had taken me a few hours to earn that £50. Hence somebody else in the same situation will learn something about value. The same thinking applies to a £5 toaster vs a £50 toaster.

A race to the bottom teaches people nothing except to be greedy, carefree with nobody benefiting. Corporations consider us CONSUMERS for a reason.

 

[CrackedButter]

The general public does not care, they want the best value for the lowest price. It's in people's nature to look for the best deal.

But at what cost, this is why the UK has become a service industry and the US has moved all its manufacturing out into the East for slave labour to toil over.

But like Bickbum says, people care when jobs are moved out because somebody can do it cheaper so those same people can buy their product 'x' cheaper. It's a downward spiral. The only way back up is to be honest about it and charge a price where nobody is working as a slave and the environment doesn't suffer. In this context, people want $0.99 apps when the developers should be charging higher realistic prices.

So Flight Control for $4.99? Go for it!

 

[firewood]

2. How much time and money a developer spends and whether they can make a living is irrelevant. An app is only worth what people are willing to pay. And the reason people are willing to pay only 99 cents is because of competition, not because they are cheapskates. There are so many apps out there, if you price yours too high, another developer will step in.

Absolutely.

The race to the bottom with iPhone apps was caused by too many developers jumping into an over-hyped gold rush without a good idea of the average return on investment, and then dumping their apps at well below costs to recover whatever crumbs they could. Now that the pot-of-gold has proven to be a mirage for the vast majority of all paid app developers, far less of them will be likely to make the same mistake.

And with that much less competition, the prices for paid apps will average higher.

On the other hand, the charitable and non-profit developers may have already recovered their $99 developer fee from doing 99c iPhone apps, so their apps might tend more to be outright free. So I see a wider split in app prices for the iPad, with a far lower percentage of 99c and $1.99 apps in general.

The market tends to self correct. (I say "tends" because people, including developers, are provably irrational (read some of the latest books on behavioral economics), and the market information is far from perfect.)

 

[Friscohoya]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)



Does that matter? Do you pay more for food based on how long it takes to prepare?

Regardless I think the answer is yes.



arn

Clearly I think that it does matter hence the question. Yes you do pay more for food based on the time it takes to make. Fast food versus white table cloth restaurant. Anyway, my point is if developers are putting out the same apps in just a larger size, is there any objective reason that they should cost more? Or, as I suspect they will do, will developers just price the same apps higher because its on a bigger higher definition screen? If the latter is the case, I think that the market will react appropriately.

 

[Delirium39]

If it sold 100,000 copies at $1, I would.

The vast majority of apps on the store sell less than 1,000 copies, most less than 100 even. That $1 doesn't sound so great anymore, does it.

 

[Delirium39]

so you agree with me that these ipad apps are jokingly overpriced. cool

No, the iPhone apps are jokingly underpriced.

 

[drjsway]

So you don't keep up on the news where people in the East make products for Western markets for pennies a day, basically a slave wage? Apple is one of a few exceptions and I was generalising anyway.

Yes, we take advantage of the poverty of third world countries to manufacture goods cheaply. I don't see anything wrong with that. These people would have no jobs and no wages at all if our factories weren't there. To call it slave wage is ridiculous. They are not held in the factories against their will. Slaves don't make a wage at all.

But like Bickbum says, people care when jobs are moved out because somebody can do it cheaper so those same people can buy their product 'x' cheaper. It's a downward spiral.

The goal shouldn't be to keep these jobs in the country. It's to educate more of our citizens and create new jobs that people making pennies a day aren't capable of.

 

[NSMonkey]

dude... you can't sell the same candy bar 100's or 1000's of times!

perhaps you should get real?

No, but you can use the same candy bar-making machine to make millions of candy bars... dude.

 

[NSMonkey]

They will work in a magical and revolutionary way ... at an unbeatable price

Yeah, they will actually. Or do you know something about universal iPhone/iPad apps that I don't?

 

[NSMonkey]

I sure hope doubling the screen size does not mean quadrupling the price of an App that was originally $1.99.

Sheesh

An iPad screen is five times the size of an iPhone screen (153.6K vs. over 786K pixels). So I assume quadrupling the price is OK with you, because four is less than five. I mean, you were attempting to apply some kind of math to your "reasoning", right?

 

[kas23]

This is really dumb. Why are there developers on here calling potential customers cheapskates? The nature of the market is that consumers will want to pay as little as possible for the most quality. Likewise, producers want to generate the greatest profit they can from their product. Are these two ideals that hard to grasp without resorting to name calling?

Friggin, name your price and the market will decide what they will be willing to pay. Period.

 

[NakedPaulToast]

This is really dumb. Why are there developers on here calling potential customers cheapskates? The nature of the market is that consumers will want to pay as little as possible for the most quality. Likewise, producers want to generate the greatest profit they can from their product. Are these two ideals that hard to grasp without resorting to name calling?

Friggin, name your price and the market will decide what they will be willing to pay. Period.

It's not so much the developers calling potential customers cheapskakes, but developers responding to being called greedy.