Phil Schiller Addresses More App Store Concerns

[stealthboy]

Stealthboy, I understand where you're coming from but did you really think you were going to make a half million with an app? Some made big bucks but that was few and far between.
However, if you can make something truly cool,subjective, then you have the possibility of charging a higher price. Anyway, wait until that Apple tablet drops. Boom! Money up the ass.
Good luck dude. I wish you all the best. Just keep creating man. Don't stop!

No, it's all good. I was certainly under NO impression that I'd make any huge amount of money, but it's just a bit depressing to get the equivalent of slave-labor wages for all your work, that's all. I just wonder how the smaller developers can keep this up - I certainly can only maintain this as a hobby because it wouldn't be worth it to do this for a living.

 

[ebock]

I too got sick of it, and changed to a rival (as you may see in my sig). I like Apple products, I own a few, but the iPhone is not for me anymore.

I am about to agree with you. The Google Voice debacle has put me over the edge. I think the iPhone is a great platform but Apple and AT&T both have no clue how to execute. The 3Gs was my first and last iPhone and I am about to ETF this thing and go over to Verizon and get a Blackberry Tour. I can't believe I abandoned my rock sold EDGE 8820 for a crappy 3G iPhone. The 3G service is terrible and Apple's policies on applications went from draconian to down right ludicrous.

 

[bigmc6000]

The problem, in my opinion, is more related to the iPhone age demographics. Create good apps for the 2nd highest iPhone age population....and you'll find they have the money to pay for apps and they will sell. Not all iPhone users are in high school and college which is a age demographic that seems to think everything should be free....

Or, if you want to 'blow out' some numbers (big $) create that app for the 2nd tier of iPhone users and then price it at $0.99. A perfect example is the app 'Classics'. I highly doubt that the majority of the #1 iPhone demographic age group is buying that app.

FWIW.

A quick review of the top 10 gives this...
1 - .99
2 - 4.99
3 - .99
4 - 1.99
5 - .99
6 - 4.99
7 - 4.99
8 - .99
9 - .99
10 - .99

So while being 99 cents certainly helps I wouldn't go so far as to say that more than 99 cents = death. That #6 app (Oregon trail) has been out since March 9 and has over 1200 ratings and, yet, it's still in the top ten. I believe its original price was 9.99. So, in some sense I agree that 99 cents seems to be a sweet spot but I think as these numbers show if you make an app that really gets things right you can price it much higher than that.

 

[uberamd]

I am about to agree with you. The Google Voice debacle has put me over the edge. I think the iPhone is a great platform but Apple and AT&T both have no clue how to execute. The 3Gs was my first and last iPhone and I am about to ETF this thing and go over to Verizon and get a Blackberry Tour. I can't believe I abandoned my rock sold EDGE 8820 for a crappy 3G iPhone. The 3G service is terrible and Apple's policies on applications went from draconian to down right ludicrous.

So you are complaining about the quality of a 3G network that you could have done some research into before buying (or heck, canceled in your 30 day window but DIDN'T), and how Google Voice was denied, even though you have only owned an iPhone since late June, at the earliest? Wow. Nice to see you take the rejection of apps that you had nothing to do with so personally. I guess I love my 'crappy' iPhone 3GS. Crazy. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[LagunaSol]

This race to the bottom has hurt overall app quality, IMHO. There is no incentive for a developer to spend time on a quality product if they have to price it at $0.99.

Hopefully this situation will resolve itself over time. The 99 cent model just isn't sustainable. It's hilarious to see people complain that some truly stellar apps (like Space Invaders Infinity Gene - a fantastic game, my favorite so far - at $4.99) are a "rip off." $5 is a rip off? Seriously? Have they ever bought a game for the Nintendo DS or Sony PSP?

The App Store is definitely in need of some "deeper" gaming experiences that justify higher price tags. And they'll still be far cheaper than what you'd get on a traditional gaming handheld. People need to get over this distorted perception that anything over 99 cents is overpriced.

My best iPhone app (FitnessBuilder) cost me $20 and was worth every penny. I'd love to see more apps with that amount of depth and detail.

 

[LagunaSol]

The 3G service is terrible and Apple's policies on applications went from draconian to down right ludicrous.

Good luck with Verizon's policies on applications.

 

[uberamd]

Hopefully this situation will resolve itself over time. The 99 cent model just isn't sustainable. It's hilarious to see people complain that some truly stellar apps (like Space Invaders Infinity Gene - a fantastic game, my favorite so far - at $4.99) are a "rip off." $5 is a rip off? Seriously? Have they ever bought a game for the Nintendo DS or Sony PSP?

Those willing to pay $5, will pay $5. Those who only pay $0.99, or download free apps are probably people not willing to spend $5 no matter what. $0.99 apps are generally no good, *but* if a developer is able to sell 6 copies at $0.99 for every 1 copy at $5, they are still making more money at the $0.99 level. If you make something good, people will buy as long as its priced accurately for the features. Doodle Jump is a great game. $0.99, and it sells like crazy. Other $0.99 apps suck, but thats the way it goes.

Developers are smart enough to price and adjust price accordingly.

 

[BaldiMac]

This means that Safari, iPod, YouTube and the Phone applications should all be 17+, as they can be used to access "objectionable material".

Not Quite sure how they can reconcile that.

Very easily. They can all be disabled through parental controls the same as 17+ apps. Except for the phone. But if you didn't want your kid to have a phone, you could just buy an iPod Touch.

 

[bigmc6000]

Good luck with Verizon's policies on applications.

Was thinking the exact same thing - you go from Apple's 50k+ to verizons "hundreds." Of course some people are so stupid as to believe that it's just because there aren't the developers for it, right, that's what it is. It's not that Apple's got the best model out there when it comes to balancing developers, apps, consumers and the quality of the iPhone experience, right...

 

[alent1234]

when you have a userbase of 40 million and growing and the only royalty is 30% to Apple then $.99 apps aren't a big deal.

it's like PC gaming in the late 1990's where 95% was utter recycled crap and lost money. then there was a fallout, a lot of dev houses went under and only the good ones survived. PC gaming is still around today, there are a lot less games coming out but the quality is generally better.

Blizzard has been around for 20 some years, their games always take longer than anyone else to develop. the games are always late but they rake in the cash because they put out a quality product and people buy their game for years after they are released. and their games don't cost more than the competition.

 

[bigmc6000]

Those willing to pay $5, will pay $5. Those who only pay $0.99, or download free apps are probably people not willing to spend $5 no matter what. $0.99 apps are generally no good, *but* if a developer is able to sell 6 copies at $0.99 for every 1 copy at $5, they are still making more money at the $0.99 level. If you make something good, people will buy as long as its priced accurately for the features. Doodle Jump is a great game. $0.99, and it sells like crazy. Other $0.99 apps suck, but thats the way it goes.

Developers are smart enough to price and adjust price accordingly.

I think a lot of the problem is devs seem to think they have to start at 99 and end up low balling themselves. As far as I'm aware changing the price is relatively easy so why not start out at 4.99 w/ a free demo (as the iShoot guy will attest this is the #1 way to make money) and then when sales start tapering off move it down to 2.99 and then again down to .99. There's no reason you should price yourself at 99 cents to start unless you really honest to God don't care about maximizing profits.

 

[slu]

Both of these statements are not even close to being correct.

1-No one is forcing you to buy a two year contract. The iPhone is available without a contract.

2-The product does not use public airwaves. It uses a frequency spectrum in the US that is controlled by the FCC, and that spectrum was purchased by AT&T.

Apple is a publicly traded business that is an independent entity and makes it's own decisions. They created a product that created a monopoly that everyone wants a piece of the $.

If you don't want to be a part of it (which means you have to play by their rules-as ambiguous as their rules may be), then don't be. It's as simple as that.

It's a free market. Create something to compete with it.

If you are seriously arguing that the iPhone does not use the public airwaves, there is not much I can do to help you.

The whole reason the FCC has any regulatory power over AT&T is because they use the public airwaves. Which they don't purchase. They purchase the right to use the airwaves that are public and regulated by the government. Much like Apple makes its own rules, the government makes the rules regarding the use of the public airwaves and they can change those rules as they see fit.

 

[uberamd]

I think a lot of the problem is devs seem to think they have to start at 99 and end up low balling themselves. As far as I'm aware changing the price is relatively easy so why not start out at 4.99 w/ a free demo (as the iShoot guy will attest this is the #1 way to make money) and then when sales start tapering off move it down to 2.99 and then again down to .99. There's no reason you should price yourself at 99 cents to start unless you really honest to God don't care about maximizing profits.

I do agree with you. Another thing I notice is devs start at $0.99, label it as a 7 day introductory price, then after its purchased and reviewed, bump it up to $2, $3, or wherever they want to go with it. That seems to work fine too.

 

[Jayomat]

The email seemed to provide some reassurace to Frank that Apple was taking the App Store criticisms seriously and will hopefully address them in the near future. Schiller also recently also personally responded to Daring Fireball's John Gruber addressing some other App Store criticisms.

of course they will "listen".. apple makes a hell of money with the appstore and it is *one* of the main selling points for iphones and ipod touchs. if it does not attract the customer anymore, and they turn away from it, it would be a desaster for apple...

well... good for them that most people are sheeps

 

[LagunaSol]

Developers are smart enough to price and adjust price accordingly.

True, and I'm sure there is enough money being made on 99 cent apps to keep the 99-cent-app market alive for a long, long time.

That said, the customer perception that anything over 99 cents is overpriced is not going to help attract a lot of quality development.

Me, I'm hoping for some deeper gameplay. Most games I download I toss aside after mere minutes of play. I'm dreaming of something like StarCraft mobile - or something along the lines of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass. I'll pay good money for apps like that.

 

[uberamd]

That said, the customer perception that anything over 99 cents is overpriced is not going to help attract a lot of quality development.

Thats the perception I think most customers have that refuse to spend more than $1. If a customer is willing to spend more than $1 on a well reviewed app, they have the opportunity to notice that there is indeed a difference between a good $5 app, and a $1 app. Thus, that customer becomes more willing to move from that $1 tier.

Customers like us, who have some common sense probably realize that apps priced at $1 are generally not top quality, top experience, and top re-playability apps.

 

[i.mac]

Apple has became an evil and monopolized company

there you go... the word 'monopoly' again.

troll and/or... ignorance, pure ignorance. Not worth expanding on this.

 

[slffl]

He sounds jealous he hasn't made a million dollars off of an app yet. I'm sure his tune would change if he ever does. Have fun developing for the HTC Hero LOL

 

[Linkster82]

ebook readers

Without reading through all the previous posts (because I'm lazy), am I the only one who has downloaded the Barnes & Noble ebook reader? What's all this nonsense about banning ebook readers?

 

[ChrisA]

The problem, from a developer's point of view is risk. No one will invest much money developing an app if there is a chance the app might be rejected. Apple will not publish the rules and makes un-predictable decisions.

What is "much money" depends on who you are. For Google they could afford to risk a million dollars in Google Voice but smaller developers can't gamble that big.

 

[RevoDS]

Jailbreaking was rampant, leading Apple to adopt the concept of the App Store for themselves. It is very clear that the first generation did not sell as much as the 3G, even with the price drop that occurred.

The Apple I didn't sell as much as today's iMacs, therefore it was a failure, right?

Edit: Oops, sorry if that was addressed already...I thought I was further along in the thread

 

[uberamd]

The problem, from a developer's point of view is risk. No one will invest much money developing an app if there is a chance the app might be rejected. Apple will not publish the rules and makes un-predictable decisions.

Most developers don't make apps where chances of rejection should even be considered. This applies to most games as well as other apps. As a developer, if you use common sense and base your app rejection chances on what is already available, there shouldn't be any issues.

 

[heisetax]

Why just 1 app store?

Why is it that Apple can get by with having only one source of software for the iPod Touch/iPhone? Sometimes it is better to be able to talk straight with the software developer, sometimes we can get by without their direct support. This choice should be our & the developers decision not Apple's.

Having only one source of software leads to these problems of inconsistent use of terms. Just as some deveopers have left with more that will follow their lead, if Apple remains in sole control of software on the iPod Touch/iPhone there will be a shying away by many excellent developers. It seems as if the restrictions have not kept the poor or worse developers away.

I have stayed away from the iPod Touch/iPhone platform because of the one source of software iTunes App Store. I have kept alive my Newtons & Palm PDAs long after when I wanted to. In my accounting field I am used to talking straight with the software developer company. Using one app store seems to be what we would expect from icroSoft not from Apple. What happened to "Think Different?" Time will probably force me into making a decision soon. With Palm's history of making the PDA what Apple couldn't do, the Palm Pre or such may be the best answer to Apple's choke hold on software supply on the iPod Touch/iPhone.

 

[dejo]

Apple will not publish the rules...

Well, that's not exactly true. The iPhone SDK Agreement has a whole section entitled "Program Requirements for Applications" where Apple attempts to explain the rules. There does, however, appear to also be some "undocumented" rules.

...and makes un-predictable decisions.

Occasionally, yes.

 

[*LTD*]

I have stayed away from the iPod Touch/iPhone platform because of the one source of software iTunes App Store. I have kept alive my Newtons & Palm PDAs long after when I wanted to. In my accounting field I am used to talking straight with the software developer company. Using one app store seems to be what we would expect from icroSoft not from Apple. What happened to "Think Different?" Time will probably force me into making a decision soon. With Palm's history of making the PDA what Apple couldn't do, the Palm Pre or such may be the best answer to Apple's choke hold on software supply on the iPod Touch/iPhone.

So . . . are you not interested in the App Store out of principle or because it doesn't meet your needs?

One simple place to get everything. It's had a few hiccups, but for the most part it's working out absolutely brilliantly for the average user. So well in fact, that others are strugling to copy the App Store paradigm, but without much success.

"Think Different"? Damn. Not sure what more you want from Apple. They've only been thinking different and redefining markets and the way we use tech since 2001. Right up to the present moment, Apple is showing everyone the way forward. A few app rejections and some minor niggles that the average user will never see or care about will do nothing to derail Apple's push into new directions, dragging the rest of the half-asleep industry right along with it.