If I were to have someone write and application for me, is it cheaper to have them code it for iOS or Android, in general, or is it about the same. 
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.
iOS Programing, iOS or Android Cheaper?
- Thread starter MilleDav01
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Generally, it will be about the same.
There are various things that are easier or harder to accomplish on the different platforms so that's not an across-the-board statement.
Also, different developers may be more comfortable/familiar/experienced with one or the other platform which will affect how much they would charge.
Watch out: it seems like this topic attracts each platform's fanboys so, unfortunately, you' may get some to FUD-filled responses.
There are various things that are easier or harder to accomplish on the different platforms so that's not an across-the-board statement.
Also, different developers may be more comfortable/familiar/experienced with one or the other platform which will affect how much they would charge.
Watch out: it seems like this topic attracts each platform's fanboys so, unfortunately, you' may get some to FUD-filled responses.
I don't see how it's about the same? Android can be coded on much cheaper computers and the dev environments are free and or cheaper too. You need a pretty modern Apple computer to do iOS development. Android can be written on a $300 laptop.
Plus, to publish iOS apps you need to be a registered Apple developer and that costs money too.
Plus, to publish iOS apps you need to be a registered Apple developer and that costs money too.
I would not let "which is cheaper to program" make the choice of which platform I will be using.
You need to pick the platform/hardware that fits your needs the best and go from there!
You need to pick the platform/hardware that fits your needs the best and go from there!
If the app is for in-house use, then there is no need to publish on the app store, hence no need for a registration fee.
The rate mobile developers charge is usually unrelated to the development tool costs. 10's of millions of people and businesses already own Macs and iOS devices as sunk costs. Others are looking at potential revenue and/or lost opportunity costs far greater than tool costs. So the going rate is usually far more related to supply and demand for the skillset. In some areas, the typical rates are roughly the same, but there are parts of the world where the supply is greatly slanted to one platform or the other. So YMMV.
Also, within each platform, the variation of the rates can be very wide. Much wider than the mean or median difference. Very often, in contracting out app development, you get what you pay for (or less).
Last edited:
Am I missing something here? I thought that it cost to get an your app on any device. Internal or external still costs, you can't even develop a test app on a device without paying Apple.
Unless your talking about jailbreaking the device, which a lot of businesses wouldn't want to do.
How do you get your app on a device for in-house use without paying Apple?
Code:
I believe you do need to pay Apple for a developer's license, to get the programming resources you need to develop an app, but you don't need to distribute it through the App store. I thought there was a separate fee for getting your Apps into the App Store, but I could be wrong.
As I understand it, there are 3 tiers with iOS:
Free - download Xcode and run in the simulator
Paid - $99/yr in order to have test devices and be able to upload to app store
Paid Enterprise $??/yr in order to put your app devices for a company
I paid the $99 for 2 years and then went back to free because I don't need to be on the device at this point in my projects, but would love to test on the device for free if there were a non jailbreak way.
I really don't understand why Apple charges for testing on the device, they could allow someone to test on a few devices without hurting sales any. The development of larger complex apps takes time and testing on simulator only doesn't cover everything. I don't really understand Apple's logic on this, seems greedy even if it's only $99, I've been a programmer for some 30 years and never had to pay for access to test devices before.
I'm pretty sure it's because they don't want to allow a vector where people can distribute their app outside of the App Store.
I think $99 allows you to beta test your app on something like a 100 devices? So for a small company or organization, you could just distribute an app by setting up all your employees as beta testers, without paying the $??? Enterprise Fee. Looked at that way, $99 is a bargain.
So you've never developed for one of the major game consoles? Ever priced one of their SDKs? That makes it a bit harder to hack game code to cheat.
But the bigger reason may be to limit spam. Spammers depend on free bots. But a million iOS app spewing bots would cost at $99/pop.
The $99/annum is also a small percentage of the cost of a recent Mac plus iOS device (or two), so doesn't really make that much difference to someone who can afford a Mac and is serious about app development. Not a big deal in a metro area where a moderately experienced dev can charge around the neighborhood of $100++/Hr or $35k++ per iOS app.
Last edited:
No, never built any games except some Cocos2d tutorials. I've heard they [xbox...] charge thru the nose.
I guess there's a second side to this... the more they charge, the less spam. And game devs share some of the wealth with those that develop the platform.
I guess the whole thing works, except the discovery of new apps, but this would have been the case with or without the app store.
I guess even I can be wrong, maybe there is value in paying
It's the audience
It's all about the audience you are targeting. It doesn't matter what price you have to pay, if your application is good and you have targeted at the right market, you are good.
Though developing for IOS is better (personal opinion), but it all depends on the content being provided.
It's all about the audience you are targeting. It doesn't matter what price you have to pay, if your application is good and you have targeted at the right market, you are good.
Though developing for IOS is better (personal opinion), but it all depends on the content being provided.
It's all about the audience you are targeting. It doesn't matter what price you have to pay, if your application is good and you have targeted at the right market, you are good.
Though developing for IOS is better (personal opinion), but it all depends on the content being provided.
There is and has been at least 2 different markets (iOS vs Android) but those lines are tending to blur a bit as the higher end markets where iOS tends to lead, are saturated and the new growth markets are poorer and tend to use Android.
This will blur even more as the devices become an appliance and the upgrade cycles go long. This has been seen in the tablet market where tablet users hold on to the device longer than expected.
The upside for Apple is that they likely know it's more important to be the last phone you buy than it is the next phone you buy. Last refers to last for a long time or when the upgrade offerings no longer justify the price.
Apple will still have a struggle in Asia / India etc where the cost is much more of an issue than in Europe/Japan/US.
However, once the upgrade cycle slows, the cost/year goes down, so if someone is keeping the phone for 3 years vs 1.5 years, the cost would be 1/2 and at that point they would be more willing to pay extra if the offerings are justified somehow, even if it's only a "status" thing.
Good news is that at that point, the apps become more important as all platforms will want the "Killer apps" to be on their platform, which tends to explain Apples new relationship with IBM.
I can be wrong, but to get a license you must register using your real name etc. If you wanted to spam it would be a nuisance that apple knows your credentials...
The hardware costs for developing iOS is being overestimated. One can easily run the latest xcode on a refurbished Mac Mini from say 2009 (and run it well). While I would agree that there aren't nearly as many different kinds of cheap devices to program iOS with vs. Android, the Mac Mini option or older Mac option does allow one to do this "cheaply". On the Android side you don't need much until you decide to run the Emulator.... The annual Apple developer license of $99 is not going to add to the cost of getting a developer. It is going to come down to quality and getting quality developers on either platform is going to cost more and should be equivalent.
I didn't know that programmers tested. lol. kidding! only just....
Sorry for that... but I agree that Android developers should be cheaper because
(a) Java developers are MUCH easier to find than Objective-C or Swift developers
(b) More people have Android devices than iOS devices
(c) Android development is easier to start because the developer kit is free
(d) The developer isn't required to have access to a Macintosh
(e) Easier to make money on iOS, so more iOS developers would rather develop on their own
Last edited:
Not really. Supply and demand effects the pricing range more than the time, tasks and materials needed.
It seems that a lot of people are interested in learning Android development (the workshops are bigger than for iOS in some areas), but there's less total money in Android apps to create a demand for them (due to less total app store revenue and less Enterprise app activity). So even if it takes more time (in testing and QA due to greater fragmentation), the rate could be less in some locales, but not in others.