Thoughts on Mac App Store

[iDisk]

I've noticed in the forums their have been mixed reviews about the launch of the Mac App Store.

This thread is to educate those who don't quite see the vision and its impact on the software industry.

HISTORY

Those of you who are familiar with Apple, know that Apple back in 2001 set the industry standard for how digital music would be distributed, which was the iTunes Store. The music industry was slow to adopt this new format but it later realized that Apple had established the future in music distribution. The iTunes Store spawned a wave of aspiring developers and larger developers (Yahoo, Rhapsody, Microsoft...) to launch their own music services along with other media digital content.

PRESENT

2008 came the App Store, a store designed for the revolutionary product iPhone. Before the iPhone, Apps on phones sucked. Developers had to jump through layers of bureaucracy just to get their App on a crippled device. Many people complained about the App Store, when it launched, but later realized that the new Gold Rush was with the iPhone and iPod Touch, and it still is today. We've also noticed that since the App Store, competitors have been quick to adapt a dumbed down version (ie: Android, Palm) of our App Store. Needless to say that Apple has paid over 1 Billion dollars to developers since the launch of the store in 2008! Unheard of in our industry.

FUTURE

Now comes 2011, with the launch of the Mac App Store. A easy and more efficient way for developers to program for the Mac. The Mac App Store, will usher in a new frontier of Apps for Mac! Since consumers are already use to the two current stores we have (iTunes & App Store) the Mac App Store will be an easy transition and they'll no longer have to search for programs for the Mac. This will be a huge advantage to gaming developers and consumer who love games, as well as for businesses to find more productivity Applications if for some reason Apple's own software can't supplement the need. Also Artist will be able to thrive and discover new ways to become more innovative with their work.

CONCLUSION

Apple looks to the future and we've always been right on the decisions we've with our limited resources. Apple does what's right for the consumers and the consumers LOVE Macs, iPods, iPhones and iPads as a result of it. The Mac App store will be a beautiful tree in the Apple Garden.

Bruce

 

[ag227]

I dont know if this has been covered before...

But my concern is with free apps. Lots of free applications on the internet use advertising to make a bit of the money instead of charging for them.

With the app store I am hoping that all these sorts of free applications will remain free although there is no advertising to make money from. It wouldn't be to bad if they charged a little but I have no idea how much the developers would have to charge per app in order to make the same amount they would do for advertising.

I hope more than anything that Apple does not allow advertising in Apps through the app store. If they do then I will be leaving Apple for sure.

 

[CylonGlitch]

Quick bullet points from what I have read.

• The MacApp Store apps are not these simple watered down versions, they are the same apps as from any developer.
• Next, it helps small developers get out there and get their products to a whole new group of people who may not have otherwise found their product.
• There is NOTHING from stoping a developer from sticking to their current model; if it's working for them, great.
• For the end user, keeping up to date can be a huge plus.
• Developers can find holes where no product exists, and target that.
• MANY people don't want to search the web for a product that may or not be good. This makes it faster to not only find products, but also see ratings.
• NO ONE IS STOPING YOU FROM NOT USING IT (Developer, or Client)
• Apps will need to be approved by Apple -- means that those apps are basically safe from malware (such as porn, right?)

For me, I see this as nothing but a boon for the end user; especially those who are busy, or don't know much about technology things. I work a lot, and when I want something I don't have hours to spend searching for a product and then reading reviews on it, etc.. Having them all in the same place, with reviews and ratings, makes my life easier. Not that I'll stop searching for individual apps, but my first attempt will be to check out the App Store.

Bottom line though, if you don't like it, don't use it.

 

[iDisk]

Not to Worry

I dont know if this has been covered before...

But my concern is with free apps. Lots of free applications on the internet use advertising to make a bit of the money instead of charging for them.

With the app store I am hoping that all these sorts of free applications will remain free although there is no advertising to make money from. It wouldn't be to bad if they charged a little but I have no idea how much the developers would have to charge per app in order to make the same amount they would do for advertising.

I hope more than anything that Apple does not allow advertising in Apps through the app store. If they do then I will be leaving Apple for sure.

iAds will eventually evolve from iOS. Though to answer your questions, Not to Worry.

Bruce

 

[CylonGlitch]

But my concern is with free apps. Lots of free applications on the internet use advertising to make a bit of the money instead of charging for them.

With the app store I am hoping that all these sorts of free applications will remain free although there is no advertising to make money from. It wouldn't be to bad if they charged a little but I have no idea how much the developers would have to charge per app in order to make the same amount they would do for advertising.

99.9% sure that iADS will be available for these apps as well. Besides, there is nothing stoping the apps from using the same ad revenue that they already had; just have to be more creative. Instead of relying on their website to generate ad traffic, they will need to move the ads in app.

 

[Daveoc64]

This reads far too much like brainwashed nonsense to me.

What are your actual points?

How did iTunes spawn services like Rhapsody when that service launched 3 years before the iTunes Music Store? How was iTunes revolutionary if the service had already been made?

Those of you who are familiar with Apple, know that Apple back in 2001 set the industry standard for how digital music would be distributed, which was the iTunes Store. The music industry was slow to adopt this new format but it later realized that Apple had established the future in music distribution.

Anyone familiar with Apple would know that they launched iTunes for Mac and the original iPod in 2001 (without the iTunes Store).

The iTunes Music Store launched in 2003.

Anyone familiar with the industry would also tell you that things are moving towards a subscription model, which Apple is being "slow to adopt".

Before the iPhone, Apps on phones sucked. Developers had to jump through layers of bureaucracy just to get their App on a crippled device.

That sounds exactly like the App Store to me. Expensive fees and a slow approval process topped off with a huge set of rules that are harmful to consumers. "Crippled Device"!? I'm not even going to comment on that!

Now comes 2011, with the launch of the Mac App Store. A easy and more efficient way for developers to program for the Mac.

How and why is this the case? You don't say. All I see is a store that virtually all of the most popular Apps on the Mac right now wont be eligible to enter.

"Easy and more efficient" can't possibly be correct. Developers will have to make many changes to their Applications before they can be allowed in the Mac App Store.

 

[Cougarcat]

Oh no, not the guy who refers to Apple as "we."

 

[iDisk]

Wheres your argument?

This reads far too much like brainwashed nonsense to me.

What are your actual points?

How did iTunes spawn services like Rhapsody when that service launched 3 years before the iTunes Music Store? How was iTunes revolutionary if the service had already been made?

Apple added the polish and missing pieces to what Rhapsody had tried to establish.

Anyone familiar with Apple would know that they launched iTunes for Mac and the original iPod in 2001 (without the iTunes Store).

The iTunes Music Store launched in 2003.

Anyone familiar with the industry would also tell you that things are moving towards a subscription model, which Apple is being "slow to adopt".

Yes. I'm aware that iTunes 4 launched the iTunes Store. Not necessarily slow, but more strategic in its go to market approach.

That sounds exactly like the App Store to me. Expensive fees and a slow approval process topped off with a huge set of rules that are harmful to consumers. "Crippled Device"!? I'm not even going to comment on that!

Clearly your mis-informed. Please tell me how vibrant and profitable the mobile applications market was before Apple arrived? Certain Independent Developers becoming Millionaires in a span of a month, sounds revolutionary to us.

How and why is this the case? You don't say. All I see is a store that virtually all of the most popular Apps on the Mac right now wont be eligible to enter.

Minor tweaks, that's about it.

"Easy and more efficient" can't possibly be correct. Developers will have to make many changes to their Applications before they can be allowed in the Mac App Store.

Clearly your misguided. The Mac App store keeps Developers in the vibrant and fruitful Apple ecosystem. They can focus all their energies developing for Macs and iDevices. The industry WANTS Apple and Apple, is finally going to allow them to take a piece of history, or shall I say develop for it.

Bruce

 

[dknightd]

I think I'll judge it when I see it.

Anybody think this Apples next step toward entering "cloud" computing?

 

[Daveoc64]

Oh no, not the guy who refers to Apple as "we."

Indeed.

I don't think I can respond to the collective.

 

[Cougarcat]

Certain Independent Developers becoming Millionaires in a span of a month, sounds revolutionary to us.

Yes, and a system without paid upgrades, leaving developers who charge for a version 2 to make a living and then get pissed 1.0 customers leaving 1-star reviews, that is also revolutionary as well?

Minor tweaks, that's about it.

Bruce[/FONT]

Obviously you haven't read the app store guidelines. None of the utilities I use daily will be able to be in the store, it doesn't matter how much they are "tweaked."

 

[iDisk]

Not a Big Deal

Yes, and a system without paid upgrades, leaving developers who charge for a version 2 to make a living and then get pissed 1.0 customers leaving 1-star reviews, that is also revolutionary as well?

That's actually a dual Developer and Consumer issue. If those developers would do more worthwhile updates to their Apps then users would want to upgrade to the latest hardware that supports it. Some consumers just don't like to upgrade immediately, but Apple has been working on ways to ensure that they do and that developers have their users with the latest version of their app.

Obviously you haven't read the app store guidelines. None of the utilities I use daily will be able to be in the store, it doesn't matter how much they are "tweaked."

Obviously I have. The "tweaks" are reference to the platform. The developer goes from iOS to Mac OS and they'll need to tweak certain things their unfamiliar with in regards to the Mac OS platform, though things like COCOA and Objective C don't change from either platform. So developers will already be familiar with the core technologies of the Mac OS.

One more thing to note, if more developers would embrace all of Apple's technologies, the "outcry" wouldn't be that big of a deal.

Bruce

 

[Cougarcat]

That's actually a dual Developer and Consumer issue. If those developers would do more worthwhile updates to their Apps then users would want to upgrade to the latest hardware that supports it. Some consumers just don't like to upgrade immediately, but Apple has been working on ways to ensure that they do and that developers have their users with the latest version of their app.

You missed my point. It's not about OS or hardware upgrades. It's about the lack of upgrade options for apps. Developers can't do "worthwhile updates" to their apps because there's no money in it. They can't offer an upgrade path. Instead, they have to make a totally separate app which pisses off the loyal 1.0 users.

This is something only Apple can solve. They'd better address it out the gate with the Mac app store.

Obviously I have. The "tweaks" are reference to the platform. The developer goes from iOS to Mac OS and they'll need to tweak certain things their unfamiliar with in regards to the Mac OS platform, though things like COCOA and Objective C don't change from either platform.

Well that doesn't make sense, because you were responding to Daveoc64, who said that most apps break Apple's guidelines. He wasn't talking about iOS apps being ported to the Mac, he was talking about pre-existing Mac apps that will never get to be on the App store because of Apple's draconian restrictions.

 

[iDisk]

Innovate!

You missed my point. It's not about OS or hardware upgrades. It's about the lack of upgrade options for apps. Developers can't do "worthwhile updates" to their apps because there's no money in it. They can't offer an upgrade path. Instead, they have to make a totally separate app which pisses off the loyal 1.0 users.

This is something only Apple can solve. They'd better address it out the gate with the Mac app store.


Well that doesn't make sense, because you were responding to Daveoc64, who said that most apps break Apple's guidelines. He wasn't talking about iOS apps being ported to the Mac, he was talking about pre-existing Mac apps that will never get to be on the App store because of Apple's draconian restrictions.

What's wrong with a developer having to innovate to keep customers?

Hasn't Apple done that for decades?

Pre-Existing Mac Apps won't be a big issue. Why do some developers embrace this? and others like the Adobe approach of hanging on to the past?

It's time to innovate and raise the bar. Apple can only do so much.

Bruce

 

[Cougarcat]

What's wrong with a developer having to innovate to keep customers?

Hasn't Apple done that for decades?

Obviously there is nothing wrong with innovation. The problem with the current app store model is that developers can't be rewarded for continually innovating their apps because they can't charge for upgrades.
For them, it makes more business sense to leave their app at 1.x and move on to something else. Offering upgrade options in apps is essential for innovation.

I suggest you read Bjango's excellent blog post on this issue.

Pre-Existing Mac Apps won't be a big issue

Bruce

So you don't think it's a big issue that popular Mac utilities like iStat Menus, Path Finder, Fruit Menu, Windowshade X, Default Folder X won't be able to be on the store?

You talk about "innovating and raising the bar," the reason we have apps like Path Finder is that Apple doesn't innovate in the Finder. It would be a shame if the app store remains closed to it.

 

[CylonGlitch]

Obviously there is nothing wrong with innovation. The problem with the current app store model is that developers can't be rewarded for continually innovating their apps because they can't charge for upgrades.

I agree with this, there should be ways for developers to come out with major upgrades for an additional fee. And allow two tiers; previous owners get it for X and new owners get it for Y. It does HAVE to be fixed; otherwise you're right, no incentive for the developer to keep improving their application.

So you don't think it's a big issue that popular Mac utilities like iStat Menus, Path Finder, Fruit Menu, Windowshade X, Default Folder X won't be able to be on the store?

You talk about "innovating and raising the bar," the reason we have apps like Path Finder is that Apple doesn't innovate in the Finder. It would be a shame if the app store remains closed to it.

Why wouldn't these be approved? I haven't read the requirements on OSX apps, just the iOS apps. Since I let my developer status lapse and I'm at work, could you quickly summarize or point me to a site that does. I'm guessing they won't allow things that modify the functionality of the OS; and / or use undocumented features. The first one I disagree with, the second I prefer.

 

[iDisk]

Think Different

Obviously there is nothing wrong with innovation. The problem with the current app store model is that developers can't be rewarded for continually innovating their apps because they can't charge for upgrades.
For them, it makes more business sense to leave their app at 1.x and move on to something else. Offering upgrade options in apps is essential for innovation.

I suggest you read Bjango's excellent blog post on this issue.

My friend, Apple's development platform should be an extension to developers. Meaning if you've created a successful App on the App Store that has a value customers can utilize, then the developer should innovate beyond the iOS stage to the Mac OS stage of development. Then evolve that to initiating their own Software start-up company, that reaches the masses even more then what Apple can provide.

The Apple ecosystem is to encourage more small businesses and creative developers to innovate and help society like Apple has done. The fun part also is, you'll make lots of money doing it while changing lives.

So you don't think it's a big issue that popular Mac utilities like iStat Menus, Path Finder, Fruit Menu, Windowshade X, Default Folder X won't be able to be on the store?

You talk about "innovating and raising the bar," the reason we have apps like Path Finder is that Apple doesn't innovate in the Finder. It would be a shame if the app store remains closed to it.

They should embrace this shift with welcoming arms. They've succeeded off Apple this entire time.

Apple can only innovate so much.

Bruce

 

[Cougarcat]

I agree with this, there should be ways for developers to come out with major upgrades for an additional fee. And allow two tiers; previous owners get it for X and new owners get it for Y. It does HAVE to be fixed; otherwise you're right, no incentive for the developer to keep improving their application.

Why wouldn't these be approved? I haven't read the requirements on OSX apps, just the iOS apps. Since I let my developer status lapse and I'm at work, could you quickly summarize or point me to a site that does. I'm guessing they won't allow things that modify the functionality of the OS; and / or use undocumented features. The first one I disagree with, the second I prefer.

Yes, no private APIs are allowed, and

• It looks similar to Apple Products or apps bundled on the Mac, including the Finder, iChat, iTunes, and Dashboard
•*It changes the native user interface elements or behaviors of Mac OS X

More here.

Trial apps are also not allowed, which is also another big problem. Trials are even more important on the Mac, with higher price points for apps, than on iOS.

My friend, Apple's development platform should be an extension to developers. Meaning if you've created a successful App on the App Store that has a value customers can utilize, then the developer should innovate beyond the iOS stage to the Mac OS stage of development. Then evolve that to initiating their own Software start-up company, that reaches the masses even more then what Apple can provide.

In that utopian vision of yours you do not address the issue at hand.

Apple can only innovate so much.

You are right, which is why the Apple's app stores should be friendly to innovation. In their current state, they are not.

 

[thecypher]

I dont see how the app store would be limited to not allow paid upgrades. It is no different than the world today. You don't get Office 2011 free just because you have Office 2008. Or same for iWork. So I presume the paid upgrades would be listed as separate items in the store for purchase. So we would see Office 2011 Upgrade and Office 2011 Standalone as separate items with different pricing. Customers with Office 2008 would continue to receive updates to Office 2008 if there are any. But they won't be able to download Office 2011 upgrade for free. This should be standard functionality for the store. A classic example in the current app store is the Angry Birds application which is very popular. They released a new Halloween Version in Oct which was a separate item which you had to pay for even though you have bought Angry Birds before.

 

[Cougarcat]

So I presume the paid upgrades would be listed as separate items in the store for purchase. So we would see Office 2011 Upgrade and Office 2011 Standalone as separate items with different pricing.

Yes, hopefully this is will be the case. But how will the store handle upgrades? How will it "know" that you have the original app and are eligible for the upgrade, especially if you bought the original elsewhere? No license key mechanisms are allowed.

Apple hasn't said anything, which is troubling. If it works like it does on iOS, it'll be a disaster.

 

[NATO]

Apple does what's right for the consumers and the consumers LOVE Macs, iPods, iPhones and iPads as a result of it.

I wish it did, but Apple clearly does what's right for Apple - customers either accept it or go elsewhere.

The fact that there has been nothing but criticism directed at Apple and it's control-freakery regarding the App store guidelines, it's stance on Adobe Flash etc shows that Apple doesn't always do what's right for the consumer.

'Think Different' has been abolished in favour of 'Do as we say'.

It's an unlikely scenario, but my worry is that in future versions of OS X, the Mac App Store will become the ONLY way to install apps on a Mac. The App store on iOS and OS X is mainly a way for Apple to rake in vast amounts of cash from the 30% it takes on every sale.

 

[Cougarcat]

The App store on iOS and OS X is mainly a way for Apple to rake in vast amounts of cash from the 30% it takes on every sale.

Apple doesn't rake in "vast amounts of cash" with their stores. They pretty much break even. The stores exist as perks to buy their large profit margin hardware. Making the App store the only way to download software will make their hardware less appealing, not more.

 

[CylonGlitch]

The fact that there has been nothing but criticism directed at Apple and it's control-freakery regarding the App store guidelines, it's stance on Adobe Flash etc shows that Apple doesn't always do what's right for the consumer.

I think they did the right thing. Flash is a closed specification that is controlled by one company. HTML5 is an open standard that, although Apple hand a hand in, isn't solely controlled by Apple. Flash has never been ideal; just good enough. Now I don't necessarily agree with Apple's way of going about changing things, but I do see why they want it changed and I respect them for making a stand. They are not preventing people from installing flash, just not doing it for them.

It's an unlikely scenario, but my worry is that in future versions of OS X, the Mac App Store will become the ONLY way to install apps on a Mac. The App store on iOS and OS X is mainly a way for Apple to rake in vast amounts of cash from the 30% it takes on every sale.

If they did that it would kill their sales. People understand phones and gadgets are different then computers (although technically not that different); most people wouldn't stand for it if you can't install what you want on your computer.

There is no reason to forbid it. They'll open the OSXStore, make it easy and convenient for users; lucrative for developers and 90% of the users will forget that they can install things themselves.

As for upgrades, I have been thinking about it. They have been showing iWorks in the App Store, Apple will make some upgrades paid upgrades. Not sure how they will do it, but they will; they have to. Otherwise things like iWorks '12 will be free? I don't think so.

 

[NATO]

Apple doesn't rake in "vast amounts of cash" with their stores. They pretty much break even. The stores exist as perks to buy their large profit margin hardware. Making the App store the only way to download software will make their hardware less appealing, not more.

Are you sure you're not confusing the App Store with iTunes? It's a well known fact that iTunes doesn't make Apple a lot of money but the iOS App Store, with a 30% take on all paid apps sold stands to make Apple in excess of $440 Million per year (over 2.2% of overall revenue) according to some (according to this calculation). With Mac Apps typically being more expensive than iOS Apps, that 30% cut stands to make them even more.

 

[Cougarcat]

Are you sure you're not confusing the App Store with iTunes? It's a well known fact that iTunes doesn't make Apple a lot of money but the iOS App Store, with a 30% take on all paid apps sold stands to make Apple in excess of $440 Million per year (over 2.2% of overall revenue) according to some (according to this calculation). With Mac Apps typically being more expensive than iOS Apps, that 30% cut stands to make them even more.

That's wrong, according to CFO Peter Oppenheimer:

"Regarding the App Store and iTunes stores, we are running those a bit over break even, and that hasn't changed," Oppenheimer said during a conference call following Monday's quarterly earnings report.

Source.