Thursday
Oct182007
iPhone Apps Have to Pay Their Way
Thursday, October 18, 2007 at 5:13PM
We Mac developers all love to program. We love to design, build and create cool stuff for you. We like to hear what you think and try to make you even happier next time. That's what being a Mac developer is all about and we do that partly because we love to. We also do it because it's good business sense and, at some point, Mac devs have to eat too. I mean, did you think that Wil Shipley's shirts come from Tesco?
So there's love and there's business. And now there's a new business in town: the business of making iPhone apps. Slightly lost in the brouhaha surrounding the SDK announcement was the fact that Apple has also, in effect, announced an iPod SDK due to the fact that the iPod touch runs OS X.
I'll repeat that, in case you're still not getting it: the most popular portable music device in the world, the one everyone has, the default choice, the cultural icon, the device which Apple sells millions of each quarter, the device which has previously been closed off to all butCapcom PopCap, EA and Nike now has an SDK.
Granted, not every iPod sold is an iPod touch and the installed base of OS X capable devices is still less than two million worldwide. I'm willing to speculate, though, that the OS X platform is the future of every iPod with a screen. They renamed the traditional iPod "classic" and the word "classic" has connotations in the Apple lexicon. You know what I'm talking about here.
How long before there are as many iPods in the installed base as there are Macs? Last quarter, Apple sold 1.76 million Macs and 9.8 million iPods. Nearly ten million iPods in three months. Again, not all OS X iPods but you see where this is going. As well as an exciting new technology to work with, the iPhone/iPod SDK is going to be a goldmine for Mac OS X developers.
There are several different business avenues we could go down with iPhone apps, but I can see a few straight away:
The only scenario I hope I don't see, except as a special offer, is the last one. Possibly the worst business decision we could make as Mac developers is to devalue iPhone applications to the same level as Dashboard widgets.
Unless Apple has a great technology story that we have no inkling of, it's clear that iPhone apps will take significant development efforts to make. This isn't just a recompile - at the very least, a new UI to your app will need to be designed, built and tested. That costs time both in developer learning and also in user support. There will have to be a business case for building iPhone apps, even iPhone satellite versions of existing desktop applications.
I would hope that Mac developers look at the iPhone as the truly new platform that it is, rather than as an adjunct to Mac OS X. Just because it has some elements of Cocoa doesn't mean it's Mac OS X Lite.
Now, I don't believe that iPhone apps will necessarily command the same prices as desktop applications. One of the interesting pieces of psychology I encountered when pricing FlickrExport was that people perceive less value in something that's "just a plugin" than something that's a "whole app" - never mind that FlickrExport is more featureful and more powerful than the Flickr Uploadr app. Perhaps iPhone apps will be perceived in a similar way, but I think we as developers can make a case for the iPhone and its apps to be regarded in their own right if we market correctly.
I'm not saying that no iPhone app should ever be free, and I'm not trying to start a cartel here, but lets take the time between now and February to think about how this new market opportunity fits into our business models.
[Update: Yeah, PopCap, not Capcom.]
So there's love and there's business. And now there's a new business in town: the business of making iPhone apps. Slightly lost in the brouhaha surrounding the SDK announcement was the fact that Apple has also, in effect, announced an iPod SDK due to the fact that the iPod touch runs OS X.
I'll repeat that, in case you're still not getting it: the most popular portable music device in the world, the one everyone has, the default choice, the cultural icon, the device which Apple sells millions of each quarter, the device which has previously been closed off to all but
Granted, not every iPod sold is an iPod touch and the installed base of OS X capable devices is still less than two million worldwide. I'm willing to speculate, though, that the OS X platform is the future of every iPod with a screen. They renamed the traditional iPod "classic" and the word "classic" has connotations in the Apple lexicon. You know what I'm talking about here.
How long before there are as many iPods in the installed base as there are Macs? Last quarter, Apple sold 1.76 million Macs and 9.8 million iPods. Nearly ten million iPods in three months. Again, not all OS X iPods but you see where this is going. As well as an exciting new technology to work with, the iPhone/iPod SDK is going to be a goldmine for Mac OS X developers.
There are several different business avenues we could go down with iPhone apps, but I can see a few straight away:
- Standalone iPhone app with no equivalent desktop app.
- iPhone version of your desktop app, sold as a separate product.
- iPhone version sold in a bundle with the desktop app.
- iPhone version bundled for free with the desktop app.
The only scenario I hope I don't see, except as a special offer, is the last one. Possibly the worst business decision we could make as Mac developers is to devalue iPhone applications to the same level as Dashboard widgets.
Unless Apple has a great technology story that we have no inkling of, it's clear that iPhone apps will take significant development efforts to make. This isn't just a recompile - at the very least, a new UI to your app will need to be designed, built and tested. That costs time both in developer learning and also in user support. There will have to be a business case for building iPhone apps, even iPhone satellite versions of existing desktop applications.
I would hope that Mac developers look at the iPhone as the truly new platform that it is, rather than as an adjunct to Mac OS X. Just because it has some elements of Cocoa doesn't mean it's Mac OS X Lite.
Now, I don't believe that iPhone apps will necessarily command the same prices as desktop applications. One of the interesting pieces of psychology I encountered when pricing FlickrExport was that people perceive less value in something that's "just a plugin" than something that's a "whole app" - never mind that FlickrExport is more featureful and more powerful than the Flickr Uploadr app. Perhaps iPhone apps will be perceived in a similar way, but I think we as developers can make a case for the iPhone and its apps to be regarded in their own right if we market correctly.
I'm not saying that no iPhone app should ever be free, and I'm not trying to start a cartel here, but lets take the time between now and February to think about how this new market opportunity fits into our business models.
[Update: Yeah, PopCap, not Capcom.]
Reader Comments (20)
@Dimitrios, nope, I came to make that exact same point, from that same Daring Fireball pullquote.
The iPod Touch is an unproven product. Most I talk to agree that right now the best job it is doing is making the iPhone a more attractive product as the "for just a little more..." upgrade. Maybe in a few years this will change. Apple still sold more minis/sells more nanos than any other of the iPods -- keep that in mind, because it's THAT mass audience products like Nike+ want to tap, and that audience is still SDK-less.
@Lee Fallin: You're quite right. If Apple is going to take money from developers beyond the normal costs of ADC membership, it will change the economics. We'll see.
@Ross: Your point is well made, but my entire article was trying to argue that an iPhone app with the same name as a Mac dekstop app should not be considered merely a 'feature' of that desktop app. In part, I say that because I believe that the iPhone and iPod touch are computers in their own right and not simply peripherals for Macs.
I agree that iPhone apps should be compelling without a desktop counterpart, but I don't see why, for example, OmniFocus on the phone can't enhance and be enhanced by OmniFocus on your desktop.
@Ahoten: You're right that the pre-touch iPods are not in the same family. They're a completely different hardware and OS platform and I do not expect to ever get an SDK for those devices. What I am venturing is that the touch UI will become the next generation platform for every iPod above the Shuffle. As I said: "I’m willing to speculate, though, that the OS X platform is the future of every iPod with a screen."
Yes, my apps will never run on any Nano currently in existence. I expect, however, that they will run on a future NanoTouch.
@Noah: Yes, the iPod touch is an unproven product, but Apple is making such a massive investment in the mobile OS X platform that it will be made to succed by hook or by crook. It's not obvious - to me at least - that the nano can never be based on mobile OS X.
I think all you guys that don't understand the point. Apple is shifting it's strategy from "click wheel" classic style ipods to OSX based touch screen ipods. Since currently ipods do have a huge market share, this pattern is expected to continue with the touch screen ipods/iphone. Meaning that as people want to replace their Phone,Personal Media Player, laptop with something new, an OSX based ipod will be high on the list of replacements. If you can now make software that runs on these, you will have an opportunity to write software for a potentially huge costumer base. My only hope is that Xcode is required to block all the windows shareware crap makers from playing. If M$, being the worlds largest software company, was smart they would be the first in line for the sdk and start porting office, but we all know they ain't so they won't.
"I agree that iPhone apps should be compelling without a desktop counterpart, but I don’t see why, for example, OmniFocus on the phone can’t enhance and be enhanced by OmniFocus on your desktop."
I think it can. I just don't think it's likely to be worth paying more for it to do so.
@delta, there's a very nice scientific calculator app on the iPhone. Look at "http://scicalc.belfry.com/". This downloads as a bookmarklet -- the entire code gets put in a data: url -- so that you can run it at anytime, offline.
@Jonathan Wight, there are a lot of ebooks available as plain PDF's, which can be read as email attachments (or just make a mailbox folder full of them). The PDF reader in Mail now lets you turn the iPhone sideways.
I'm totally digging the iPhone app goodness.
However, no matter how insanely awesome the iPhone apps are, I could never imagine spending more than 20$ for one.
The advantage for the developers is that there should be an absolutely massive customer base.
I think its more likely that a good realistic price would be around 5-9$
I guess it depends on the market. Business apps would probably expect to be a bit more expensive.
Personally, I'm not exactly sure what I expect the iPhone market to be like.I guess the best bet would be to look at the current state of palm and pocketpc markets.
But I think apple has some tricks up their sleeves. I think they're going to handle the purchasing and serials and stuff like that. That would be very handy.
Someone please write a Book Reader with animated page turns. I am dying to read books on the IPhone while I am commuting to work.
@Norm, sorry the iPhone does not include a working ereader.
Mailing myself a PDF is not a solution. Because:
1) Not all ebooks are PDFs (I have a lot of books in the proprietary Mobipocket format)
2) Attachments aren't cached on the iPhone, so would need to refetch the file each time (actualy might be wrong here).
3) It wont remember where I left off.
4) No bookmarking, dictionary, etc
I'd probably want an ebook reader to use the volume up/down controls to act as page up/page down too.
Slight de-rail on Frasier's thread. Anyway - point being, there is market for 3rd party software on the iPhone/iPod Touch.
Re: ebook reader for iPhone.... I'm sure Zach was referring to Books.app.
http://code.google.com/p/iphoneebooks/
Greetings Fraser + Co,
I enjoy your discussions.
Apologies for arriving to this discussion late, but I only recently came up for air and found your this post by way of catching up with DaringFireball.
I, like David McDonald, am a designer/developer intrigued with the SDK options approaching and eager for hands-on working with a developer keen to push this little iPhone-thang into new realms.
I am video-centric by nature/history and currently working on several layouts for a non-linear media editor that would be useful for portable authoring. What started as a magazine cover illustration quickly became a minor UI obsession that I'd like to find a useful outlet for... If anybody out there is looking for some pixel polishing and UI/UX product mastery I am eager to engage - for fun, but mostly profit.
As an aside, while I was working in Amsterdam my brother and I popped over to Edinburgh to be outfitted with the family tartan {with three branches to choose from it became a nice aesthetic choice} for my approaching Renaissance wedding. I spent several days roaming the same streets by day and closing Grass Market pubs with lovely lasses as prelude to my bachelor party {sorry, the Dutch girls were actually more fun, er wild, um uninhibited}. I found Scottish history fascinating and didn't realize how much cultural weight they have had on America. I highly recommend such a trip.
I'd move to Scotland in a flash should a proper job open up.
Caio, dah-links,
-Jonathan-
Even if we love our work, most of us really do work for money. An app developer should focus their talents on what is marketable and what will give them the most profit. Actually, it is quite hard to figure that out, at first the market may boom for iPods, but who knows? After you've invested all you time and effort on this, a new producct comes along and you have to start learning all over again.
Duncan Samuel
Web Based Scheduling Software
"I agree that iPhone apps should be compelling without a desktop counterpart, but I don’t see why, for example, OmniFocus on the phone can’t enhance and be enhanced by OmniFocus on your desktop."
I think it can. I just don't think it's likely to be worth paying more for it to do so.
Personally, I'm not exactly sure what I expect the iPhone market to be like.I guess the best bet would be to look at the current state of palm and pocketpc markets.
I'd like to read the articles in this website.May be you can go to louis vuitton,there will be some new and cheap louis vuitton products for choosen.You know louis vuitton didn't have the outlet store himself,but we provide the discount louis vuitton handbags,shoes,wallets,belts for Factory Direct price.So,enjoy yourself on our online shop.
"I agree that iPhone apps should be compelling without a desktop counterpart, but I don’t see why, for example, OmniFocus on the phone can’t enhance and be enhanced by OmniFocus on your desktop."
I think it can. I just don't think it's likely to be worth paying more for it to do so.
Great!
I'm not exactly sure what I expect the iPhone market to be like.I guess the best bet would be to look at the current state of palm and pocketpc markets.
I agree that iPhone apps should be compelling without a desktop counterpart, but I don’t see why, for example, OmniFocus on the phone can’t enhance and be enhanced by OmniFocus on your desktop.
Meaning that as people want to replace their Phone,Personal Media Player, laptop with something new, an OSX based ipod will be high on the list of replacements. If you can now make software that runs on these, you will have an opportunity to write software for a potentially huge costumer base. My only hope is that Xcode is required to block all the windows shareware crap makers from playing
Re: ebook reader for iPhone.... I'm sure Zach was referring to Books.app.