Comments on: The Emperor’s New Clothes http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124 Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:50:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: The golden age of the software business. => ignoredByDinosaurs http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-867 The golden age of the software business. => ignoredByDinosaurs Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:30:01 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-867 [...] the much advertised success, Apple actually hasn’t gotten the AppStore quite right. See here, here and here for some very well reasoned complaints and observations from developers on how the [...] [...] the much advertised success, Apple actually hasn’t gotten the AppStore quite right. See here, here and here for some very well reasoned complaints and observations from developers on how the [...]

]]> By: Time to fork iTunes at Appleology http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-866 Time to fork iTunes at Appleology Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:04:51 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-866 [...] the app store from the iTunes music store, they need to reimplement the approval process. Clean up iTunes Connect. Provide a more scalable approval process that doesn’t piss developers off because they have [...] [...] the app store from the iTunes music store, they need to reimplement the approval process. Clean up iTunes Connect. Provide a more scalable approval process that doesn’t piss developers off because they have [...]

]]> By: FCC Queries Apple, AT&T, and Google about Google Voice App | Design Website Easy http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-858 FCC Queries Apple, AT&T, and Google about Google Voice App | Design Website Easy Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:21:10 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-858 [...] time and money into creating iPhone apps. (Steven Frank, Justin Williams, Craig Hockenberry, and Layton Duncan have written must-read essays about troubles developing for the iPhone, focusing on the App Store [...] [...] time and money into creating iPhone apps. (Steven Frank, Justin Williams, Craig Hockenberry, and Layton Duncan have written must-read essays about troubles developing for the iPhone, focusing on the App Store [...]

]]> By: Hamish http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-855 Hamish Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:54:27 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-855 I'm not particularly informed on the issue, so I'm curious, how has "Apple killed the viability of anything above $0.99"? Honestly, if it is because that is what customers want to buy, it is characteristic of the market rather than any nefarious plan on Apple's behalf. Why exactly should Apple protect the developer community from the effects of a competitive market, against the interests of their [real] customers? Of course, it is not a fair market as long as Apple maintains the tight grip on the market that they do. But it makes me smirk just a little bit when developers who have quite happily bought into the Apple 'lifestyle' (trendy, over-priced, vendor dictated) are surprised that they are treated no differently. I’m not particularly informed on the issue, so I’m curious, how has “Apple killed the viability of anything above $0.99″?

Honestly, if it is because that is what customers want to buy, it is characteristic of the market rather than any nefarious plan on Apple’s behalf. Why exactly should Apple protect the developer community from the effects of a competitive market, against the interests of their [real] customers?

Of course, it is not a fair market as long as Apple maintains the tight grip on the market that they do. But it makes me smirk just a little bit when developers who have quite happily bought into the Apple ‘lifestyle’ (trendy, over-priced, vendor dictated) are surprised that they are treated no differently.

]]> By: Neal from iPhoneUserNews http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-853 Neal from iPhoneUserNews Sat, 01 Aug 2009 12:37:27 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-853 Well, the FCC finally got bored of suing Howerd Stern for letting people bite each other on air. Now they're moving on to this. Might be interesting. Well, the FCC finally got bored of suing Howerd Stern for letting people bite each other on air. Now they’re moving on to this. Might be interesting.

]]> By: Ben http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-849 Ben Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:36:39 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-849 The FCC has sent Apple (and AT&T and Google) a <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/31/fcc-takes-on-apple-and-att-over-google-voice-rejection/" rel="nofollow">"Please Explain"</a> letter. Pretty much entirely awesome. The FCC has sent Apple (and AT&T and Google) a “Please Explain” letter. Pretty much entirely awesome.

]]> By: patrick http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-848 patrick Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:19:09 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-848 Hi Layton, I couldn't agree with you more. Great post. I think there is a third option to improve the situation. Instead of relying on the Apple to fix their App Store why don't people start building tools that help people promote their applications outside of the App Store. It is not a perfect solution because you will still rely on Apple for payment processing and have to go through their god awful approval process but if developers had tools to promote their applications across the web then maybe the pricing model might change and the apps worth more than $.99 could charge more than $.99. This is one of our motivations behind starting http://appsto.re we want to be able to give developers tools to promote their applications. We only just launched last week but we have lots of plans. By the way I am a big fan of your facematch app, http://appsto.re/facematch. Please get in touch if you want to talk more on how to help iPhone devs patrick at appsto.re. Hi Layton, I couldn’t agree with you more. Great post. I think there is a third option to improve the situation. Instead of relying on the Apple to fix their App Store why don’t people start building tools that help people promote their applications outside of the App Store.

It is not a perfect solution because you will still rely on Apple for payment processing and have to go through their god awful approval process but if developers had tools to promote their applications across the web then maybe the pricing model might change and the apps worth more than $.99 could charge more than $.99.

This is one of our motivations behind starting http://appsto.re we want to be able to give developers tools to promote their applications. We only just launched last week but we have lots of plans. By the way I am a big fan of your facematch app, http://appsto.re/facematch. Please get in touch if you want to talk more on how to help iPhone devs patrick at appsto.re.

]]> By: SW http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-843 SW Fri, 31 Jul 2009 06:54:20 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-843 I've been developing for the iPhone since the App Store opened, and my experience is very different; for me it works almost perfectly. I've never had any problems with supplying apps (4 so far), with all of them, including updates, taking a few days at the most for making it into the store. Additionally, none of the other stores enable me to be a small developer and charge money: Android store is horrible from a legal standpoint (I'm personally responsible for any demands by customers wanting to have their money back; I have to do a tax declaration in every country I sell in and in the US, for each separate state, since I am legally the one selling, not Google (very fun trying to do this from Europe); I have to set the price in SEK which means almost no users understand what the application costs; all of this makes it impossible as a one-man operation to use Android, unfortunately), Palm's haven't really been available yet, and at least when I initially looked at the demands they had similar issues as Android; Windows Mobile is too new for me to have considered. So, essentially, for a small operation like myself, Apple's solution is by far the best. Without it there is no way I would have been able to sell anything like I have. But: For a larger operation there are of course issues such as investing a lot of money without being sure the application will make it into the store, and if you are developing an application which might be problematic from Apple's point of view I realize there is a need for far more transparency Also, having different top lists depending on price is a good idea, definitely. In short, my experience is much better than yours, but I do see where you are coming from, even though I also think that the fundamental problem is that it is difficult to showcase 50,000 applications; no matter what, only a few of those will be visible. I’ve been developing for the iPhone since the App Store opened, and my experience is very different; for me it works almost perfectly. I’ve never had any problems with supplying apps (4 so far), with all of them, including updates, taking a few days at the most for making it into the store.
Additionally, none of the other stores enable me to be a small developer and charge money: Android store is horrible from a legal standpoint (I’m personally responsible for any demands by customers wanting to have their money back; I have to do a tax declaration in every country I sell in and in the US, for each separate state, since I am legally the one selling, not Google (very fun trying to do this from Europe); I have to set the price in SEK which means almost no users understand what the application costs; all of this makes it impossible as a one-man operation to use Android, unfortunately), Palm’s haven’t really been available yet, and at least when I initially looked at the demands they had similar issues as Android; Windows Mobile is too new for me to have considered.

So, essentially, for a small operation like myself, Apple’s solution is by far the best. Without it there is no way I would have been able to sell anything like I have.

But: For a larger operation there are of course issues such as investing a lot of money without being sure the application will make it into the store, and if you are developing an application which might be problematic from Apple’s point of view I realize there is a need for far more transparency Also, having different top lists depending on price is a good idea, definitely.

In short, my experience is much better than yours, but I do see where you are coming from, even though I also think that the fundamental problem is that it is difficult to showcase 50,000 applications; no matter what, only a few of those will be visible.

]]> By: Michael Tsai - Blog - The Emperor’s New Clothes http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-830 Michael Tsai - Blog - The Emperor’s New Clothes Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:47:52 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-830 [...] Layton Duncan: A lot has been written about the success of the App Store, over 50,000 apps available, 1.5 Billion downloads in its first year, talk about how it’s unprecedented etc. However I think it’s long past time for a reality check here. This is a no holds barred, deadly serious, but sometimes snarky look at the App Store. [...] [...] Layton Duncan: A lot has been written about the success of the App Store, over 50,000 apps available, 1.5 Billion downloads in its first year, talk about how it’s unprecedented etc. However I think it’s long past time for a reality check here. This is a no holds barred, deadly serious, but sometimes snarky look at the App Store. [...]

]]> By: Yves Gonzalez http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-828 Yves Gonzalez Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:01:17 +0000 http://www.polarbearfarm.com/blog/?p=124#comment-828 A tiered store would help solve some of the pricing issues. Having a different Top 10 list for $1-5, $5-10, $10-20, and $20 above priced apps would help get quality (but pricy) apps some better recognition. As it is now, anything above $10 has almost no chance of getting into the Top 10, as the list is quantitative and not qualitative. Would be nice if the Big boys can compete for the Top Premium App spot, and let low priced apps compete amongst themselves. A tiered store would help solve some of the pricing issues. Having a different Top 10 list for $1-5, $5-10, $10-20, and $20 above priced apps would help get quality (but pricy) apps some better recognition. As it is now, anything above $10 has almost no chance of getting into the Top 10, as the list is quantitative and not qualitative.

Would be nice if the Big boys can compete for the Top Premium App spot, and let low priced apps compete amongst themselves.

]]>