All Articles Tagged marco arment

More on the iPhone (and iPod touch) Development Advantage

jobs_speaks_app_store

Instapaper and Tumblr developer Marco Arment riffs on the NYT’s article on Palm webOS’ trouble wooing developers, and it’s predictably good stuff.

His major point is that with its huge install base (which topped 50 million iPhones and iPod touches months ago), it makes more financial sense to develop for Apple’s platform, rather than Google’s Android or Palm’s webOS which might have on 5% to 10% as many devices on the market.

Giving developers an app store is the easy part. The hard part is bringing us enough customers. The iPhone is so good that it built up a huge installed base without any third-party apps, but no Android or webOS devices can say that yet.

Arment points out that the iPod touch makes a huge difference as well, giving developers a similar device to work on without the need for an expensive cell phone contract. He also echoes Fake Steve’s comments on different hardware complicating development, though he thinks if Android popularity continues to grow, the platform might justify the investment one day.



App Store Broken or Developers? Losing iReligion vs. the Two App Stores

appstore-hero-20090608

Is Apple’s iTunes App Store broken, a combination of developers racing to the bottom and users getting conditioned — and feeling entitled — to pay less than what an app is worth? Or, are some developers not yet savvy enough in terms of planning and marketing to take advantage of the App Store business model?

Since we covered Ramp Champ this morning, it’s timely to cover both the thoughts of the developer, Gedeon Maheux, and a response from Tumblr and Instapaper developer Marco Arment that are currently surrounding it.

The crux of Maheux’s post, Losing iReligion, is that the App Store is broken, that it’s too hard to gain visibility, and that if you miss the immediate exposure-on-landing of hitting a top list or featured spot, you’re doomed to obscurity.

In order for a developer to continue to produce, they must make money. It’s a pretty simple concept and one that tends to get lost in the excitement to write for the iPhone. It’s difficult for me to justify spending 20-50 hours designing and creating new 99¢ levels for Ramp Champ when I could be spending that time on paid client work instead. I would much rather be coming up with the sequel to Space Swarm than drawing my 200th version of a magnifying glass icon. But I’d also like to have some assurances from Apple about reducing the length of the App Store approval process, having the ability to respond to factually incorrect iTunes reviews, not be limited to 100 beta testers, or that large, prominent developers won’t always get preferential treatment. In short, I’d like to know things will be fixed and I don’t mean merely posting a page of marketing text in iTunes Connect.

Arment, argues that there are The two App Stores. The first is superficial, geared to Top Lists and $0.99 apps that are basically disposable by both users and their developers alike. These make quick money and then disappear. The second are the profound apps, which flourish only from user word-of-mouth and online coverage, and while they don’t get the initial boom, they have a longer tail before it comes to bust. He further argues that it’s when developers mistake one App Store for the others, and miss-target their efforts, that frustration occurs.

The Iconfactory’s apps are able to compete strongly when people choose apps based on research, reviews, or feature comparisons. But that’s not how App Store A’s customers operate. Whether Ramp Champ is a better game than Skee-Ball is irrelevant to them because they’ll never take the time to find out.

Anyone interested in development and why we get the apps we do (and the ones we don’t) should take the time to read both posts (linked above). Then come back and let us know what you think. Are there two App Stores? Which one do you shop at? And why?

What Would a Verizon iPhone be Like?

Could Verizon Handle the iPhone (Chart)

What would a Verizon iPhone be like? We ask because almost everyone in the US wants the iPhone on Verizon (or so our comments, tweets, and email tell us). But how often do we stop and think about what that device might actually be?

Developer Marco Arment has done just that, but instead of a wondrous network dream, he’s giving us a lockdown nightmare:

  • Verizon to demand 30-50% commission on all on-device App Store sales, and all iTunes media sales.
  • If not a complete replacement of the App Store with Verizon’s own application market.
  • Removal of key applications to force users to pay for premium Verizon services (like V-Cast in lieu of Maps)
  • Removal of WiFi and lockdown of GPS (okay, we added that for old times sake — but it’s happened with BlackBerry and Windows Mobile)
  • Ugly Verizon branding plastered all over the iPhone.

Arment theorizes this is why we haven’t seen it happen yet:

I bet Apple did go to them this past spring to attempt to get a Verizon iPhone off the ground, and I bet Apple’s reps left the discussions, thinking, “These guys are nuts.”

Fact or FUD? It will be interesting to see, based on yesterday’s Android “openness” announcement, if Verizon really has changed its ways, or if users who want the iPhone on Verizon would ultimately get an iPhone they didn’t want.

Oh, bitter, poetic irony.

Let us know what you think, best case and worst.