22710362: For the love of software, fix the App Store.

[openradar-mirror]

Description

Apple is a company that loves software. As Steve Jobs said it is the "soul" of Apple's products.

"You know, if the hardware is the brain and the sinew of our products, the software in them is their soul.” - Steve Jobs

There is something about elegant and robust software that makes a computing device more than the sum of it's parts. It turns hardware into tools that get real work done. In early days solutions like AutoCad, WordPerfect, and Lotus 123 were enough alone to buy expensive hardware.

A computing device is really only as useful as the software running on it. Although today we use our mobile devices mostly for communication and entertainment, when email is launched, the device becomes email. When maps is launched the device becomes a navigator. It's the killer apps that make having the device worthwhile. Communication and entertainment are just two killer apps out of many. What each of us want from our device is different and the applications that we need, use, and love are what personalize it for us.

It is only great software that will bring out the full potential of great hardware.

Apple prides itself on great design. They know it's the hardware and the software that make up the entire design of the product. When I design software for iOS devices, I design the software with consideration for the hardware and consider it as part of the user experience. I test my software with and without cases and with different color devices. I study how the software looks on the device when the device is sitting on a table, how the spacing around the screen ties in to the user interface and how the entire hardware and software experience feels to the user.

The App Store has left users with poor experiences with apps and a lack of rich software. There is a mismatch between the beauty of the device and many apps on the App Store. I believe this is partly due to fact that Apple appears to view apps as content, not software. They appear to have intentionally drove the price of apps down. They want users to have access to, and download as many free and low cost apps as possible. The more apps users have, the less likely they are to switch to another platform, and the more likely they are to buy the next iOS device. The casualty of this strategy is the users trust and overall experience, and the stability of developers businesses.

App Store policies do not cultivate rich software. Instead, it fosters abandonware, nagware, and adware, and lots of it. The shear amount of these type of apps make it difficult for users to find the quality apps that are there, and by extension it makes it harder to sustain a business in the App Store for developers that care about the user experience.

What is Apple inviting on to users devices with the following policies?

1. Free software There is hardly anything of value a great software developer can give you for free. Free apps should not be on the App Store. If it's free, it doesn't need to be in a store. Allow free apps to be freely distributed outside of the store. Make the App Store a safe place customers can buy great apps.
2. Ads in software Ads do not belong in software. A company that makes billions making the most beautiful hardware on the planet, is inviting advertising on the face of it? On a device that is constrained for screen space? Any developer with a soul cringes at the idea of putting ads in their masterpiece. I use a litmus test: If you wouldn't want it in your mail application, you shouldn't put it in your app. I tried putting an iAd in one of my apps as a test years ago. I ended up pulling the app off the store.

Are ads in apps really an important policy for this platform, and for Apple? What good is this doing for users? Would Apple be willing to put an ad on the lock screen, and let users earn credit by serving them ads. They wouldn't do such a desecration to the beauty that is the iOS operating system. And I don't blame them.

1. In-App Purchases vs. Trials In-app purchases are great for games and magazines, but terrible for software. Forcing developers to scheme and try to get users to pay to unlock functionality is bad for users and developers. It nickel and dimes the user a reduces the developer to a digital pan handler. Developers should not have to cautiously strategize to sell frivolous up-sells to try and make a profit on their products. It can and has worked for some mass appeal apps. But for niche high value solutions this model is less then ideal.

Even where it does work, it's terrible. Charging users for tokens to gamble on a virtual slot machine where they can never win real money back should be against the law. Games that lock you out of play and make you wait to play, or pay to get access now? Is this the experience we want to create?

Good developers do not want to be digital pan handlers. Ironically one of the popular purposes of in-app purchase is to remove the ads! Do you sense a self feeding shit storm brewing here?

Free trials would be a much better experience. Ideally there would be a launch count limit to the trial. The developer can choose how many launches of an app a user can use for free. That way the app and the icon stay on the users device. If the potential customer finds value in the app, and they reach that limit, then the next time they launch it, they are prompted to buy the app in-full at that time. When a user is trying to launch the app is the perfect time to make a sale. This change would eliminate any distinction between free apps and paid apps. They would all be free to try, and paid to own, and free to use once you own it.

1. Free Updates (but no paid upgrades) The App Store needs paid upgrades. I wrote to Steve Jobs in 2010 asking for this. Updates and upgrades should be distinct. Updates should be free to deliver minor releases and bug fixes. However, upgrades should be paid for. If a developer is adding more value into a product customers should pay for that value, and good customers are more than willing to pay for that additional value. Besides, it's up to them to choose. Leveraging an existing customer base is essential to sustain a product over time.

Suppose a developer has a product that doesn't make enough to support the development. How can the developer possibly maintain it and keep it up to date with new iOS features every year for existing customers without being able to charge for the development?

Note that even if the developer pulls the app off the store, existing customers are still left with broken-ware. I know this from personal experience. This situation is bad for users, bad for developers, and bad for Apple. Paid upgrades with a tie-in to the existing user base is the answer.

1. Universal Apps / Universal Purchase This policy is aimed at bootstrapping new hardware with free and low cost applications on day one. Developers can not just add more device support for free.

It is not yet clear what universal purchase actually means however I do suspect, and hope universal purchase may actually be a step in the right direction if it works as follows:

Developers would have control over the price tiers for different devices. For example: A customer buys a TV app for $9.99. The developer can bundle in the iPad and iPhone app for free. However, if they buy the iPad app, the developer can have a lower price of $5.99 and include the iPhone app, but not the TV app. If a customer purchases the iPhone app, $3.99 and that includes only the iPhone app. At the time of purchase the customer can choose which option they want. Do they want all three devices, or just the device they are targeting? This gives developers the opportunity to price the app according to the device, and bundle and up-sell at a reduced price to the user accordingly. It gives developers great incentive to support Apples various devices and it's win, win, win. Simply put you can't take from the developer without taking something away from the user.

Conclusion Apple is making it somewhat difficult for many developers to sustain their business and maintain products over the long term. I have an important distinction with regard to the App Store. Because developers have little control over the conditions and policies, and no relationship with customers, selling apps in the App Store can not be considered a business. It's an opportunity.

I won't bore you with my personal story, but it has been a rags to some really nice rags story for me. I am not complaining because I am not succeeding. I am very successful in the App Store. But for the love of great software, I want developers like me to be able to adhere to their values and their craft and be able to sustain. If you want to make something great, you have a great opportunity in the App Store. But unfortunately there just isn't enough control surface for developers to impact the growth of their business. This is true for any size company selling software in the App Store today. Even if a company makes millions per year in the App Store, it is still at extremely high risk that any change to ranking, ratings, or other policies made by Apple could dramatically impact their businesses.

As developers, we want to create great products. We don't want to be SEO hacks, spammers, racketeers, or digital pan handlers. If you have to resort to these things to be in the software business, then what does that say in terms of the impact that these policies have had on the App Store economy and the software industry?

As Apple tries to launch new hardware categories, platform participation is critical to the products success. The more Apple does to align incentives with creating great software, the more those incentives are aligned with developers businesses, and the more they are aligned with delivering great user experiences to customers that are truly worthy of the hardware.

Product Version: Created: 2015-09-15T23:00:03.284120 Originated: 2015-09-15T18:59:00 Open Radar Link: http://www.openradar.me/22710362

[openradar-mirror]

Modified: 2015-09-15T23:31:09.308300