Developers: Don't Treat the Windows Store like the iOS App Store

I don't know - the underlying argument here, that developers need to avoid a race to the bottom isn't particularly new, new to Microsoft [0], or in my opinion convincing. This article seems like a strange mix of a Microsoft marketing piece, and a call for app developer collusion. In other industries it seems almost by definition that the worth of the product is what it's selling for -- .99 cents for most apps. Arguments along the lines of "surely apps are worth more because, c'mon look at the price of coffee," use only emotion based on how much work we see go into those as developers not the value provided to users. It's very easy to blame poor revenue as a marketplace problem rather than a product problem and it's this type of thinking that drives this conclusion rather than proper analysis.

A hit driven industry can be brutal but I'm not convinced that the app store is more of one than traditional software, social websites, marketplaces, and games all spring to mind as places where success is very hit driven. Even outside our industry: books, television, movies, music, fashion - these all all hit driven because that is what fits best with where the demand is.

* In the television industry most shows have both higher production costs and lower prices than software, does this mean this industry is broken?

* Increasingly for app store purchases with higher prices I hear about the apps from avenues other than the Apple featured list (ex drawing apps, higher priced games.) It seems that the marketing channel that is being provided for free is being mistaken for the only way to market.

Fundamentally as a developer if I want my app to sell for more money, I should make it bring more value to the customer, not hope for minimum pricing constraints on all apps. It's a great thing as a consumer that distribution and marketing channels like the app store have made it possible for me to use more software, and spend more money on software than I ever did on a pc.

[0] See minimum pricing of Xbox live games on both Xbox and Windows Phone

The developers have nothing to do with it. The types of apps and pricing structure that will appear in the store depends entirely on how the store owner curates and presents the apps. Developers will obviously just price to maximize/revenue or exposure depending on their goals.

Steam for example has none of the same problems as the app store because they very actively curate, and they don't let the riff raff in, which erodes consumer confidence in shopping in the store.

Apple on the other hand, actively structures their store to drive down prices. The busiest, most profitable placement in the store is the top volume charts. Which naturally means that developers will lower their prices to climb the charts and get better placement. Additionally they don't curate much, or allow demos, so consumer confidence that they will like the app they buy is low.

I've thought for a while that the Apple app store has become very problematic for independent software developers. Somehow the consumer expectation for the reasonable price of an app has been driven below $2 no matter how much utility it provides. I hear people regularly complaining when apps they will use for hundreds of hours cost more than $3. Or bitching because the developer of such an app did not reply to their email (when the time spent answering such an email might be $5 - $10 based on a reasonable wage for the developer). We have major hit games that would have cost $50 on a console or PC coming out for $3 - $5 on phones and tablets. The prices to me are just not sustainable. At the moment, the excitement and opportunity of working in the mobile software industry is still driving developers to be willing to ship things way under cost just to develop their skills, gain a foothold and to participate in something they enjoy. But this can't last forever, and I'm not sure how it is going to correct itself.

Somewhat relevant, how it all started on OSX: http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/06/first-wave-of-mac-app-st...

@Author: for the latest numbers: http://www.distimo.com/leaderboards/apple-mac-app-store/unit...

App store pricing is a function of intrinsic value to the customer and competition in the market. No matter what you propose, the race to the bottom (optimal) can only be avoided if similarly skilled developers in cheaper countries can be kept out of the store. Good luck with that...

Initial market leaders have limited choices: out-market, out-innovate, out-price or out-service the competition. Deliver value or perish. It's a 'win' for the consumer, who can vote with their wallets (now transparent) and their reviews (also transparent). In general, it's a win in terms of quality and experience for the consumer, and for the small developer as well.

I am very happy about this. Big name companies can no longer get away with crappy software and crappy support. Little guys can shine. For most developers amongst us, this is an opportunity, not a threat.

PS Though I like the feature of 15min review on Android, I think this breaks the feedback and quality cycle (who bothers to complain if you got your money back?!?). They should abandon this mechanism.

Smart developers will charge money one way or another, but there will be a race to the bottom for most verticals. Now that a single individual for $100 can get a distribution license and ship an app that does something, the barrier is too low to force higher prices or higher quality. As long as that individual is willing to sell their product for cheaper than the next product, eventually there is a race to the bottom.

Software's incremental cost is $0 on the app store, so you can sell it for $0 and throw a few ads on it, and if the dev makes > $0 they might be happy with that, and if they aren't they'll adjust prices upward until they get what they want.

Also, this doesn't happen with physical distribution usually because things can't sell for less than the cost to manufacture, distribute, and sell. At least, the price for physical goods doesn't hit $0.

Slightly rough characterization of iOS apps, but I must agree that apps on Windows 8 desktop can essentially be viewed as full software products. Plus, it will frequently be backed by businesses so money may not be as sensitive.

Personally, I hope that tradition PC game makers take advantage of the MS Shop and continue to charge the same as they currently do. This could translate very well for other software products/apps as the games largely drove the $.99 revolution.

Really? Even now in its juvenile stage the Windows 8 store suffers from most of the problems of the that plague the AppStore - the microsoft imposed censorship, guarantees that some interesting apps will never be made. And never be payed for. So you are left with yet another bland clone.

The other thing that the store gives you is low visibility. Because there is one and one only channel of distribution for these apps - currently if I take only the most popular games - it is a list of 60 or 90 titles. I cannot read the titles of the games, let alone try some non-free. There are no humble bundles, gogs, desuras, gamersgate or key-sites from which to obtain or which can increase the visibility and renown. And no - review sites are not good enough because the seller loyalty lays with the customer. The professional reviewer usually with the company that pays the bills.

The problem with apps is there are too many of them. You get overloaded. Where as with an open platform you can tune to the distribution channel that serves your needs best in the app store world this is impossible.

I've said in other places and I'll say it again. One of the problems is that Microsoft also takes a lot of money for their dev tools. The express editions are limited with the things that can help your apps shine. AFAIK profiling is only available in VS 2012 Professional and up. $500 can be hard to justify for a moonlighting app dev. Heck I've even worked at companies where $500 for a dev tool was too much.

This is actually contrary to Apple where they give you every opportunity with their tools to make shiny apps and make their platform a joy to use.

And also I'm not saying that Microsoft should give away their tools for free. I just think that the cost is too prohibitive to individual developers who would like to make their apps "great" instead of "good enough". This could mean that the store would be full of "good enough" apps. And if it is only "good enough" why charge more?

I hope this works out for the Windows developers, but I have a suspicion that it wasn't the developers alone who ruined the iOS App Store.

And, unfortunately, it really is "ruined"[1]. I started my current project as an iPhone app, then decided to move to an iPad, but, six months ago, after really evaluating the market, I realized I needed to make my product a web-based subscription with mobile features (probably embodied as apps). There was no way I could charge enough for my app to make a business, since I'm not creating a product that caters to the tens of millions.

1. It is ruined in the context of being able to make a living on an app without getting insanely lucky. There is little a company can do to market around the luck factor, and prices are so low that there is no middle ground.

>The iOS App Store is a Race to the Bottom

It is very easy to build something the 2nd time especially when your competitor has invested heavily into working out the kinks. For many software-chop-shops it makes sense to find something with high downloads and without much competition, rip it off, and sell it at 1/2 the price. Repeat ad nauseum.

I think the only way to curb this race to the bottom is to re-introduce brand recognition to the consumer base. If software company X is known for producing well-tested-reliable software then I wouldn't hesitate to pay 20-50% more for their version of the software. Unless Windows Software does this I think it'll just be another lowest-bidder-wins marketplace.

The Mac App Store is a much better comparison than iOS, and it's far from a race to the bottom there. If you look at the Top 100 Grossing apps, only 10 or so are priced at $4.99 or less.

Most of the apps are closer to the traditional desktop software pricing range of $19.99 - $99.99.

Despite all the criticism in this thread, I thank you for writing this, and I hope you are right.

This article is a useful combination of "here are some very real reasons the Windows app store is different" and "waaaaah i don't like competition don't make things cheap and impair my ability to make a living off of users; you'd better collude to make things more expensive or you're bad people." To the first part, I say, bravo. To the second, I say, call me a waa-mbulance. :P

There are so many apps I might buy if I could try them, but I will never buy apps that I can't try. The ad model sucks and the lite model (2 different apps) sucks.

You should be able to install, use for 3 days, then it would get deleted from your device if you don't buy it.

Author doesn't seem to know about the Mac App Store (http://www.apple.com/osx/apps/app-store.html)

Good points in the article, although I didn't like the condescending tone of "step into my office for a talk".

Reminds me of the Sparrow mail client[1], which shut down in spite of having a great product. Also, allowing a trial period and own in-app purchases is a good move by Microsoft.

Also, how are the Mac OS X App Store developers and prices faring? I think that's an important point of comparison that the author failed to make.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/07/you-sh...

Don't worry, I won't "screw up" the Windows Store by accidentally developing anything for it.

By the way, Adam Smith called. He wants to have a chat with you. Maybe you should "step into his office."