The App Store Hype Gets A Dose Of Reality
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to mass-market tech blogs.
It's the same fundamental misunderstanding. It's like launching a Facebook app and hoping the app directory helps you take off (in the early days there were people who did just this), or banking on getting mentioned on TechCrunch.
Now, I don't know what Rick Strom did or didn't do to market his apps, but success or failure isn't the App Store's fault. It removes a huge chunk of friction from the sales funnel, but it's all at the final, transactional step.
There's a big chunk in the middle which consists of marketing and, AFAIK, no app developer has talked extensively about their marketing efforts, only about their position in the App Store.
Rick is right: you're probably going to lose that game. Rather than go home I'd try to figure out a better game to play.
Downloadable software where the main source of app discovery is Google rather than the App Store? (i.e. for Macs or PCs or both)
App Store: 600,000 competitors, success by any of which decreases your visibility.
Whole wide Internet: lots of other people writing software, but if they're not in your niche they might as well not exist. I don't lose sales just because DeliciousMonster launched.
App Store: sales curve starts with initial spike, then dies within 2 weeks.
Whole wide Internet: sales curve typically gradually increases as you tune your site and marketing with step increases at new releases
App Store: iFart
Whole wide Internet: you make apps people use on a daily basis for things that are important to them. They send you letters about how happy your app made them.
App Store: $4.99 is expensive
Whole wide Internet: $19.99 is cheap
As for the differences in sales curves, that's actually reflective of how much easier it is to find and purchase new apps on the App Store (as well as the increased competition -> price reduction that their aggregation provides), as opposed to having hundreds or thousands of different purchase sites with their own method for payment processing. Also note that most iPhone apps tend to be for entertainment, for which an early sales spike and sudden drop-off is the norm regardless of platform...or medium.
I think that for developers and pretty much anyone in a creative pursuit the above mentality is key. If you set out to build something solely for the money you are not going to produce something of the same quality as someone who builds something they want to build anyway, and consequently you will fail at your objective.
Maybe not, but it's a lot different than developing for the web or Facebook, where you can continuously iterate on your product, get better over time, attract a few loyal users and expand from there. The difference between iPhone and other software platforms is like the difference between trying to become a pop star or starting a software company.
1. Those that relied on merely having their app in the app store to generate purchases. 2. Those that spent far too long and far too much developing an app then fell into trap #1.
They are afraid Objective-C and XCode become the next development platform.
Well you know what? With all its defects, it is still the number one marketplace for online apps. And Objective-C, a complete unknown a couple of years ago, is hotter than never.
Period.
Who is afraid Objective-C and Xcode will be the next development platform?
What does "the next development platform" even mean?
ObjC and Xcode are just fine, and developing apps for the iPhone is a lot of fun (outside of the AppStore experience, apparently), but I'm not sure they deserve any sort of conspiracy theory.