Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers • Hacker News Board

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#271

Post by xnyan » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 4:33 PM UTC

makecheck wrote: post #151

sixothree wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sick of this. I'm so, so sick of this. I swear every time this happens, I think "oh, there is no app by that name" and then I have to double check make sure I really used the right search term and that the result is actually a first party app. If I were searching for a genre such as "podcast" or "camera" app, I understand seeing paid ads. But when I search for a specific name, I see absolutely no reason whatsoeve…

Among my feedback was a request to restore real search filters. If one can click an “exact app name” box or similar, the results should always be as intended. Of course I asked for more (like “no apps with more than $5 in-app purchases”).

That gives up control and they have no competitors in this market (iOS app stores), can’t see that happening without anti-trust.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#272

Post by xnyan » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #224

wilshipley wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Customers hate subscriptions, and small developers don’t like them much, either, because they create the expectation that the app will be upgraded very regularly. This expectation is fine for companies like Adobe, who are going to be cranking out a new version on a regular basis. But it’s onerous to a smaller developer. My understanding is Apple is now discouraging developers from using the subscription model unless…

Charging for upgrades creates perverse incentives as well, Adobe before they switched to subscriptions was a good example of that. Every new release had a ton of features to encourage people to pay for the upgrade. Few of these features were of much value. At least with a subscription you are incentivised to keep existing users happy.

I think the key takeaway that is that the process of selling applications lacks flexibility. Subscriptions, paid upgrades, one time fees and ads all make sense in some situations. It depends on the type of application, the developer, the business, and the needs of the customer. I would prefer if Apple just got out of the way completely but since that can’t happen, they could at least offer more options for developers to choose what method is best for them and their customers.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#273

Post by ksec » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 5:29 PM UTC

The problem isn't with the 30% Cut. It is the value that it offers. Right now it is nothing more than rent seeking. Apple doesn't even have to lower the Cut. They need to provide more values from the Cut.

It could be CDN for your app, where Apple could lower the bandwidth usage for certain uses, using the Apple EdgeCache. Or additional tools that helps developer's productivity.

There are lots could be done. And yet Post Steve Jobs Apple hasn't acted on it.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#274

Post by chadlavi » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 5:30 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #165

chadlavi wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Let's say I'm on version 9 of my app and I release a new major version 10. I think I could use in-app purchases in a new pushed version 9.1 that allows all the people who already have the app to purchase the upgrade to 10. Everyone who buys the app brand new now gets version 10, without that in-app purchase to upgrade to 10.

Right, but if someone starts at version 3 they need to always be on version 3 until they pay…

That's the whole point the linked post makes--they wish it were easier to make that happen. Updates represent labor. It's fair to ask users to pay for that labor.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#275

Post by ocean12 » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 5:51 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #245

spencerflem wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be much happier paying to upgrade on my own terms than being held hostage every month with subscription fees. Subscriptions add up fast and for most things if the app is good enough now I don't care too much about continuing support.

And even if subscriptions are small, the hassle of tracking them adds up fast too, because each subscription is an unnecessary relationship with a third party, a relationship I don't want to have. When I buy bread, I don't enter into a relationship with the baker or the supermarket. I want the same to be true of software.

I refuse to use them, even when it pushes me back to the default apps that came with the device.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#276

Post by _qulr » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 6:02 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #273

The problem isn't with the 30% Cut. It is the value that it offers. Right now it is nothing more than rent seeking. Apple doesn't even have to lower the Cut. They need to provide more values from the Cut. It could be CDN for your app, where Apple could lower the bandwidth usage for certain uses, using the Apple EdgeCache. Or additional tools that helps developer's productivity. There are lots could be done. And yet P…

CDN for your app sounds like a minority use case, a service that could be sold separately. Not even relevant for native-only apps. I don't want Apple to try to justify the 30% with luxury services, I just want them to reduce the cut.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#277

Post by jdxcode » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

npunt wrote: post #150

miffy900 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, not true. Steve Jobs initially envisioned the iPhone as a device with no 3rd party app support. Even internally, Apple execs at the time had to lobby him to change his mind: https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-...

Let me copy/paste what I wrote the last time this perspective on iPhone apps came up: Remember they were literally defining everything at the beginning - OS, UX, APIs, core features, hardware, first party apps, market positioning, etc etc. Needs of third party developers weren’t nearly as important as nailing the basics and ensuring a risky project was a success. The html5 app bit was a way to test the waters for dev…

I don't see how they would've had the SDK released in 9 months (and the App Store in 13) after the first iPhone if it wasn't in the plans (at least partially) the entire time.

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#278

Post by Wowfunhappy » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #224

wilshipley wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Customers hate subscriptions, and small developers don’t like them much, either, because they create the expectation that the app will be upgraded very regularly. This expectation is fine for companies like Adobe, who are going to be cranking out a new version on a regular basis. But it’s onerous to a smaller developer. My understanding is Apple is now discouraging developers from using the subscription model unless…

Charging for upgrades creates perverse incentives as well, Adobe before they switched to subscriptions was a good example of that. Every new release had a ton of features to encourage people to pay for the upgrade. Few of these features were of much value. At least with a subscription you are incentivised to keep existing users happy.

> Few of these features were of much value.

Then why were users upgrading?

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#279

Post by wilshipley » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 8:28 PM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #232

wilshipley wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I responded to some of these in a different response, I’ll edit it a bit here, but my points are the same: The subscription model fails in a lot of ways, for everyone. For example, my next app is an interior design / home control app. How would the customer feel if they stopped paying and didn’t have access to their house any more? Most people would be pissed. I don’t want to hold my customers’ data for ransom and cu…

I don’t want to hold my customers’ data for ransom and cut them off if they stop paying me my extortion money. You don't have to, you could make it readonly when the subscription expires.

This would be what I’d aim for, absolutely.

I talked to some indies who do this for apps they sell outside the App Store, but none of them did it with App Store apps. I believe they indicated there were obstacles to doing it with the App Store (as it is). I’m definitely not an expert in this — I’ve never had a subscription app.

-Wil

Re: Every year I fill out this survey from Apple, for Apple developers

#280

Post by wilshipley » Sat, Jun 13, 2020, 8:39 PM UTC

on_and_off wrote: post #236

wilshipley wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The subscription model fails in a lot of ways, for everyone. For example, my next app is an interior design / home control app. How would the customer feel if they stopped paying and didn’t have access to their house any more? Most people would be pissed. I don’t want to hold my customers’ data for ransom and cut them off if they stop paying me my extortion money. I’m pretty sure we can do micro-subscription already…

> for everyone / my next app is an interior design / home control app. That's a good point but really not "for everyone". Agreed that for a one shot app like this, pay once is the model that works. Although one could argue that you still held the customer data captive as soon as they get a new phone and the app is no longer compatible.

Sorry, “for everyone” was intended to mean, “the flaws I’ve identified hurt Apple, some customers, and some developers” not “100% of customers are hurt by the flaws.”

—

I’ve spoken with an Apple SVP about the compatibility issue and it's huge, you’re right. My suggestion to them at the time was to boot apps out of the app store that don’t stay up-to-date.

But there’s a gap I can’t solve, which is Apple doesn’t want users paying more just to keep their apps running on new iPhones.

As a datapoint, though, iOS apps have a LONG shelf-life. I have an iOS app I shipped with iOS 7 and it still runs on iOS 13.

With macOS, yes, we’re all angry because Apple finally made good on its promise to deprecate 32-bit apps after like six years of warning us. And, yah, I lost 60% of my games on Steam and I’m upset about it, but also I like my machine being way more responsive (loading both the entire 32-bit stack and the entire 64-bit stack at once meant a ton of memory pressure and swapping), and I like that Apple doesn’t have to maintain to entirely different codebases and can fix bugs and add features once not twice.

And it’s not like 64-bit apps are a new thing — if you’ve submitted an app to the Mac App Store you’ve been required for YEARS to have it run on 64-bit machines.

It sucks that Steam didn’t enforce this as well — not because they should do Apple’s bidding, but because it would have been a mitzvah to Steam’s customers who just lost a lot of games.

-Wil