This is only a problem for people who plan to make <$100 from their app
Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
11–20 of 26 posts
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#12More than anything, I think the intention behind the developer fee is to act as an additional buffer against low-quality developers. Personally, I have no objection to it. If you're serious about putting time into developing for Apple, $100 bucks isn't really all that big a deal. Furthermore, 30% isn't a bad deal either considering that Apple is providing you with a large platform for distribution as well as potential exposure.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#13I see the developer fee as just a barrier to entry to submit apps to the marketing place - kinda just to stop the riff-raff. I suspect it also is linked to the the legal agreement as some type of consideration.
There already exists a $1500 barrier to entry: the cost of a Mac. Thanks though, if I want to load programs on my iPhone, I'll do so through Cydia.
Mac mini starts at $599. And no need to be hostile--he's making a legitimate point. By charging a relatively modest fee to use the store--the tools themselves are free, unlike things like VS--Apple is making sure people have minute skin in the game.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#14I see the developer fee as just a barrier to entry to submit apps to the marketing place - kinda just to stop the riff-raff. I suspect it also is linked to the the legal agreement as some type of consideration.
I'll agree -- the $100 cost to developers is also a psychological one. You're more likely to carefully consider the development of your app if you've invested financially in it.
Also, imagine the hordes of crappy apps that would come through if the barrier of entry were just OS X and an internet connection. The App Store review process simply wouldn't be able to keep up. Apple's primary focus has always been on quality and always will be.
I'm not saying I condone locking developers into paying fees for platform-specific development, but as an iPhone user, I don't want to wade through a bloated app store to find something useful.
If Apple could both increase the effectiveness and iterative speed of the App review process, I think they could afford to lower the iOS developer fee a little, and perhaps even make it free.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#15If they don't need the money, they should pool it into a developer lottery. best app in each category wins the pot.
entice developers further while still keeping out the riff-raff. problem solved.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#16This is only a problem for people who plan to make <$100 from their app
Which includes 100% of freeware, and 99% of weekend "hey let's put this on the net and see if people want it" projects.
Both of those things used to be a big part of the Mac software ecosystem, but they're slowly dying away. And if Apple moves forward with its apparent plan to prohibit unsigned code from running by default, while charging $99/year for the privilege of having your code signed, both will be effectively extinct within the next year.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
There already exists a $1500 barrier to entry: the cost of a Mac. Thanks though, if I want to load programs on my iPhone, I'll do so through Cydia.
Mac mini starts at $599. And no need to be hostile--he's making a legitimate point. By charging a relatively modest fee to use the store--the tools themselves are free, unlike things like VS--Apple is making sure people have minute skin in the game.
Of course. Even here people can't resist the Apple hate pronunciations. What do people think they'd be developing if it wasn't for Apple? Would the $X billions of dollars paid to App developers be made some other way? Basic games?
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mac mini starts at $599. And no need to be hostile--he's making a legitimate point. By charging a relatively modest fee to use the store--the tools themselves are free, unlike things like VS--Apple is making sure people have minute skin in the game.
Of course. Even here people can't resist the Apple hate pronunciations. What do people think they'd be developing if it wasn't for Apple? Would the $X billions of dollars paid to App developers be made some other way? Basic games?
I didn't believe I was being hostile. It's just a matter of fact statement that if I need programs loaded for me and friends, I'll send it to Cydia.
I cannot afford a MacBook, nor the 100$ fee to develop.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#19I see the developer fee as just a barrier to entry to submit apps to the marketing place - kinda just to stop the riff-raff. I suspect it also is linked to the the legal agreement as some type of consideration.
I see it more as a way to assign value to the concept. If one pays for the access then someone is more likely to do something with it. I once met some guys that would offer free lessons in jiu-jitsu at the local college, but they had more students once they started charging.
The legal agreement is an interesting thought.
As for a barrier to low-quality apps, it doesn't seem to have worked.
Re: Apple has a gajillion dollars. Devs still have to pay $100.
#20What's the point? Either pay the $100, or don't.
How much cash money Apple has is orthogonal to how the developer program is structured. Maybe the $100 fee has benefits for gatekeeping purposes, but that's a separate evaluation and discussion.
I'm not an iOS dev, and anything I would do on mobile would be Android first, so I don't have any reason to try to defend Apple here.