Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

russ.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 127 posts

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#21

Post by function_seven »

jsty wrote: post #18
jwr wrote: post #12

This is why I think every app should be sold in a subscription model. The current users of this app are very happy with it, and yet they will suffer when the developer can't make enough new sales. It's like a Ponzi scheme: everything falls down if you can't enroll enough new users. That's not sustainable.

For apps you install on your own machine, I think the JetBrains perpetual license model is probably my favourite so far. After a certain period you can stop paying the subscription and keep using the old version. But if you want to keep up to date with features and bug fixes, you keep paying the subscription. It just seems to align incentives on both sides quite well.

I really like their model as well. I think the really novel part of it is that, when you decide to stop paying the subscription, you keep the perpetual license for whatever was current a year ago. So if you just updated to the latest and greatest, and you love it, then you need to pay one more year subscription in order to "buy" it out right.

I think that's clever

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#24

Post by benmdi »

xwdv wrote: post #19

Take it from someone who’s worked with client apps making ten times as many downloads at similar price points: if you want to be successful in the app business you need to look beyond optimizing App Store search terms. You need to be marketing and promoting your application across multiple channels to a wider audience. It does not sound like this developer was doing that, so while it is sad he has had revenue slashed…

This is just another way of saying "Apple doesn't give a f*ck about indie developers." Might be true, but it's still shitty.

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#25

Post by groovybits »

benmdi wrote: post #17
mrkstu wrote: post #14

I think he already has his answer- Apple doesn't guarantee search placement- though it is odd that he'd fall all the way off altogether. If you're relying on Apple (or Google) to feature you in their search results, you're already at their whim with no recourse.

That's a BS answer, and if it's the one Apple wants to give, then they should not be surprised when they 1) are seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on 2) Get treated like a monopolist in courts.

I'm not sure I understand this reasoning.

Why should Apple or Google be responsible for promoting your app? If I walk into a supermarket and I don't see the item I wanted on their front feature displays (meaning I need to walk down the isle to find it), does that mean the supermarket is monopolistic? Does that mean the item vendor should stop selling their product in that supermarket?

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#27

Post by jtbayly »

jwr wrote: post #12

This is why I think every app should be sold in a subscription model. The current users of this app are very happy with it, and yet they will suffer when the developer can't make enough new sales. It's like a Ponzi scheme: everything falls down if you can't enroll enough new users. That's not sustainable.

No no no. Nothing about the subscription business model guarantees that an app will be or become sustainable. If I buy an app like this and it works. I can use it until something breaks it. That is true even if I'm the very first and only person who ever purchases it. If I'm the first and only subscriber the app will suddenly stop working a few weeks later when the dev realizes he can't make a living on it.

That stinks for the dev, but it's not my fault, and I shouldn't be punished by revoking my ability to use the app.

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#28

Post by drivingmenuts »

benmdi wrote: post #24
xwdv wrote: post #19

Take it from someone who’s worked with client apps making ten times as many downloads at similar price points: if you want to be successful in the app business you need to look beyond optimizing App Store search terms. You need to be marketing and promoting your application across multiple channels to a wider audience. It does not sound like this developer was doing that, so while it is sad he has had revenue slashed…

This is just another way of saying "Apple doesn't give a f*ck about indie developers." Might be true, but it's still shitty.

Why should Apple care more about indie developers vs a much larger developer with multiple apps and more marketing reach? Sure, you've got grit and determination but who's making them more money?

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#29

Post by _bxg1 »

This is a good argument for having multiple app stores. I don't totally blame Apple's devs here: it's completely imaginable that small, innocent changes in what's no doubt an enormous codebase could have totally unpredictable effects on individual search rankings.

The problem is that there's only a single point of articulation. If half a dozen app stores all got search results "mostly right", then little variations like this wouldn't sink a business. This is far from the only example of the single-platform effect. Facebook gets (or is forced) to be the arbiter of free speech. YouTube gets (or is forced) to be the arbiter of copyright claims. In the world of PC games, for contrast, Steam's algorithms can't totally sink a game because they don't have a total monopoly. There's itch.io, GOG, and now Epic. You can go to other platforms (or all of them!).

I love Apple's app store. I love how hard they fight to protect their customers from exploitative and dangerous software. I feel safe downloading apps there in a way that I didn't on Google Play. But monopolies are bad, even in the rare cases where they don't degrade the quality of the product.

Re: Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Developers

#30

Post by benmdi »

groovybits wrote: post #25
benmdi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a BS answer, and if it's the one Apple wants to give, then they should not be surprised when they 1) are seen by devs as a unattractive platform to build a business on 2) Get treated like a monopolist in courts.

I'm not sure I understand this reasoning. Why should Apple or Google be responsible for promoting your app? If I walk into a supermarket and I don't see the item I wanted on their front feature displays (meaning I need to walk down the isle to find it), does that mean the supermarket is monopolistic? Does that mean the item vendor should stop selling their product in that supermarket?

Those situations are in no way comparable. It's wild to me you think they are.

No one is saying they are responsible for promoting your app. What we're saying is that if they're going to lock down their platform so that you can't install apps without going through their store, then they shouldn't arbitrarily, with no explanation, destroy years of good will thats been built up by genuinely building and delivering a high quality app people love.

I think you're suffering from the "just world bias", honestly. Look it up if you haven't heard of it. TL;DR is that as much as you want to believe they don't, shitty, unfair things happen everyday. Pretending they don't doesn't help the situation.

Post reply on HN