iOS app success is a "lottery": 60% (or more) of developers don't break even

[Jodell88]

Apple often boasts that the App Store offers users hundreds of thousands of apps to choose from. But while the incredible variety may benefit consumers, the mature market can make it more difficult for small developers to get noticed.

"Over the years I have seen visibility of applications I've worked on greatly reduced," developer Pat McCarron told Ars. "Right now your app is likely not going to be found if you never break the Top 100 or Top 200 lists. Users won't navigate forever down the list of top apps to find yours sitting lonely at the bottom."

Rogue Amoeba's Paul Kafasis agreed that the App Store has become more of a lottery, and less a chance for small developers to succeed along with well-established companies.

"The App Store is very much like the lottery, and very few companies are topping the charts," Kafasis told Ars. "It's a hit-based business. Much like music or book sales, there are a few huge winners, a bigger handful of minor successes, and a whole lot of failures."

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tery-and-60-of-developers-dont-break-even.ars

I wonder if Android fares better in this regard.

 

[theeedude]

Probably not. Mobile apps are like gold rush now, crowded field.

 

[oznerol]

As the infographic says - marketing is key - and many independent developers either overlook it or can't afford it.

It's a rookie mistake to blow your budget on things like art and development - with the idea that the "cream rises to the top". It's also a rookie mistake to believe that the app store rankings are key. "If I only broke the top XX charts, app sales would grow organically in a self-sustaining loop" is a common mantra.

That might have been true a few years ago, but today, you need an external force to maintain ranking and sales. Otherwise, every developer's sales graph looks the same - an exponential curve to zero.

 

[Ns1]

As the infographic says - marketing is key - and many independent developers either overlook it or can't afford it.

It's a rookie mistake to blow your budget on things like art and development - with the idea that the "cream rises to the top". It's also a rookie mistake to believe that the app store rankings are key. "If I only broke the top XX charts, app sales would grow organically in a self-sustaining loop" is a common mantra.

That might have been true a few years ago, but today, you need an external force to maintain ranking and sales. Otherwise, every developer's sales graph looks the same - an exponential curve to zero.

++

 

[Deeko]

Frankly, this is a big reason why I develop for Windows Phone. Sure, there are fewer users - but there are also fewer apps. A lot easier to get noticed. I have one of my apps on both WP7 and Android right now, and there are more downloads for the WP7 version. As soon as it dropped off the "new" list for Android, it basically disappeared.

edit: To clarify, I develop in some fashion for all platforms, Windows Phone is just the primary / first target.

 

[AstroManLuca]

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tery-and-60-of-developers-dont-break-even.ars

I wonder if Android fares better in this regard.

Far as I've heard, Android users buy a lot less apps than iOS users so I imagine the situation is even worse. On the other hand (and I'm not sure if this is true so someone correct me if I'm wrong), isn't it free to develop for Android whereas you have to pay at least $100/year to develop for iOS?

 

[Deeko]

Far as I've heard, Android users buy a lot less apps than iOS users so I imagine the situation is even worse. On the other hand (and I'm not sure if this is true so someone correct me if I'm wrong), isn't it free to develop for Android whereas you have to pay at least $100/year to develop for iOS?

$30 one time registration fee for Android.

 

[TuxDave]

It's not a lottery. It's business. If you make an app without a plan for marketing, you're gonna stay at the bottom. It's like people trying to make a name for themselves on Youtube. You better start partnering or figure out how to get viral.

 

[MrX8503]

You also have to get a Mac to develop for iOS. iOS is probably the most expensive out of them all. RIM is paying 10k to developers that can reach $1k in revenue but under 10k.

 

[oznerol]

Frankly, this is a big reason why I develop for Windows Phone. Sure, there are fewer users - but there are also fewer apps. A lot easier to get noticed. I have one of my apps on both WP7 and Android right now, and there are more downloads for the WP7 version. As soon as it dropped off the "new" list for Android, it basically disappeared.

edit: To clarify, I develop in some fashion for all platforms, Windows Phone is just the primary / first target.

What's the WP7 revenue like - and when you say more downloads, can you quantify that? What kind of applications are you making?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

You also have to get a Mac to develop for iOS. iOS is probably the most expensive out of them all. RIM is paying 10k to developers that can reach $1k in revenue but under 10k.

The Mac would also need to be a fairly good one if you don't want go insane waiting around on Xcode.

 

[Mopetar]

The Mac would also need to be a fairly good one if you don't want go insane waiting around on Xcode.

I don't think Xcode requires terribly much in terms of resources. I've not used it, but I do know that the iOS simulator runs much better than the Android one as the iOS one just natively compiles the code to run on the Mac hardware, whereas the Android emulator actually emulates the ARM architecture, making things feel more sluggish.

Also I know a few people who've either made a hackintosh or have an OS X VM running on non-Mac hardware. I don't think that they've ever tried running Xcode, but it's not completely necessary to get a Mac in order to do iOS development.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I don't think Xcode requires terribly much in terms of resources. I've not used it, but I do know that the iOS simulator runs much better than the Android one as the iOS one just natively compiles the code to run on the Mac hardware, whereas the Android emulator actually emulates the ARM architecture, making things feel more sluggish.

Also I know a few people who've either made a hackintosh or have an OS X VM running on non-Mac hardware. I don't think that they've ever tried running Xcode, but it's not completely necessary to get a Mac in order to do iOS development.

It's not what I would call lightweight, on a 2010 MBP13 with 4gb of ram it could take 5 minutes or so for Xcode to be usable after loading a reasonably large iOS project. Launching the simulator itself was also easier to measure in minutes than seconds.

The OSX in a VM route has it's share of headaches as well, Xcode has had issues running in Lion VM's from what I have seen and there is always the questionable legality of it.

The minimum setup I would want for iOS development is a new Mac Mini with 6-8gb of ram and a SSD just to ensure everything runs smoothly but I'm less tolerant of slowdowns than most people.

 

[dagamer34]

The problem is that there are too many people thinking that they can just crank out an app ( or find someone who will) and make millions. Honestly, have you seen some of the apps in the app store?

The difference between success and failure in the app store today is that last 10% where you polish your app to almost ridiculous levels before releasing it. If you aren't willing to do that, expect to fail.

I think the same rules also apply to Android and Windows Phone except its even harder. So many people think that $3 is expensive for an app when back 10 years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find a high quality $30 app in a brick & mortar store.

 

[dagamer34]

You also have to get a Mac to develop for iOS. iOS is probably the most expensive out of them all. RIM is paying 10k to developers that can reach $1k in revenue but under 10k.

If you aren't willing to invest money into making an app, I don't know what to expect. Besides, I started coding my first app on a late 2006 MacBook Pro with just 2GB of RAM and it ran fine. A new cheap $600 Mac Mini would run circles around it.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

If you aren't willing to invest money into making an app, I don't know what to expect. Besides, I started coding my first app on a late 2006 MacBook Pro with just 2GB of RAM and it ran fine. A new cheap $600 Mac Mini would run circles around it.

It's a fair point that anyone making a decent app would probably not mind investing some money in getting set up. The issue for me was I already have a high end desktop and laptop so it seems foolish to spend $1k or so getting a system that is inferior to what I already have just for development.

I found Xcode's performance extremely frustrating even on much newer hardware. I am surprised you didn't have any problems trying to run it on a Core Duo.

 

[alent1234]

The problem is that there are too many people thinking that they can just crank out an app ( or find someone who will) and make millions. Honestly, have you seen some of the apps in the app store?

The difference between success and failure in the app store today is that last 10% where you polish your app to almost ridiculous levels before releasing it. If you aren't willing to do that, expect to fail.

I think the same rules also apply to Android and Windows Phone except its even harder. So many people think that $3 is expensive for an app when back 10 years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find a high quality $30 app in a brick & mortar store.

Your potential sales are higher

Angry birds has had a billion downloads. Activision and ea spend tens of millions $$$ on marketing for that kind of revenue

 

[shortylickens]

Strong competition is always good for the consumer.

 

[shortylickens]

Frankly, this is a big reason why I develop for Windows Phone. Sure, there are fewer users - but there are also fewer apps. A lot easier to get noticed. I have one of my apps on both WP7 and Android right now, and there are more downloads for the WP7 version. As soon as it dropped off the "new" list for Android, it basically disappeared.

edit: To clarify, I develop in some fashion for all platforms, Windows Phone is just the primary / first target.

Give me a link.

 

[foghorn67]

If devs would stop making social apps....
How many FB's, Twitters, IG's do we need?
Path? wtf?

 

[dagamer34]

If devs would stop making social apps....
How many FB's, Twitters, IG's do we need?
Path? wtf?

Social apps can spread like wildfire, which is why many will try but few will succeed.

 

[Sheep]

If devs would stop making social apps....
How many FB's, Twitters, IG's do we need?
Path? wtf?

Considering Facebook's Android app sucks balls (and I'm told the iPhone/iPod Touch app isn't much better), I'm glad alternatives like Friendcaster exist.

I don't use Twitter but I'd imagine some of the alternate apps handle certain functions better than the official one.

 

[foghorn67]

Considering Facebook's Android app sucks balls (and I'm told the iPhone/iPod Touch app isn't much better), I'm glad alternatives like Friendcaster exist.

I don't use Twitter but I'd imagine some of the alternate apps handle certain functions better than the official one.

I'm not talking about a portal for an established social network. I'm talking about app developers with no ad revenue and no sales revenue sucking up millions of dollars from naive investors. The sell is they are going to create yet another social network.

For an example, google search Kevin Rose. What a b.s. artist.