Apple announces it will offer App Store subscriptions to all apps, take smaller 15% cut

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    So much good in this. 

    Paid Search Results are long overdue for the App Store. This benefits every developer and every user. Developers can finally have a way to truly market worthwhile Apps, and users will always be seeing the most relevant Apps at the top of searches.

    And is a very fair move, developers with App subscriptions that are not fly-by-night operations (see: after 1 year), now get 15% more of the revenue. Apple is effectively giving up half of what it earns in iOS App Store subscription revenue. 

    Very smart, generous, and welcome for devs and users.
    ronnpatchythepirateapple headbrucemc
  • Reply 22 of 84
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,285member
    What's the point of search ads other than Apple looking for another "services" revenue stream to offset declining hardware sales?
    It would help indies. Apparantly. 
  • Reply 23 of 84
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    Not too thrilled about the idea of subscriptions. I've got a lot of apps, I mean a LOT of apps. If even a small percentage goes subscription, then these apps will suddenly cost a lot more over time. That's not good.

    if an app that now costs $5 is a subscription at $5 a year, how many people will even want it? Most of the apps I've obtained are useful just a few times a year. That's enough for me to spend a few bucks for, not not nearly enough to subscribe to. I suspect that if a lot of developers take this route, then their sales will drop substantially.
    jackansidysamoriajbdragonapple head
  • Reply 24 of 84
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,285member
    brucemc said:

    It's not huge but it is a needed start. Under Eddy I think we weren't going to see any changes.

    A lot of pro-app devs have been hesitant to get serious about iOS because it's not economical to sell an app once and constantly be rebuilding it for free when Apple launches something new. Having it tied to a subscription model should help with that, though a full paid upgrade system may still be needed for some of them.
    Indeed, a step in the right direction.  Not everything that is needed to make the App Store (for all platforms, but especially iPad and Mac) as good as it can be for sure, but definitely an improvement to allow devs to be able to better monetize and hence an incentive to keep investing and make great apps.  Now need to add some "try before buy" functionality, ability for devs to charge for major upgrades (for those that want to purchase), and allow devs to interact with their end users to get feedback (anonymously).

    Ability to advertise is not in itself a bad thing.  Something I am sure all developers want.  Outside of the App Store, application sellers have many options to get their product known, and I am sure all of them do some advertising.
    The subscription model is great if tied (as I think is indicated) to upgrades. That is you don't get updates if not subscribed. This will generate a known revenue stream and encourage the adoption of new OS features. 
    jackansi
  • Reply 25 of 84
    cintoscintos Posts: 111member
    Move to 15% is to snag entities such as Amazon, who will not pay Apple 30% for an iOS user's access to their Video Collection...
  • Reply 26 of 84
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,259member
    Companies are starting to do an end around wrt subscription pricing anyways.    Some still won't be happy about the 30% first  year but they can calculate their churn rate and crunch the numbers easily. 

    The flexible pricing options and other features will likely keep many developers from rolling their own with external services.  

    I'm not afraid of subscription pricing because I already subscribe to Netflix, HBO Now and more.   Subscription pricing is going to it easier for developers that have a suite of apps and potentially harder for the developer of a single app. 

    Subscription also works great in some cross-platform scenarios.  I just subscribed to 1Password Families and much of the allure is knowing that the product exists on Mac, Windows, iOS and Android. Wherever I find myself my data will be there and the apps are all free to use as a sub. 




  • Reply 27 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    melgross said:
    Not too thrilled about the idea of subscriptions. I've got a lot of apps, I mean a LOT of apps. If even a small percentage goes subscription, then these apps will suddenly cost a lot more over time. That's not good.

    if an app that now costs $5 is a subscription at $5 a year, how many people will even want it? Most of the apps I've obtained are useful just a few times a year. That's enough for me to spend a few bucks for, not not nearly enough to subscribe to. I suspect that if a lot of developers take this route, then their sales will drop substantially.
    Did it occur to you that a better business model that makes more money is a better solution than treating Applications like dime-a-dozen trinkets?

    Have you noticed how pathetic the App Store has become? Have you noticed how, despite Apple's best efforts to create amazing new OS-level features every year, 3rd party developers can't be bothered to spend the time incorporating them in their Apps for absolutely 0 return?

    It is easy to blame lazy developers for this, but it is just as accurate to blame Apple for not creating better financial incentives for development work. Once you get past that initial $5 download...why should a developer ever care about that user again? There has been little-to-no potential for Apps to be a recurring revenue stream for most developers. The only ones making money are ones abusing In-App purchases for fake currency, and that's not right.

    You should be paying more than a 1-time $5 purchase, if that App gets better and better over time and evolves with Apple's OS.
    asdasdbrucemcthepixeldoc
  • Reply 28 of 84
    jackansijackansi Posts: 116member
    TurboPGT said:
    So much good in this. 

    Paid Search Results are long overdue for the App Store. This benefits every developer and every user. Developers can finally have a way to truly market worthwhile Apps, and users will always be seeing the most relevant Apps at the top of searches.

    And is a very fair move, developers with App subscriptions that are not fly-by-night operations (see: after 1 year), now get 15% more of the revenue. Apple is effectively giving up half of what it earns in iOS App Store subscription revenue. 

    Very smart, generous, and welcome for devs and users.
    That's all fine and dandy in the idyllic land of rose-tinted glasses...

    The cynical, real-world view would be that every search term/result that threatens a well established player in a certain area could be snapped up easily by them by dominating the auctions and squeezing out the little guy...  Only difference is that Apple profits more directly from the squeezing with this move to ads.

    Definitely a smart move for Apple to get more revenue.  I don't see any real benefit for the consumer or developers.


    App subscriptions could be very useful for devs... if they don't go overboard with it.
    edited June 2016 dysamoria
  • Reply 29 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member

    cintos said:
    Move to 15% is to snag entities such as Amazon, who will not pay Apple 30% for an iOS user's access to their Video Collection...
    Actually it is more about the proliferation of subscriptions as a whole. Apple wants to give more developers the ability to utilize flexible subscription models. Not just a Netflix, or an Amazon, who have huge licensing overhead costs to provide the content. Yes, those companies are now thrilled over this, as they just got a free revenue boost from Apple.

    But the small developer should be elated, as a subscription model for their App is much more feasible when A) there are more flexible plans/options, b) the revenue cut is less extreme.
    edited June 2016 patchythepirate
  • Reply 30 of 84
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 2,083member
    I despise subscription model software business.

    Apple is reversing all it accomplished in pushing this abusive industry toward being better for consumers. 
    jackansi
  • Reply 31 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    jackansi said:
    TurboPGT said:
    So much good in this. 

    Paid Search Results are long overdue for the App Store. This benefits every developer and every user. Developers can finally have a way to truly market worthwhile Apps, and users will always be seeing the most relevant Apps at the top of searches.

    And is a very fair move, developers with App subscriptions that are not fly-by-night operations (see: after 1 year), now get 15% more of the revenue. Apple is effectively giving up half of what it earns in iOS App Store subscription revenue. 

    Very smart, generous, and welcome for devs and users.
    That's all fine and dandy in the idyllic land of rose-tinted glasses...

    The cynical, real-world view would be that every search term/result that threatens a well established player in a certain area could be snapped up easily by them by dominating the auctions and squeezing out the little guy...  Only difference is that Apple profits more directly from the squeezing with this move to ads.

    Definitely a smart move for Apple to get more revenue.  I don't see any real benefit for the consumer or developers.


    App subscriptions could be very useful for devs... if they don't go overboard with it.
    Well that's just ridiculous. In your "real-world", the App Store must not be the mess that it is today when it comes to relevant search results. Your comments on "potential abuse" cannot be taken very seriously, as you can bet it will be something that Apple will monitor and curate as needed. Its a small issue, compared to the huge benefit it brings to discoverability of Apps that should be discovered. You think Junk Apps that today prey on App Store users and take advantage of Apple's poor search results are going to start paying for top spots? Nope.
    patchythepiratebrucemc
  • Reply 32 of 84
    ericthehalfbeeericthehalfbee Posts: 4,050member
    Next up? Allowing developers to have an App "upgrade" program where you can convert a "lite" version to a full or pro version without needing to have separate Apps.
  • Reply 33 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member

    asdasd said:
    brucemc said:

    Indeed, a step in the right direction.  Not everything that is needed to make the App Store (for all platforms, but especially iPad and Mac) as good as it can be for sure, but definitely an improvement to allow devs to be able to better monetize and hence an incentive to keep investing and make great apps.  Now need to add some "try before buy" functionality, ability for devs to charge for major upgrades (for those that want to purchase), and allow devs to interact with their end users to get feedback (anonymously).

    Ability to advertise is not in itself a bad thing.  Something I am sure all developers want.  Outside of the App Store, application sellers have many options to get their product known, and I am sure all of them do some advertising.
    The subscription model is great if tied (as I think is indicated) to upgrades. That is you don't get updates if not subscribed. This will generate a known revenue stream and encourage the adoption of new OS features. 
    That's not how its going to work in a literal sense.
    But the idea is for developers that DO plan on updating their Apps with new features over time, to use a business model that is more appropriate for funding future development.
  • Reply 34 of 84
    Subscriptions for iOS apps? No thanks. Maybe if we see some true pro apps with 3D Touch integration running on a more robust operating system. Apple says the iPad Pro is their vision for the future of computing, but they sure don't seem very invested in it. We don't even have Final Cut Pro for iOS, and that's Apple's own software!
  • Reply 35 of 84
    drewys808drewys808 Posts: 543member
    tzeshan said:
    This plan may not be very successful.  The developer may charge much higher subscription fee for fearing the subscriber will drop it sooner.  
    Not sure I understand your 2nd sentence.

    But I'd think that many developers would charge a drastically reduced subscription price for the 1st year but with higher fees the subsequent years, since this would:

    1. incentivize more to try your app initially.
    2. push more profit to yourself (the developer) since Apple's revenue cut falls to 15% after the 1st year.

    We'll see how the market reacts over time.
  • Reply 36 of 84
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,932member
    Why do I get the sense that ads is Apple's quick way of saying they fixed search and discovery while at the same time being able to show an increase in "services" revenue. Honestly I think it makes more sense to fix search and discovery first and then maybe implement ads.
    palominelord amhran
  • Reply 37 of 84
    spacekidspacekid Posts: 169member
    Hopefully they make it easier to have sample version of the app that people can try for free.

    tokyojimu
  • Reply 38 of 84
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,507member
    TurboPGT said:
    melgross said:
    Not too thrilled about the idea of subscriptions. I've got a lot of apps, I mean a LOT of apps. If even a small percentage goes subscription, then these apps will suddenly cost a lot more over time. That's not good.

    if an app that now costs $5 is a subscription at $5 a year, how many people will even want it? Most of the apps I've obtained are useful just a few times a year. That's enough for me to spend a few bucks for, not not nearly enough to subscribe to. I suspect that if a lot of developers take this route, then their sales will drop substantially.
    Did it occur to you that a better business model that makes more money is a better solution than treating Applications like dime-a-dozen trinkets?

    Have you noticed how pathetic the App Store has become? Have you noticed how, despite Apple's best efforts to create amazing new OS-level features every year, 3rd party developers can't be bothered to spend the time incorporating them in their Apps for absolutely 0 return?

    It is easy to blame lazy developers for this, but it is just as accurate to blame Apple for not creating better financial incentives for development work. Once you get past that initial $5 download...why should a developer ever care about that user again? There has been little-to-no potential for Apps to be a recurring revenue stream for most developers. The only ones making money are ones abusing In-App purchases for fake currency, and that's not right.

    You should be paying more than a 1-time $5 purchase, if that App gets better and better over time and evolves with Apple's OS.
    Not really. The entire point to the App Store is low pricing. If that model is broken, then sales will plummet. It's not all about the developer making as much as they want to, it's a combination of that, and what the buyer will pay. It's pretty clear that buyers won't pay much, if anything, for an app. Prices have drifted lower over the years.

    you're wrong about developers not caring after the sale. I've got about 300 apps on my phone, and about 650 on my ipad. Yes, that's a lot. More than half are paid apps. A number are in app purchasing, with the app initially being free. Both methods work. I'm continually getting app updates that add features, eliminate bugs, and conform to the latest iOS updates. Sometimes, I get 25 updates a day. And shortly after Apple updates, or upgrades iOS, I can get upwards of 30 updates a day for a time. So you're just wrong about developers caring. You must have very few apps. When Apple came out with the iPad Pro, there was a slew of updates for it. Then many apps updated for the Apple Pencil.

    but would I have taken chances with apps if I thought I would be paying for them forever, even though most of those apps are marginally useful, that is, just a few times a year? Definitely not! So many app developers wouldn't have sold me their apps at all. But I'm willing to lay a subscription for something of major value, and it's been possible in the App Store for some time.

    for example, I pay $99 a year for AutoCad 360, because I use that a lot, and it's an app of major value. See, we can do that now. I also pay for extra features in apps that I own. For example, I use AudioTools. That app has in app purchases for extra modules. I think I originally paid maybe $17 for the app, but have since spent over $100 for extra modules. These aren't the only ones. We can subscribe to Office 365 too.

    so subscriptions aren't impossible now. But what Apple wants to do here will make even rarely needed apps subscription, and that's a bad idea.
    jackansi
  • Reply 39 of 84
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    Subscriptions for iOS apps? No thanks. Maybe if we see some true pro apps with 3D Touch integration running on a more robust operating system. Apple says the iPad Pro is their vision for the future of computing, but they sure don't seem very invested in it. We don't even have Final Cut Pro for iOS, and that's Apple's own software!
    Final Cut Pro is hardly an App that Apple puts a lot of development effort into for macOS, let alone iOS.
    Unlike iMovie, which they appear to update regularly for both macOS and iOS.

    The only thing I'm getting from posts like this is that you don't see the value in paying for iOS Apps. I think the market has shown the exact opposite over time, and Apple is looking to further expand the value of Apps and the business behind them.
    edited June 2016 patchythepirate
  • Reply 40 of 84
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,529member

    Great now developer will be incentivized to make you pay a subscription.

    I am not interested in paying over and over again to use and app. Today I have a number of apps which are free and provided limited features, they also have subscriptions which are in the area of $19 to $30 per years, and these apps have issues, I reached out to the developers about the issues and basically if you not paying the yearly fee they are no interested in talking to you. Why would I pay for an app with issues in hopes they will fix it after I pay more. When they push out a new versions with new feature they tend to break more things.

    I no problem paying once for an app that works and this whole online app store has made the quality go down, it is the whole it is good enough we can fix it later attitude had not made me interested in paying for an app over and over again.

    jackansi
Sign In or Register to comment.