Average paid Android apps are 2.5 times more expensive than iPhone apps
A new analysis of smartphone application prices has found that content sold on Google Android has an average price two-and-a-half times higher than that of Apple's iPhone.
The data was released on Thursday by Canalys, which reviewed the top 100 paid applications in the Android Market and compared them to the top 100 on the iPhone App Store. On average, the top 100 Android applications cost $374.37, or an average of $3.74 per application, compared to the $1.47 average on Apple's App Store.
The numbers led Canalys to declare that applications sold on the Android market are "too expensive," and conclude that Apple's "more mature, controlled" digital storefront raises competitiveness and lowers the price of software.
"That developers can apparently charge more for their apps on Android and make it into the top paid list is clearly a positive," said Rachel Lashford, Canalys managing director for Mobile and APAC. "But the reality is that with fewer people willing to purchase apps on Android than on iOS today, there is more of a necessity to do so."
"Developers and publishers need to balance the iOS volume opportunity with a potentially greater value per download opportunity on Android, where more apps command higher price points. Selling more apps at higher prices is the Holy Grail for developers, but achieving big volumes of paid apps on Android is no small challenge."
The survey found that 82 of the top 100 paid applications in the U.S. iPhone App Store are priced at $0.99. In comparison, just 22 of the top 100 on the Android Market are under a dollar.
It's been long established that developers make far more money from Apple's iPhone App Store than they do Google's Android Market.One recent analysis found that iOS applications bring in 300 percent more revenue than their Android counterparts.
Apple revealed in January that it has paid more than $4 billion so far to App Store developers. Sales and earnings have only grown in revenue since the App Store first launched in 2008 as the iPhone has gained in popularity.
Beyond mobile application prices, Canalys also found other key differences between the Apple App Store and Google Android Market. For example, among the top 100 applications listed in both storefronts, only 19 applications appeared in both lists.
"It is clear that apps or games that prove to be runaway successes on the iPhone do not automatically prove to be so popular with Android smartphone users," Canalys Senior Analyst Tim Shepherd said. "Apple's App Store and the Android Market are very different retail environments. The former is now a mature but still very closely controlled retail environment, while the latter remains more open but also less secure and consumer friendly."
Developers have adapted to the differences between the platforms to try to maximize sales. For example, Electronic Arts routinely discounts its iPhone games to give them visibility among the App Store's top 25 list, as visibility is crucial.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
So, not only are Android apps inferior compared to the iOS versions, but they're also more expensive! And every major app or game always gets released for iOS first. And many never get released for Android.
So Android people have to wait much longer to get a certain app or game, if they get it at all, and if they do, then they have to pay more for their inferior version.
I bought Midway Arcade today for 99 cents. Not bad at all. There are some classic, cool games included with the app that I remember playing ages ago. Defender and Joust are two classic games that come to mind.
However angry birds wouldn't be on the list of androids top 100 paid applications, because the android version is free/ad supported. How many other simple games follow this model?
A valid comparison would be to compare the top 100 applications on each platform (whether free or not), or even better, it would actually compare the price of the SAME application across both platforms.
Considering prior studies have shown that ios users are more likely to accept paying for applications, it's not surprising that ios has FAR more $1 or $2 applications. On android, the developers of these applications can make more money giving them away for free, and collecting ad revenue. Honestly, I'm surprised more ios apps don't follow that approach... at least that way they're not paying a 30% cut to apple.
Phil
Big bag of hurt as far as I'm concerned.
Is it any wonder people pay for apps less often on Android?
No. Several of the paid apps I have on my iPad, I got for free on Android, just with adds. All the Angry Birds as an example. If I do not feel like looking at the adds, shut off the internt connection and they go away.
That's hilarious.
So, not only are Android apps inferior compared to the iOS versions, but they're also more expensive! And every major app or game always gets released for iOS first. And many never get released for Android.
So Android people have to wait much longer to get a certain app or game, if they get it at all, and if they do, then they have to pay more for their inferior version.
I bought Midway Arcade today for 99 cents. Not bad at all. There are some classic, cool games included with the app that I remember playing ages ago. Defender and Joust are two classic games that come to mind.
So much for your Android users as poverty-stricken bums theory, huh Apple ][?
... at least that way they're not paying a 30% cut to apple.
Phil
How much Ad revenue generated by any given Android program gets paid to the developer?
Higher or lower than 70%?
What's Google's cut?
I am not even sure what this is saying? If you are not comparing app for app what are you comparing? As a poster stated earlier, Angry birds on Android is free and add supported while it is a paid app on iOS therefore would not count in this comparison. Plus they are only looking at the Android market, yet there are several places to get apps, I really like Amazon's Android market so I buy from both.
They are comparing the Top 100 Android paid apps VS the Top 100 paid iOS apps. It says so right there in the article.
Also, you can drop the last "d" whenever you write "add", because it's ad. Ad comes from the word advertisement, not addvertisement.
A new analysis of smartphone application prices has found that content sold on Google Android has an average price two-and-a-half times higher than that of Apple's iPhone.
Android users steal lots and lots of software. so the poor developers have to raise prices. Otherwise they would lose money.
/s
So much for your Android users as poverty-stricken bums theory, huh Apple ][?
Not at all. I still believe that many of them are poverty stricken bums and people who do not have high technical standards. The Android market does not generate a whole lot of revenue compared to the Appstore.
I am not even sure what this is saying? If you are not comparing app for app what are you comparing? As a poster stated earlier, Angry birds on Android is free and add supported while it is a paid app on iOS therefore would not count in this comparison. Plus they are only looking at the Android market, yet there are several places to get apps, I really like Amazon's Android market so I buy from both.
There are also free ad supported versions of Angry Birds available on the App Store, iOS users have a choice, pay a buck and no more ads.
btw a friend ran up a $600 phone bill playing Angry Birds on a cheap Android handset on a cheap plan with high data costs.
This is equal to 10 months of my phone plan which included a free iPhone.
Android users steal lots and lots of software. so the poor developers have to raise prices. Otherwise they would lose money.
/s
Steal?
Don't you mean side load?
On android, the developers of these applications can make more money giving them away for free, and collecting ad revenue.
Do you remember the .com years? People paid for eyeballs; that was a "real" asset. From a quick bit of digging, it looks like the going rate for most ads is $100 per million impressions. The full-page type ads can go as high as $500/million.
Let's assume the higher number-- $500 for every million ads displayed. At 20 impressions per user per day, you need the average user to use the app for 100 days to earn $1.
I don't disagree with the idea that it is an easier way to make money in the Android marketplace, but it isn't as easy as on iTunes.
They are comparing the Top 100 Android paid apps VS the Top 100 paid iOS apps. It says so right there in the article.
Also, you can drop the last "d" whenever you write "add", because it's ad. Ad comes from the word advertisement, not addvertisement.
I could drop the d but I enjoy watching the greymmer nazi's cri the bluse
Lets suppose an app that came out sold for $4.00 a copy on android and sold 100 copies in a month - the developer, before market costs, would receive $400.
The same app was introduced into the iOS AppStore for $0.99 a copy, and would most likely sell 1000 copies in that month - the developer, before market costs, would receive $990.
Both of these numbers for each app store could be more or less, but it is a statistical fact that iOS sells more apps and generates more revenue.
The point is, iOS sells more apps to it's customers, the developer can make 1 universal iPhone/iPad app that works on pretty much all devises, making it easier for the developer to develop the app and also make more profit. The android market requires multiple versions, requiring more time of the developer, and also has fewer downloads and purchased apps.
They are comparing the Top 100 Android paid apps VS the Top 100 paid iOS apps. It says so right there in the article.
That's right, they did say that in the articule, but how can you say the Android apps are more expensive when they aren't comparing the same apps?
That's right, they did say that in the articule, but how can you say the Android apps are more expensive when they aren't comparing the same apps?
My question was rhetorical, something the forum police failed to pick up on.