You the indie developer could become the next Flexibits. Could. But almost certainly not. Okay – not.
What’s more likely is that you’ll find yourself working on a Mobile Experience for a Big National Brand(tm) and doing the apps you want to write in your spare time.
If there’s a way out of despair, it’s in changing our expectations.
John Gruber, referencing Simmons’ article:
There is so much that could and should and will be said about this. But the bottom line is that indie development for iOS and the App Store just hasn’t worked out the way we thought it would. We thought – and hoped – it would be like the indie Mac app market, only bigger. But it’s not like that at all.
I’ve been saying this for years. I’m glad the rest of the world is catching up.
Anyone that was developed for the J2ME, Symbian, Palm, CE systems knows how it worked out.
Those making applications for corporations, selling tools , trainings, books and certifications are the ones making the money.
The Power Law tells you that a few people will make a fortune and the vast majority will make almost nothing from apps (or any other software). No fiddling with distribution models will change this basic fact.
…the harder it will be to earn a living.
If:
– The barriers of entry are low
– It is fun
– It is easy
– It is ‘cool’
then it is not going to make money for you.
I do earn a good living by coding with stuff that is quite fun (IMO), but requires some niche stuff that many may consider hard, code that few people would find ‘cool’. Barrier of entry is nil though.
I mean, if all the above are true… there is going to be a massive offer: prices will drop to zero. And as the article says, the only way that it will be worth economically is by doing something hard that has value.
That, or actually making applications for business that need them and are willing to pay to have the apps written for them, but that removes most of the ‘fun’ and ‘cool’ factors.
Yeah, My job fits those qualifiers:
Not fun,
Not easy,
Not cool,
High barrier to entry.
Which is why I don’t talk about it here that much.
Business software is where the money is. “Cash cows” can be the stupidest things, usually coming with a horrible UI design, braindead implementation, buggy, crashing permanently, awful processes (“What is that revisision controller you’re talking of?”), not updated to current standards, and of course expensive. Working on it is typically nothing people would do on their free will, so you have to give them lots of money for compensation. This compensation is for all the aspects that are contrary to your list and often apply nicely to business software development:
– The barriers of entry are high
– It is not fun
– It is not easy
– It is not ‘cool’
Additionally – and I think this is significant in the context of common app store models – the way how payment arrives at the developer is important. Business software often isn’t sold. You cannot just buy it. Instead you obtain a license which requires continuous renewal. So it’s not just about unit sales, but more about contracts you have. Add vendor lock-in and you have a perfect position in negotiations when you’re the software vendor. Of course you can ask for much higher prices, and then give a little part of that to your developers who keep the whole show running.
Regarding the programmers: They aren’t self-taught. That’s not possible, because certified processes demand certified programmers, and they have to pay to get certified by a certified examiner. This is for the “entry level” argument. You need to invest money to obtain sheets of shiny paper that show that you know something, and you need to provide a “track record” that you have done it before, successfully, with a comparable job title. Otherwise – no (easy) entry to where programming earns you a living.
And this also illustrates the main difference between business and industry clients (where lots of money is available) to private consumers (where only few money is). If you want more money, you need to increase your unit sales. There is no usable way to negotiate on price. You don’t have much of a chance to argue about the “value generation” of your product…
As you can read me today, some of thé software are free.
I do compare them as an artist showcase dvd. You know who did it, you know what you will find and you know how much they can be pretty awesome.
Why développrs are NOT comparer to mudicians ? Juste becaude we never see them, it could be th 112th violin of à full orchestra.
Why dont’ we treat them like rock star ? Just because we treat them very much better than an old star failing. Still, they could be paid as much as them with the help of app store.
Programming is still not an art, NOT à rocket science, more like using à slot machine.
Feel free to listen to that vidéo of mine
https://youtu.be/uNXY45yqwQg
Have a Nice thought
+1 very insightful.
Also in the enterprise, the developer is usually a corporation with lawyers and business contracts in place that mean the developer can be compensated for achieving their project milestones. With app store development, developers make all the investments, take all the risks, and have practically no leverage, and after all that they still have to sell to the public in an overcrowded marketplace to generate their first dime. The majority will walk away with very little for their efforts.
Edit: Devs who build apps under business contract will almost certainly likely do much better than those who have to compete for attention in the app store.
Edited 2015-07-02 02:00 UTC
That makes thé différence between à long one singer show gig and à full concert of blink 182 : both are rock and roll. But one is working alone, thé other could be showing à pré recorded mp3 with larsens, it would still be followed by millions. On twitter and facebook.
In thé end, only one of them already won the Biggest Blind.
Having à MSDN subscription with full access to all human and technology resources doesn’t give you thé right at laughing seeing stackoverflow being trolled and destroyed every day with réal military purpose and techniques.
What oracle, Microsoft or Google could do with so much money AND individual support is behond tout imagination and IT IS CLASSIFIED. As an act of terrorism trying to show any thing that could prove it to anyone.
You have to pût thé mi-lion, and when you have that mi-lion you juste chat with champain and laugh at their jokes. To realize that it is NOT worth risking to be thé next witch.
[q]
Witch is,
Wont shade and run are,
Modules, Instanciated, part of à framework.
Xho would want to know thé Biggest picture ? What if I tell you there is more than a full world war coming
and https://youtu.be/uNXY45yqwQgthttps://youtu.be/uNXY45yqwQg fadt and everybody knows who have it In thé à ** ?
Thé Biggest button, aint got no shit right here. That’s thé robot, ai purpose. Oh and they do have thé time to look into thé stash cave.
[q]In a long run or in a short period, Military solutions never WORK.
[q]
Saïd Bill Clinton.
Why do someone betrade his own family ? Money? What if you surely coming back ? And Saïd no ?
You dont’ talk to me like that, go to hell, who are you ? World class slap !!! Did you see that one coming back ?
And action.
Still friend, right here ???? What thé hell are they loôkîng for ???? There In à row baby !!!!
two two
As an iOS indie developer, I have taken on a full time job for the last year. I now do both, which means I have much less time. Although, when I couple my indie and full time efforts, it’s pretty nice financially. You can still make a living on the store, but you MUST develop great software…great software always finds a way.
Finally, do ever mistake Android is a way of making any real money. You won’t. Even serving ads is terrible. The only reason you might do it, is because you are paid to do it.
No…. You have to create good enough software that strikes the perfect balance between useful and expensive.
See the top two apps in the US AppStore – Micecraft and HeadsUp. Neither are particularly great.
Yeah, you missed the point completely.
rubberneck,
Yea, apple has more money per developer in the ecosystem, over 3 times more according to this link:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tristanlouis/2013/08/10/how-much-do-ave…
Still, it’s quite clear that even with apple the median developer is in poverty, and it’s probably only gotten worse since then. I hate to admit it, but there are too many of us in the field, if 90% of us died at random, it’d be a much healthier ecosystem
This is not a problem of Application stores. This submission makes it sound like the App Store made app discovery harder. it didn’t. It made it easier compared to the alternative. Without centralised App Stores, one would have to scour the internet to find the apps they need, and would probably need to maintain those apps manually, rather than have them be maintained and automatically updated when new version become available.
One can still advertise their app outside the app stores and maintain links directly into the app store, so nothing has changed in that regards.
The only difference is that there are a heck of a lot of apps, and it is incredibly hard to be noticed. Not because there is any problem with the app store as such, but because none of us has the time to evaluate all of the alternatives.
The app store is like the indie Mac app market, but much bigger. The only issue is that it is much bigger, and with that size, it is harder to get noticed. It’s the fallacy of composition thing again. People see something small and think, if it was bigger, it would be better which is usually true – to a point. But the flip side is that there is a finite amount of dollars (or pounds or whatever currency) on the planet chasing after finite market with an ever expanding product line-up. Of course, on average, each developer will earn less, and in practice, a few will become extremely successful more due to luck in timing than anything else.
The only thing that the alternative (i.e. no app store) would achieve would be to discourage app writers in the first place.