Skip to main content

Are Mac Software Developers Working For Themselves Or Just Serving Apple?

I must admit to never having been a Piezo user, given that there are open source methods around to achieve a similar outcome. Nonetheless the app has proved popular among Mac users because of the simplicity it brings to the task of recording application audio.

Rogue Amoeba, the publishers of Piezo, removed their app from the App Store thanks to the restrictive T&Cs. The app has been sold only from the Rogue Amoeba website for the last year. 

Counter-intuitively it turns out to have been a financially sound move. Whilst sales have fallen off slightly revenue has actually increased, the reduction in sales being more than compensated for by the removal of Apple's 30% cut of the selling price.

It's interesting to note that users are still able to seek out the software they want, without the nannying of Apple's regulators. Also that users are happy to pay a fair price for a piece of software even without the 'security'conferred by purchasing from the App Store.

By selling through the App Store Rogue Amoeba were actually cutting themselves a worse deal - giving Apple a 30% cut for exactly no value.

It would be interesting to see the numbers behind Rogue Amoeba's graphs to establish what the break even point would have been in terms of Apple's cut. But I can't help wondering how many Mac developers are similarly denying themselves an income in order to support Apple's bottom line.

How that same argument plays out on iOS remains to be seen, unless the EU or US Competition regulators force Apple to allow sideloading of apps and app stores, in the same way that Google does, iOS developers have no way of knowing how much of their income is being given to Apple for no reason.

For now, this seems like a good reason for not distributing MacOS apps through Apple. Even if Apple is likely to make it more and more difficult for customers to install apps outside of the Store as time goes by.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…