Exhibit One: a tilt-shift application built for OS X, which costs $14.99. Purchase from the developer’s web page, install conventionally. Copy installation files manually to run on more than one computer.
Exhibit Two: one of numerous, similar applications for the iPhone, which costs $1.99. Purchased from the AppStore, installed accordingly, sync between computers via iTunes to run on more than one system.
Really, does much more need to be said? The AppStore has a better distribution model, a better pricing model, and with the iPad, arguably a better interface model for using many applications also. With a larger audience of potential users, it’s pretty clear why iPhone versions of “normal” apps can earn more money for developers than desktop counterparts.
At this point in the game, we wonder why any developer with even the slightest clue isn’t abandoning desktop application development and embracing the iPhone and iPad with complete gusto. Unless we’re talking a niche pro app that needs a desktop for some reason (multiple monitors, more computing power, et al), there’s no reason 99% of applications shouldn’t be headed to the AppStore at full speed.
Similar Posts:
- The impending Mac AppStore. – Just over a year ago we addressed the suggestion of a Mac AppStore, effectively saying, “it won’t ha…
- Bring AppStore-banned apps to Cydia/Installer.app! – Per Nullriver’s own statement, Apple’s final judgement on NetShare is simple: perma-banned from the …
- Why Apple should embrace potty humour. – John Gruber reported earlier today that Apple denied listing an application on the iTunes AppStore t…
Comment by linking this page in a tweet. Or, tweet @WyldKard.