Cullmann Design Blog

Apple’s announcement of the iPad this week and the incredible growth of Apple’s AppStore, I thought it would be appropriate to share my thoughts on software distribution and marketing in a closed eco-system for software. This post is the first half of a two part series on closed eco-systems, like the Apple AppStore, for application development and distribution and the effect that will have on customer adoption.

Last week, I had written the first in a two part series on software development and distribution on closed application store eco-systems. I had used Apple’s AppStore as an example partially due to the release on Apple’s newest device the iPad and also because the AppStore is by far the most successful example of a single distribution system for software developers. In part 1 I had outlined the benefits to consumers and developers in using a closed system like Apple’s. Part 2 will show some how control can negatively impact those who create content for AppStores and those who want to use software on their devices.

To be clear, Apple represents one of the most aggressively closed systems for both developers and consumers. The platform itself only allows for loading of native applications from the the Apple AppStore. Beyond creating a web-based application that is optimized for the device itself, there is no way to implement a solution that is not specifically endorsed by Apple. Other mobile platforms such as Android, BlackBerry, Symbian and Palm all offer methods for users to install applications directly onto a device without the need to have their wares approved by a governing entity. Being able to distribute a piece for software on your own website, your own terms or with any licence agreement gives developers flexibility and channel that is better suited for innovation and support to the end-user.

The ability to work beyond confining terms and license agreements allow developers to push platforms and solutions that allow the the mobile industry to grow and be challenged. This was true with the explosion of Palm in the late 90′s and continued in a smaller scale with platforms like WindowsMobile, Symbian and recently with the open-source based Android operating system. The adoption of a popular piece of software can challenge manufacturers to change hardware, create a new use-case or even extend the life of a product. Software developers can also support a product far beyond the “end-of-life” that a manufacturers support. Ironically, Apple is a prime example with users of their Newton still supporting and improving the platform. If it were not for devoted developers still writing software and loading it directly onto the devices, many working Newtons would have long-ago become plastic paperweights.

AppStores are positioned as a solution to preserve quality and integrity for the end user. Each application is screened and tested to ensure that it is free from anything that may harm the end user or expose them to an unpleasant experience on a manufactured device. There are too many iFart applications or virtual lighters to allow one to speculate the definition of “quality in taste”, but the model holds true for most in maintaining security and safety for the end-user and their data. It does represent an issue that Apple (nor BlackBerry at the time of publishing) has disclosed the criteria for what parameters are used to judge if an application should be allowed or rejected from their AppStore. This presents several issues for application developers poised to pour many, many hours into an application’s development. The first is “how do I know if my application will be accepted?” the second “what do I do if my application is rejected?”. Neither of these are clear beyond the requirement of developers to adhere to the Software Development Kit (SDK) specifications provided. This is not a consequence of an open system where a developer has several solutions if the hardware manufacturer does not approve or endorse an application. For most devices, there are several methods to install or append software to a device by either I/O access (USB, FireWire, etc.,) or via a networked solution.

Having a focal rally point for comments would seem to be an ideal way to communicate with and distribute user feedback for a developer’s software. In an open system, comments and reviews are distributed all over the internet and users looking for a solution must sift through search-terms and potentially irrelevant material to discover a solution. AppStores put search-term results in logical formats and focus a single point-of-distribution with a link, install option and user reviews in once place. This may not be a good solution if your product is #2, or #3 (or lower) in the search results. Users searching for a solution via Google, Bing or any other search engine may find results different depending on their search history, the terms that are searched or how much they may have invested in their own marketing. An open-system gives a more fractured option list, but a better opportunity for the less popular, and potentially, more appropriate application or content for the searcher. Reviews can also be reached in this same matter rather than shown in aggregate in a single AppStore page.

As a follow-through thought on marketing, you have to think about the financial implications of participating in an AppStore. For some, BlackBerry and Android for instance, there is no commission taken for sales within their eco-systems. Both of these examples are not market-leaders and participation by developers are required to help build the brands. The developers are a corner stone in the platform’s infrastructure. Apple has a slightly different model. Developers pay a 30% charge for every sale. Apple, a market leader, presents a different marketing position. The Apple user base has only one choice to find and install applications: The Apple Store. If you are a developer for iPhone, iTouch and now iPad applications, the AppStore 30% is the only game in town. This is one of the more influential criteria driving developers to more open solutions like Android and, one can speculate, creating a market amongst thought-leaders and geeks to purchase more open-platform devices like the Google Nexus One and Motorola Droid. The popularity of the iPhone and it’s AppStore has set a president and a trend for software distribution that I hope will be contained to the mobile platform and not to the computer industry in general.

That same distribution method is also changing the model for how companies are using the web and “Apps” for marketing and customer conversion. Many of the most popular applications in the AppStore (and Android Portal) are no-cost solutions allowing customers to interface with paid-services or free-mium services. Pandora, DropBox, Box.net and Amazon are only a few examples. Many of these services leverage easy access to position advertising or easily provide consumers access to their content from anywhere they may be to monotize interactions. Native apps and even having an application, a brand footprint on an always-connected, intimate device like a mobile phone is ideal for encouraging interaction and brand loyalty. 2010 will show that there will be a saturating of the market with Apps and brand touch-points. Those not already in the market will have to fight against early incumbents for mind-share and a coveted place on the user’s home-screen (the new prize in marketing real-estate).

Dichotomy: As a developer I am frustrated by the confines that the AppStore represents. As a marketer, any AppStore can be a new distribution channel and focal point to drive customers to interact with your brand from anywhere at anytime. The Apple iPhone, a market-leader, and soon the iPad (success is to-be-determined!) will provide ambitious developers willing to work within Apple’s confines an opportunity at wealth. For those who want to think beyond those confines, platforms like Android and BlackBerry are an opportunity to spread their wings and push the devices they develop for to the limit.

Apple’s announcement of the iPad this week and the incredible growth of Apple’s AppStore, I thought it would be appropriate to share my thoughts on software distribution and marketing in a closed eco-system for software. This post is the first half of a two part series on closed eco-systems, like the Apple AppStore, for application development and distribution and the effect that will have on customer adoption.

I design and develop websites and applications for commercial clients. Typically they are distributed for a small, focused audience and for a limited number of platforms. With the emergence of the iPhone as a leading platform, there is a lot of pressure to begin to move projects into this space. From a personal point of view, I’m excited to look at the iPhone as an inspiring new playground for interface design and a new venue for projects. For most users, it is an execution of what Apple does best: Easy. There is some baggage that comes with “easy”, but that will be outlined in the second installment of this series.

The closed-system that Apple has also offers some very important advantages:

The biggest advantage to consumers who via a closed-system like the Apple AppStore is security. By security, I mean the level of trust a use has when they install something. This has been a huge hurdle for Windows for many years. Without a central authority or trusted source to deem an application as “safe” users, are put in a position of risk with every application they install. The AppStore (and any closed-system requiring a centralized approval process) overcomes this hurdle by giving any application in the store its “seal of approval” as default with it’s inclusion.

Quality is also a big contributor to the popularity of the AppStore. Despite all the proliferation of “flashlight” and “farting” applications, the process of having an application OKed and included as an offering in the AppStore is a level of Quality Assurance. There is an assumed level of stability and finish that should make it an experience consistent to the platform. Any complaints can be managed within the AppStore’s policies and applications can be revoked and, potentially, removed remotely.

The AppStore is also a great place to look at all of the offerings for a platform in one place. This is what I also appreciate about the Apple Download Page for OS X: A consolidated collection I can search through easily with consistently presented write-ups, screenshots and ratings. This is also fueling the rise of the “AppStore” as a trend for all platforms as well. It’s excellent branding and a better experience for the user to have all of a platform’s best work in one location. The Apple experience is especially well thought-out. Consumers looking for a solution, the ability to search a term and be presented with several options, all with good feedback, and an easy-to-compare structure in one location is a huge benefit. It relieves one of the heaviest burdens of an open system which is finding the perfect solution be wading through review after review on Google and in forums. It benefits the user, the brand and, in the end, the developer.

For developers getting their start, working within a previously existing infrastructure is a great way to get your first branding and marketing start. You can leverage already existing traffic to the channel and, if you get picked up as a spot-light project, your application can take-off and define you or your company as an major player in the space. There is very little risk as not getting any traffic or a big hit will not deter future users and the quality assurance process will only sharpen your programming skills. Once accepted, being able to add a download badge or similar store “call-to-action” on your application’s homepage or blog gives you a strong air of credibility. [[INSERT APPSTORE BADGE]] The central location of your app within the infrastructure will also provide you with a higher probability of a reviewer or blogger finding your application and finding it. A review outside of the eco-system is likely to give you traffic and strengthen your brand.

The most obvious and, depending on your motivations, the most important part of a gated infrastructure for applications if the financial eco-system. With the exception of free-applications, the nature of a closed system centralizes the transaction between the developer and end-user and simplifies the messy monetary exchanges. This usually comes at a cost. In the case of the Apple AppStore, developers are losing 30% of every sale. If you are in the business of developing applications, you have to weigh the positive affects of an infrastructure versus the costs for marketing themselves and supplying a transaction system or working with a third-party sales portal.

Although I have many personal objections to the undocumented review process and closed nature of the Apple AppStore and many similar application distribution vehicles that aim to mimic it, the power of their offering to users and the convenience they provide is undeniable. I would not be able to comfortably recommend not making use of an application eco-system if one where available for a client’s project. In fact, as someone who works in marketing, I would object if a client where to try to avoid a potential channel for distribution. From the developer’s perspective, the closed eco-system of these stores represents a heavy cost in monetary compensation and also in the confines that SDK, user agreements and licensing put on works. If the purpose of a developer’s application is to support a separate channel and use an application as an accessibility solution, then the model works very well (many of the popular apps in the iPhones store use this ideology). If the intent is to sell a software package as a complete deliverable, then the creators should look at what the distribution opportunity really represents before committing to any agreements.

With the introduction of the iPad and Apple’s clear movement to delivering more and more content through the AppStore, the closed system of Apple looks to cut-off content creators who employ a more open and accessible model. At the time of publishing, it looks as though the iPad will have no support for Adobe Flash, a preferred video delivery and casual gaming format. This will force users who want to use this device for entertainment to get almost all of their materials through the AppStore. This is an ironic turn when compared to the iPhone release. Apple had originally announced that there would be no application development for the iPhone, but rather all content and utility would be delivered via a fully-functioning browser on the device. Times have changed.

UPDATE: The second part of this 2 part series: A Case For The iPad (and Closed System Development) Part 2 is available for reading.