
Apple: Help the best app developers not get "acquihired" - sxates
http://blog.selligy.com/post/27652044305/apple-help-the-best-app-developers-not-get
======
flyosity
This article really bothered me. Sparrow made a ton of money with only a small
handful of people working on the product. It was extremely profitable and
popular. I don't think any developers working there would have problems with
Ramen noodle salaries with all the money that they were making.

When Google comes knocking on your door with eight figures, what do you expect
them to say? How altruistic do you expect someone in that position to really
be? They developed and designed a hit app that everyone loved and the team was
snapped up. They don't owe anyone anything, it was their own decision, and
although they were profitable and could have continued working on their
products into the future, they chose to take a huge payday. This has nothing
to do with Apple, a 30% cut, or them not making enough profit because they
definitely were.

~~~
achompas
These developers worked hard to ship the best Gmail client on iOS or OS X. Why
is everyone angry about their comeuppance?

Software is a business, just like any other. Every project -- even open source
projects!! -- needs money to operate, and many times these projects -- yes,
even open source projects!! -- organize around businesses or foundations. See
Enthought and Continuum for two examples: they exist, among other things, to
support development of scientific computing libraries for Python.

Does this hurt for people who bought Sparrow? Not really. You paid them $10
for their app. Google offered them up to $25 million. You still have a
functioning Sparrow app, and once that stops working you'll return to Mail.app
until a new amazing mail app comes along.

Perspective, people. This is a website focused on tech entrepreneurship, and
you guys are flipping out over a _company sale?_

~~~
jasonlotito
> Why is everyone angry about their comeuppance?

Because, as of now, a tool they've come to rely on is essentially done. It
won't get updated, and should future versions of an OS that it runs on changes
something, there is no promise of a fix.

This could be solved if the code base was released publicly, but that hasn't
happened yet.

> Does this hurt for people who bought Sparrow? Not really. You paid them $10
> for their app.

The people behind Sparrow were very public about features they were working on
that will never get implemented. I know I almost bought Sparrow because of
those public statement. There is also the expectation that buying into an app,
it will continue to get updates so it will continue to work. Now, time
invested into Sparrow is essentially a time bomb. Eventually it will stop
working, and the user will have to switch.

Sparrow is free to take the money. However, how they handled this was a slap
in the face to it's paying customers.

~~~
achompas
_Because, as of now, a tool they've come to rely on is essentially done._

I relied on Spool. They got bought, I was bummed, then I moved on. This isn't
the end of mail apps as we know it.

 _Eventually it will stop working, and the user will have to switch._

To Mail.app. Or Gmail. Or any other number of email clients out there.

I'm sure some customers are disappointed. But at some point it's not about the
customers--it's about you. If you want to sell your company, you're going to
do it no matter what customers want. Customers can't know whether a company is
the "sell now" type a priori, and that sucks, but it's also the nature of
business.

~~~
sunkencity
Yep, this is the reason open source tools are the best to "rely" on. I prefer
open-source code editors, because if I'm gonna take the effort to master their
more advanced features, I want them to stay available. I'm thinking of
switching back to mutt for email.

------
Steko
"This is not a good trend for Apple. Apple is depending on apps like Sparrow
to make the iOS platform shine. Excellent apps like Sparrow cost a lot of
money to build and maintain. Apple should be working hard to ensure
independent app developers can earn even more than top salaries at Google, or
they will all be poached away."

I'm not sure this even follows. Every time we see an iOS hitmaker acquired in
8-10 digit deals it tells the dev community that their golden ticket is to
develop for iOS.

...

"There are two things Apple can do to help developers make more money:

1) Allow developers to charge monthly/annual subscription pricing...

2) Allow developers to track the success of social and internet ad campaigns."

Neither of these ideas would have gotten Sparrow's devs anywhere close to the
money they made by signing up with Google. Sometimes people want to cash out,
we need to stop pretending that is the end of an era of decent email clients.
Sparrow is still there and it works. Other clients will clone and improve on
it.

------
ajross
I hate to say it, but if Sparrow had been picked up by Apple and the same
thing had happened, I really don't think these posts would have been written (
_edit to be fair: though I'm certain a lot of people in the other camp would
have complained about Apple shutting down a popular gmail client_ ). This
Google-is-the-enemy culture in the Mac world continues to amaze me.

~~~
LaSombra
Indeed. It seems they treat every Mac/iOS app as "theirs", like the are the
sole proprietors of the team/software/website and when someone other than
Apple acquires/acquhires them they feel betrayed, as if the developers pledged
allegiance to stay that way forever.

Just take a look at Instagram's wave of complains when they released an
Android app.

EDIT: It looks like, to me, that there's almost some kind jealousy from high
profile bloggers, but that's just me.

~~~
k-mcgrady
I don't think anyone is annoyed they were acquired. I'm annoyed that I paid
for their Mac and iOS apps and now development is discontinued. I also find it
shady that they had a highly publicised half price sale last weekend just
before they shut down development. This isn't a service we pay for month-to-
month. It's something we paid a higher than average price for (based on App
Store prices) and expected continued development. It sets a very bad
precedent.

~~~
drewcrawford
> It's something we paid a higher than average price for (based on App Store
> prices) and expected continued development.

I think the lesson here is that you buy a thing as it is today, not for how it
could be in the future. If you are not happy with a thing as it is, do not buy
it.

See, for example: <http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbuchanan/it-never-gets-better>

~~~
k-mcgrady
That's true but the developers did say they were working on bringing some
features to the app (push notifications for example). I think it's easy for me
and you to understand that they were acquired for their talent but to ordinary
people it just looks like they've bought something, were promised updates, and
they weren't delivered. That reflects badly on all developers and it's
something that's been happening a lot in the last few years. Businesses need
their customers to trust them and acquihires are making the entire community
look bad.

~~~
ryannielsen
_I think it's easy for me and you to understand that they were acquired for
their talent but to ordinary people it just looks like they've bought
something, were promised updates, and they weren't delivered. That reflects
badly on all developers and it's something that's been happening a lot in the
last few years. Businesses need their customers to trust them and acquihires
are making the entire community look bad._

Acquihiring is irrelevant. If anything, what's making the app developer
community look bad are developers making promises they don't or can't keep.

It's simple: if you promise something, deliver it.

Know why Apple doesn't pre-announce features? Because announcements are
promises, and nothing can be promised until it's done. Heck, even being as
careful as they are, they've announced features that never shipped. At my
company, we're extremely wary of pre-announcing anything when we interact with
our users and, when we do, we go to lengths to emphasize that we can't promise
anything until it ships.

To be clear, I'm not accusing Sparrow's team of willfully misleading, lying,
or misrepresenting anything. I'm certain they were confident their promises
were good. Nor do I fault their decision to join Google; I'd probably do the
same given the right compensation and opportunities. This is just a great
example of why promising features is risky and should be avoided – you never
know what the future will bring.

------
robomartin
This is more of a general thought rather than a specific comment on the
article.

It occurred to me that other day that one of the best things Apple could do
for both developers and end-users is to do away with the whole business of
"Lite" apps.

What I mean by this is that iOS users should be able to download and use any
app prior to purchasing it. The developer would determine the trial period.
The developer would also decide if you get to try it on both an iPhone and an
iPad or if you just get to check it out on a single device. The OS would
enforce the mechanism and keep everyone honest.

Once the trial period expires you have to pay for the app or it auto-removes
itself. Of course, you can always go back to the app store and purchase the
app to get it back.

What I would hope this might do is create a situation where one could price
apps at a higher level right from the start. There are lots of apps that are
not even worth $0.99. I've certainly purchased a number of them. At the same
time, there are apps that are grossly under-priced. The problem is that it is
tough to get people to spend money on some of these apps, particularly if
they've been burned by paid apps that are crappy. An OS-enforced trial-period
mechanism might allow developers to do quality apps and charge accordingly. It
would also allow users to really explore and find exactly what they want
without having to waste money.

Having said that, my gut feeling is that Apple makes a ton of money from crap
apps that go for $0.99. People buy them to try them out and, because they are
cheap, don't really get too worked-up about them afterwards.

~~~
pooriaazimi
> _iOS users should be able to download and use any app prior to purchasing
> it._

Apple already does this. But only in Taiwan: "Apple Offering 7-Day Refund
Policy on App Store Apps in Taiwan" (June 2011)

[http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/27/apple-offering-7-day-
ref...](http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/27/apple-offering-7-day-refund-
policy-on-app-store-apps-in-taiwan/)

> _my gut feeling is that Apple makes a ton of money from crap apps that go
> for $0.99_

They barely make a profit on the App Store. They make money selling hardware.
The software is just an appetizer.

------
therandomguy
If you write "Apple: help the...", it appears like that was a statement from
Apple. It should be, "Apple, help the best...". Not about the grammar or
anything, but just to get clarity from the title.

~~~
scoot
> Not about the grammar or anything, but just to get clarity from the title.

If it's about clarity, it's about grammar. No need to apologize.

------
zaptheimpaler
Frankly, this article annoys the hell out of me. Firstly, what trend is he
talking about? He gave me two examples - Sparrow and QuickOffice. That's not a
trend, thats two apps, and if there really is one, then that should've been
made clearer.

Now, assuming this is a recurring trend, it still remains to be seen whether
its one worth dealing with for Apple. Even if this kind of poaching happens,
its likely that its on such a small scale that it makes almost no difference
to the ecosystem of the app store. Basically, the assertion that "Apple is
depending on apps like Sparrow to make the iOS platform shine" is backed by
nothing.

If nothing else, the points about what Apple could do to help devs make more
money are useful. Even in this case, I don't see why apple providing support
for subscription fees is superior to letting the app creators handle that
through online accounts. If the subscription part were handled by Apple, that
just means more of a delay when the app makers want to change the
structure/pricing of the subscription and even less control over the
statistics that they can gather. The point about providing detailed statistics
is great.

As achampas said, acquisitions and talent poaching is simply an economic
reality, and a good one for developers because it gives them better economic
prospects and more freedom in choosing their jobs.

Overall, a personal disappointment over the fact that Sparrow will no longer
be under development is completely acceptable("my favorite email application
on both iOS and Mac OS"), but thats not a good reason to decide that some
trend is bad and that it should be fixed.

------
pwthornton
I'm torn on this: <http://interchangeproject.org/2012/07/20/goodbye-sparrow/>

On one hand, I think this could be great for Gmail and even the wider world of
email by bringing Sparrow's great UI/UX work to a bigger audience and more
platforms and experiences. Gmail's engineers and back-end technology +
Sparrow's UI/UX team seems like a match made in heaven.

On the other hand, this is the end of the fantastic iPhone and Mac apps.
Eventually bugs or incompatibilities with new OSes will end of life them, and
Google does not have a good track record of making good native experiences for
any platform other than Android. I hope that doesn't continue.

The worst thing for me would be if Google took this talent and only improved
the Web experience, while also no longer delivering a good iOS experience.
Good should take the Sparrow iOS app and make it into the official Gmail app
for the platform. They should then take parts of it for the official Android
app. After that, the Mac Sparrow app should become the basis for future Mac
and Windows Gmail apps.

------
LVB
Rude. For as much as the guy loved Sparrow and how it has "added a lot of
value to [his] life" for $9.99, good luck finding a "congratulations" or even
"thank you" in the post. Instead it's a bunch of complaining about how he is
now denied his app, along with a few jabs at the Sparrow team, Google, and
Apple for not fixing it all.

Recommended reading: "Who Moved My Cheese?"

------
pfranz
Yearly subscriptions for a standalone app? I understand the motivation for
continuous income. What's wrong with the old method of releasing a paid 2.0?
Admittedly, it's a bit hairy in the Apple App Store world since you can't have
paid updates, but why not a separate app? That way you can have maintenance
releases in the old version and charge for the new one. Although, the rub is
you can't give discounts for upgrades.

Like it's stated in the article, you pay a fixed price for a song that's
released. Why should my software stop working if I don't want new features?

~~~
marcomonteiro
I think another challenge with this approach would be marketing/awareness.
With app updates, current users are notified that there is a new version. If
you put out a new version separate from the previous one then your existing
user base is unaware that there is a new (and better?) version of XYZ app.
It's just messy. Paid upgrades directly supported by the App Store/OS would be
much better IMO.

------
mladenkovacevic
I don't have access to Sparrow so I'd like to know from people who do use it:
how much better is your email experience because of it?

I ask because I'm sceptical of Sparrow's business model in the first place. I
am most people. I come from a culture of ISP bundled email services (hidden
cost) and Hotmail and Gmail and I basically refuse to pay my own take-home
income to be able to send & receive emails. I'm actually more generous than
most people because I might even pay $3 for an app that will make my email
experience better but what happens when all the people who are into doing that
(not a whole lot of people) have purchased the app? The market will have dried
up. And what then? Monthly subscription? Unless it is bundled with other
services I'm not interested. Upgrade to a "Pro" version of the product? No
thanks.

I think this is the beginning of the end of nice-to-have paid apps. Once a
developer has exhausted his or her market they are forced to find another
brilliant idea. How many brilliant and executable ideas do you have in you?

~~~
malyk
I use the sparrow Mac client and love it. I keep it on the top left of my 27"
iMac screen about and it's roughly 350px wide by half the screen tall. Twitter
sits underneath it at the same width/height. It only has 2 email accounts
linked to it (work and personal) and they are both gmail. It's always on and
always there.

I prefer it to the gmail web app because I can keep it visible and it's a
couple of keyboard shortcuts away to read and send email, can keep me logged
in to both accounts simultaneously without having to "hack" gmail with an
incognito window or two separate browsers, and...it's not a web app. Oh, and
the interface is so much simpler than gmail and I confess to not using labels
or tags or filters or anything "advanced" in gmail so it is perfect for me.

I'm personally not so bothered that they aren't going to continue improving it
because it does everything I need it to do, but for me it was definitely worth
the $10 I paid for it and it fits my workflow/screen layout much much better
than a web app would.

------
stevenwei
_1) Allow developers to charge monthly/annual subscription pricing._

This is possible via IAP, and some apps follow this model, but unfortunately
in a world of $.99 apps users just aren't willing to pay a subscription fee
for a utility app.

 _2) Allow developers to track the success of social and internet ad
campaigns._

I agree that this would be very useful, although again at a price point of $10
or below (minus 30%), all you're going to find out is that your ad campaign
has negative ROI anyway.

Either way, these suggestions do nothing to prevent developers from getting
acquihired if a big company comes along with a big offer - especially if
they've previously raised a round of funding.

Marco has managed to avoid acquisition because he bootstrapped Instapaper
entirely on his own, retains full decision making power, doesn't have
investors pushing him for an exit, and hasn't received an offer he's satisfied
with (yet). But I would say his situation is probably the exception rather
than the norm.

------
dnissley
I just don't understand... what features were people expecting sparrow to add?
That they are now disappointed about not getting anymore? I have yet to hear
anyone who expressed their disappointment about the announcement say anything
specific about what they thought they were losing.

~~~
hobin
They're not even losing anything, _because the app didn't disappear into thin
air_. To be completely honest, I think most of this is simply people being a
little dramatic.

~~~
prodigal_erik
It's perfectly feasible to keep software working indefinitely, but our
industry is nowhere near mature enough to do it. In just a few years this
unmaintained app will become unusable over some gratuitous platform change.
But hey, they knew they weren't getting source when they bought it.

------
eps
Monthly subscriptions would've done zilch for Sparrow. Moreover I don't see
what sort of apps (apps, not just native frontends for the services) could
actually adopt a subscription model and not loose most of their user base.

------
sbtest
The sparrow case aside, there does seem to be limited prospects for sustaining
a business focused on producing high quality apps. There seems to be very few
patterns for success; e.g. acqusition, serialization of a single hit game, or
a store with an overlay requiring the least possible effort to produce.
Obviously exceptions can be found, but the idea that the app environment could
be modified to make other types of businesses more viable likely has some
truth to it.

------
radicaldreamer
"Yet - Google and plenty of other big firms have done a terrible job at
harnessing the talent that young entrepreneurs have."

The biggest blocker is scale.

------
slaven
I just have to add that we've solved the second part of the problem - being
able to measure web marketing - and for free.
[http://blog.tapstream.com/post/27658813582/apple-wont-
stop-a...](http://blog.tapstream.com/post/27658813582/apple-wont-stop-
acquihires-but-maybe-we-can-help)

------
tomflack
To further this goal I'd love to see Apple add paid upgrades. Possibly with a
"can't just be bug fixes, must have significant new features" rule.

This will probably happen when one of the big Apple Mac app store apps needs
an update. Aperture, Logic, Final Cut...

------
suresk
I, too, wish Apple would allow campaign tracking, but there is (or at least,
was at one point) a backdoor way to do this - signup as an affiliate (via
LinkShare) and use that to track conversions.

------
ww520
It's a matter of economic. If the Sparrow devs were paid adequately to stay
independently, they won't agree to be acquired. How much are you willing to
pay an app to make it stayed independent?

------
greghinch
My only takeaway from the Sparrow acquisition is that I wish Apple had done it
and put them in charge of Mail.app. Can't fault them for taking a payout for a
lot of hard work

------
asparagui
re his suggestions:

#1, is doable, but Apple probably will never do it. Why buy the cow when
developer will submit updates for free?

#2, link tracking, will never happen. That's a whole can of worms (privacy
advocates, etc) they don't want to open.

And so the cycle will only continue: developers build up product/skillset to a
certain point, get bought out. The users complain, believing that by spending
a few bucks on an app they should get ponies for life. Sorry, it doesn't work
that way.

~~~
deepinsand
Re #2: it already happens, just in a limited capacity.

A lot of mobile ad networks (if in app, not mobile web) will cookie you with
the UDID before and after you click on a link.

Android lets you pass some referral information on links to the Google Play
market, letting advertisers do this w/o cookies and also on the mobile web.

------
SudarshanP
I hope SublimeText goes opensource soon. Else if they sell out, a lot of
customers will have to become sad. I guess Vi/Emacs are still the best choice
:)

------
guelo
If Apple gave a shit about their developers' businesses they wouldn't be
taking 30% off the top of every transaction.

~~~
suresk
For 30%, you get: order processing, distribution, update management, and some
marketing for your application. The order processing alone is is worth it in
the case of a .99 app - the CC fees alone would usually be more than 30% in
that case, plus you never have to deal with chargebacks.

Of all the problems with the app store, I think the cut that Apple takes is
pretty far down on the list - in fact, I find it downright reasonable.

------
tlogan
Was Sparrow profitable? Does not anybody know that?

------
cooldeal
A few points:

1) The app store pioneered the 99c app. Windows shareware was usually $30
before that(think WinRAR, WinZip). A $5 price is considered outrageous now.

2) Apple does not provide a way for developers to charge for paid upgrades

