The demise of native coded apps

Posted by MadaboutDana
Dec 9, 2020 at 09:21 AM

Very interesting, Martin – this confirms what I’ve thought about IT markets (specifically consumer-focused ones!).

Apple has managed to corral the high-end markets for itself, more or less (and the new M1-based hardware is going to accelerate that drive, I suspect).

It’s a pity, then, that so much iOS software was sold so cheaply in the early days. Although you do get some fascinating outriders (Omni Group, I’m looking at you!).

A number of Windows developers flourished back in the 1990s/2000s by producing modestly (but not cheaply) priced apps that worked extremely well. There are still a few of these developers around (Incomedia with Website X5, for example – a very popular product; the various note-taking apps already widely discussed on this forum).

But tracking software prices over the years is a study in the vagaries of market demand (or unexpected lack of it, in some segments).

Martin Pilkington wrote:
tightbeam wrote:
>There isn’t anything more frustrating than a wonderful app that is
>>restricted just to Mac users or just to Windows users. Cross-platform
>>apps let developers maximize their customer base, so who *wouldn’t*
>code
>>for everyone? A slight performance degradation seems like a worthwhile
>>tradeoff. Nothing I do is so important that it must be done in a
>>microsecond versus a millisecond.
> >If you would like an answer from a developer who has just released a
>native Mac app (Coppice), it’s actually pretty simple: I want to write
>the best app possible. I *could* open myself up to the Windows market,
>or even Linux, by using something like Electron, but that would lead to
>a lower quality product. Each platform has opinions as to the look and
>feel of apps, and their respective native toolkits provide a lot of that
>for free. You get none of that with a cross-platform toolkit. Some allow
>you to get pretty close but only with additional work on the part of
>developers, which is work not spent on features or other bug fixes. Some
>users can put up with the non-native feel, but do I as a developer want
>to build an app people merely “put up with”? Not really.
> >As for why the Mac, it’s partly because that’s what I use and know how
>to develop for. It also arguably provides the best native toolkit of any
>platform, which is why the Mac generally has a higher proportion of
>native apps.
> >There’s also a question of just how much each platform is worth. For
>example, while Apple’s platforms are significantly smaller in market
>share than their competitors, they often have a massively
>disproportionate market share of “people willing to buy 3rd party
>software”. This is why a company can build a Mac app and be successful,
>but port it to Windows and have it make less money, despite Windows way
>more marketshare. It’s also why so many apps appear on iOS before
>Android (if they ever appear on Android). The costs of developing for
>each platform can be the same, but the relative financial importance of
>platforms can vary.
> >That said, it’s worth noting that this can depend a lot on the type of
>software. If you’re building server software then you’ll get way more
>success on Linux or Windows. Business software (especially for large
>businesses) will likely have lots of success on Windows, and for games
>you almost have to go for Windows. Meanwhile software for individuals,
>smaller businesses, or creative users often does way better on the Mac.
> >Hopefully gives at least one view as to some of the reasons why
>developers go native.