The other day, Rovio released their popular Angry Birds game on the Android Market. It immediately got 1 million downloads on day one and has over 2 million by now. What’s more intriguing is that this $0.99 app on the iPhone is offered free on Android.
Rovio sold over 6.5 million copies of Angry Birds for iOS in August. At $0.99 and less the 30% cut of Apple, they netted about $4.5 million from the iTunes App Store. That doesn’t include the $4.99 app for the iPad.
After being downloaded 2 million times for Android, Rovio made a total of $0. The full version of Angry Birds for Android is ad-supported. That remains to be seen how much they will eventually make out of it.
For developers, it looks like the iOS makes for a better environment to make money from apps compared to Android. Rovio could have also sold it at $0.99 Android Market but they opted not to. A paid app is certainly much better than an ad-supported app from a developer’s perspective.
Here’s a question — if you’re an App Developer, would you rather make your apps free but ad-supported or go straight for a paid app?
Given Yuga’s argument that paid apps give better returns than ad sponsored apps, then I guess developers who choose to port their apps to the Android Platform in spite of, ACTUALLY love Android more than they do iOS4.
Regardless of the arguments presented, I laud Rovio for their boldness. By releasing the full game for free on Android, they’ve certainly established themselves as a game-changer in the Android field.
Paid app. so you can have a reward, for your puyat and pagiisip ng codes. Also in Apple may direction, compare sa Google.
Twitter: hex614
says:
i downloaded the angry birds for my android motorola phone i think last monday lang.
sana marami pang free apps na lumabas
Twitter: killrfillr
says:
Paid apps is definitely more rewarding for developers. Nakakapagod mag-code tapos wala ka man lang makukuha in return.
I agree with you.
unless you can provide figures to support that a paid app always earns better than an ad-supported one, your logic is flawed. you should also take into consideration that for popular apps, an ad-supported version can be more profitable as it continues to generate earnings from a single user compared to a paid one with a fixed price.
sakin cguro my free version din tapos if the user want to get the full version they have to pay.
Twitter: Jhayclazziquai
says:
Aggghh…..Apple brainwashed everyone….
Twitter: budgetdeficit
says:
@kill3rfill3r
“Paid apps is definitely more rewarding for developers. Nakakapagod mag-code tapos wala ka man lang makukuha in return.”
afaik meron ding developers sa Apple appstore na di kumita yung paid apps nila.
Paid Apps.
So if I did a great job making a high-quality game with great graphics and addictive gameplay. Then I have to pay my bills and save money for a decent car. People are willing to reward your quality game by voting with their wallet. Then I’ll go and sell my game!
$0.99 is so affordable, it’s the price of 2 Combo Meals!
Developers: Do Not pretend you code for free, especially if your day job is programming-related and you are given a monthly salary.
Reason you would give an app for free: You are already paid well, OR you do it for fun, OR you do it because it has ads.
Rule of business here: Do something that does Not feel like work, yet you earn from it, and people are willing to pay you for it.
If you give software for free, and then feel bitter for other software that earn money, that’s a sign you wanted to earn money for your software in the first place.
So, if you give software for free, be sure you do it wholeheartedly.
Twitter: kline_zeus
says:
@thenonhacker
I need to know where you get Php20 Combo meals
Anyway, there has to be a renumeration of some sort with anything you do. Either for pleasure or pain. Ads or paid. Knowledgeable programmers definitely should have a business plan with their apps.
@Ryan: Syempre, sa JolliJeep!!!
[...] Where are the Ruby on Rails developers? From as far back as last year, I … Read more on YugaTechNew Relic Raises C Round of Funding to Transform Application Management for the Cloud and Datacenter [...]
not too sure bout this but, based on the picture above, the software is a `lite` version – not the full version which is likely to be paid
it doesnt really matter if one chooses the paid or the free with ap version
in developing an ap or any software think first of the quality, if you make a good ap, no matter what path you take, the money will come in
in thinking of getting paid first usually results to crappy aps and people losing trust in you as a developer thus no profit
Twitter: sylv3rblade
says:
I go both.
One paid version without ads and One free version with ads.
moderate your greed…
mr. bogus: That depends on your definition of “greed”. I mean, I hope you’re not confusing “Business” and “Earning Money” with “Greed”.
Peace!
Does anybody here actually develop apps for either side? Android or iOS? Android allows you to develop your apps FREE… post your apps to the Google Market for FREE… earn through Ads for FREE (or sell your app for a small premium price and Google gets a cut)
Let’s compare that to iOS.
Develop your app ONLY if you have a MAC OS (Definitely NOT FREE)
Post your app on the AppStore for a PRICE (so how can anyone offer anything FREE?; You pay Apple for posting your application to the AppStore)
Anything you earn, Apple gets a cut.
So… as a developer (and I am one) I’m developing for the …. Android
cause for me (and this is my opinion) Apple sucks (worse than M$). And you have the chance to earn passive income 
GOD BLESS!
OT: I am surprised to see comments such as “Apple is worse than Microsoft”.
I thought it was just me who thinks there are worse companies than Microsoft.
GOOGLE STREET VIEW SCANDAL
To me, Google is worse that Microsoft, especially when it comes to privacy. Microsoft’s telemetry data are opt-in, while Google has a “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy of collecting people’s information.
“Google says Street View cars picked up e-mails, passwords; ‘we failed badly’”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/10/google-privacy-street-view.html
GOOGLE BUZZ SCANDAL
I was a fan of Google before, but event after event I noticed a pattern where Google try to sneak though loopholes to get your privacy violated.
“WARNING: Google Buzz Has A Huge Privacy Flaw”
http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-google-buzz-has-a-huge-privacy-flaw-2010-2
GOOGLE CHROME SCANDAL
As a Firefox user I wouldn’t switch to Google Chrome that easily. First reason is plugins, 2nd reason is Google Chrome is another example of sneak-in “Google owns your data” game.
“Be sure to read Chrome’s fine print”
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10030522-56.html?tag=mncol;txt
BROWSER FLAWS
And don’t indulge on Internet Explorer having flaws, because Chrome, Safari, and even my favorite browser Firefox has their own security flaws, too. The difference will be on the response of companies fixing those flaws. Apple is bad in this area.
“Google Chrome privacy worse than you think”
http://coderrr.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/google-chrome-privacy-worse-than-you-think/
Wow, and your point is?
As a developer, the only thing I care about are two things
1) Lowest royalty fees possible when producing and selling products
2) Ease of access to SDK and low cost of acquisition of said SDK
3) Availability of method to sell/disperse said product with the widest coverage at the lowest cost
Your links are laughable and are really OT… but get this… I can Google/Bing/Yahoo search for same dirt for M$, crApple or even goOGLE and you get the same dirt, the same crap, the same violations (but placed in different scenarios and eras in time). I just like G00gle since they don’t charge you for the same crap, the same dirt and the same violations done to you. Unlike the other two companies who do the same things and actually make you pay through your nose to for them to do it to you.
OT: Thus I marked it as OT.
Oh yeah, the price to pay for Google is your privacy.
It’s naive to think the Google is not one of the “evil companies”.
You can only indulge about Google as a fan, but as you already said you can research all about Google’s behaviors as the monopoly of search.