The iPhone is rocking the world of GPS
Looks like the iPhone is about to shake up the world of GPS software.
In a Forbes article published today, some existing GPS developers sound a bit shrill when complaining about the iPhone. For instance, they dislike that you will be able to use your purchased iPhone applications on multiple devices:
A customer could have three iPhones synched to the same iTunes account, and thus would only be paying for one copy of the application, but using it on three devices.
— Steve Andler, vice president of marketing, Networks In Motion, quoted in Forbes, July 4, 2008
Translation: “Apple’s model conflicts with our business plan, which is to charge our customers several times for the same software.”
The writer, Elizabeth Woyke, explains that some developers dislike that iTunes doesn’t support a subscription model:
ITunes also presents billing challenges for developers, which typically charge users a monthly or daily access fee for mapping services. The firms say their billing system keeps users’ data current and helps underwrite the expense of constantly updating maps.
— Forbes, July 4, 2008
Translation: “Apple’s model conflicts with our business plan, which is to prevent the user from owning software they’ve already paid for.” (The bit about “keeps users’ data current” is particularly nice.)
And they dislike that Apple prevents iPhone applications from running in the background:
Citysense Chief Executive and Co-Founder Greg Skibiski says plotting people’s movements enables the service to detect which clubs, restaurants and bars are drawing crowds at a particular time. To preserve battery life, however, the iPhone allows only one application to be open at a time, which means Citysense’s app likely won’t achieve its full potential on the device.
Translation: “Apple’s concern for the iPhone’s battery life and customer experience conflicts with our software, which was designed with the assumption that background applications would be supported and that our customers value our software more than battery life.” (Question: if the software is that highly valued by the customers, why can’t they simply leave the application open and running?)
There are also understandable concerns about Apple’s own software plans. A TomTom spokeswoman says they’re taking a wait-and-see approach.
Might be a long wait.
Sounds like GPS developers need to Think Different.
First, the multiple copies is questionable. Personally, I have one phone. Because it uses FairPlay, it means that someone else who is synced to my account will get the software but as soon as they “unsync”, the software won’t work. Just like music.
Heck, if you’re worried about this, charge twice as much.
The subscription for maps is legitimate. Again, there’s no way for the store to handle this at the time of purchase. Of course, the solution is to have users register for subscriptions when they first launch the application.
The background application issue is legitimate. In answer to your question, the reason is because the phone then becomes something which is only usable for one thing at a time.
While I’m not convinced of how useful CitySense is–no offense to the concept, it’s just not my style–take a typical driving example: my users want audible directions. “Turn right onto Main Street in 100 feet,” is a nice warning to receive as you’re driving to your destination. In fact, I probably would want it to interrupt my phone call. Of course, once I get a phone call, I stop getting directions. Or if I check my calendar. Or if I decide to change playlists. Or do anything other than leave my application running on the phone.
I generally agree with your position, but I think the complaint about subscriptions is entirely legitimate and I’m surprised at your mockery of it.
Acquiring and maintaining map and routing data is extremely resource intensive. Licensing the data is, accordingly, expensive, and updates to the data simply can’t be free for the lifetime of the product.
Moreover, any internet service required to support the application costs real money. If you can’t charge subscription rates, then the only other business model is subsidization of services via advertising. Seeing as advertising dollars come out of the consumer’s pocket (at pennies on the dollar, considering the services rendered), I don’t see a forced move to the advertising business model as a net societal gain.