10 Most Lucrative iPhone Apps–for Apple : Apple’s 8th Most Profitable App: Texas Hold’em

By Anthony Celeste , published on June 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM
Picture 9 of 13
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Texas Hold’em is number 10 in Apple’s all-time top 20 paid downloads list, but in terms of income, we feel that it has jumped ahead of two 99 cent apps (Pocket Guitar and Flick Fishing) due mainly to Texas Hold’em's relatively high price of $4.99. Texas Hold’em has been a hit for Apple since its release on July 7, 2008 and it held the number six position in Apple’s list of most downloaded paid apps of 2008.

Texas Hold’em holds a unique place in the App Store: it’s a top-selling app that Apple developed. Apple only offers two more self-developed apps: the free Remote (which controls iTunes and AppleTV, using your iPhone as the remote control) and the 99 cent Keynote Remote (which controls Keynote, essentially Apple’s version of Power Point, using the iPhone as a remote control).     

When introducing Texas Hold’em, Apple made the decision to sell one of its own apps in the App Store, which (in theory, at least) exists for third-party vendors. We find this choice somewhat disturbing. Granted, Texas Hold’em adds impressive graphics and interactivity to a virtual poker game, but isn’t Apple making enough money with the iPhone without asking users to pay for this app?  This reminds us of Apple’s decision to include the free iMovie video editor on every new Mac, while charging users $29.99 for QuickTime Pro. iMovie specifically blocks importing anything other than digital video from a camcorder. Thus, Mac users require QuickTime Pro for the everyday activity of converting a standard camera video (or a downloaded or cell phone video) to another format. Regardless, Apple as an app developer doesn't have to split its revenue with the company's iTunes division, unlike every other paid app developer, so Apple makes lots of profit on this game.        

Sponsored links
Comments
Anonymous 06/10/2009 9:08 PM
Hide
-4+

Maybe people don't realize the pure amount of drivel created on the internet nowadays. Having a $99 dollar fee to put up any app, including free ones, limits the selection to those created by people with the earnestness to create something remotely worthwhile. If anybody could create an app and put it up for free, there would be no way for apple to sort through the shear number of crap programs. It would turn the app store into youtube; a few thousand videos worth watching in a sea of millions of idiots with camera phones.

CR0W M@GN3T 06/10/2009 9:12 PM
Hide
-0+

aggie11 :
Maybe people don't realize the pure amount of drivel created on the internet nowadays. Having a $99 dollar fee to put up any app, including free ones, limits the selection to those created by people with the earnestness to create something remotely worthwhile. If anybody could create an app and put it up for free, there would be no way for apple to sort through the shear number of crap programs. It would turn the app store into youtube; a few thousand videos worth watching in a sea of millions of idiots with camera phones.



Nicely said. The fee is definitely important as quality control for the app store.

theuerkorn 06/10/2009 9:41 PM
Hide
-0+

aggie11 :
Having a $99 dollar fee to put up any app, including free ones, limits the selection to those created by people with the earnestness to create something remotely worthwhile.


Agree.

TCeleste 06/11/2009 12:45 PM
Hide
-1+

"Maybe people don't realize the pure amount of drivel created on the internet..."

Rest assured that I'm painfully aware of the drivel. But it's important to keep in mind that Apple has a process in place for screening apps (and yes, that process needs some fine tuning).

My opinion is that this process should be what weeds out the useful from the drivel. To me, the $99 fee just weeds out lower income developers, and those willing to create low price or free apps.

anamaniac 06/11/2009 8:47 AM
Hide
--1+

Wow...

All of those seem like a complete waste of time...

Jailbreak that damned thing already...
Free homebrew FTW!

td854 06/11/2009 11:48 AM
Hide
-0+

TCeleste :
To me, the $99 fee just weeds out lower income developers, and those willing to create low price or free apps.



Seems to me like a "developer" would have to be pretty low budget (living in a cardboard box?) to not be able to afford a measily $99.

DjEaZy 06/11/2009 3:06 PM
Hide
-0+

... with most of the games is like '90 are back... almost the same resolution and 3D graphics... there would be interesting to see such games as NFS 1 & 2, Terminal Velocity, Duke Nukem 3D and stuff like that ported to the iPhone...

TCeleste 06/12/2009 10:05 PM
Hide
--1+

td854 :
Seems to me like a "developer" would have to be pretty low budget (living in a cardboard box?) to not be able to afford a measily $99.



Actually, living in a college dorm, or just being laid off, may be sufficient for $99 to be a lot of cash. I think there's a bit of a double standard at play here.

I know it's not possible because of the licensing, but what would happen if Linus Torvalds suddenly demanded $99 from everyone wanting to develop a Linux application? The entire open source community would be up in arms (and rightfully so, in my opinion).

What about if Bill Gates demanded $99 from every Windows developer? He'd be accused (again, rightfully so) of abusing his position to pilfer $99 from every Windows developer.

But Steve Jobs gets a free ride, no questions asked, like it's some kind of corporate entitlement.

Primus462 06/12/2009 10:51 PM
Hide
-0+

I just checked out Enigmo in the app store and it is listed as $2.99. This article is only 2 days old and claims the app costs $0.99. What gives?

TCeleste 06/13/2009 12:34 PM
Hide
-0+

Apparently a change in price. App developers are permitted to put apps on sale, and to change prices.

Steven Bancroft 06/15/2009 4:25 PM
Hide
-0+

Primus462 :
I just checked out Enigmo in the app store and it is listed as $2.99. This article is only 2 days old and claims the app costs $0.99. What gives?



Oh please. This is an app STORE, and its not like Apple started charging the fee overnight. This has been in effect since day one. I do not develop apps but I agree with the first couple statements about needing the fee to weed out the useless Youtube like environment. If you cannot round up the cash, it's simply not for you. If you are really talented and cannot afford it, I'm sure someone would be willing to invest in you. Comparing Steve Jobs to Linus and Bill in that scenario is not at all accurate.

Steven Bancroft 06/15/2009 4:33 PM
Hide
-0+

TCeleste :
Actually, living in a college dorm, or just being laid off, may be sufficient for $99 to be a lot of cash. I think there's a bit of a double standard at play here.I know it's not possible because of the licensing, but what would happen if Linus Torvalds suddenly demanded $99 from everyone wanting to develop a Linux application? The entire open source community would be up in arms (and rightfully so, in my opinion). What about if Bill Gates demanded $99 from every Windows developer? He'd be accused (again, rightfully so) of abusing his position to pilfer $99 from every Windows developer. But Steve Jobs gets a free ride, no questions asked, like it's some kind of corporate entitlement.



Sorry, this is what I meant to quote.

Sponsored links