The problem with push: can small developers afford it?
In March, Apple announced its support for push notification. Ars looks at push and wonders if small- and medium-sized developers can afford this technology. — Push was the big buzz this past March.
Context & Ripple Effects
Apple confirmed push notification support in March 2009, closing the gap left by its decision not to allow background applications on the iPhone — and immediately reframing the cost structure of iPhone software. Ars's April piece takes up the question the announcement created: someone has to run the servers that originate each notification, and that bill does not scale down for a two-person shop.
The timing matters because the App Store was already stratifying. Coverage from late March 2009 noted pirates had cracked roughly 20 percent of the approximately 25,000 paid applications, squeezing indie revenue, while analysts observed the iPhone reshaping the economics of the game software industry toward studios that could sustain ongoing operations. Push adds a recurring infrastructure obligation on top of a one-time download sale.
First-order effects
- Small- and medium-sized developers must now choose between absorbing always-on server costs to keep their apps 'live' or shipping without push and ceding real-time engagement to better-capitalized rivals.
- Studios with existing backend operations can add notification-driven features at marginal cost, turning an Apple platform feature into a moat that widens with scale.
Second-order effects
- App Store competition shifts from feature parity toward operational capacity, pressuring solo developers to either outsource notification infrastructure or accept second-tier visibility for time-sensitive app categories like messaging, news, and games.
- Third-party middleware providers have an opening to sell hosted push services to indies, inserting a new supplier layer between Apple's service and the long tail of the catalog.
Third-order effects
- If recurring backend obligations become table stakes, the App Store structurally favors developers who treat apps as services rather than products, deepening the divide between hobbyist output and professional studios.
- By owning the sole sanctioned delivery channel for notifications, Apple positions itself as the gatekeeper for user attention on the device — a dependency relationship whose pricing and policy terms developers cannot negotiate around.
The trend: Mobile platforms are shifting developer economics from one-time sales toward always-on service operations, concentrating advantage with players who control both the delivery channel and the infrastructure budget.