mobile photography technology, culture and community

Study reveals iPhone photo apps cheaper than Android

This graph, provided by Suite 48 Analytics, shows the percentage of apps within different price brackets in both iOS and Android app markets.

Suite 48 Analytics published a study today revealing that apps on iPhone cost on average 38% less than their Android equivalents. Of the 50 top ranking photo and video apps on iPhone, a majority are priced $0.99, compared to only 34% of Android apps. 

While the initial price of iPhone applications may seem lower, the study points out that many iOS apps like Hipstamatic rely on in-app purchases to generate revenue. That trend may be waning as well—49% of iPhone apps older than one year allow in-app purchases compared to 29% of those released in the last six months.

The study also revealed a few other imaging app trends:

  • 38% of the top ranking photo apps are photo enhancement apps (such filters or effects apps), followed by "combine" apps (such collage apps), and camera apps.
  • Top ranking iPhone photo and video apps have higher user ratings than their Android counterparts.
  • Only 10% of the top ranking photo and video apps are video apps (another 13% are apps that can be used both for photos and videos), indicating that still photography continues to dominate the market.
  • Only 1% of the top ranking photo and video apps are primarily print product ordering apps such as greeting card or photobook apps; 5% have ordering print products as one of their features.
  • 34% of the top grossing photo and video apps on iPad are specially made for iPad, i.e. not offered on iPhone.
  • The top 25 free Android photo or video apps in the U.S. generate 63% of their downloads outside the U.S. The equivalent number on the iPhone is significantly lower, at 51%.


Total comments: 3
Doug Pardee

I suspect that the disparity in user rankings is because iOS hardware is so homogenous. It's pretty much just iPhone4, iPhone4s, iPhone5, and iPad.

The Android market is much more disparate, and a look at the low-ranked comments on any given Android app (photo or otherwise) shows that most of them are on the order of "1 star: Couldn't get it to work on my Fizzle 4709."

From my observations, the popularity of Samsung's Android products contributes to this incompatibility problem. Samsung seems to like to do things in weird ways at times, and apps have to be coded to work not just with "proper" Android implementations but with Samsung as well.

Then there's the cheap stuff. My LG Lucid shares a problem with some of the old Acer smart-phones: due to a bug in, the EXIF dates stored in photo files are always 2002/12/08. The Lucid's Android Camera app gets around that bug, but most third-party apps don't. I now know better than to blame the apps, but most people don't.


The headline should read. "Developers make more on Android apps than IOS Apps" . therefore Developers should develop for Android first to take advantage of that and the bigger user base.

unknown member
By (unknown member) (Jan 31, 2013)

How many iOS devices are there out there now running the same version of iOS, a few? How many different Android devices running how many different version of Android, about a thousand running 8 or 20 different versions of Android? So the developer looks at the ability to profit and says "I can optimize the app for a few iOS devices and reach umpteen million customers. I can optimize the app for about 1,937 Android devices/versions and reach thousand each." Which was is a more efficient path to profit? That's why Apple avoids market segmentation as much as possible. I exaggerate, but you get the point.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
Total comments: 3
About us