Salesforce.com to impose massive fee hike for app store security review

Free applications won't be affected by the change, Salesforce.com says

Salesforce.com is raising the cost of an initial security review for paid applications in its AppExchange store from US$300 to $2,700, saying the hike will allow it to deliver the reviews much faster.

"At Salesforce.com, trust is our number one value," Salesforce.com senior vice president Ron Huddleston wrote in an official blog post this week. "The high standards that we set for ourselves, and that our customers absolutely expect, extend to our thriving partner ecosystem through the mandatory enterprise-grade security review for all AppExchange apps."

Beginning Sept. 1, the price hike will kick in for all new paid applications, Huddleston wrote. It will still cost $150 per year to list an application on the AppExchange and those offered free of charge won't be affected by the price change, he added. The fee for applications already in the review queue will remain at $300.

In addition, "all of the revenue from the price change will be reinvested back into the review process," Huddleston said.

Salesforce.com has seen an exponential rise in the number of applications submitted for review, according to Huddleston. "With these changes, we are able to dedicate more resources to the security review process, significantly reducing wait times for partners with apps in security review while also delivering the security and trust our customers expect."

The vendor also plans to give partners "more education around the importance of security and trust, actively promoting security and trust throughout the technical design process, and increased operational support to prevent unnecessary delays during security review," he added.

Apart from the security review fee, Salesforce.com also charges developers either 15 percent or 25 percent of net revenue derived from their applications, depending on the model they choose.

Huddleston's blog post quickly drew replies from posters identifying themselves as Salesforce.com developers.

"As a developer on the cusp of pushing an application to security review, this is a bit disappointing," one wrote. "I'm afraid the up front costs will drive a lot of imaginative people elsewhere. Maybe this is a knee jerk reaction but this is rough."

But some level of fee increase makes sense, as "it would serve as a healthy filter," another poster wrote. "It would seem sensible to have a modest increase of 2x or 3x for 100% native apps and perhaps the 9x increase for hybrid apps and those that connect to non-Salesforce systems."

However, the cost of a security review "should be commensurate with the level of effort," the poster added. "From what I can gather from logs, the security review of our most recent native app took about 3 hours."

Salesforce.com will devote "every dime" collected through the increased fees to security testing resources, Huddleston wrote in a reply. "It's not revenue generating. It's about a better service. Full stop."

There were 1,878 applications listed on the AppExchange website as of Friday, with 56 percent of them paid and the remaining 44 percent offered at no charge.

Forty-one percent were classified as related to sales, followed by 22 percent for IT and administration and smaller numbers for finance, marketing and collaboration.

Partners who build applications for the AppExchange gain access to APIs (application programming interfaces) they can use to connect their products with Salesforce.com's software for CRM (customer relationship management) and other areas.

Chris Kanaracus covers enterprise software and general technology breaking news for The IDG News Service. Chris' email address is Chris_Kanaracus@idg.com

Tags business issuesInternet-based applications and servicesapplicationsSalesforce.comsoftwareinternetbusiness managementcloud computingmobile

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Chris Kanaracus

IDG News Service

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Latest News Articles

Most Popular Articles

Follow Us

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Resources

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?