We're not paying enough for apps
news.cnet.com
We're not paying enough for apps
1–10 of 121 posts
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#2He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument.
On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it."
An unlimited $49.95 license makes more sense to me. Or a two-device license with upgrades to capture existing users who are willing to make additional upgrades based on sunk costs.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#3He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument. On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it." An unlimi…
Agreed. The author's argument is nullified by this statement: "I still won't pay $50 for a nice-to-have utility"
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#4He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument. On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it." An unlimi…
Agreed. The author's argument is nullified by this statement: "I still won't pay $50 for a nice-to-have utility"
The author has what looks like two mac laptops plus an external monitor. At least one of the macbooks is a macbook pro from the image in the article, so conservatively $3.5K in hardware? And $50 -- less than 1.5% of hardware price -- is too much money! I understand people have been conditioned to think software should be free, but getting hung up over $50 to fix what sounds like a significant hassle seems dumb. The alternative is what -- getting a hardware kvm or physically switching keyboard + monitor connections?
Also fta:
Since arguing with Bartels, I have discovered Teleport, a newer, free,
Mac-only keyboard-and-mouse sharing app. Its existence made me think,
briefly, that I had won the argument. But Teleport has issues (the mouse
gets stuck on target machines) and I've found it, for me, unworkable.
That said, I kind of agree with underwater the vendor misprices the app: $24.90 per computer, when the software is literally useless without two computers, should be $50 per pair + $24.90 for 3rd, 4th, etc.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#5I'm surprised synergy+ wont work in a pure mac environment. I use it every day but my setup is 2 linux machines and a windows machine. If I couldn't use it - I would buy something like what he describes. I would quickly look at any and all options - though $75 for the option described would give me pause. The ability to drag files from machine to machine sounds cool - though right now I get close to the same thing with ssh.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#6This concept points to one of Robert Cialdini's laws of influence: One is far more likely to drive all over around town to save 50 cents in the cost of a $2 pen than spend a few seconds to negotiate 50 cents from a $400 suit, even though the savings are exactly the same. You nickel and dime far less when you perceive the price to be 'not cheap'.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#7He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument. On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it." An unlimi…
I work at a software company. One of my friends there adamantly refuses to pay for software (he is still waiting for a proper unlock for the iPhone 4S). Talking with him about paying for software (yes, reminding him that his salary comes from people paying for software) reminds me of talking with my Republican-to-the-core friend about Global Warming. He just refuses to budge on his "values".
I remember once doing a charity event (training for a triathlon). I thought I had a good relationship with my parent's neighbor. I thought we had interesting conversations about life. He wrote me a tax-deductible check for $10 for my cause. That was the lowest donation out of the many I ended up raising.
Money is weird. It's free speech, in a way. You can express what you want by either paying it or with-holding it.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#8He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument. On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it." An unlimi…
I work at a software company. One of my friends there adamantly refuses to pay for software (he is still waiting for a proper unlock for the iPhone 4S). Talking with him about paying for software (yes, reminding him that his salary comes from people paying for software) reminds me of talking with my Republican-to-the-core friend about Global Warming. He just refuses to budge on his "values". I remember once doing a c…
I don't understand your argument about the $10 check. Sounds like you're looking a gift horse in the mouth.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#9I've had the exact same experience with respect to my iOS app: https://zetabee.com/tip-of-my-tongue/
No matter what price ($0.99 - $9.99) I set, I make the same gross revenue. Reviews tend to be nicer when people buy it for $2.99 - $4.99.
Re: We're not paying enough for apps
#10He says he wants and needs the app, it's worth the money but he still didn't pay? That's not a very convincing argument. On the developer side pricing this kind of consumer software per-device seems like poor marketing. It's unnecessarily reminding every potential customer about incremental cost. It also anchors the price incorrectly: "this software is worth $24.95, but you'll need to pay $49.90 to use it." An unlimi…
yeah this is an interesting point. on one hand it's a dead-simple model to explain and makes sense if you're using 6 computers. on the other hand the majority of users will not go above 3. i would probably say $50 for every 3 devices, only sold in 3-packs. this tiered version would seem a bit more fair and not have much impact on sales/support IMO.