Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

blog.wilshipley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 125 posts

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#11

Post by phillmv »

deedubaya wrote: post #6

As a developer with Apps in the MAS, I can see where this makes sense from the developer's perspective. But I think it is a mater of laziness on the dev's part. Let me explain: From a users perspective, this would suck. It is an antiquated system. "I have to pay for an upgrade just so it works on the new OS?" Think of how many times you've had to do this in the past, and how you felt. Apple will act in the best inter…

Can you currently do in-app purchases on the Mac App Store? That was my first thought as well.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#12

Post by killion »

I really like how most applications in the iOS store have been about upgrades. When a new version comes out I get it automatically without paying. Camera+ is a great example.

Because the user base for the platform has been growing the potential install base for your application grows with it. The graph in Wil's post shows that the same application had a huge sales surge just because more people were exposed to it.

If a new version of Delicious Library comes out his existing customers will be very happy with the new features and bring more customers in with them. I bet Apple would even promote the new app and a huge sales spike would happen again.

In my mind the new model isn't how to get the most money from your customers, it's getting the most customers.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#13

Post by phillmv »

I want to say something about sharecropping, but I have a hard time thinking of the appropriate analogy.

It's making me think about the service model as being a superior revenue stream, for-better-or-for-worse. From a user's perspective, the MAS already acts as a service; the subsidy is just being paid for at the developer's end of the scale.

I love the iTunes/MA stores as a marketing and distribution channel, but I hate how heavy handedly Apple behaves with enforcing business models. I think there's an argument to be made that we can avoid the Android marketplace crapware without forcing everyone to become serfs.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#14

Post by markkanof »

seanalltogether wrote: post #7
kennywinker wrote: post #2

The consensus among all the devs I've talked to is that this feature will magically appear the next time Apple does a significant update to one of it's bigger ticket apps... Final Cut, Aperture, Logic, etc. I can't see any way they can get around this problem without adding paid updates. Until then 3rd party developers are high and dry.

Which honestly underscores one of my biggest complaints when working inside Apples ecosystem. I always get the feeling that they're building solutions for themselves first, and developers second, they don't take an agnostic approach to creating a platform. A good example of this is when you look at their UIKit and Appkit frameworks, all of the components were designed to the specific behavior that Apples engineers wa…

That's a fair criticism, but the flip side of it is at least there is one real user of the frameworks they are building, which proves that in at least one situation the provided functionality is useful. Sometimes it seems like frameworks coming out of other big software companies provide what they imagine their customers will want, not what is actually useful when building real applications.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#16

Post by abruzzi »

Something similar that the Mac App store is killing is the competitive crossgrade. It used to be a boon to buy Logic at full price, then be able to buy its competitors like Digital Performer or Cubase for half price. Currently the App Store can't support that.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#17

Post by cjensen »

The Mac software scene has always had lots of indie developers. Let's look at that scene for some facts... The indies generally charge an upgrade fee for "major" versions, and give free upgrades for "minor" updates.

Most, like Wil, do the right thing. Delicious Library hasn't had a major release in years, but it is maintained.

Others (for example, in my experience "DVD Remaster Pro" and Parallels Desktop), clearly abuse the major update system as a revenue source. They release fake major releases with lots of new skin but few features every six months or a year to rake in the dough.

Honestly, it's a mess. But the solution to me is obvious: Angry Birds from Rovio. Rovio didn't just release the thing and stop. They keep adding significant features (the game is probably 10X as large as when I bought it for the iPad). Customers feed back with great reviews. Rovio is rewarded with continuing sales and stays in the top seller lists. Meanwhile, apps like "Plants v. Zombies" are static and drop off the top lists quickly after a quick burst of popularity.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#18

Post by phil »

ianterrell wrote: post #4

It's not a 1-to-1 replacement or panacea, but in app purchases can mitigate the problem—i.e. free update with new features disabled until purchased.

Here's an excellent blog post that explores that option (at the end):

http://shapeof.com/archives/2012/03/brent_simmons_on_deflati...

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#19

Post by metageek »

Splines wrote: post #10
ianterrell wrote: post #4

It's not a 1-to-1 replacement or panacea, but in app purchases can mitigate the problem—i.e. free update with new features disabled until purchased.

I was thinking the same thing, but I don't think that's sustainable, nor is it a good user experience. If you have X choices of IAP features available, are you going to test the 2^(X+1) configurations out there? Probably the best you could do with IAP is offer current version as IAP, and roll your n-1 features back into the main app as a free update on a periodic basis (i.e., want the latest and greatest, buy it now,…

I think ianterrell's idea was that, if you're going from, say, version 2 to version 3, you release version 3 for free, but all the new version 3 features are a single in-app purchase. No nickel and diming.

One result of this approach is that everybody gets bugfixes for free, which users are sure to like better than a model where they have to pay for fixes.

One thing you have to decide is what to do if you then release version 4, and someone never paid for 3. Does he have to pay for 3 and 4 separately, or can he just buy 4 and get the 3 features for free? (I'm pretty sure you don't want to let him buy 4 and not have 3; that's where you start getting configuration explosion.) The latter has precedent in the packaged world, with vendors that would give you the same discount when upgrading from any earlier version.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#20

Post by benihana »

phillmv wrote: post #13

I want to say something about sharecropping, but I have a hard time thinking of the appropriate analogy. It's making me think about the service model as being a superior revenue stream, for-better-or-for-worse. From a user's perspective, the MAS already acts as a service; the subsidy is just being paid for at the developer's end of the scale. I love the iTunes/MA stores as a marketing and distribution channel, but I…

>without forcing everyone to become serfs.

Calling people who willingly cede less than a third of their profits for access to the giant infrastructure and advertising Apple has at their disposal is a bit of hyperbole. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement for both parties, which both parties are free to sever at any time. Doesn't seem like serfdom to me.

Post reply on HN