The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades • Hacker News Board

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#121

Post by gurkendoktor » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 1:26 PM UTC

Can't we just hop over to a subscription model altogether, now that we pretty much have the infrastructure?

It would lower up-front costs. I bet piracy would go down too. It would give developers an incentive to keep even small apps bug-free. It would make more sense for apps like Instapaper where the server needs to keep running. Everyone would get exactly what they pay for, and nobody would have to keep using an older version for artificial (financial) reasons.

The only downside I can see is that people cannot decide to stick with an older version because they actually like it better. But that's something that Apple customers are probably used to (e.g. surprise 10.6 users, no OTA contacts & calender sync for you anymore!). And for Apple, it may decrease vendor lock-in because people have no sunk costs anymore.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#122

Post by falcolas » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 3:16 PM UTC

msbarnett wrote: post #102

falcolas wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet the new purchaser ends up spending more under this model than they would under a paid upgrades model. New user pays $40 for features X, Y, and Z. User of a previous version, containing X and Y, would pay $10 for the new version. Under the in-app purchase model, both customers have to pay $50 for X, Y and Z, which provides a high barrier to entry, a poor customer experience, and poor reviews for the app. There…

I'm not following. Say the app is originally $10. A year later you push out the "2013 feature pack" for $10 more. Existing customer pays $10 ($20 total over lifetime) for upgrade. New user pays $20 at once ($10 base + 2013 pack). A year passes, 2014 pack comes out, existing user pays $10 ($30 over lifetime), new user pays $20 ($10 base + 2014 pack (which subsumed all features of the 2013 pack)). The existing user is…

Except, the new user isn't paying $20 at once, they pay $10 to the app store to buy the app, then they have to pay $10 at a later point inside the app to enable new features.

Same problem. The new user has a poor experience, and essentially pays twice for features that were bundled in the app to begin with.

Of course, at the $10 price point for initial purchases and upgrades, it's simpler to just release a separate app.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#123

Post by msg » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 5:56 PM UTC

I'm sorry I didn't read the whole thread and I know this is late.

Why not provide two versions of Delicious Library Inf? One costs $20. It only works/installs correctly if you have the original app. The other one costs $40. It is a standalone app. Make a minor bugfix update that says "hey" to the users of Delicious Library 2, and link to the expansion. Sell both.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#124

Post by warmfuzzykitten » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:55 PM UTC

"I've looked at clouds from both sides now..." I've been an app developer and an app buyer. As a developer, of course I want to get more money from my installed base. They're easy to find; marketing costs are essentially zero. As a buyer, I've always looked at "upgrades" as a scam to suck more money out of my pocket for a product I've already paid for. I hate it more when I'm paying to get bugs fixed - bugs as a money-making opportunity! - and even more if I'm blackmailed into upgrading by the threat of dropping support for my existing product, which, of course, will stop working about 10 seconds later. I have some software that seems to be "upgraded" for a "discounted price" every two or three months!

How about you stop treating software like fresh fruit delivered with a worm in it and start treating it like, say, new cars? Sell it with a warranty. Allow me to extend the warranty, up to a point, for a reasonable price that covers maintenance only. If I have a reason to buy a shiny, new 2013 BozoWare, and the reason isn't that the 2012 model is already broken, I just may. Some people buy new cars every year; everybody buys a new one sometime.

Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades

#125

Post by keeperofdakeys » Thu, Mar 29, 2012, 4:59 AM UTC

MatthewPhillips wrote: post #30

seanalltogether wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I can't think of a better endorsement of a platform than the creators investing real development dollars into using it. The alternative is Google, who doesn't release any top-tier paid apps on Android or Chrome Web Store. Or host anything important on Apps Engine.

Your first point isn't really valid, they are an ad company, paid apps don't fit their business model. Providing a phone OS, ad service, and free apps that interact with their core services however are.

The second is more interesting though. They actually do use it quite a bit. Its the kind of thing they use internally, and the employees use for personal projects or when they need something technical for an external presentation. Also, app engine is probably built to serve a different purpose to their other services.