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

We're not paying enough for apps

news.cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 121 posts

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#31

Post by Tmmrn »

I would be more interested in his reasons to abandon Synergy.

>But all good things come to an end. Especially the free ones.

Why? For the past few years my desktop has been running very successfully on Open Source software. (With some blobs like flash that are just needed for legacy compatibility) I don't see that changing in the near or far future.

> I have had to stop using Synergy. Setting up this free, open-source app is a black art,

I remember when I was trying synergy. I opened the manual and thought "that is quite complicated" and quickly found quicksynergy (there are probably other equally fit GUIs). It's a bit counter intuitive what IPs to put where but after that it's just putting an IP or hostname in on each PC and click a button... That's much less "black magic" and didn't take me more than 5 minutes...

> and when CBS replaced my PC with a MacBook, giving me two-Mac setup (which, I admit, is extravagant), I couldn't get Synergy to work anymore.

So what was the error?

Of course that was not the point of the article. But he spent so much time explaining how he wouldn't buy the other application because it was too expensive I wondered why he didn't take that time to research why synergy didn't work or what GUI to use to make setting it up easy.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#32

Post by cageface »

But I still wasn't ready to part with my $50 for this little utility when the price point in my head was $0. And when there's so much great stuff in the App Store for $4.99.

This is exactly the problem with the app store. People have an idea in their heads of what an app is worth, no matter how much work it took to produce it. Price is completely decoupled from cost and from sales volume. This is like saying a Lamborghini and a Kia should both cost $9999 because they're cars.

Ultimately this is going to lead to a ton of low quality junk in the market. A quick perusal of the top 50 selling apps suggests we're already there.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#33

Post by justincormack »

suresk wrote: post #24

I find it a little odd that he spent so much time haggling over a $50 tool that is obviously providing a lot of value to him. The response from the vendor (about it being hard to make money to pay his developers when selling a fairly niche tool) resonates with me, though. I built a fairly specific-use tool on the side last year and started selling it on the Mac App Store. I found that prices weren't very elastic, and…

I am more inclined to think the customers may be right and this app is not worth $50 to them. There are competing free products, but also competing work flows like using Dropbox to move documents between your two laptops depending why you are using two. The guy has clearly thought about this a fair amount.

There is apparent oversupply of app developers who seem to think they will make money but the evidence is very few will build sustainable businesses while the rest just help Apple out by adding diversity.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#34

Post by jwr »

suresk wrote: post #24

I find it a little odd that he spent so much time haggling over a $50 tool that is obviously providing a lot of value to him. The response from the vendor (about it being hard to make money to pay his developers when selling a fairly niche tool) resonates with me, though. I built a fairly specific-use tool on the side last year and started selling it on the Mac App Store. I found that prices weren't very elastic, and…

I find it more than a little odd. I've just bought the app (two computers), because it's something I've been looking for for a long time. I'd pay just for the shared clipboard feature. I can't count the number of times I had to copy a URL into a file on Dropbox, or Notational Velocity, just to be able to paste it into an E-mail being written on my laptop right next to my main machine.

Spending $50 saves me a lot of time and frustration. Also, it is much cheaper than writing the software myself (which I was seriously considering). I'm more than happy to pay that.

I also hope that because the software is well priced, the company won't feel a need to diverge into multiple half-baked products. I've seen that happen to Ironic Software (Yep, and afterwards Leap, Deep, Fresh), I'm seeing it happen to IcyBlaze (iDocument, and then Sparkbox). I'd much rather see a company develop ONE well-supported and polished app than diverge into multiple bug-ridden ones.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#35

Post by bartelsmedia »

Tmmrn wrote: post #31

I would be more interested in his reasons to abandon Synergy. >But all good things come to an end. Especially the free ones. Why? For the past few years my desktop has been running very successfully on Open Source software. (With some blobs like flash that are just needed for legacy compatibility) I don't see that changing in the near or far future. > I have had to stop using Synergy. Setting up this free, open-sourc…

> I would be more interested in his reasons to abandon Synergy.

Please check out http://www.keyboard-and-mouse-sharing.com/synergy-alternativ... for more info.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#36

Post by bartelsmedia »

jwr wrote: post #34
suresk wrote: post #24

I find it a little odd that he spent so much time haggling over a $50 tool that is obviously providing a lot of value to him. The response from the vendor (about it being hard to make money to pay his developers when selling a fairly niche tool) resonates with me, though. I built a fairly specific-use tool on the side last year and started selling it on the Mac App Store. I found that prices weren't very elastic, and…

I find it more than a little odd. I've just bought the app (two computers), because it's something I've been looking for for a long time. I'd pay just for the shared clipboard feature. I can't count the number of times I had to copy a URL into a file on Dropbox, or Notational Velocity, just to be able to paste it into an E-mail being written on my laptop right next to my main machine. Spending $50 saves me a lot of t…

Thank you for your support.

> I also hope that [..] the company won't feel a need to diverge into multiple half-baked products.

You bet. Since 1998, we have a small set of well-maintained software products. ShareMouse is not a quick shot. We are here for the long run.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#37

Post by erichocean »

gigantor wrote: post #6

This 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'.

Negotiating 50 cents off a $400 suit just makes you look like a dick. So while the "savings" might be the same, the personal cost is a lot higher on the $400 suit.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#38

Post by sceptre »

chime wrote: post #9

I'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.

"There may be a psychological effect at work where people who pay more are actually more invested in their purchase and less likely to slam it in public." Apple has known it for a long time...

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#39

Post by ericb »

wallflower wrote: post #11
pagekalisedown wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your argument about the $10 check. Sounds like you're looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Going completely OT here - but let me explain the complete context of why $10 was not a generous donation: The event was done through Team-in-Training. Team-in-Training is an organization that raises funds for cancer research. To raise funds, they help individuals train for an endurance event like a marathon/triathlon. Over 80% have never done an endurance event before. The training is fairly intense and lasts three…

> As for my parent's neighbor with the $10 check, he didn't care for the cause (even though he is in that field) or, more importantly, for me and what I was trying to overcome/conquer/do/accomplish. It hurt but I eventually got over it.

Or he just donated to something else. Or he had no idea what "normal" is. Or he had his mortgage payment coming up, or the medical treatments for his wife's condition. Or he thinks that giving shouldn't be artificially tied to high quotas and sporting events.

Or, it could be that he's picked up on your judgmental and self centered attitude and didn't feel good about giving the money to you. To ask people for money for a specific cause, and use that to judge them about their feelings toward you, and their overall generosity is obnoxious on several levels.

Re: We're not paying enough for apps

#40

Post by jacquesm »

wallflower wrote: post #11
pagekalisedown wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your argument about the $10 check. Sounds like you're looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Going completely OT here - but let me explain the complete context of why $10 was not a generous donation: The event was done through Team-in-Training. Team-in-Training is an organization that raises funds for cancer research. To raise funds, they help individuals train for an endurance event like a marathon/triathlon. Over 80% have never done an endurance event before. The training is fairly intense and lasts three…

The decision to sign up for an obligation of $4000 was yours, not your neighbors. He gave you $10, which is $10 more than he was obliged to give you.

Just like in any MLM scheme your ability to 'work' the people close to you is what allowed you to sign up for the program in the first place. It is almost as though you felt that your neighbor was obliged to give you a certain amount based on your perception of your relationship, his station in life and his ability to give in combination with helping you, but in fact you misdirected him by asking him to give (indirectly) to a charity.

Chances are that if you had asked him for a contribution to you instead of to a charity that you would have ended up with more than the $10, and how you would have spent that money would have been up to you.

I don't think you can draw the conclusion that he didn't care for you, you simply don't get to call how other people spend their money, and you aren't entitled to a say in that.

The best thing you can say to someone when they give you free money is 'thank you'. To go on a public forum and berate them for giving too little is really not the nicest response.

Suggestion: talk it over with your parent's neighbor and see what his side of the story is, rather than complaining about him to strangers. It is possible that you will come away with another 'life changing experience', one that teaches you about yourself and your relationships with other people.

Post reply on HN