The App Store also also needs automatic/forced free updates. It sucks releasing something with a bug, creating an update that fixes it within a month, and still having users complaining about the bug several months later.
The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
41–50 of 125 posts
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you currently do in-app purchases on the Mac App Store? That was my first thought as well.
Yes. You can. However, I would much prefer the world Wil describes over a world with in-app purchases. I would much rather pay the 20$ or whatever to upgrade my software, than be nickel and dimed all over the place.
I agree on the nickel and dimeing, but that is a matter of implementation.
Imagine In-app purchase options for options X, Y, an Z, $0.99 each. I only use X, so I'm only going to buy that. You use all the features though, so the developer provides an In-App option for all three features for $1.99.
Still feel nickel and dimed?
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#43I 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.
Well… I don't know if "willingly" is the right word.
I can very easily imagine a near future where it's not rational for small vendors to opt out of it. You're not wrong; it's just… more complicated than I am capable of articulating at present.
IMO, there are just very real reasons to be weary of the shifting power dynamics in the consumer software space.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#44The App Store also also needs automatic/forced free updates. It sucks releasing something with a bug, creating an update that fixes it within a month, and still having users complaining about the bug several months later.
You could add a nag screen to your app that would show if you have a heartbeat API call that returns that the user is using an outdated version.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#45As 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…
Your comment only makes sense under the argument that when a user purchases an app, the developer is indebted to the user to provide future functionality of any variety. Maintenance should not be expected for free. New features should not be expected for free. How much those two pieces of work cost should be dependent on future expected earnings for the developer and the perceived value to the consumer, not on whethe…
Just different types of thinking I guess.
I justify charging for new features, not maintaining the ones the user already paid for.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#46Earlier 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.
"The alternative is Google, who doesn't release any top-tier paid apps on Android or Chrome Web Store."
Google's business model isn't to release paid apps on their stores. They have many free apps that are downloaded by the 50's of millions and have 4.5-5 stars almost across the board so, yes, they do release top tier apps.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#47As 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…
Your comment only makes sense under the argument that when a user purchases an app, the developer is indebted to the user to provide future functionality of any variety. Maintenance should not be expected for free. New features should not be expected for free. How much those two pieces of work cost should be dependent on future expected earnings for the developer and the perceived value to the consumer, not on whethe…
> Maintenance should not be expected for free.
Users who purchase an app definitely expect there to be maintenance on the app. This is because we know no one tests their app to 100% perfection.
If I knew that the app I get at the time I pay is all I get with no future updates, not even bug fixes, then I'd wait several months to make sure no one else finds any bugs before I ever dare to buy the app. So developers give users the expectation of future updates and fixes to assuage user fears so that they actually buy the 1.0 release and give the developers some money to keep living on.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
"The alternative is Google, who doesn't release any top-tier paid apps on Android or Chrome Web Store." Google's business model isn't to release paid apps on their stores. They have many free apps that are downloaded by the 50's of millions and have 4.5-5 stars almost across the board so, yes, they do release top tier apps.
> Google's business model isn't to release paid apps
This differs from every OS vendor I'm aware of in the past. Just noting.
> they do release top tier apps.
Could you point out to me some of these apps where the alternatives are sold for top-tier prices?
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#49The Mac App Store has been a huge boon to Mac software developers
It has? Whenever I look, I tend to see trivial little apps of the same depth and quality as your typical iOS App Store app. Feels like a ghetto to me.
Re: The Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
#50I feel like the solution isn't paid upgrades but instead monthly/yearly subscription for access in the Mac App Store. The 'appification' of the web is eliminating the idea of major release "versions" of software...it's just an app in consumers' minds and it will always be the same product (with gradual improvement of course). As a result, just charge users for ongoing access to your app and keep them paying by provid…
I had an idea for a subscription service that would give developers a share of the subscription based on how much their app was used compared to other apps. That may work perfectly for the Mac App Store.
So I pay 10 dollars a month to have access to the MAS and I download 3 apps. I use App A 50% of the time, App B 20% of the time and App C 30% of the time. (To keep the math simple lets pretend Apple doesn't take their share). App A's developers would get $5 a month, App B's developers would get $2, while App C's gets $3.
Maybe to handle the Pro apps like Final Cut you could have different subscription tiers?
To users, this would be a simple netflix like subscription model. Developers would have an incentive to make their apps more useful and engaging. (I'm sure it could be abused too)