Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

QquegChristian

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2010
472
544
What bottom of the barrel nonsense. Free Trials are not key to successful business models.

Super expensive pro level software sells just fine without free trials. What a joke.
Seriously? Super expensive pro level software all HAVE free trials! Even plugins to use inside other pieces of software all have free trials.

I downloaded a free trial of a plugin for Adobe InDesign two days ago. Then I paid $50 to buy it. Just a plugin to make find/replace macros to speed up my workflow within the program. There are several options out there for this. I tested them and paid for the best even though one option was free.
 

Nausicaa

macrumors 6502a
Jan 11, 2007
607
283
I think Apple should do something like introduce a new tier of developer for the app store that has access to more ways to sell their product and maybe even more accessibility to the hardware itself. I don't know what mechanism they could use to decide who is allowed to enroll, but it could be an interesting compromise.

Maybe an annual license fee that reduces Apple's share of sales to 20%, as well as the additional features.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moby1977

Dranix

macrumors 65816
Feb 26, 2011
1,063
543
left the forum
We don't need typical bloated "pro" apps on modern systems. Let this junk die. A combination of smaller, cheaper and better optimized for the task tools is often the way better solution.

And as a side node - It would help the whole world if people would stop regarding "pro" as something to be elitist about. You are not an elite because you use something in your job.
 

navaira

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2015
3,914
5,138
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Perhaps I do not understand something but what would stop a dev from launching a free app with limited functionality, then adding the full functionality as in-app purchase, and later an upgrade also as in-app purchase? Does Apple not allow that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arran

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,486
43,410
Perhaps I do not understand something but what would stop a dev from launching a free app with limited functionality, then adding the full functionality as in-app purchase, and later an upgrade also as in-app purchase? Does Apple not allow that?
Yep, there are "lite" apps available now on the app store, so in a sense this is the demo version.
 

Dranix

macrumors 65816
Feb 26, 2011
1,063
543
left the forum
Perhaps I do not understand something but what would stop a dev from launching a free app with limited functionality, then adding the full functionality as in-app purchase, and later an upgrade also as in-app purchase? Does Apple not allow that?

That is my plan for my apps. Cheap baseapp and instead of payed updates additional features as InApp.
 

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,107
9,297
I'd say it's people's expectations what they expected from an iPad pro.

Had it run a version of OS X , I'm sure the devs would have lots of innovative idea how to get the most out of it, now it's kind of back to the drawing board of how they can invest and return a profit from the AppStore where people don't want to pay more than $4.99 for an app.

Apple might want to look into establishing an AppStore pro, I myself find it easier to find apps I need via Google first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShaunAFC3

QquegChristian

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2010
472
544
Yep, there are "lite" apps available now on the app store, so in a sense this is the demo version.

I think the issue devs are having with "lite" apps is that they can't offer the full functionality for a limited time. They can't expire. Plus they require a second set of developing, updating, etc. Plus there is an issue with the user's data created in the trial period carrying over to the full app.

It's very strange that the App Store hasn't worked this out yet. Lite apps are inelegant. Between IAPs, monthly billing options, and iTunes movie rentals having expirations, I don't see why iOS can't handle free trials... All the tools are there. Maybe then we'd see more great games too.

If a developer said that they'd created an app that fully replaced Photoshop, they could easily charge $299 for it. The problem is that Photoshop users would be VERY skeptical that it could actually replace things and want to run it through its paces. Creating a lite version wouldn't help, as they'd have to restrict a ton of the features that a Photoshop user would be skeptical about. They could say it has color profiles and soft proofing, but if we can't test how accurate it is, we will be weary that they pulled it off well. It's been decades that no one has knocked Adobe off its perch, so you've really got to prove that you have the goods. When somebody does that, they could sell 50,000 copies at $300 in a short period of time and make 15 million dollars to start. The existence of that app would drive iPad Pro sales, and drive more sales of that app. The cash influx would allow the developer to improve the app more frequently. 2 years from now they could have a huge update for $99.

It doesn't sound consumer friendly, but neither are IAPs. It may just be the only way to get truly desktop quality pro apps in the store. I pay $600 a year for Adobe and their iOS apps suck. Real programs that allow you to make real money within them will cost you.
 

jb1280

macrumors 6502a
Jan 13, 2009
869
255
It would be good for the platform, Apple, and customers for them to simply allow free trials of software and full refunds to customers if they don't like the software. It would also help if there was better curation of the App Store for good apps that solve the problems for people that are priced according.

This would also stop giving small developers a scapegoat for not developing for the platform. I found the article to be a bit of a fluff piece and simply an airing of grievances for a few select companies. A profile could be written about the OmniGroup and you would get a very different story. One that embraced iOS, stands behind the utility of their products by offering refunds on iOS purchases, and offers a pretty robust roadmap and support.

If there is no business case for a company to not develop for a particular platform, there should be no problem about that. However, the grievances that these developers put forward I think are some pretty weak tea.

A lot of the issues that developers are facing are also self-inflicted due to poor business decisions.
1. I kind of hope Paper gets hosed in the market. What are the 8-9 different platforms they are testing on? What is the ROI on localization in 13 different languages for a drawing app?
2. As cool as it was to buy Pixelmator for iOS for under $5, it was a really awful business move. There will be those who argue that the move was necessary to gain traction, but developers have been devaluing their own work as much as Apple has.

As a consumer and someone who uses iOS devices for work, I look for tools from companies that solve the problems that I have, develop universal applications where appropriate, support versions of software, sells new paid versions every 24 months or so, and is willing to take money from me, which means actually creating tools. I'll buy a $200 project management application every two years because it creates value for me. I'm not going to buy a $20 calendar, because there really isn't a market for one, at least one that creates $20 more value than the default.

Final thought - software shouldn't be immune to the downward pricing of computing over time. $20 calendar or note apps and $1000+ software suites made sense when an average computer cost more than the highest end iMac sold today. For those really expensive suites, software as a service makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko

sracer

macrumors G4
Apr 9, 2010
10,288
13,021
where hip is spoken
It would be good for the platform, Apple, and customers for them to simply allow free trials of software and full refunds to customers if they don't like the software. It would also help if there was better curation of the App Store for good apps that solve the problems for people that are priced according.
If Apple isn't doing it and it would benefit customers and developers then it's because it wouldn't benefit Apple.
 

Piggie

macrumors G3
Original poster
Feb 23, 2010
9,117
4,016
How about a separate "Pro" store?
Different rules, and different pricing structure in there?

People who want to 1 dollar joke apps, games, and novelty stuff won't be looking in there, but those who wish to start creating content and a more prepared to pay for higher quality software will know the place to look for it, without wading thru a ton of cheap/toy apps all mixed in with them.

Could that work ?

You have a "Pro" machine/Hardware, so why not a "Pro" store that you can choose to look in for these more higher end apps?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Codeseven and Arran

KPOM

macrumors P6
Oct 23, 2010
18,031
7,872
To me the biggest problem with the iPad Pro IS the lack of Apple pencils!!! WTF Apple, did you maybe forget to make any or what?:mad:
It's not that they forgot, it's that Apple hasn't lost its perfectionist mentality that it picked up from Steve Jobs and Jony Ive. The original iPhone barely shipped on time because they were making last minute changes. But back then it took 74 days to sell a million. It probably took a week to sell that many iPad Pros. The Apple Pencil is an engineering marvel, but like many brand new processes it seems Apple has struggled with yield. From Apple's shipment times, it seems that they are confident they will have them worked out in a few weeks.

That said, I agree that Apple needs to open up iOS for iPad a bit more, particularly for the iPad Pro. I'm guessing it has MacBook-like margins, so Apple shouldn't be afraid of the iPad cannibalizing the MacBook or MacBook Air sales. Developers can be more creative with their pricing (30-day subscriptions for a nominal fee, for instance), but Apple can do things, too.

Totally saw this coming on post on these forums. I'm not a developer. But I saw this fork in the road. I do not think subscriptions are going to be welcomed for this device. While I love my iPP I don't see paying OSX prices without a true file system and multiple windows (more than two). Maybe an iPP app will floor me and I'll eat my words and vote with my dollars. But most iOS apps seems single purpose or limited to a specific function. So, they seem functionally a la carte. So I'm not wanting to spend big bucks on limited functionality. Is this a limitation of iOS? I don't know.

I disagree. I'm looking forward to Office 365 with the inking capacity once Microsoft releases it. It could make the iPad Pro my preferred PowerPoint platform.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Codeseven

Arran

macrumors 601
Mar 7, 2008
4,848
3,781
Atlanta, USA
I almost feel like there needs to be a separate "Pro" store with a different feel to it.
How can you have 99 cent fart apps next to say $1000 for a CAD/3D Editing app ?

Would anyone ever pay $1000 or more for an iOS app ?

Good points. The Pro has outgrown the "dollar store" app mentality that clicked with 99 cent ringtone buyers.

A pro store, with everything priced over (say) $70 would set a different tone. And since only app buyers could post reviews, there'd be far fewer low-quality, time-wasting reviews.
 

Capt T

macrumors 6502a
Mar 20, 2010
968
250
Hope you all noted that is a MSN (Microsoft news) article

Not saying there are not some developer issues, but as to the trials, they have ways to do that with in app purchases. Also I agree Apple needs to do a better job helping promote business class apps. The App Store is not the best for finding some of those apps while searching either.
 

KPOM

macrumors P6
Oct 23, 2010
18,031
7,872
30% isn't a problem, charge what you want plus 30%, not too difficult. It's not free for any software developer to sell their goods on any of the closed ecosystems, whether console or mobile. Apple, like Sony and Microsoft have built the platforms and control them for both their own benefit and for the customers protection. You pay a publisher, distributor and stores to sell your wares why should it be any different for these guys?

Time limited trials should be something that Apple offers and I believe that they should offer a Pro Apps marketplace.
What's wrong with a 10-day subscription for $5? Someone considering paying $99 for an app would really balk at a small fee for a short subscription?
 

macfacts

macrumors 601
Oct 7, 2012
4,723
5,553
Cybertron
Not necessarily. This is what Microsoft is doing with Office on the iPP. Even with bad reviews, people will still download to try (for free), and buy if they want it.

Microsoft already has brand presence, people already know about ms office so those negative reviews do nothing. Negative reviews for indie developers trying to make pro apps means their app will never be on any top100 list or be found by users.
 

macguy360

macrumors 6502a
Feb 23, 2011
829
468
Interested to get your views on this new story:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/tech...-app-store-problem/ar-BBneqN6?ocid=spartandhp

Reading this story, I can totally understand what the devs are saying.
Apple's Rules, and way of doing things, is, if anything the largest problem when it comes to making the iPad Pro the device Apple want it to be.

Some interesting points raised in this article and would be interested to get your views?

IMO Apple has let greed trump innovation in how it has allowed developers to build up a freemium market in the IOS app store.

When the iPad first came out, very few apps were free. Developers built apps with the idea of selling them at a $0.99 to $9.99 cost range typically and Apple took 30% of sales. As the iPad models increased performance, new Apps and games took advantage of the new hardware and we saw games like Infinity Blade and open world RPG's being built that were amazing.

Then developers realized they could make a game that was built similar in concept to a slot machine at a casino using cost/reward concepts that have been researched in medical psychology and proven to invoke addiction as a way of making money from micro transactions. These developers used these proven methods of addiction gaming to sell in app purchase items for upwards of $99 significantly higher than the cost of a typical console/pc game. People have spent billions of dollars on these "free" games to the extent that we now have television commercials during the Super Bowl advertising these "free" games.

Not only has Apple allowed this insanity, but we as consumers have allowed it. Parents across the world are letting their children play with apps that are in essence, the same thing as letting their children sit down at a slot machine in a casino. If you haven't seen what gambling addiction looks like, go to a casino and watch people sitting at slot machines for hours on end. Look at their faces and you may realize they look quite similar in expression to the faces of children playing "free" games on IOS. Then ask yourself, should you be supporting something like this?
 

Ludatyk

macrumors 603
May 27, 2012
5,368
4,355
Texas
The biggest problem is the "Pro" that's attached to it. And it doesn't make it any better that it's a 1k product to begin with.

I'm just tired of the constant articles of it not being able to replace a laptop or that you can't get "real" work done with it. It's as if bloggers or tech writers have already written off.

I'm perfectly fine with it... Im well aware of the direction  is planning on taking with the iPP. iOS will eventually mature into a well suitable OS... The hardware is there, just a matter of time before the OS matches it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShaunAFC3

thinayr

macrumors newbie
Nov 19, 2015
14
99
Fort Collins, CO
Great article / thread: A few thoughts:

1) As a creative professional, I will pay for software that allows me to do what I need to do. That doesn't mean "fringe" developers can expect me to pay $30-100+ for mediocre apps, but I would expect my purchasing to mirror what I actually buy on my Mac... full adobe CC, FCPX, a handful of audio and video editing apps, etc. Again, I WILL pay the same Mac App Store prices if it's something I can truly use to create what I need.

2) I'm even MORE inclined to spend money on such apps right now because I truly desire the iPad Pro to become a pro-level platform that does what I need. Anyone who can be fast enough to fill that void is going to get my $$

3) The lack of free trials and direct support is irksome, but workable. I look at other truly creative apps on iOS (Loopy is a great example). I downloaded the free version, loved it, and bought the "Pro" version. Using the software to actually create music, I became a member of Loopy's forum community and built a direct connection to the developer thought their website. I think it can be done.

4) The tightness of the App Store might actually be in the favor of devs, as it's significantly harder to pirate software without jailbreaking. (every time I jailbreak I just end up back in the box through the convenience of upgrades). Now that I'm older and can actually afford to spend a modest amount on software, I do BUY the apps I use professionally... for the first X years of my life, I pirated everything, especially if it was a quick fix to solve a problem. With the App Store model, devs can be assured that MOST of the people who need to use their software will have to pay to get it on their devices.

Just my .02 : )
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShaunAFC3

QquegChristian

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2010
472
544
IMO Apple has let greed trump innovation in how it has allowed developers to build up a freemium market in the IOS app store.

When the iPad first came out, very few apps were free. Developers built apps with the idea of selling them at a $0.99 to $9.99 cost range typically and Apple took 30% of sales. As the iPad models increased performance, new Apps and games took advantage of the new hardware and we saw games like Infinity Blade and open world RPG's being built that were amazing.

Then developers realized they could make a game that was built similar in concept to a slot machine at a casino using cost/reward concepts that have been researched in medical psychology and proven to invoke addiction as a way of making money from micro transactions. These developers used these proven methods of addiction gaming to sell in app purchase items for upwards of $99 significantly higher than the cost of a typical console/pc game. People have spent billions of dollars on these "free" games to the extent that we now have television commercials during the Super Bowl advertising these "free" games.

Not only has Apple allowed this insanity, but we as consumers have allowed it. Parents across the world are letting their children play with apps that are in essence, the same thing as letting their children sit down at a slot machine in a casino. If you haven't seen what gambling addiction looks like, go to a casino and watch people sitting at slot machines for hours on end. Look at their faces and you may realize they look quite similar in expression to the faces of children playing "free" games on IOS. Then ask yourself, should you be supporting something like this?

You'll probably have people argue with you, but you are SPOT on.

The funny thing that is even more sad to me is that my nephews have parental controls on all their devices to not spend on IAPs... So I see them staring like zombies at countdown clocks and stuff. It may be MORE sad to see a kid just waiting that stuff out. Staring at NOTHING.

I used to play all kinds of games on my iPhone, but I don't bother looking for new games anymore. It's just a wasteland.
 

macguy360

macrumors 6502a
Feb 23, 2011
829
468
You'll probably have people argue with you, but you are SPOT on.

The funny thing that is even more sad to me is that my nephews have parental controls on all their devices to not spend on IAPs... So I see them staring like zombies at countdown clocks and stuff. It may be MORE sad to see a kid just waiting that stuff out. Staring at NOTHING.

I used to play all kinds of games on my iPhone, but I don't bother looking for new games anymore. It's just a wasteland.

Yeah, Im with you on that. I actually spent more on the App store when there were full good quality games. Now I rarely visit the App store. I've played a couple of the freemium games, but at this point I am morally opposed to them and I don't want to contribute to downloads, thus boosting the ranking of the game in the app store.

You can actually go through and identify the different psychological tricks they do in the games. I'll use clash of clans as an example...

1. In psychology, researchers have learned that providing rewards at even distribution intervals of time decreases desire to want to continue seeking the rewards. The trick is to provide a reward at a random time in order to not be able to determine when the next reward will be given. Thus in clash of clans, they have the Gems being rewarded from trees, bushes, and the occasional gem chest. They randomly appear and when you tap on them you are rewarded with a "Ding" noise similar to winning a casino slot machine. You also get a little animation type flash on the screen if you are looking at the bush, tree, or chest box when it pops the gems out. This leads me to #2.

2. The first couple hours of playing a freemium game, you are being programmed to link reward with visual and auditory stimulation... think Pavlov's dog. The game starts out giving you free gems, a pretty decent amount if I remember correctly like 300-500. The game then walks you through the "tutorial" where you are shown "programmed" how to spend gems for speeding up actions/acquiring items in the game. Each time you are shown "programmed" in the tutorial, there is an auditory and visual stimulation so that your brain links those sounds and animations with the reward of progressing in the game. Additionally, the game provides reinforcement through the use of bushes, trees, and gem chests that give you the auditory and visual stimulus each time reinforcing the idea of using gems for rewards.

3. As the game progresses, it continues to get harder to get the reward. You were originally programmed to expect the reward quickly in the first couple levels of the game. Then as you gain levels, it takes longer and longer. This is how they get you to spend real money on the game. You spend money to get the reward to be back to being quick like it originally was.

4. Connected to #2, the game offers free gems to get started. Casinos do the same thing. If you have ever been to a casino, they usually give money for "free play" when you first sign up for an account. They also randomly send you mail with coupons for "free play". The idea of providing free gems at the beginning of the game comes from this same thought process of getting you to partake in the activities.

5. Lastly, the game provides a multiplayer aspect giving you a sense of community. When you go to a casino, ever notice how the seats are next to each other at the slot machines or how you always see people playing at table games like craps with big groups of people and very rarely is there anyone ever playing on their own at a craps table or other table games. There is a psychological aspect of gambling in which a sense of community is created. You are doing it with other people and they are practically friends even though they are complete strangers and could care less about you. Creating a sense of community draws people in to play "freemium" games because it makes you feel more attached to the game. You have to go back and get on often so that you can support your friends in the game.

Each of those previously mentioned points is straight out of psychology research. Gambling addiction is real and it affects a lot of people. It isn't because someone is prone to becoming addicted, but because researchers have identified how our brains work and how we react from rewards. When we allow our children to play freemium games, we are essentially letting them sit down at a slot machine or letting them gamble at a craps table. The effect that this could have on their brains and personalities is still unknown because research on gambling psychology hasn't been conducted on children yet as far as I know.
 

GrindedDown

macrumors 6502a
Jun 4, 2009
715
263
Las Vegas
Yeah, Im with you on that. I actually spent more on the App store when there were full good quality games. Now I rarely visit the App store. I've played a couple of the freemium games, but at this point I am morally opposed to them and I don't want to contribute to downloads, thus boosting the ranking of the game in the app store.

You can actually go through and identify the different psychological tricks they do in the games. I'll use clash of clans as an example...

1. In psychology, researchers have learned that providing rewards at even distribution intervals of time decreases desire to want to continue seeking the rewards. The trick is to provide a reward at a random time in order to not be able to determine when the next reward will be given. Thus in clash of clans, they have the Gems being rewarded from trees, bushes, and the occasional gem chest. They randomly appear and when you tap on them you are rewarded with a "Ding" noise similar to winning a casino slot machine. You also get a little animation type flash on the screen if you are looking at the bush, tree, or chest box when it pops the gems out. This leads me to #2.

2. The first couple hours of playing a freemium game, you are being programmed to link reward with visual and auditory stimulation... think Pavlov's dog. The game starts out giving you free gems, a pretty decent amount if I remember correctly like 300-500. The game then walks you through the "tutorial" where you are shown "programmed" how to spend gems for speeding up actions/acquiring items in the game. Each time you are shown "programmed" in the tutorial, there is an auditory and visual stimulation so that your brain links those sounds and animations with the reward of progressing in the game. Additionally, the game provides reinforcement through the use of bushes, trees, and gem chests that give you the auditory and visual stimulus each time reinforcing the idea of using gems for rewards.

3. As the game progresses, it continues to get harder to get the reward. You were originally programmed to expect the reward quickly in the first couple levels of the game. Then as you gain levels, it takes longer and longer. This is how they get you to spend real money on the game. You spend money to get the reward to be back to being quick like it originally was.

4. Connected to #2, the game offers free gems to get started. Casinos do the same thing. If you have ever been to a casino, they usually give money for "free play" when you first sign up for an account. They also randomly send you mail with coupons for "free play". The idea of providing free gems at the beginning of the game comes from this same thought process of getting you to partake in the activities.

5. Lastly, the game provides a multiplayer aspect giving you a sense of community. When you go to a casino, ever notice how the seats are next to each other at the slot machines or how you always see people playing at table games like craps with big groups of people and very rarely is there anyone ever playing on their own at a craps table or other table games. There is a psychological aspect of gambling in which a sense of community is created. You are doing it with other people and they are practically friends even though they are complete strangers and could care less about you. Creating a sense of community draws people in to play "freemium" games because it makes you feel more attached to the game. You have to go back and get on often so that you can support your friends in the game.

Each of those previously mentioned points is straight out of psychology research. Gambling addiction is real and it affects a lot of people. It isn't because someone is prone to becoming addicted, but because researchers have identified how our brains work and how we react from rewards. When we allow our children to play freemium games, we are essentially letting them sit down at a slot machine or letting them gamble at a craps table. The effect that this could have on their brains and personalities is still unknown because research on gambling psychology hasn't been conducted on children yet as far as I know.

This post just blew my mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arran

QquegChristian

macrumors 6502
Jun 24, 2010
472
544
This post just blew my mind.
Not to fully derail the thread, but yes, there have been lots of articles about this. Some free to play games in the top 100 are just actual slot machine games! All the fun of a real slot machine with zero chance of a return.

The thing that shocks me is that REAL slot machines in casinos haven't evolved to be closer to games like Candy Crush. They look more like games now, but they all still operate in the same way they always have. I was just reading an article that the comedian Gallagher (yes, the watermelon guy) owns a patent for the gamification of slot machines. This was years ago he was pitching that.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.