Android Market to Offer 24-Hour Return Policy on Apps

[johnnyjibbs]

I think a lot of the 'fad app' sales (e.g. iFart mobile) would fall dramatically if Apple implemented such a policy. People often buy apps charged at $1 on a whim and have no complaints. But 2 days later, they may decide that they've had their enjoyment and refund it back after novelty value has worn out. if there was an option to do so However, such people would not be disatisfied not to receive a refund as it was money well spent, just that they would probably never use it again so if a refund was available they would take it...

Separate install and download? Get real...

 

[russellelly]

Surely the solution is simple - allow developers to choose whether or not they want to implement a trial, and for how long. I can see no reason for it to be Android/iTunes/whatever global policy either way.

 

[Eraserhead]

Also, Android is very popular among college groups learning systems and programming for systems.

Does this mean any more than your college offering a course with Android?

 

[DukeofAnkh]

Sorry to walk all over your rant, but Apple ALREADY has this. Nearly every application I buy for my iPhone I purchase from iTunes on my computer, then install at my convenience. As miketcool said, it's nice to be able to keep shopping for apps while something you just bought downloads in the background. The "purchase, wait for install, purchase, wait for install..." method directly from the iPhone just doesn't do it for me. And since I don't have 3G coverage in my area, I rarely purchase any apps while I'm away from home.

When shopping from iPhone, you don't have to wait for it to install, you can go back into the app store and keep browsing and buying... I've had, I think, 3 apps downloading simultaneously on mine. Just saying.

As for buying in iTunes then installing, does the G1 have anything like this? 'Cause, honestly, it's often easier to browse around the store in iTunes than on iPhone. I wouldn't wan to be forced to download stuff from iphone.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Apple needs this!

Apple doesn't need this. It just creates more work for Apple who has to process the refund. Let the market decide what apps are worth the money. Smart developers offer free "lite" versions to test the apps out. That is a smart business decision. Anyone who buys an app untried buys at their own risk, and understands that risk. People need to spend wisely.

 

[question fear]

So, you can try it out, then dump it at no cost to you. Glad I don't have Google stock anymore...

Er...every other smartphone OS has software that offers demos very similar to this. In fact, this past weekend I was trying a chess game for my winmob phone, I had 3 days to play it and then it expired unless I registered. And over several years of owning Palm, Apple and windows mobile devices I've generally only made purchases that were higher than $10.00 if I could demo them first, or see a video of them in action. I've got about $75.00 worth of software on my winmob phone, but tested at least $150.00 worth before weeding out the stuff that looked good but post-demo I realized I didn't need.

And for some software 24 hours isn't enough time. But it's a good start, especially for more expensive products (anything above $5.00 or so) so you aren't gambling on something you end up hating. It probably saves some money and time for google and the developers, since they don't have to deal with someone who buys an app and then realizes it's not what they wanted. They have time to determine that without having to go back and bug someone about how it didn't do what they described, etc.

I'm seriously shocked that people are so hostile to this concept...it's actually incredibly good for the consumer.

 

[CTYankee]

I like the 24 hour trial period, but no upgrades via the store? I'll keep the Apple store's way, thanks!

 

[miketcool]

I'm seriously shocked that people are so hostile to this concept...it's actually incredibly good for the consumer.

We're talking people who KNOW theyre paying way too much for voice and data at AT&T for a phone that won't copy and paste, multi-task, tether, or view all websites. A competitor is offering something the iPhone isn't and its time to whine.

"The Palm Pre has to suck because I paid $499 for this phone."

"Android lets us return Apps that are bad and get our money back, please. What about people who impulsively buy apps that turn out to be bad. I'd hate to get a fair refund!"

"Big deal, your phone has an 8mp camera and a xenon flash. Apple made MY camera."

"Physical keys? Are you crazy, I love relearning typing."

 

[miketcool]

I like the 24 hour trial period, but no upgrades via the store? I'll keep the Apple store's way, thanks!

It really sucks. Whenever an update is available, I get notified immediately in my notifications tab and can download the updates on the spot. Apple has it right, no one should have effortless updates like in Android. We should all go to the store and check for ourselves.

Afterall, It's easy to keep track of hundreds of apps that way. I mean, thats how I do it on my mac at home, surf the web for hours locating updates because its to hard to use software update or the auto update services the apps provide.

 

[overcast]

As is OS X, both Mac and iPhone/iPod Touch versions. It borrows heavily from FreeBSD and Apple actually "donate" code back to the BSD developers to use in the BSD OS.

However, with you all the way on the 'not bashing things you ain't tried' front. The Palm Pre looks bad ass, blatantly manufactured to "assassinate" the iPhone it seems, but looks amazing. Will definitely be trying one when they hit UK shores, probably exclusively to 02 like a certain other phone

So Linux is BSD now ? lol

 

[chewietobbacca]

Does this mean any more than your college offering a course with Android?

Sure, there are courses just doing it for learning, but a lot of it is in support of a professor or TA or whatever that's trying to get something bigger out. It's got a pretty good flexibility too with Linux and the potential hardware choices out there

 

[ewoods]

When shopping from iPhone, you don't have to wait for it to install, you can go back into the app store and keep browsing and buying... I've had, I think, 3 apps downloading simultaneously on mine. Just saying.

Oh I know, but it still takes you away from the app store. It's like if Firefox shut down every time you downloaded something. Sure you could just re-open it and browse back to the page you were on, but how inconvenient would that be?

 

[motti]

absolute control?

What I'm reading between the lines is that the Android Devs must be very sure that there is no way one can "return" an application within 24 hours after having "saved" it on one's mobile.

So that means either there is a control mechanism in the phone which won't let you get to the apps (and which won't be disclosed) or there is an over-the-air control mechanism which checks each app if it has been paid for.

Neither does sound good to me

 

[ChrisA]

Maybe Apple will have to offer this too?

Notice that right after Adobe introduced the 30 day free trial for LightRoom Apple was forced to offer the same 30 day trial for Aperture. Apple does directly respond to direct competition.

 

[sesnir]

Another thought... doesn't a trial period for a 99 cent app seem like overkill? If it was a $20 application or something, then fine, you want to do the research and take the time to make an informed purchase... but a 99 cent app?

Do you need a trial of a candy bar before you put a dollar in the machine?

The only trial system I support is an optional one heh. And while trials may make sense for non-game apps, I don't think they're needed for iphone games since, as a mobile platform, most games are designed to be playable in short bursts (meaning a trial would give away too much of the game in most cases).

 

[ewoods]

Another thought... doesn't a trial period for a 99 cent app seem like overkill? If it was a $20 application or something, then fine, you want to do the research and take the time to make an informed purchase... but a 99 cent app?

I agree. There should at least be a price point at which an app becomes returnable. Otherwise you run into a situation where people will be downloading 99 cent "throw-away" apps when they need something to do while waiting in the doctor's office and then just return them when they're done. I can see it working for the over $10 apps though. I'd love to get one of the commercial dictionaries available for the iPhone but because there are several for $25 or more, I'm just not sure which one to choose. It would be nice to be able to get two or three of them, try them out, and just keep the one I like and return the others. (A decent rating system would also be an acceptable alternative).

 

[macnews]

There are sound economic reasons why Apple should have some sort of system and why they should avoid it all together.

From Apple's point of view, they have created a system of low priced apps - many at the $1.99 or $0.99 range. With a system like this you don't have huge margins for things like returns. This system relies on many sales to make decent returns. It is low where most consumers don't mind the low price and Apple's system can offer access to a large market more incentivized by the device and its capabilities.

Consumers of course would prefer some sort of return policy because buyers remorse is a real consideration. The remorse could be due to poor software, a true reason to return something you purchased. Remorse can also come from just not enjoying what you purchased - no fault of the developer, you just made a bad decision. Then you have remorse from spending of money you didn't have or someone else (like a wife or significant other who isn't as technically inclined as you thus upset you spent more $$$) thinks you shouldn't have spent. Again, not the developers fault.

Developers are probably torn. In some ways offering a return policy will strengthen those who really have worth while programs and could actually allow them to increase what they charge. In effect, a return policy would separate the wheat from the chafe. Consumers may not mind paying more if a safety net exists.

The big question is will the improved returns from a "safety net" return policy out weight the losses from returns? Apple's review system could also back fire on a return policy. Imagine an app gets a ton of returns just because people don't use it and have remorse due to no fault of the app or developer. This could lower sales and drive developers away from creating apps for the iPhone in the long run.

The answer I think lies in better info on part of the developers. They should have a more full featured website. They should also consider making a "lite" version available. Ideally, it would be great if Apple could allow for apps to expire after a certain number of uses or time period of use.

I think Google's policy will backfire just not sure if we will hear much about it. Why? Not as many users and the bulk who are using Andriod phones right now are more technically savvy, thus I think less likely to return apps than say your typical iPhone user. The iPhone has been in the wild for a while now and has much more broader use than Andriod phones so it will take a while before we hear the true outcome.

 

[question fear]

macnews: I think a 24/48 hour demo period would actually be great for apps above a certain price threshhold. Otherwise it becomes quite the gamble, since you won't know until you buy it if it is worth the $10, $15, $20 etc. Especially as docs to go and other productivity tools really start getting rolled out...Dataviz isn't going to sell docs to go as a .99 app. Rather than sell a "lite" version, they get the chance to show someone why the full app is worth whatever they're going to charge.

It's significantly better for the consumer, and could help many of the developers of more expensive applications get the word out without having to sell "lite" versions, etc.

 

[jdk2man]

Two things here:
When I buy software at Best Buy, I dont get to return it in 24hours, ie. games and such. If I paid $60 for a game and dont like it, well, I have another game on my shelf.
Obviously, alot of big games have demos or "movies" of their games but I usually dont get those.
So why should you in the apple store get a refund if you dont like it? Especially if its <$10.

Which brings me to my second thing, .99 cent apps.
I cant think the last time I bought anything for my Windows mobile phone that was under $10. maybe sometimes $9.99, but never under a buck.

It amazes me all the whining iPhone users do over a friggin dollar app. (i happen to be an iPhone user BTW so no flaming). I mean, be happy you have a dollar app. You aint never gonna see that anywhere else!

Whats sad for developers is that the expectation is to sell it for under $10. So now we are dependant on mass sales to make any profit. I cant imagine spend months on a cool app, put it in the store for .99 cents and get a hundred sales and have disappear behind all the fart and bouncing apps.

I cant wait till the devs wake up and start creating killer apps that they sell for $15 - $30. And the day of the dollar app is gone.
But when that happens, you will have to have a trial or demo.

interesting times.

 

[mstream2008]

There is a misunderstanding here.
'Upgrades' are not 'updates'. In Google terms they are different.

The use of the word ‘upgrade’ should mean that Google is not referring to version updates that address bugs, complaints, and new features

link

 

[mstream2008]

1) With a refund system, we'd all get too critical and we'd end up returning most games after we experienced the gimmick.

Why? Actually all online resellers allow and have always been allowing refunds. PalmGear, PocketGear, Handango, MobiHand, softwaremarket.nokia.com - they all allow refunds. Even within a month.
If an app is really useful, several 'refund abusers' will not hurt the sales.
Such a system contributes to creating more serious apps, which are more expensive than 2 or 3 USD.

 

[Mastidon]

Forces a change

As a developer, I think this has to be the single worst idea in modern history. It prevents us from investing more time and effort in an app knowing all good and well that somebody can easily pirate the app now. Google will have no way to track if you ininstalled the app or not. You are now depending on trusting consumers which IMO is simply insane.

And I completely agree with the point, when is the last time ANY retail store such as Best Buy let you return an open game because you didn't like it?

 

[kas23]

We're talking people who KNOW theyre paying way too much for voice and data at AT&T for a phone that won't copy and paste, multi-task, tether, or view all websites. A competitor is offering something the iPhone isn't and its time to whine.

"The Palm Pre has to suck because I paid $499 for this phone."

"Android lets us return Apps that are bad and get our money back, please. What about people who impulsively buy apps that turn out to be bad. I'd hate to get a fair refund!"

"Big deal, your phone has an 8mp camera and a xenon flash. Apple made MY camera."

"Physical keys? Are you crazy, I love relearning typing."

+1

These are the same people who would be outright praising this system if Apple came up with it first. It's kind of pathetic.

 

[kas23]

As a developer, I think this has to be the single worst idea in modern history. It prevents us from investing more time and effort in an app knowing all good and well that somebody can easily pirate the app now. Google will have no way to track if you ininstalled the app or not. You are now depending on trusting consumers which IMO is simply insane.

And I completely agree with the point, when is the last time ANY retail store such as Best Buy let you return an open game because you didn't like it?

You can already pirate iPhone apps via crackulous. As for this statement:

It prevents us from investing more time and effort in an app...

I think it will actually encourage developers to spend more time and effort on their apps because once the constumer finds out he or she downloaded a buggy, unfinished piece of garbage, then it's game over for that app. If a developer truly truly spends time on creating an above average app and the consumer finds it entertaining or useful, then there is nothing to worry about.

 

[mstream2008]

It prevents us from investing more time and effort in an app knowing all good and well that somebody can easily pirate the app now.

When you upload your app to Google Android Market, you can enable Copy Protection feature

Google will have no way to track if you ininstalled the app or not.

That's not the case. Google has control over uninstalling. Google can remotely remove an app.