Apple Announces Major App Store Changes Including New Subscription Terms and Search Ads

[lsatterfield]

I think as long as the right apps utilize the subscription service, it'll be fine. Apps that were always already a subscription make sense. But even then, how does one go about a free trial for an app that needs payment for a subscription upfront? Don't in-app purchases seem like a better method in the long run? I'm not going to pay $5 for an app that I won't use past the first week--if at all. Although, if they are able to work out subscription payments, maybe they can work out a way to do a designated trial period, with a deadline for cancellation?

 

[Paradoxally]

I will ditch any app that switches to a compulsory subscription model. There is no justification to be paying $5 a year for software that receives a couple of updates a year (if even that) and the rest are just "bug fixes and performance improvements".

Free and "one-time pay" apps will continue to exist and I will happily choose those which very likely will get the job done as well as subscription based apps.

 

[addicted44]

I don't know how people can support this. A subscription model continues to devalue apps, leading to low quality ones, instead of allow high quality apps to exist, like they do in the Mac ecosystem.

What Apple really needed to do, is what indie devs have been asking them since 2008. Upgrade pricing. Better ways to keep in touch with their customers. And Free trials.

Those are the steps Apple needs to take to even try and bring the iOS app ecosystem to the high quality levels the Mac one existed at prior to iOS.

 

[patrickbarnes]

Ads in the App Store is a travesty.

30% plus they're going to bury your app unless you pay more for ads? Bye bye all indie devs.

 

[SMIDG3T]

Some people are getting carried away with these ads. You'll see ONE ad per search. And think about it, as someone has already mentioned, aren't all the apps on the App Store ads? They want us to download their own apps.

 

[Zwhaler]

What a bunch of wasted space in the ad. The top and bottom bezels are much larger than they need to be. Hmm.....

 

[840quadra]

Zero interest in subscribing to software on my iOS devices. Other than that, the other changes will be welcomed.

 

[justin216]

The important thing to remember about the idea of the subscription, as I read through these replies -- if you aren't seeing the value in what they're delivering, you can unsubscribe easily.

Do you feel it's really sustainable to charge $0.99 for an app one-time, but then expect that developer to update for new iOS features, screen sizes, bug-fixes, etc. when they're not really being paid on the app in an on-going fashion? What happens today is they discontinue "Version 1" and create a brand-new app "Version 2" and charge you again, which means you get a mess of legacy apps that aren't ever updated. Tapatalk comes to mind, as does Tweetbot. Seems like Prompt did this as well.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say "Hey, Dev XYZ, I love your work and want to keep using this great app, here's $0.99/yr to make sure you keep the lights on and keep improving it!". If the app is terrible or not updated at a pace you feel is acceptable, then you unsubscribe. Let your money do the talking if they're not receptive to user feedback.

 

[avanpelt]

Instead of opening up apps to subscription model pricing, I wish Apple would make it possible for developers to charge upgrade pricing for major new releases. That would be a win-win for everyone, I think.

Developers would still get the ongoing revenue they seek but they would have to earn it. If a developer doesn't update a subscription-based app that I enjoy using for long period of time, I have two options -- delete an app I enjoy or keep giving the developer money in exchange for no additional work on their part.

If a developer does a half-assed upgrade and wants more money for the upgrade, I would like to have the option to refuse the upgrade and to continue using the version I currently have (so long as iOS updates don't break it). On the flip side, if they put out a great upgrade, I would be happy to throw some money their way in exchange for the upgrade.

That said, the current system that allows developers to charge for major upgrades (i.e. pull the previous version from the App Store and make a completely new listing in the App Store for the new version) is clearly broken. I'm just not sure giving developers an option to go to a subscription model is the best solution for end-users.

 

[Glassed Silver]

Boy oh boy... where do I start?

What a load of crap. Guess soon it's time to thrift through all those apps I have installed and start kicking them out as soon as I see the first apps hitting me with a paywall.

And ads as part of a discoverability effort? Fair to both big players and indies? When ad space is auctioned?
Does the author of this article really understand what he says when he sings the praise of Schiller?

Now I love me some Schiller during Keynotes any day of the week, mostly Tuesdays of course, but good God those are some horrible suggestions here.
No word about how this could hurt the customer? Come on, critical reading man!

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[patrickbarnes]

A maximum of ONE ad will be displayed at a time and you won't see any if you're under the age of 13.

Yes, so who do you think is going to take that one spot? An indie dev or a massive corporation with unlimited budget?

All this does is make the App Store even less appealing to smaller developers.

 

[sinsin07]

The important thing to remember about the idea of the subscription, as I read through these replies -- if you aren't seeing the value in what they're delivering, you can unsubscribe easily.

Do you feel it's really sustainable to charge $0.99 for an app one-time, but then expect that developer to update for new iOS features when they're not really being paid on the app in an on-going fashion? What happens today is they discontinue "Version 1" and create a brand-new app "Version 2" and charge you again.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say "Hey, Dev XYZ, I love your work and want to keep using this great app, here's $0.99/yr to make sure you keep the lights on and keep improving it!". If the app is terrible or not updated at a pace you feel is acceptable, then you unsubscribe. Let your money do the talking if they're not receptive to user feedback.

It depends on how many $0.99 one is willing to spend on different app subscriptions, if the subscriptions are even that low of a price.

Owning a smartphone could get significantly more expensive with app subscriptions.

What it really boils down to with subscriptions is "Do I really need this app?".

A person may be willing to pay a onetime fee, but not so willing to subscribe.

 

[coolfactor]

How about making changes to the App Store so that there aren't so many outages?

Are you a developer that loses revenue whenever there's an outage? Do you think that Apple is sitting around doing nothing about their data centre infrastructure?

 

[CaTOAGU]

So long as the subscription rates are kept reasonable, this should be OK, the devil will as always be in the detail. I'm not in general overly keen on subscription models but something needs to change, it's not reasonable to expect developers to support their apps in perpetuity especially for the ones that cost below $5. If apps such as those started charging the same amount or slightly less per yea, that would probably be fair. What wouldn't be fair would be if they, for example, started charging $2 per month, increasing the overall cost by $19. Those kind of moves, en mass would be a serious problem, in my opinion. Time will tell, but, whatever happens, the status quo is probably not sustainable.

 

[rorschach]

You mean how right now how you pay $1.99 and get all of the updates for that app for FREE FOR LIFE? That's a ridiculous model that was never long-term sustainable. At least this way with a subscription developers will be motivated to update their apps often to keep user's engaged.

Everything is going the subscription route: Office, Photoshop, heck even Windows is a "service" now.

Version 1, version 2, version 3.0... those are things of the past.

What happens when the app's developers go out of business, or quit, or decide they no longer want to support the app? The app will stop working and I will no longer be able to use it.

If I buy an app outright, I can use it as long as it continues to function with my current OS. (And even then, I can always choose not to update the OS if I really rely on the app.) I am not bound to the whims of the developers or their financial situation.

There's also the scenario of developers removing features from apps in "updates". Maybe I don't want to update the app because I don't like changes that have been made. App subscriptions will force me to "update" whether I want to or not.

There are far more negatives with app subscriptions than positives.

Upgrade pricing is the solution here.

 

[SMIDG3T]

Yes, so who do you think is going to take that one spot? An indie dev or a massive corporation with unlimited budget?

All this does is make the App Store even less appealing to smaller developers.

Apart from the business model changing? All developers will get 85% after one year. The ad service is based on an auction too.

 

[_mdavenport]

Phil Schiller is one of Apple's best execs, can't say I feel the same about Cue

Agree. Cue needs to get it together.

 

[now i see it]

App developers want revenue streams. Ok.
Users want to pay a couple bucks at most and be done with it.

It's war.

 

[avanpelt]

The important thing to remember about the idea of the subscription, as I read through these replies -- if you aren't seeing the value in what they're delivering, you can unsubscribe easily.

The way I read it, it sounds like if an app goes to the subscription model and you're not seeing the value because the developer isn't releasing updates or whatever the case may be, you can stop paying; but in order to stop paying, you must delete the app. I'm reading into things there but that's how it sounds to me. I think allowing developers to charge upgrade pricing would have been a far, far better solution.

 

[bdavis89]

Ultimately this is just about generating more revenue for Apple.

 

[Zirel]

Apple working on yet more ways to help screw over the customer and get their 30 pieces, [EDIT] I meant 30 Percent...

And by that, you mean they are changing from 30% to 15%.

RTFA.

 

[SMIDG3T]

Ultimately this is just about generating more revenue for Apple.

Yeah because after one year, they get less, 15% from 30%.

 

[Zirel]

Getting tired of ads and subscriptions for everything these days.

Would you prefer paying the money upfront just to find out that the App sucks, or that you just need it for a couple of days, so they are pirating it anyway?

 

[Paradoxally]

Ultimately this is just about generating more revenue for Apple.

Exactly.

Apple first, users second, developers last.

And indie devs? Apple doesn't care about you.

 

[bdavis89]

Yeah because after one year, they get less, 15% from 30%.

At the same time they opened subscriptions and various other options to all apps. They thought this through, and will come out with more. Apple is a master at manipulating the way they do things so that people like you think they actually care. Its business.