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

Apple Rejecting Apps With Pricing Info Like 'Free' in App Title

coolfactor said:
GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!
Click to expand...

That is just your opinion. Let the market determine what sells. Cars, soda, airline tickets, etc.. many products are sold with variations of features and prices.
[doublepost=1490762570][/doublepost]
Rainshadow said:
What would be great is if Apple allowed You to test an app for free for 24-48 hours and then it locked and prompted you to pay for it after the trial.

Kind of like the other app stores ;)

That would help cut down on a LOT of lite versions and would likely entice me to buy more apps.
Click to expand...

Consumers do not need to be enticed. The problem is that Apple "allows" things. And you let them do it.
[doublepost=1490762927][/doublepost]
ghost187 said:
Good Job!

Next Up: Put a hard cap on in app purchases per month. For example, no app should require you to pay more than $100 per month. In addition to this, they should not allow developers to sell the same in-app purchase more than once, unless it is a subscription. Games like Clash of Clans use casino like tactics to exploit kids or even adults into spending thousands of dollars. Most SuperCell games have over $20,000 USD of IAPs, which is required to compete with other "Max Level" members. These micro transaction games are cancer, and Apple would do the right thing here by putting a hard cap to protect its customers.
Click to expand...

Wow, what a socialistic perspective. It is amazing how you are recommending restrictions on the freedom of consumers to choose to live their life as they see fit. Why not limit how much Apple can limit? That would fix the problem of this entire monopolistic ecosystem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ackmondual, Christoffee, 69Mustang and 1 other person
coolfactor said:
A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!
Click to expand...

That's easy to say now, but there are lots of old apps that can't do that. Before free apps could have in-app purchases, the only way to offer a trial was to have a Free version and a Paid version. Apple changed their rules, but haven't given developers any way to go back and merge their existing apps into one.

As a developer with a game from 2008 in the store that has both a Free and Paid version, I'd love to be able to combine them and then only have to maintain one version. Until Apple lets us do that, I'll continue to have two versions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuralJuror, Santiago, ackmondual and 2 others
Sadly I dont think this will make developers release one app instead of 10 apps. Now they will just rebrand it Lite.
 
calzon65 said:
Headline: Apple rejects app named "Freedom of Choice" for containing the word Free ... news at six o'clock.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right.
Build your own store and allow freedom of choice, so anyone can come and piss all over it as they wish!
Didn't think so!
Guys like you are here just to bash everything Apple does, regardless if that is good or bad. It has always been like this here, since I remember it. By the way tittle should reflect what the App is about and not how much it will cost. So good move Apple.
 
coolfactor said:
GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!
Click to expand...

Yeah. Remember Apple bragging about how many apps there were in the app store when the app store was new. Now, there are 9 junk apps for every useful app it seems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atmenterprises
coolfactor said:
GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!
Click to expand...
They'll just change the title to remove the offending term, not pull their app.
 
Rainshadow said:
What would be great is if Apple allowed You to test an app for free for 24-48 hours and then it locked and prompted you to pay for it after the trial.

Kind of like the other app stores ;)

That would help cut down on a LOT of lite versions and would likely entice me to buy more apps.
Click to expand...

But what if you are able to go through all the content of said app, and utilise it for your purposes, within a few hours, let alone 24-48 hours - you'd get it all for free.

I may need to just edit a PDF, or spreadsheet, or just pass some time while on a flight. I just download the app freely, use it, discard it. Doesn't seem fair.
[doublepost=1490774989][/doublepost]
ghost187 said:
Good Job!

Next Up: Put a hard cap on in app purchases per month. For example, no app should require you to pay more than $100 per month. In addition to this, they should not allow developers to sell the same in-app purchase more than once, unless it is a subscription. Games like Clash of Clans use casino like tactics to exploit kids or even adults into spending thousands of dollars. Most SuperCell games have over $20,000 USD of IAPs, which is required to compete with other "Max Level" members. These micro transaction games are cancer, and Apple would do the right thing here by putting a hard cap to protect its customers.
Click to expand...

So you want to adults to transfer the responsibility onto the developers - and in the process affect everyone else - why?

If you can't control yourself/your children with an in-app purchases, that is your fault.
 
iCloudStrife said:
What if you want to advertise your app being free as in freedom, not as in beer?
Click to expand...
Do you think Apple's reviewers are brainless idiots, or intelligent individuals?

And an app that shows the nearest place where you can get free beer would easily be accepted.
 
This is yet another consequence of Apple bizarrely not offering a "demo" download, necessitating two store entries for a single app.
 
adding free was often pointless as so many had in app purchases to get a full version.

I don't mine in app purchases they work but there should be a clear distinction between apps that are free with add and totally free and ones that need to be unlocked to work.

I also think Apple needs to limit in app purchases to 3, some apps have 8 or more and only buying all gives you full functionality. That's getting criminal in my opinion.
 
mazz0 said:
This is yet another consequence of Apple bizarrely not offering a "demo" download, necessitating two store entries for a single app.
Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with this oft repeated complaint, I've had at least one app that functioned for a set period before wanting IAP/subscription to keep it working, so it appears it can be done.

If I remember a specific example I will post it.

Similar with the 'cannot charge for updates' complaint, If update really worth charging for, make it an IAP surely???
 
Apple has made the AppStore a nuisance.
We need alternative Appstores, that do not compete on centent but on lay-out, visibility, selectable criteria, taste profiles, etc.
Let someone else do it if Phil can't get his hands on it.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about you but I have used the word "free" when searching for an app.
Now we have to use lite or pro or whatever new label they come up with.
How about coming up with a better way to search?
 
coolfactor said:
GOOD!

One of the reasons I don't browse for apps is all of the junk titles that I see. It's like a cess pool of uncertainty.

A developer should release ONE app, a good app, and then have upgrade options within it. Not 10 different variations of the same app at different price points!
Click to expand...

This is bad for the customer and apple makes more money. An app that you paid for with options unlocked can be shared with family members for free, but the in-app purchases won't be shared.
 
I suppose this means we are now gonna see "Fręę" everywhere. Apple forcing everyone to go international.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back