Popular Design App 'Sketch' Leaves Mac App Store Due to Poor Customer Experience

[KALLT]

Three reasons to leave: (1) don't like sandboxing and want to access customer's private data more. (2) want to get more money (3) was unhappy with customer's reviews.

Sandboxing holds some functionality back, it's the truth. Conversely, sandboxing doesn't stop data-mining either, it just restricts access to the file system and communication with other processes. Asking for upgrade pricing is absolutely legitimate. In fact, developers can't reward existing customers with special prices, because the App Store won't allow it. The App Store's review system is garbage anyway. It gives a false impression by incorporating potentially obsolete reviews into the final rating, it is consistently abused by trolls and people who don't bother looking for help if they don't understand something and it is not possible for anyone to rebut. Moreover, if you happen to use an App Store in a minor language, you will likely never see any reviews, let alone up to date reviews.

 

[nickman55]

Over the last year, as we've made great progress with Sketch, the customer experience on the Mac App Store hasn't evolved like its iOS counterpart.

How did the iOS version evolve more than the Mac version? Both have the exact same limitations that they are mentioning. If they want to leave the Mac App Store, they shouldn't feel obligated to explain their reasons, but what they shouldn't do is cram garbage down our throats by saying the sandbox environment and review times hinder one version while simultaneously allowing another to thrive. The only limitation that I see worth merit is the lack of upgrade pricing.

 

[palmerc]

This is disappointing for a lot of reasons, but in no small part because I prefer to buy my apps through the App Store. I like centralized updates, having only the one relationship with Apple and the ability for Apple to kill an app if it proves to contain malware.

It seems Apple and Mac OS developers are headed for a showdown, where the OS locks out non-App Store apps a la iOS or they bend to every theoretical requirement of an app at some point in its future. Possibly of course, Apple is in the process of addressing the underlying OS issues (rootless operation) that prevent a loose sandboxing regime. I would personally like to see developers forced into the App Store, because not all customers are keen on the idea of providing personal and credit card details with every app and for every company.

Apple does need to provide Upgrade pricing and Trials for software immediately. This seems like an obvious and reasonable request especially considering their TV and Music stores already have DRM technology that could be used for trials and the upgrade pricing is done for TV shows and movies.

 

[VeryVito]

Hope this gets things moving. Our company (although not nearly as popular as Sketch) is planning to follow suit soon. Apple truly needs to step up its game on the Mac App Store to allow developers to offer things customers expect from desktop software companies: clear upgrade paths, refund policies, trial versions, etc. The MAS is decidedly "amateur hour" when it comes to professional software sales.

 

[iSee]

Ouch! Well, the MAS is terribly limiting. If this, a straight-forward document based app can't live there, that's a bad sign.

Long term, I wonder if such limitations will begin to hurt the iOS ecosystem? It doesn't have the safety-valve of established external software stores. (They exist, of course, but aren't nearly as robust as for OS X.)

 

[Asclepio]

they should remove EL Crapitan

 

[Adam552]

When there is so much freedom on a OSX device to just download any application from the web, the Mac App Store doesn't do enough special things for the amount of restrictions it enforces on developers.

 

[Loge]

I would much prefer to purchase from the MAS, particularly for small utilities where it is tedious to set up an account for a one-time transaction of a small amount, and it's one more company to potentially lose your data.

 

[nuckinfutz]

I don't buy anything from these guys anymore since they bamboozled me with their last two font apps.

It's pretty funny that the biggest complainers about the MAS, the ones that love to wax on about their relationship with their customers tend to be those developers that have sold apps only to abandon them leaving users high and dry.

I'm looking at you Bohemian and Realmac.

Stop ********ting us. You're here for the money not to make me as a customer feel all warm and tingly.

as for MAS. Apple's focus over the next two generation of releases should be to consolidate the stores and unify functionality. Right now everything is silo'd data. Sandboxing should address the most egregious of developer complaints. It's been years and MAS apps are safe. It's ok to allow a bit more flexibility IMO.

Let's stop dreaming that the "old" way is superior. I don't love having to track my serial numbers or contact developers for licensing information. I don't love having to deal with 50 different ways of registering or authenticating apps. The old way was a crapshow but Apple does have to fix their god awful stores. It's bad when your virtual store is worse in functionality than a brick and mortar.

 

[Rogifan]

The App Store is FAR from hurting. A couple apps that a small group of people care about choosing to leave the App Store won't hurt them by any means.

I think there are legitimate issues with the MAS but as usual this will be blown out of proportion by the tech press, just like when Sketch said they weren't doing an iPad Pro app and the tech bubble immediately declared the iPad Pro DOA because of lack of software support.

 

[bsolar]

1. Don't see this being a problem if more attention was given to testing and software quality which is a well-known problem with Sketch. Facebook and many others are able to deliver features and bug fixes with a 2-week review cycle;

2. Would be nice to understand what possibilities they're referring to, but my opinion is: fix your bugs first, improve the current workflow next, focus on adding features when Sketch matures;

3. Heard this complain multiple times, never seen an opinion on alternative revenue models such as the one Adobe employs (subscription).

All of your proposals make sense if you are willing to adapt to the App Store's limitations, but that's exactly the point: what the Sketch developers decided is that for them it's not worth it.

 

[evanmarx]

99$? i don't ever remember having paid 99$ in the App Store for Sketch ... SO is that the new price in the wild? hmmm, i don't know ... many sketch users i know, discovered it in the App Store...

 

[palmerc]

The Mac App Store was brilliant when first introduced to consolidate the apps you wanted and trusted in one location, but Apple has done nothing with it since it was introduced.

I would love to see:

(1) Upgrade pricing

(2) Review threads. There are a lot of impatient and bad-tempered reviews posted that I would love to argue against to help defend developers that make really good apps

Agreed on upgrade pricing. Why hasn't this happened?

As an iOS developer I would like, as part of their cut, an issue tracking system where a review or even bugs could be followed up on by the developer. Give the developer an opportunity to address problems and improve low scores more directly. Too often the app reviews have nothing to do with the app and instead are related to some personal beef.

 

[8692574]

Somebody is trying to pull a "Flappy Bird" me think....

 

[rdlink]

Here come the cheap skates. My advice is to get a better paying job. This is a professional app and the price is totally reasonable. Don't buy it if it's too expensive. But please stop trying to suggest that $99 is a lot of money for a professional app. That's just bull.

While I don't disagree with the notion that an app that brings value is worth the price, you didn't really address the OP's point. I know a lot of apps that are labeled as "professional" that are not worth their asking price.

The OP was just stating that they didn't believe the $99 being charged was commensurate with the value the app provides. If you disagree why not state why you think it really is worth $99, instead of labeling the OP as a "cheap skate" with no evidence?

While I understand that Adobe Creative Suite is very expensive I also know that a professional who bills three figures per hour will find the tools in the suite to be a good value, because it allows them to function efficiently and generate income. By the same token, although I make my living producing documents, spreadsheets and presentations I find the cost of Microsoft's office suite to be obscenely expensive compared to Apple's free suite. So I believe MS charges too much for the value the apps provide.

 

[auero]

99$? i don't ever remember having paid 99$ in the App Store for Sketch ... SO is that the new price in the wild? hmmm, i don't know ... many sketch users i know, discovered it in the App Store...

Last year they raised the price. https://twitter.com/sketchapp/status/517010776352387072

 

[palmerc]

99$? i don't ever remember having paid 99$ in the App Store for Sketch ... SO is that the new price in the wild? hmmm, i don't know ... many sketch users i know, discovered it in the App Store...

A big hassle in the App Store as a buyer is the fact that you can't handle discounts like educational discounts. All of these type things are something Apple could provide to further justify their cut of the revenue.

 

[heeloliver]

Good for them. it's been years, and the Mac App Store is still garbage. Updates are a pain in the ass and I avoid opening it. The original software update utility was SO much better.

 

[robgendreau]

Right there with you. The things they cite are tangential to the customer experience. The MAS experience is mostly things like how hard is it to find/purchase/install/authorize the app. Those go very well in my experience.
Their complaints are more about some friction for their development cycle (not unimportant, but not a customer experience).

I do agree that the MAS needs to work more on expanding the sandboxing and arguably upgrade pricing for sustainability (but again that is not a customer "feature" as much as a business model choice).
I am always curious on what sandboxing limitations developers are hitting that they want to bypass. Would be better if they actually said what cool new features they are going to bring in the future that they can not via MAS rather than unspecified awesomeness for our imaginations.

I think the MAS is a trove of ripoff apps by every pseudo developer who slaps a skin over readily available open source stuff and rips off gullible Mac users cuz they assume Apple is doing some quality control...look at all the video converters and other junk for example.

And it's predominately a toy store. Not your workhorses like Adobe, MS, Filemaker, etc.

But, OTOH, there are some very high quality applications there. Just had to separate wheat from chaff.

But consider the limitations. Macphun makes some great MAS offerings, but their Creative Kit can offer those in a bundle, AND include plugins for Aperture, Photos, Lightroom, Photoshop, etc. Or consider GraphicConverter, which has been on Macs since the dawn of time. The MAS version has significant limitations, see here: http://www.lemkesoft.de/en/products/graphicconverter/mac-app-store/

And there lots of utilities that could never be in there.

So if you only shop in the MAS, you're missing out on a LOT of good tools. I think it's rather odd that Apple curates their stores carefully, but the MAS is the Dollar Store or Kmart of software. And some of the non-MAS stuff is far more useful, and shows better what the MacOS can do than what's in the MAS. Dropbox was a good example of that.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

1. Don't see this being a problem if more attention was given to testing and software quality which is a well-known problem with Sketch. Facebook and many others are able to deliver features and bug fixes with a 2-week review cycle;

A software company that doesn't have control over when their software is released is a real step backwards. It's like boxed software and publishers all over again.

 

[dysamoria]

I keep seeing developers screaming about sand boxing. I'd like to see what the actual issues are. Some of the freaking out seems to be a lot of developers hating doing things differently from "the way it's always been done".

A software company that doesn't have control over when their software is released is a real step backwards. It's like boxed software and publishers all over again.

Forcing developers to get it right for a release was always better for the customer than the current "get it to compile without errors and shove it off to the website. Patch/revision it later" crap we have now.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

It's pretty funny that the biggest complainers about the MAS, the ones that love to wax on about their relationship with their customers tend to be those developers that have sold apps only to abandon them leaving users high and dry.

I'm looking at you Bohemian and Realmac.

Stop ********ting us. You're here for the money not to make me as a customer feel all warm and tingly.

as for MAS. Apple's focus over the next two generation of releases should be to consolidate the stores and unify functionality. Right now everything is silo'd data. Sandboxing should address the most egregious of developer complaints. It's been years and MAS apps are safe. It's ok to allow a bit more flexibility IMO.

Let's stop dreaming that the "old" way is superior. I don't love having to track my serial numbers or contact developers for licensing information. I don't love having to deal with 50 different ways of registering or authenticating apps. The old way was a crapshow but Apple does have to fix their god awful stores. It's bad when your virtual store is worse in functionality than a brick and mortar.

We all know that Realmac did to us with Ember.

 

[Bromeo]

Intuit seems to be removing Quicken 2015 from the Mac App Store, or they leave it there for people to find it, purchase, and install it. Recently on firing up Q2015, I got a message that updates would no longer be provided through the App Store, and that I could migrate at no charge to a retail licensed version by downloading a utility. I did just that. It converted the installed application from MAS to one as if I had paid and downloaded it from Intuit, along with some much-needed bug fixes.

Guess what the next thing that popped up on my screen with my "retail licensed" copy of Quicken 2015... "Upgrade to Quicken 2016 Today!" ... back to the old yearly upgrade cycle for ... what... three features I don't need.

So, I took that as they need that yearly upgrade revenue, but it's not "frictionless" with the Mac App Store.

Seems to me these companies need to gravitate towards annual licensing if that is the only sustainable business model. Mac App Store needs to implement options to facilitate free trials, paid upgrades, periodic subscription fees, and a no-questions-asked automated refund process (like Google Play Store on Android). All that would go a long ways toward improving the App Store experience.

As a professional software developer, I have been tempted by handing over 30% of my revenue to Apple / Google to facilitate all that their app stores do. It would save me from hiring and/or contracting out to manage my own digital license fulfillment... heck 30% would be a screaming deal to have it all said and done.

On the flip side, 1Password from Agile Bits seems to be making the most of the MAS. You can buy it directly from them, of course, but if you buy it via the App Store, you can store your encrypted password vault on iCloud Drive, which allows more than just file-granular syncing, but record-by-record syncing. It's a huge deal, and one that requires Sandboxing, something only enabled when distribution is via the Mac App Store. Carrot/stick, perhaps, but it worked, and I bought my 1Password desktop app via MAS for that critical reason.

As to the junk in all the app stores, it seems to be a common problem. Even Amazon struggles with 99-cent Kindle ebooks that are just poor rips of public domain (and sometimes not!) literature. How do you police that? Opportunists will find a way... whack-a-mole, I guess.

 

[Bubba Satori]

And the insane price for the app couldn't be the problem? Sketch does not do enough to be entitles of 99$...

Speaking of $99 dollah and insane prices.

I love the smell of irony in the morning.

 

[dBeats]

Can't you have an in-app purchase that activates new features in an upgrade? So update to HelloWorld v2.016, offer an in-app purchase of $x to get new features not in HelloWorld v2.015. Heck, why not an in-app purchase for each new feature? What's the problem with this? Oh right, devs that can't modularize their code well enough to do it....

Customer Experience for MAS is good, it's the developer experience that maybe has much to be desired. But devs are traditionally grumpy and want to do things their way. Apple knows this and expects the good developers to adapt and innovate while the old guard will just die away.