5 ms·

I'd be interested in reading why neither Apple or Google have support for trial apps in their respective app stores. Microsoft has this in the Windows store, b

I'd be interested in reading why neither Apple or Google have support for trial apps in their respective app stores. Microsoft has this in the Windows store, both for phone and computer and I'll grant that Google has a very quick and easy return system (push a button and it's done, unlike Apple). Is there a reason to not do it that I'm missing? My curiosity comes from practicality: I'd love to try out the more expensive apps on iOS but I don't want to pay out up front and then be disappointed and have no trivial way to say "nah, wasn't worth it." Even Target lets me show up with a thing and some manifestation of having paid for it then takes the thing back with minimal fuss.

alanfalcon 11y ago
FWIW, the refund system for Apple seems pretty quick and straightforward, even if it's not a simple one click process. Not saying it couldn't be better, but I wouldn't be put off trying expensive apps because of it.
- jacalata 11y ago
  I have no idea how to claim a refund for a shitty app, so it certainly fails my bar for straightforward.
peteretep 11y ago
I'm not very price sensitive, but would buy a lot more software with a quick built-in refund. I've installed and then almost immediately uninstalled way too much junk to take the risk on a £10 battery app, for example, that I'd have gladly spent on the best one I found.
- bearbin 11y ago
  Google does automatic refunds if you uninstall an app within 2 hours from purchase, which seems like a good system to me.
  - peteretep 11y ago
    That would work well for me. Don't think iOS does, or if they don't, they don't publicise it well enougj
    - bad_user 11y ago
      You can get refunds for iOS as well. You just need iTunes to do it. Do a Google search for "ios refund".
      - peteretep 11y ago
        Sure, if you fill out a form from iTunes. The op was talking about automatic refunds on deletion.
        bad_user 11y ago
        I don't get it. Is this about laziness?
        jacalata 11y ago
        Would you consider it acceptable to have to fill in a form in iTunes to install each application? Why not, just laziness?
frik 11y ago
Many apps in AppStore/PlayStore already have in-app-purchases. So it's basically "Shareware" (a 1990s term) or Lite-version or a demo-version, and to unlock all features you have to pay once or per year. The difference for the developer is you have to maintain only one version with optional features, and not two different app-versions (demo/lite/trial + full version (maybe even with optional features))
jamesk_au 11y ago
Some iOS developers are using in-app purchases to provide support for trial periods. For example, a fitness app named "Sweat with Kayla"[1] (apparently a renowned female personal trainer) is currently featured prominently at the top of the front page of the Australian App Store. The app description states: Sweat with Kayla is free to download. All consumers are welcome to a free 7-day trial period. Should you choose to continue use of the Sweat with Kayla app, we offer a single auto-renewing subscription option: Just $4.61/week ($19.99/month) Is that trial period contrary to the App Store Review Guidelines?[2] Clause 2.9 says: "Apps that are "demo", "trial", or "test" versions will be rejected." Strictly speaking, "Sweat with Kayla" might be a "full" version, because you get the whole thing (at least for seven days). On the other hand, clause 11.9 says: "Apps containing content or services that expire after a limited time will be rejected, except for specific approved content (e.g. films, television programs, music, books)." Perhaps Apple takes a broad approach to this clause and Kayla's workouts and food plans were seen to be sufficiently close to the named examples of "specific approved content" to pass muster. It would be surprising if Apple had decided to feature the app without reading its description. Interestingly, the most favourable feedback left by those who have posted reviews for "Sweat with Kayla" appears to be gratitude for the trial period, which saved reviewers from paying anything before deleting it. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/sweat-with-kayla/id1049234587 https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/sweat-with-kayla/id104923458... [2] https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- tadfisher 11y ago
  The "7-day trial period" makes me assume they have indeed passed muster, as that is the minimum-length content subscription period: > Content subscriptions using IAP must last a minimum of 7 days and be available to the user from all of their iOS devices
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
tonyedgecombe 11y ago
I'm not sure trials make much sense when the cost is so low, I suspect you risk diluting meagre revenue even further.

alanfalcon 11y ago

FWIW, the refund system for Apple seems pretty quick and straightforward, even if it's not a simple one click process. Not saying it couldn't be better, but I wouldn't be put off trying expensive apps because of it.

jacalata 11y ago
I have no idea how to claim a refund for a shitty app, so it certainly fails my bar for straightforward.

peteretep 11y ago

I'm not very price sensitive, but would buy a lot more software with a quick built-in refund. I've installed and then almost immediately uninstalled way too much junk to take the risk on a £10 battery app, for example, that I'd have gladly spent on the best one I found.

bearbin 11y ago
Google does automatic refunds if you uninstall an app within 2 hours from purchase, which seems like a good system to me.
- peteretep 11y ago
  That would work well for me. Don't think iOS does, or if they don't, they don't publicise it well enougj
  - bad_user 11y ago
    You can get refunds for iOS as well. You just need iTunes to do it. Do a Google search for "ios refund".
    - peteretep 11y ago
      Sure, if you fill out a form from iTunes. The op was talking about automatic refunds on deletion.
      - bad_user 11y ago
        I don't get it. Is this about laziness?
        jacalata 11y ago
        Would you consider it acceptable to have to fill in a form in iTunes to install each application? Why not, just laziness?

frik 11y ago

Many apps in AppStore/PlayStore already have in-app-purchases. So it's basically "Shareware" (a 1990s term) or Lite-version or a demo-version, and to unlock all features you have to pay once or per year. The difference for the developer is you have to maintain only one version with optional features, and not two different app-versions (demo/lite/trial + full version (maybe even with optional features))

jamesk_au 11y ago

Some iOS developers are using in-app purchases to provide support for trial periods. For example, a fitness app named "Sweat with Kayla"[1] (apparently a renowned female personal trainer) is currently featured prominently at the top of the front page of the Australian App Store. The app description states: Sweat with Kayla is free to download. All consumers are welcome to a free 7-day trial period. Should you choose to continue use of the Sweat with Kayla app, we offer a single auto-renewing subscription option: Just $4.61/week ($19.99/month) Is that trial period contrary to the App Store Review Guidelines?[2] Clause 2.9 says: "Apps that are "demo", "trial", or "test" versions will be rejected." Strictly speaking, "Sweat with Kayla" might be a "full" version, because you get the whole thing (at least for seven days). On the other hand, clause 11.9 says: "Apps containing content or services that expire after a limited time will be rejected, except for specific approved content (e.g. films, television programs, music, books)." Perhaps Apple takes a broad approach to this clause and Kayla's workouts and food plans were seen to be sufficiently close to the named examples of "specific approved content" to pass muster. It would be surprising if Apple had decided to feature the app without reading its description. Interestingly, the most favourable feedback left by those who have posted reviews for "Sweat with Kayla" appears to be gratitude for the trial period, which saved reviewers from paying anything before deleting it. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/sweat-with-kayla/id1049234587 https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/sweat-with-kayla/id104923458... [2] https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
tadfisher 11y ago
The "7-day trial period" makes me assume they have indeed passed muster, as that is the minimum-length content subscription period: > Content subscriptions using IAP must last a minimum of 7 days and be available to the user from all of their iOS devices
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

tonyedgecombe 11y ago

I'm not sure trials make much sense when the cost is so low, I suspect you risk diluting meagre revenue even further.