3 ms·

The problem is that the ios app store (not sure about play) does not offer a paid upgrade option. It is unrealistic to expect developers to toil away, improvin

The problem is that the ios app store (not sure about play) does not offer a paid upgrade option. It is unrealistic to expect developers to toil away, improving software each year, using new platform features, all for no incremental income from existing users. I'm an app developer with a relatively successful app who spends about 1 minute every 6 months thinking about upgrading the app. No money, no honey.

deergomoo 9y ago
This is the biggest problem, really. Your three options are: subscription, which the article lists the problems with; publishing a new ‘My App 2’ on the store, which is confusing for users and unless your app stores nothing or is entirely cloud based, presents a migration path that is messy at best or; offer new features as in-app purchases, which, depending on the scale and nature of your app, can be incredibly complex or even impossible to do in a way that makes sense. I can’t see it being done because it goes agains the ‘simple’ principle of the App Store, but would be nice to be able to separate the concepts of bug/security fixes and featur updates to allow multiple concurrent versions to exist under the same entry.
thejosh 9y ago
What about new users? Wouldn't you want to keep improving to attract new users? Depends on your market though I guess.
- syllogism 9y ago
  Don't updates roll your review ratings, though? For user acquisition I'd rather be sitting on 500 reviews and a 4 star rating that point out some legit problems. That's better than releasing a new version and having the reviews reset to 0.
rcarmo 9y ago
I would gladly pay for upgrades - if they are reasonably priced, of course, and I don't mean for $5 apps. Some of the iOS apps I run cost me $15-$50 a pop, like Prompt, Coda, Working Copy and a few Omni apps. But I bought them _across a few years_, and I would rather buy food and books for my kids than spend $5-$10 monthly on a single app, _except_ when it is the front-end for a service I need (like Dropbox, which I still use). My approach to mobile apps is that I prefer to pay up-front and spend around $100 yearly (on average, discounting service-oriented apps) rather than pay $5 for _anything_ on a monthly basis - that allows me to buy one quality app per quarter, and avoid losing time and money on frilly apps and subscriptions I don't need. I think the real problem here is people making up useless "services" and wanting to turn their apps into niche shopfronts that will only ever reach a minuscule portion of their target base. (I will on occasion spend a few extra bucks on a quality game for the kids - or myself - too, but even then I've been avoiding anything with in-app purchases of any kind, and tend to go for promotions rather than new launches.) edit - typos
clumsysmurf 9y ago
Google Play doesn't have this either. It comes up year after year, and seems like an obvious omission ... but where there must be some conflict with Google's priorities.
ksec 9y ago
I think many have argued that an App is a product, and you dont upgrade your Washing Machine, Set Top Box or Routers etc, you buy a new one. Hence you buy a new App. That is all perfectly fine, but it turns out most users, ( Not developers or Geeks ) will only buy a new product when their product stop working or became OUT DATED. Since most App will continue to work for as long as it is, users have no incentive to buy a newer version. That is why developers wanted a Subscription model. It is hard to sell to its existing users pool, a rental model allow them to have a continuous revenue. With upgrade model, it is basically offering a discount for its existing users, instead of telling them to buy a New version. And it turns out, the more subscription Apps there is, the more i like the upgrade pricing model better.
scarface74 9y ago
There is a paid upgrade model that some publishers use, but it's a hack. Say they charged $5.99 for Foobar v.1 and then they also want to charge $5.99 for Foobar v.2 but allow their current customers to upgrade for $2.00. They keep both versions at $5.99 and sell an "app bundle" of both products for $7.99. That will allow current customers to pay $2.00. Of course the developer needs to put in big bold writing in the description of v.1 not to buy that product.

deergomoo 9y ago

This is the biggest problem, really. Your three options are: subscription, which the article lists the problems with; publishing a new ‘My App 2’ on the store, which is confusing for users and unless your app stores nothing or is entirely cloud based, presents a migration path that is messy at best or; offer new features as in-app purchases, which, depending on the scale and nature of your app, can be incredibly complex or even impossible to do in a way that makes sense. I can’t see it being done because it goes agains the ‘simple’ principle of the App Store, but would be nice to be able to separate the concepts of bug/security fixes and featur updates to allow multiple concurrent versions to exist under the same entry.

thejosh 9y ago

What about new users? Wouldn't you want to keep improving to attract new users? Depends on your market though I guess.

syllogism 9y ago
Don't updates roll your review ratings, though? For user acquisition I'd rather be sitting on 500 reviews and a 4 star rating that point out some legit problems. That's better than releasing a new version and having the reviews reset to 0.

rcarmo 9y ago

I would gladly pay for upgrades - if they are reasonably priced, of course, and I don't mean for $5 apps. Some of the iOS apps I run cost me $15-$50 a pop, like Prompt, Coda, Working Copy and a few Omni apps. But I bought them _across a few years_, and I would rather buy food and books for my kids than spend $5-$10 monthly on a single app, _except_ when it is the front-end for a service I need (like Dropbox, which I still use). My approach to mobile apps is that I prefer to pay up-front and spend around $100 yearly (on average, discounting service-oriented apps) rather than pay $5 for _anything_ on a monthly basis - that allows me to buy one quality app per quarter, and avoid losing time and money on frilly apps and subscriptions I don't need. I think the real problem here is people making up useless "services" and wanting to turn their apps into niche shopfronts that will only ever reach a minuscule portion of their target base. (I will on occasion spend a few extra bucks on a quality game for the kids - or myself - too, but even then I've been avoiding anything with in-app purchases of any kind, and tend to go for promotions rather than new launches.) edit - typos

clumsysmurf 9y ago

Google Play doesn't have this either. It comes up year after year, and seems like an obvious omission ... but where there must be some conflict with Google's priorities.

ksec 9y ago

I think many have argued that an App is a product, and you dont upgrade your Washing Machine, Set Top Box or Routers etc, you buy a new one. Hence you buy a new App. That is all perfectly fine, but it turns out most users, ( Not developers or Geeks ) will only buy a new product when their product stop working or became OUT DATED. Since most App will continue to work for as long as it is, users have no incentive to buy a newer version. That is why developers wanted a Subscription model. It is hard to sell to its existing users pool, a rental model allow them to have a continuous revenue. With upgrade model, it is basically offering a discount for its existing users, instead of telling them to buy a New version. And it turns out, the more subscription Apps there is, the more i like the upgrade pricing model better.

scarface74 9y ago

There is a paid upgrade model that some publishers use, but it's a hack. Say they charged $5.99 for Foobar v.1 and then they also want to charge $5.99 for Foobar v.2 but allow their current customers to upgrade for $2.00. They keep both versions at $5.99 and sell an "app bundle" of both products for $7.99. That will allow current customers to pay $2.00. Of course the developer needs to put in big bold writing in the description of v.1 not to buy that product.