5 ms·

Every time I see these scammy apps in the App Store, it erodes the foundations that support the walls around Apple's garden. If those walls turn out to be shit

Every time I see these scammy apps in the App Store, it erodes the foundations that support the walls around Apple's garden. If those walls turn out to be shitty rusty fences instead, then Apple should tear them down completely and give other gardeners an opportunity to make better spaces. Instead users are in the middle ground between the safety of the walled garden and the freedom of a wide-open app ecosystem. Worst of both worlds.

AlexandrB 4y ago
I agree. I'm really sick of Apple's handling of their App Store. It's been nearly 14 years and the only app distribution models Apple permits are pay once (with possible IAP), free with IAP, and subscription. Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. I think Apple has done more than anyone to turn software into a rental business where every calendar and to-do app now needs its own subscription. I love using the payment and subscription management systems in iOS - it's much better than many bespoke systems - but it's not worth having to put up with their subscription-philia.
- judge2020 4y ago
  > Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. While not via the app store itself, you're expected to lock new features behind a new in-app purchase sku, while still providing (security|stability) updates to users who aren't going to pay for new features.
  - ytpete 4y ago
    That doesn't seem like quite the same model though - a new customer has to purchase the base app plus all IAPs in order to gain the full feature set. Whereas in the traditional paid upgrades model, when you pay the full app price you get all current features and then you can pay smaller incremental prices in the future for new-feature updates.
    - brimble 4y ago
      You can still structure the IAPs to account for that, no? There's nothing stopping you from creating arbitrary bundles of IAPs, and pricing those bundles separately. One's an upgrade and presented to people who've already bought the last version, another's for new users, and priced higher, but includes the stuff from the earlier version(s).
  - outcoldman 4y ago
    I tried to sell my app in the ways: 1. Free and IAP for Pro features. I knew there are going to be only like 20% of users who would purchase it. And I was fine with that. With this model I got a lot of bad reviews, and some of the felt like fake reviews (my guess from some fake competitive apps, that can generate those fake reviews, like we are talking about in the link - Openly). 2. Because I tired of fake reviews and bad ratings, I have changed the model to something like 50% pay for basic app, 50% for Pro features. Easy change, considering I did not need to change anything in the code. Just change the prices. But now there were real reviews of people who complained about why do you need to pay for Pro if they already purchased the app. Or support emails saying "They purchased a Pro version of the app, but app still asks them to purchase Pro". Which was confusing at first, but at the end I realized that if user pays for an app, he already thinks it is a Pro version. My guess because there are other apps that use "Lite" (free with ads) and "Pro" (paid and no ads) in their names. 3. After that I have removed IAP and made app 100% paid. Ratings recovered from 3.8 to 4.5. I believe I still make the same amount of money. But the idea to give a free version of the app, just did not work for me, I guess.
    - starting_fresh 4y ago
      I like that you are selling a frontend for the OS URI handler for 10$. And then there is someone scamming you out of your revenue. A tech savvy standup comedian should be able to get a bit out of this :-)
      - outcoldman 4y ago
        My app makes about 1-2k a month. My guess that those free with IAP apps can make easily the same amount. That will be a very good salary for someone, for example, in India. And scamming with a little profit makes it easier to stay away from some of the eyes.
    - criddell 4y ago
      I think some apps create two entries in the app store. One is often something like HN Lite which is the free version and then HN Pro for the paid version. But then I guess you have the problem of reviews being split over the two "different" apps.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  >Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. As a user, I'm glad that neither of those things are supported. Given how often upgrades either remove functionality or otherwise make my experience worse, I am glad that developers are required to push an entirely new application if they want users to pay again, rather than being able to coast on their old ratings and reviews. This gives me ultimate power to determine which version of the application I wish to run. Additionally, I am quite over the nickel and diming of every other bloody application being a subscription.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  Can't you offer an upgrade IAP if you know they have purchased the previous version via IAP?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- tedunangst 4y ago
  If devs really wanted to, they could list a v2 upgrade product separately in the store, no? $10 for v2, $5 for v2 upgrade. Upgrade app has no functionality except "paste key" button, which unlocks everything after tapping "copy key" in v1 app. Or however you want to pass data between them.
  - a_t48 4y ago
    There's a good chance this would not pass several app store guidelines and be rejected.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 4y ago
    C’mon, would you buy that?
  - eddyg 4y ago
    App Store bundles are a potential solution, especially since developers can now unlist an app so it can't be found unless there's a direct link to it. It's not perfect, but it's a workable approach. Say you've had FooBarWizard in the App Store for a couple years at 99¢ and want to offer "upgrade pricing" to the all-new FooBarWizard 2 (which will be $1.99). Add FooBarWizard 2 in the App Store. Publish a new version of FooBarWizard that includes an announcement that "FooBarWizard 2 is now available in a specially-priced upgrade bundle" (a one-time pop-up or something, and then a mention on the Settings screen, for example) so existing customers know about it. Create a bundle in the App Store with FooBarWizard and FooBarWizard 2 priced at $1.99, then unlist FooBarWizard. The price of the bundle has to be at least as high as the most expensive app in the bundle. The net cost to the user is the difference between the bundle price and what was paid for the original app. So an existing user can buy the bundle and get FooBarWizard 2 for the "upgrade price" of $1. (A "new user" that tries to buy the 2-item bundle that only has 1 item pays $1.99 and still only gets FooBarWizard 2, because the original FooBarWizard is unlisted.)
- lkxijlewlf 4y ago
  > I think Apple has done more than anyone to turn software into a rental business where every calendar and to-do app now needs its own subscription. All part of the plan: https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/08/14/apple-met-with-developers-to-2017-to-push-app-subscriptions https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/08/14/apple-met-with-de...
- kderbyma 4y ago
  I think of apple as anti-software. they sell physical/digital products. but they don't do software.
blihp 4y ago
None of these walled gardens exist primarily to keep bad apps out, but rather to keep users in. It's always been about the revenue share.
- function_seven 4y ago
  I know that. I just think it'd be nice if—as a side effect—the plants and flowers here were pretty. Don't they want me to stay here? How many weeds does it take for me to climb the wall and see what's available in the F-Droid Zoo or AppGallery amusement park? When does Code Enforcement (aka FTC, if my analogy is getting a little too cute) come by and demand they clean the yard up? Rhetorical question I guess, because I'm still here in the garden ranting about it. But I'm not gonna leave. Not yet.
  - blihp 4y ago
    There's the rub: you're still there. At the end of the day, that's all they care about. They will keep pushing and taking until people start to leave and then dial it back just a bit. When all of the players are playing the same game and getting away with it, it will not get better on its own. You need to vote with your wallet as that's the only thing companies hear.
willis936 4y ago
I don't recall a time where I could ever play solitaire in iOS without being met with hostility, free or paid. There has never been reason to have faith because there has never been a golden age of the iOS app store. It's always been trash. Android has never had these issues.
- criddell 4y ago
  Maybe not Solitaire, but you can still download Apple's Hold 'em poker app. It's pretty fun and feels like a relic from a different age. I don't think I've ever downloaded an app that felt hostile. In fact, some of the best software I've ever used is on iOS. For example, Procreate is $10 and it's astoundingly good. GoodNotes was also something like $10-$20 and has been nothing but a joy to use.
bastardoperator 4y ago
Agreed, but I'll also add that this seems to be happening on every store. Miles upon miles of junk you have to sift through to get to something worthwhile. Apple, Google, Steam, Amazon... I'm presented with the worst choices. I don't know if these stores are all being gamed, but they all need to have better standards. At this point I just see them all as disorganized cash grabs.

AlexandrB 4y ago

I agree. I'm really sick of Apple's handling of their App Store. It's been nearly 14 years and the only app distribution models Apple permits are pay once (with possible IAP), free with IAP, and subscription. Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. I think Apple has done more than anyone to turn software into a rental business where every calendar and to-do app now needs its own subscription. I love using the payment and subscription management systems in iOS - it's much better than many bespoke systems - but it's not worth having to put up with their subscription-philia.

judge2020 4y ago
> Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. While not via the app store itself, you're expected to lock new features behind a new in-app purchase sku, while still providing (security|stability) updates to users who aren't going to pay for new features.
- ytpete 4y ago
  That doesn't seem like quite the same model though - a new customer has to purchase the base app plus all IAPs in order to gain the full feature set. Whereas in the traditional paid upgrades model, when you pay the full app price you get all current features and then you can pay smaller incremental prices in the future for new-feature updates.
  - brimble 4y ago
    You can still structure the IAPs to account for that, no? There's nothing stopping you from creating arbitrary bundles of IAPs, and pricing those bundles separately. One's an upgrade and presented to people who've already bought the last version, another's for new users, and priced higher, but includes the stuff from the earlier version(s).
- outcoldman 4y ago
  I tried to sell my app in the ways: 1. Free and IAP for Pro features. I knew there are going to be only like 20% of users who would purchase it. And I was fine with that. With this model I got a lot of bad reviews, and some of the felt like fake reviews (my guess from some fake competitive apps, that can generate those fake reviews, like we are talking about in the link - Openly). 2. Because I tired of fake reviews and bad ratings, I have changed the model to something like 50% pay for basic app, 50% for Pro features. Easy change, considering I did not need to change anything in the code. Just change the prices. But now there were real reviews of people who complained about why do you need to pay for Pro if they already purchased the app. Or support emails saying "They purchased a Pro version of the app, but app still asks them to purchase Pro". Which was confusing at first, but at the end I realized that if user pays for an app, he already thinks it is a Pro version. My guess because there are other apps that use "Lite" (free with ads) and "Pro" (paid and no ads) in their names. 3. After that I have removed IAP and made app 100% paid. Ratings recovered from 3.8 to 4.5. I believe I still make the same amount of money. But the idea to give a free version of the app, just did not work for me, I guess.
  - starting_fresh 4y ago
    I like that you are selling a frontend for the OS URI handler for 10$. And then there is someone scamming you out of your revenue. A tech savvy standup comedian should be able to get a bit out of this :-)
    - outcoldman 4y ago
      My app makes about 1-2k a month. My guess that those free with IAP apps can make easily the same amount. That will be a very good salary for someone, for example, in India. And scamming with a little profit makes it easier to stay away from some of the eyes.
  - criddell 4y ago
    I think some apps create two entries in the app store. One is often something like HN Lite which is the free version and then HN Pro for the paid version. But then I guess you have the problem of reviews being split over the two "different" apps.
Karunamon 4y ago
>Still no ability for developers to provide paid upgrades or "active subscription gives you updates" models. As a user, I'm glad that neither of those things are supported. Given how often upgrades either remove functionality or otherwise make my experience worse, I am glad that developers are required to push an entirely new application if they want users to pay again, rather than being able to coast on their old ratings and reviews. This gives me ultimate power to determine which version of the application I wish to run. Additionally, I am quite over the nickel and diming of every other bloody application being a subscription.
lern_too_spel 4y ago
Can't you offer an upgrade IAP if you know they have purchased the previous version via IAP?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
tedunangst 4y ago
If devs really wanted to, they could list a v2 upgrade product separately in the store, no? $10 for v2, $5 for v2 upgrade. Upgrade app has no functionality except "paste key" button, which unlocks everything after tapping "copy key" in v1 app. Or however you want to pass data between them.
- a_t48 4y ago
  There's a good chance this would not pass several app store guidelines and be rejected.
- 2muchcoffeeman 4y ago
  C’mon, would you buy that?
- eddyg 4y ago
  App Store bundles are a potential solution, especially since developers can now unlist an app so it can't be found unless there's a direct link to it. It's not perfect, but it's a workable approach. Say you've had FooBarWizard in the App Store for a couple years at 99¢ and want to offer "upgrade pricing" to the all-new FooBarWizard 2 (which will be $1.99). Add FooBarWizard 2 in the App Store. Publish a new version of FooBarWizard that includes an announcement that "FooBarWizard 2 is now available in a specially-priced upgrade bundle" (a one-time pop-up or something, and then a mention on the Settings screen, for example) so existing customers know about it. Create a bundle in the App Store with FooBarWizard and FooBarWizard 2 priced at $1.99, then unlist FooBarWizard. The price of the bundle has to be at least as high as the most expensive app in the bundle. The net cost to the user is the difference between the bundle price and what was paid for the original app. So an existing user can buy the bundle and get FooBarWizard 2 for the "upgrade price" of $1. (A "new user" that tries to buy the 2-item bundle that only has 1 item pays $1.99 and still only gets FooBarWizard 2, because the original FooBarWizard is unlisted.)
lkxijlewlf 4y ago
> I think Apple has done more than anyone to turn software into a rental business where every calendar and to-do app now needs its own subscription. All part of the plan: https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/08/14/apple-met-with-developers-to-2017-to-push-app-subscriptions https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/08/14/apple-met-with-de...
kderbyma 4y ago
I think of apple as anti-software. they sell physical/digital products. but they don't do software.

blihp 4y ago

None of these walled gardens exist primarily to keep bad apps out, but rather to keep users in. It's always been about the revenue share.

function_seven 4y ago
I know that. I just think it'd be nice if—as a side effect—the plants and flowers here were pretty. Don't they want me to stay here? How many weeds does it take for me to climb the wall and see what's available in the F-Droid Zoo or AppGallery amusement park? When does Code Enforcement (aka FTC, if my analogy is getting a little too cute) come by and demand they clean the yard up? Rhetorical question I guess, because I'm still here in the garden ranting about it. But I'm not gonna leave. Not yet.
- blihp 4y ago
  There's the rub: you're still there. At the end of the day, that's all they care about. They will keep pushing and taking until people start to leave and then dial it back just a bit. When all of the players are playing the same game and getting away with it, it will not get better on its own. You need to vote with your wallet as that's the only thing companies hear.

willis936 4y ago

I don't recall a time where I could ever play solitaire in iOS without being met with hostility, free or paid. There has never been reason to have faith because there has never been a golden age of the iOS app store. It's always been trash. Android has never had these issues.

criddell 4y ago
Maybe not Solitaire, but you can still download Apple's Hold 'em poker app. It's pretty fun and feels like a relic from a different age. I don't think I've ever downloaded an app that felt hostile. In fact, some of the best software I've ever used is on iOS. For example, Procreate is $10 and it's astoundingly good. GoodNotes was also something like $10-$20 and has been nothing but a joy to use.

bastardoperator 4y ago

Agreed, but I'll also add that this seems to be happening on every store. Miles upon miles of junk you have to sift through to get to something worthwhile. Apple, Google, Steam, Amazon... I'm presented with the worst choices. I don't know if these stores are all being gamed, but they all need to have better standards. At this point I just see them all as disorganized cash grabs.