3 ms·

1.49 is there to ensure no crappy apps. after all in case of MS trials are possible meaning you no longer need to buy crappy apps just because the description s

• suresk 14y ago
  I don't have any particular problems with the 1.49 price point (and I kind of wish the iOS app store hadn't set a standard where a $2 or $3 app is considered "expensive"), but how does an extra $.50 prevent crappy apps?
  • bztzt 14y ago
    It doesn't prevent them of course, but the higher price floor and the lower cut incentive for >$25k seem to both be designed to encourage devs to focus on high-quality apps rather than flood the store with a lot of crappy ones. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there will be tons of crappy apps anyway, but hopefully a slightly better signal-to-noise ratio overall.
  • sirclueless 14y ago
    $1.49 is an awkward price, because it involves fractional dollars, and unwelcome mental calculations. The jump from $1.49 to $1.99 is easy to make, because $1.99 is way more attractive (how many $1.49 apps are there in the iOS app store?). From there, $1.99 to $2.99 is also easy, still only a 50% increase. Suddenly -POOF- you have a whole array of apps priced around 2-3-4 dollars, instead of a $.99 bloc. This raises the price floor of apps on the Windows market, and there are a multitude of studies describing how effective price anchoring can be.
    • suresk 14y ago
      One nit: There are exactly 0 apps on the iOS App Store priced $1.49, because it isn't possible to price an app at that amount (it goes up in increments of $1). That said, I agree with you - I hope it successfully makes apps in the $2-$10 range more popular, which means developers can invest more time in them and make them better.