3 ms·
I'm shocked that an indie Mac app that isn't in the app store is trying to get away with selling a $29 license that has no free trial. To Github developers, of
by hemancuso 14y ago
I'm shocked that an indie Mac app that isn't in the app store is trying to get away with selling a $29 license that has no free trial. To Github developers, of all people. Shenanigans.
It'd be one thing if you had an awesome video whereby I could see in this in action. Or tons of awesome reviews from people I respect. Hell, I would pay $5 to try it out.
But you want me to pay $30 bucks in hopes that this doesn't suck? There is too much competition in this market to even attempt this. This developer is shooting themselves in the foot.
- supercoder 14y agoYa, hopefully their product is better than their marketing.
- moneypenny 14y agoWell, if it does everything they says it does, does that still make it any good? raises eyebrow
- FooBarWidget 14y agoWhy is it such a big deal that it isn't in the app store? As far as I can see automatic updates is the only advantage that the app store brings... and even that has been handled for years without problems by third party updating systems like Sparkle.
- batgaijin 14y agosadly, I'd say because it's a centralized place for reviews that makes it less likely a company might publish a half-written something
- fudged71 14y agoYeah, the app store model keeps the reviews out of the hands of the developers. Almost like a consumer protection.
- hemancuso 14y agoThe App Store forces your into this un-friendly model. Most developers respond with lower prices that are hopefully offset by a much wider audience [folk who are ready to buy, in a software store owned by Apple]. The lower prices and sometimes helpful reviews also reduce the risk of trying out something that ends up being bad.
- moneypenny 14y agoRestricting it to Github is also annoying, if not slightly stupid.