App Store price fluctuation angering some iPhone users
App Store users angered over sudden price changes respond in the reviews.
(Credit: CNET Networks)When Konami's Frogger popped up in the iPhone App Store early Wednesday, the $9.99 price tag immediately set off a firestorm of angry user reviews. Apple's review system has doubled as a forum for users who find bugs, or otherwise feel the need to vent about the shortcomings of various developer-built applications.
The rather exorbitant price tag for a 26-year-old software title has been met with overwhelmingly negative reaction from potential customers, even though it's been rewritten to include iPhone-hardware-specific controls using the accelerometer and touch screen. Similar offerings that have started out at the same price point have succumbed to outspoken users and have issued price drops.
On the other end of the spectrum, there's something very different going on with developers who have offered their applications for free. They've found a fairly simple way to work Apple's own ranking system to their advantage. Since developers are able to change their price point at any time, some have offered early versions of their applications free of charge then switched the price over once it reaches a critical mass.
While this move is perfectly reasonable for the people who created a good application to profit from their success, it's also taking advantage of the way Apple displays its information. Apple's top applications section as seen from both the mobile application store and iTunes lists both the free and the paid titles. Once a popular free application switches to being paid, it can jump lists. In most cases the number of free downloads jumps it to the top of the paid applications list, even if that doesn't necessarily mean the proportionate number of users has paid for it.
Some users have called for Apple to reset or make separate an application's download counter in the case that a free application goes paid, if only to bring a sense of order. Meanwhile, some paid applications that have been running the paid leaderboard for weeks have been knocked out by these smaller, older applications.
In the case of Crazy Lighter developed by Ezone.com, the switch from free to paid put it on top of the paid applications list. Coming up just behind is BreakClassic, another free app that switched to being paid. Both are only 99 cents, but users seem far more content with BreakClassic's approach, which has added more levels and functionality than it had before.
Ultimately, it will be up to consumers, not Apple, to police the applications marketplace. To an extent, equilibrium has already been reached; Apple's built-in review system has managed to at least offer warning to would-be buyers about potential problems others have been having--something quite different from the the original intent of the same review system put in place for music, movies, and audio books. Going forward, it would be wise for Apple to offer much deeper capabilities in the rating system to give users commenting, threaded discussion forums, and a way to track price changes throughout the history of an application.
How long will it be before Apple tells me that I won't be able to do anything with my Touch until I pay for the update to 2.0???
I love my Touch. But I really hate Apple.
Therefore apple gain money that can be put towards firmware updates from iPhone users, so they don't charge.
iPod touch owners pay a one off fee, therefore have to pay for updates.
You can do whatever you want with your iPod touch. The update is not mandatory, if your not willing to pay then go you...don't pay for all the new features and being able to use the app store.
Apple says its the accounting department's revenue recognition principles that force it to charge for updates-- they even charged for a wifi upgrade for some of their computers due to this principle. Anyone trained in business accounting realizes someone can make this claim legitimately, but as you point out, it is rare that companies pull that trigger.
Revenue recognition principle would state that apple couldn't recognize the full profit of each ipod touch it sells until it has released every firmware update that will ever come for it. For example, if they add 10% new features 3 times over 5 years, they could only recognize the revenue of 70% of the sales in the first year, and 10% more each time a firmware update was released.
If firmware is only for bug fixes, no revenue has to be recognized because it is acting with the same intent of the product and ensuring its proper functionality. When new features are added, revenue would have to be recognized or a booked value loss would have to be accounted for on every touch already sold, receiving the firmware update, that didn't pay for that update.
It sounds silly, but in honesty, many of the rules that all companies abide by with regards to accounting are sort of silly. Apple is just being the normal militaristic enforcer that it usually is.
That' being said, I'm a big apple fan because their stuff just works, and its new, and if it takes my firwmare charge to ensure they continue to develop leaps and bounds beyond other companies, then I can deal with that.
I'm wondering the same question myself. If there is an update, will I get prompted about the price? I'll be sure to keep my out for it.
On another note, I understand that time and effort in developing applications should be rewarded. But I really hate the "bait and switch" tactic some apps are employing. iPhone developers: If you're going to do this, write in the code a 30 day trial or DEMO when its first put out, but dont sucker consumers into an "upsell".
When was the last time you developed an application for a brand new product for MILLIONS of people to use? Why are you complaining that rather than try to make you pay for an application or software before anyone in the public has ever SEEN it, let alone reviewed it, they offer if for FREE? I understand that some developers do have millions of extra dollars to spend on advertising, but most do not. So what better advertising than word of mouth? If something works well, let the users talk about it. Then when it picks up momentum ask to be reimbursed for your hard work. There is no free lunch..
I give you a PC for free. It got stolen within 30 days. You come back to me thinking I give you a new one, but now you have to pay me. What will be your next reaction? Will you bust out your credit card and happily hand it over to me? No. Your reaction will be, " I thought it was free?". You assumed it would be because I didn't post anything indicating otherwise. Now you have to PAY me for something that is no better than what you got for FREE.
So tell me the difference here? If you say its FREE, make it so. I understand there is no free lunch, but if I did the above scenerio to you, what would your thoughts be about me then?
Ok I'll go with you on your example, except I do not think it is fair to compare PCs to applications.. You are right I would probably say "I thought it was free". If you then proceeded to tell me that, now, in order to continue making PCs you must ask for 99 cents, I would gladly give you the 99 cents. Especially since I think Tekwiz4u makes some great PCs - well worth the money.
I agree the devs who are asking for a price now should have done a better job up front, help to set consumers expectations. Especially when some people won't understand the need to create revenue to cover costs without explicitly being told up front. Keep in mind though, just like Lowensohn said in his article, some of the apps that are no longer free offer more than they did before - completely justifying the increase in price.