Hacker News Reader

Comment by fredsir | Hacker News Reader

I guess that a fart app should probably not cost anything since it's quite useless, but I do believe that it's a problem that on day one of a whole new App Store category, the first app launched, Crystal (it appeared hours before Purify and Peace for me anyways) is a free app. That's how you make mobile apps an unsustainable business.

I don't know how much work has gone into making these content blocker apps, but I bet it has taken some time - time that in any "normal" business would be charged for, and I think mobile apps creators should charge more for their apps too. In my experience, there are two types of mobile apps consumers. Those that won't pay for an app, whether it costs $1, $10 or $20, and those that will, and I think it would be healthier for the ecosystem to cater at least as much to the latter group as the former, but I don't think that's currently the case.

It's a race to the bottom, folks.

View on HN

You assume that every app developer is out to make money. This is not more true than that every PC application developer is out to make money. Some people make free software and gives it away for free. That's not a race to the bottom, unless you think Linux being free is a race to the bottom against Windows.

For some reason AppStore has surprisingly low amount of free software. It's either free with ads, free with in-app purchases or paid. Or free software missing marketing and it's hard to find it in AppStore or popular ratings.

Is there some compilation of free software links?

It costs money to join the Apple Developer Program so it's probably in peoples' minds to at least recoup that.

App developers should just go on tour - that's where they make most of their money anyways, right? Or maybe sell some T-shirts...

Meanwhile in another part of the world, a dazzling array of free software if available - just check repos like github et al. It might be a race, but it does not seem to head for the bottom. It has long since passed the apple-world in market penetration.

Money is only one of the motivators for writing software. It might be the prime motivator in the apple world (producers and consumers alike) but it by no means the only one.

Only one of these apps is free - Crystal. And it says it's temporary right on the App Store page and why. The author is making an entirely conscious, clear-eyed business decision. Here's a bit from the email he sent to his testers:

A big thank you to all 1200 of the testers who have helped shape Crystal into a solid application. I'm sorry to everyone else who didn't get a spot to test it, but the good news is, you can try it now for free!

Why Free? I want everyone to experience Crystal for themselves so as a thank you to my early adopters, I've decided to make it free for a very limited time.

Whats the catch? No catch, but I would like to request you help me out with Rating, Sharing, a quick survey or donating a little money below, I do have a wife & 2 kids to feed

Perhaps there's a race to the bottom in mobile apps but it probably produces more useful things than the race to tut-tut the decisions or generosity of others.

And an hour later, it's $0.99. I don't have any money left in my account so I'm just going to wait until there is a free one.

That's just on HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10231933

so you won't have to wait terribly long. And there are already a few that have IAP but basic functionality is free.

Does iTunes not require a credit card on file?

It does not. People typically just use an iTunes gift card in order to limit possible damage.

I don't think 'no cc on file' is 'typical' behaviour, but it is an option.

I should clarify: Among people that don't use credit cards like kids or the paranoid, the typical solution is to use a gift card. I, personally, do not like to use credit cards for purchases less than 40$. I certainly didn't think my comment was worthy of downvoting, especially since the comment I replied to asked if it was required.

I don't down vote, because down voting on HN is fundamentally broken.

I would have thought nowadays with Family Sharing accounts, kids accounts were less likely to need gift cards.

I dunno. On other platforms (Windows, OSX, Android, etc) ad blockers are just free browser plugins. While I'm sure there's a place for paid options on platforms where devs have the ability to differentiate with some "killer feature", it seems like the iOS options are the equivalent of the different AdBlock variants (Plus/Edge/Origin/et al).

I feel like in the case of an adblocker, there's precedent for that to be free. They're freely available -and- more powerful on the desktop, so why should anyone pay for a less powerful, but still useful version on their phone/tablet? That's just silly

You know these apps rely on very very long lists of domains to be blocked that lots of people have gathered during the course of years and that the developers of those adblocker apps just took those lists for free? So that's what those apps should cost.

That's incorrect. Peace for example negotiated a contract with it's rule list provider (Ghostery) to share profits. So this will help Ghostery to maintain a quality list. I'm not sure that the other blockers haven't negotiated similar arrangements. Unattributed accusations of leeching aren't very kind.

I do not think it is a problem that some people are not willing to charge something that you want to charge for.

That is, for you to be profitable, you rely on someone else not doing something.

That is the nature of competition.

It's a race to the bottom, folks, if your only barometer is money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com