Hacker News Reader

Comment by tiglionabbit | Hacker News Reader

My #1 reason to use it is that it puts the purchase on my record so I can easily re-download it if I happen to lose it somehow. No more searching through ancient emails for activation codes.

View on HN

That's not correct. Make sure you have backups because developers remove apps and then upload new versions under different application IDs, making you purchase them again.

So basically you're renting software from the AppStore. I think I paid 100 EUR for Abby FineReader and now I can't access it any more.

Agreed - I purchased Sketch 2 for 50EUR, moved to the US on a new computer as Sketch 3 came out - I can't get Sketch 2 now. I can't bring myself to pay for it again, so... Inkscape it is!

But if an app is not available on the app store, does that stop you from getting it? That's a consumer benefit but it has no corresponding benefit to the developer, so it's unlikely to be a good argument for a developer to stick with the app store.

If it's a well known application I will go out of my way and buy it outside the store if that's the only way to get it. But for some random app that I just found I have to wonder if it's worth getting it from outside the store (and frequently the answer is no). I need to a) give my credit card to a random website that will probably get hacked in the next 12 months, b) start getting unsolicited email campaigns in about 18 months when someone hires a growth hacker, c) remember how to install the damn thing when I upgrade my laptop, d) deal with the reduced security guarantees of an app that did not go through the Apple review process and is not subject to the sandboxing of the App Store.

For many apps where I wouldn't mind spending $10 to $20 in the App Store, I am probably not going to deal with all of the above to buy it directly from the developer.

I suspect you are a tiny minority though and that the cut the app store takes doesn't make up for losing a few folks like yourself.

However, I have no data to back up that claim, so I could very well be wrong.

I personally don't feel like you do because I use burner cards and emails to solve the hacking and spamming problems, and apps still have to be sandboxed unless you turn off that safeguard explicitly for the app.

Parent might be a tiny minority, but if so I'm right there with him.

> give my credit card to a random website that will probably get hacked in the next 12 months

Pretty much everyone takes PayPal which shields you from this

Or uses stripe which hides your real card number from the merchant. The annoyance of adding a card is one thing but fear of an app developer getting hacked and exposing your card doesn't strike me as a very strong reason.

they shouldnt be storing it anyways. thats not PCI compliant.

Dev logic, not how most of us are thinking

As an app developer, most users also seem to think developers are to blame for issues like the App Store failing to download apps, double-billing etc, so I don't think buying though Apple makes much of a difference there.

That's flawed logic. Your users are telling you they can't tell apart merchant/platform so you should build on top of that and assume they won't know that you're not PayPal

Wait a sec – consumer benefits absolutely affect the developer, because they affect whether or not the consumer buys the developer's app!

It's not necessarily a dealmaker or breaker; but if someone really cares about that and the market has many substitutes, it could be enough to sway them towards App Store purchase.

But that's my point. I think there is only a tiny number of people for whom that particular consumer benefit is a make or break deal.

Perhaps for now. I expect this to shift just as we saw mobile apps shift. Slowly at first then a mass migration of users towards the new model.

Example: Steam

I just don't think any implementation has really been that great yet. However as I think about Steam, it's rare I even consider a game I can't install via it - mostly due to it being an easy way to "back up" my games for later availability. That and they keep things up to date so it more or less Just Works.

The Mac App Store is now a full 5 years old. If 5 years in developers abandoning it see their revenue go up, that looks a lot more like persistent stagnation and decline for the store.

Mobile app stores post-iPhone just took off. There was no 'slowly at first' phase, in the sense that they had an uncertain future. They went gang busters from the start. But we're past theorising about how the first 5 years of the Mac App Store might go. They've gone. It really doesn't look good and I don't see any signs it might improve any time soon. A few people appreciate the convenience, but as this case study shows it's not enough to make an economic difference to developers. Steam killed it, but the Mac App Store is completely stalled.

It's a developer benefit if consumers feel averse to buying software that they can't re-download/update from a centralized software store (App Store, Steam, etc).

Right but that is my point. I don't think anyone would be averse to buying an app outside the app store just because it doesn't have that feature.

That could explain why someone chooses to buy it in the store if it is available both on and off the app store, but it's unlikely that there is many (any?) people out there who refuse to install an app that isn't in the app store.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way. It's not about refusal. It's not (primarily) a red line where crossing the line means you get no sales at all from the X% of people that care. It just incrementally raises the bar that customers' varying levels of desire/motivation to buy the app have to clear before they decide to go ahead. There are many other factors that probably have a greater influence on that bar, including price, convenience of the purchasing process, perceived quality of the product, etc. But that doesn't mean smaller factors don't matter at all. To get a sense of how much they matter, you'd have to measure it, but I doubt that things like license management convenience are completely irrelevant.

I buy my adobe software via Amazon for this exact reason. Meanwhile, I can't figure out how I can install Office 2011 on my new machine even though I have the key since MSFT doesn't even let me download the .dmg from their site anymore.

Office 2011 for Mac dmg: https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=273962

sir you are my hero.

I like how even thought I got windows 10 home with my laptop I can't install it from anywhere because the laptop didn't come with a recovery USB and the recovery partition got corrupted so basically I have to rely on downloading so-called "MSDN" images from torrents and hope for the best, verifying the hashes along the way...

That's simply untrue. You can download a copy of Windows 10 ISO from Microsoft. [0] It's the first search result if you Google Windows 10 ISO.

Plus, most laptops don't come with a recovery USB (neither do Macs) and IMO having a recovery partition is silly when installing it from scratch is cleaner/easier.

[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10

Maybe on windows 7 or 8/8.1, but on 10 I see no download, how can I download an ISO without downloading a program? Plus let's say I have a metered connection (that I often do, when I'm away from home) and my windows 10 broke by itself as it often does? I can't go to a library or something and download the iso because I don't have admin permissions and microsoft's tool requires admin permissions. I'm not trying to criticize the OS for this, it already has been criticized enough for spyware, but seriously microsoft is just making it harder for me to use their software legally. Also the confusion about buying an OEM license and why there are no retail licenses in Serbia?

If you browse from windows, that page only shows Microsoft's special "Download Program".

If you browse from linux, it shows links to directly download the ISO files.

I'm not sure what it does if you browse from MacOS.

Maybe try changing your browser's useragent? Frankly, it is a bit annoying that Microsoft tries to push their download tool.

> I'm not sure what it does if you browse from MacOS.

ISO

Huh? Select Home/Pro. Select language. Download button appears for both 32/64 bit. No special software, just a download link.

http://imgur.com/bcj3z57

Does 'More download options' reveal more options?

http://i.imgur.com/s4ElZFt.png

Nothing relevant:

>Sign in to the Volume Licensing Service Center to download Enterprise editions.

>Sign in to your subscription on the MSDN Portal for MSDN downloads.

> Visit the Windows Insider site to download Insider Preview builds

> Visit the Download Academic Products page for Education editions (product key required).

Jeez, just when I thought Microsoft was getting better about letting people...actually download their software... they go and create pages that display completely different things based on what OS you're running.

You have a good point. As a specific solution to that problem though, I would suggest Rufus. It runs without system privileges.

Link is actually https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows10I...

This is a hidden cost of non-open software.

Also, it's easier (and often cheaper) if you own multiple computers. No complex registration/deregistration of computers to ensure license compliance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com