Hacker News Reader

Comment by mlthoughts2018 | Hacker News Reader

mlthoughts2018

As someone who has never once paid for an app or paid for in-app purchases, nor do I allow apps that show ads, I find this staggering.

It’s not a judgment or anything. Just the idea of this is so bewildering and alien to me.

View on HN

As a developer who gets paid to write code, when I find an app I really like, I also pay for it, if it seems reasonable.

Like Overcast for podcasts, Nlog Synthesizer for use with my Korg nanokey for on-the-go music composition, filimic pro forr video and others.

We have different hobbies, but as a supporter of free software and a developer who works on open source code 99% of the time, I try and use open source apps as much as possible.

I recognise though that there are whole categories of app that need real money, for staff or servers (dating, online gaming).

If a developer open sourced their application but still charged for the binary on the App Store, would you pay for it?

Most open source enthusiasts get apps from fdroid which does not support paid apps but it does have a donate button on the page. I only use open source and I have donated to the apps I use most.

Yeah. If I don't expect to make changes to the application and only act as a consumer, then it makes more sense economically for me to pay so I can download it and get updates without having to compile it and load it on my device every time.

Also, isn't it nice to help developers that make nice applications, especially when they offer their apps for a reasonable price?

100% yes. We need more nice applications made by indie developers and small agencies. Apps that charge a couple of dollars, or even a modest subscription fee, and don’t harvest their users data, record their screens for marketing purposes, or run the microphone to build an advertising profile.

I don’t understand how, on a forum full of people who build software for a living, there can be so much opposition to this idea.

That's a lot more work on the developer to do that. They're going to get a million unwanted pull requests, code bike shedding, and issues raised. And they're also going to get dozens of people putting their own copies of the same app on the store to try to undercut them.

So why would any sane developer do that? Getting people to spend a few dollars on an app is already no easy feat. Most users think a five dollar app is outrageously expensive.

I think there's just not really a way for high quality, user facing applications to be open source. And when you download free of charge proprietary apps, more often than not you're giving up your data/privacy as compensation.

There are plenty of really great, free software applications: VLC, Handbrake, Audacity, etc. But most of the free software world is not end user applications. It's the OS, HTTP server, and other infrastructure software. The software that is open source is the software that big companies need, but it's not their main product. So they can justify paying employees to contribute to it, and get the patches upstreamed.

I would definitely prefer my apps like Omnifocus or Overcast to open source. But even setting aside the financial viability, running an open source project opens you up to a million people flooding you with patch requests and flame wars. If you're developing a high quality app with opinionated UX and design, that's the last thing you want.

Do you also take care that upstream isn't forced to focus somewhere else to actually pay their bills?

Recently saw Overcast mentioned here. Tried it out and it’s exactly what’s needed. Much better than the mess Apple Podcasts has become.

Plus Smart Speed is fantastic. I can listen to podcasts more quickly without actually speeding up the speech.

I am already nervous that Overcast will add more features/redesigns and add social media until it turns into a mess like most other tools. Seems today's product development paradigm redesigns a project until the initial simplicity is gone.

Overcast's author, Marco Arment, seems pretty clear in his design approach for Overcast (I listen to Accidental Tech Podcast, on which he's a host). He's pretty resistant to things to don't help the core experience of listening to podcasts. For example, he's put a bunch of time into the basic audio features and making watch playback work well, rather than lots of flashy GUI things.

If I find an app I really like, I usually buy it. Especially upgrades to pro versions to unlock the full feature set.

Polished, well made apps are absolutely worth the price.

I don't get what's so hard to comprehend. It's a store. There are lots of apps worth paying for.

What I mean is that I’ve never found a case where a purchase was required to get a quality app for some use case. I have a lot of apps on my devices, they are just all free apps with no ads and data collection disabled, presumably made by hobbyists who find that either the projects help promote them to get jobs or just find the satisfaction to be reason enough, and don’t seek financial compensation.

Given how ubiquitous free, non-ad-based apps are, it’s surprising to me to hear that people prefer different paid apps more to such a degree that the average spend is about $80.

Looking in the data it’s heavily skewed by gaming apps, so I’m guessing that is what drives my surprise. The average dollar spend on other types of apps is much lower. I suppose gaming is an area where it’s harder to find free, no-ad apps.

But for music, video, photography, podcasts, writing, sports, productivity, security, banking, etc., there are such high quality free apps without ads that I don’t get it.

Am guessing you use a computer for most of your work, and you have bought software for that? And maybe you play video games on a dedicated system, for which you have bought software?

It's mainly different use cases. I do a lot of work on ipad and iphone, so I have paid apps for those. Others like games on them, so they spend there, etc

If you're on android, it's also just a very different app ecosystem, so it's harder to think about how the other side does it.

Likewise, I have never spent a dime on an app, however I do allow ads to play if it's not obtrusive otherwise I just uninstall app. I also don't use Uber or anything of that nature. As a NY resident the subway is my saving grace. I also cook and package my lunch to work

As someone that likes to be paid to develop software, I also buy my tools and software from other fellow devs.

For FOSS stuff, I regularly donate either directly, or by buying books and merchandise from project.

Not even an Uber or Lyft? Never purchased a product through Amazon or similar? You've never had to enter your credit number into your phone to be used in any way?

The article is about app and in-app purchases that Apple gets a cut from. They don't get a cut from physical products or services (e.g. Lyft, Amazon etc).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com