Hacker News Reader

Comment by napierzaza | Hacker News Reader

I like his arguments since they are logical and backed up with data. But at the same time I never would have bought the app if I didn't use "free" for several weeks and got the idea it was useful.

This is after reading about Instapaper everywhere and hearing from close friends that it's almost the main reason they even have an iPhone (which was probably an overstatement on their part).

Edit: Can we please stop the tired argument of "you paid 600$+ for the device, what difference is 5.00$..."?

It's like people who pay 6000$ for a HDTV don't mind paying 100$ for the HDMI cable. Some people do indeed do that, but I for one determine the value of an app or accessory based on the sunken costs of the device. I value a HDMI cable's value at about 5-10$ because that is the cost of a quality one from Monoprice.

View on HN

> But at the same time I never would have bought the app if I didn't use "free" for several weeks and got the idea it was useful.

There's a middle ground between only having a Paid app and giving a way a full featured, Free, ad-supported version. For example, you can create a Trial version that stops working after a certain amount of time. If you're making a game, you can only have the first few levels in the Free version. If your app creates content, then you can make a Free version that works exactly as the Paid version but does not allow for saving the users work. [I'm assuming these tactics are not forbidden by some EULA or whatever.]

Anyway you get the idea: there are alternatives that let the user see if they think your software is worth buying that don't involve giving the entire thing away and hoping to get enough ad impressions / conversions to make it worth while. Why so many iOS developers go this route instead of the above and just give away their app with some low eCPM ads is beyond me, though I've only dabbled in iOS development so maybe that's just what works for people :)

The free version of instapaper was feature-limited, not just ad supported (at least at the time before I bought the full version)

The time-limited demo idea is forbidden by Apple's TOS.

Does anyone know why? That seems fairly petty and arbitrary.

I'd assume it's got something to do with user satisfaction. Users hate when things are taken away from them.

  But at the same time I never would have bought the app if
  I didn't use "free" for several weeks and got the idea it 
  was useful.

I second this. Having experienced the free app and having bought the full app as a result has also resulted in two other people directly purchasing the app. There's a network effect that starts at the free app. The free app may not be necessary anymore, but I doubt it was never necessary in the first place. I think that would have flattened the sales curve quite a bit.

I think what is happening is there's a threshold for successful applications. Every application and website has a vetting period where momentum and marketing can advance to certain levels where a reputation is attained. This is where Instapaper is right now. Marco wouldn't have the audience he has now if it wasn't a free service to begin with. Now that the service has a reputation and a successful following you are allowed to charge a premium.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com