Hacker News Reader

Comment by jdietrich | Hacker News Reader

I can't comment on the competence (or otherwise) of the Galaxy Store review process, but charging up-front for a mobile app is nearly always a mistake. You'll nearly always do better with a "free" app and one or more in-app purchases to unlock the full functionality, even if the "free" version is a very limited demo.

I know that some people are instinctively repulsed by such a model, but there are good reasons why users prefer it. There is real value in being able to install an app, see that it actually runs on your device, explore the interface and perhaps try some of the features before actually paying anything. Most app stores do have refund policies that amount to a free trial, but there's a big psychological difference between trying an app for free and paying for an app that you can get a full refund on (subject to terms and conditions).

View on HN

I wish paid apps had a 24-hour return window or something like that. It feels like it would be a win-win for everyone, as users would feel more comfortable taking a chance on paid apps.

I vaguely remember the Google Play Store (before it had that name) having something like this, never understood why they got rid of it. They must have concluded it made the store less profitable, but I wonder what data they were looking at, or if they interpreted it correctly.

Some people abused it to play games for free and then use the return window

In Brazil we have a right to return online orders in the 7 days of the purchase. I assume this is covered (I'm not sure). Steam does return the game if you have less than 3 hours in it.

Play store still has this and the return window is 15 minutes. A refund button will appear on the application page in play store if you uninstall the app within the 15 minute period after purchasing.

Apple on the other hand unfortunately has nothing like that. If you want refund, You have to go through the hassle of creating a ticket and they may refuse to refund for whatever reason.

15 minutes is such a strange period. "Hey sorry if this is a complex app you might get through most of setting it up. Good luck"

Agreed. I think they started it because people would grab a paid app for a one-time need and then return it after using. I saw this happen a couple times with an app that identified plants from a picture, another that scanned and removed apps that show full-screen ads, and a couple others, so the use case makes sense.

But still I think it's a mistake because 15 mins is not enough time to know if the app is going to work. Sometimes it takes that long just to get the damn thing installed! Especially if on a mobile connection or the app is big. I once got screwed because I bought an app that didn't work on my device, but I couldn't find out within 15 minutes because my storage was too full and the Play store refused to install it until I cleared out more room. It took a while to go through all my stuff and back them up to the cloud, so by the time I actually got the app installed and found out it didn't work, it had been 20 minutes or so. Now I'm very hesitant.

If someone is good with using it just once he wouldn't pay anyway.

A 1 day return period should be enough. Once you return the product you cannot trial it again without purchase.

Strong points. In addition to being better for the real paying customers, it also has anti-abuse protection baked in. Seems like a no-brainer to me to go with a 24 hour return period

That might hurt game sales fundamentally if they can be completed within that time frame.

If there’s gonna be a short timer it should start the moment the app is first opened instead of the purchase time.

Just give games and applications different rules. They're both software, but one is an artistic work, and one is a tool.

IIRC a long time ago, game devs would complain to google about people abusing refund policy by buying their games, complete the whole playthrough in a day, then requesting refund. This was before in-app purchase become the norm though, so you can buy full games upfront instead of unlocking it bit by bit via in-app purchases.

They may refuse, but do they ever? I’ve refunded many apps, days after purchase, no issues.

Yes, they have refused it a few times.

I think the workaround in the Apple community is to make the app free, and then have an in-app purchase for the full version. This often has a free trial.

As an example, I recently tried a sleep tracking app. It is a subscription service but has a 1 week free trial. I tried it for a few nights, hated the mechanics of making it work, so I canceled the free trial and uninstalled the app. $0 spent on a paid app, completely supported by Apple.

It should be something available by default, but the workarounds seem pretty widespread. The advantage of this approach is that many developers offer "pay per month" or "pay a lot once" for their paid apps. The user can choose which one they like better.

I so do too. Because apple does NOT have this, I'm wary when purchasing stuff on the app store. I was burned a while back buying a game that was a blatant lie, it was an idler and literally didn't have the gameplay elements it said it did, but I could not return it. I love the steam style return policy. Wish everyone adopted that.

Did you try to return it? “doesn’t work as expected” Is one of the ‘template’ return reasons for the App Store. I haven’t requested a refund for apps many times, but when I have they’ve always been granted.

The place to do it is https://reportaproblem.apple.com/

I can second this, when I was in the Apple ecosystem I bought and returned many apps without issue. They might have a problem with it if you leave it too long but if you request within 48 hours of purchase you should be fine.

It's true. Steam has a no-questions-asked refund that works up to 2 hours of playtime, and it seems to work great. Download a game, doesn't run, or the game is bad ? Just refund. Not sure if it would work for apps though, as games are by nature something that are meant to be played for hours in front of your screen. I don't know what would be the metric used to refund and app or not.

Yup, two hours of actual playtime sounds like a pretty fair window to me. Sure, some people are making YT vids where they complete an entire game and return it within 2 hours, but that's not enough to actually matter. For a utility-like phone app something like 30 minutes might be more reasonable, but the same principle applies.

I actually don't like this one, because it means you effectively can't make a game with an expected playtime of less than two hours.

Yes, most video games are designed to be significantly longer, but as long as the expected runtime is communicated to the consumer, there's nothing inherently wrong with designing shorter experiences.

Applications and games are very different, however. An application should be useful to you across a long-ish time window.

I still like it, I've used it several times for games that either ran horribly, or after 30 minutes just weren't any fun. Makes it so buying a game isn't a risk at all.

I've played 2 hour games, and if it was a good time I'm not going to return it. I don't think most people want to cheat indie devs, they're a very sympathetic group

This is a big part of the success of Prime. They exceeded expectations on the returns process for long enough that people got used to it and came to expect it. Waiting for the inevitable rug pull...

> inevitable rug pull

I don't think it's inevitable. If it hasn't happened by now, it likely won't happen. An entire industry has sprung up around Prime returns. E.g., HOTBINS.

Well, it's not a rug pull, but the slide towards uncurated garbage makes prime less useful than it once was. When I find myself shopping at Walmart to get the value of their curation, I have to wonder about how Amazon has changed.

I would be willing to go with this IFF the cost to activate the app were disclosed up front. But in my experience, it never is. (On Google's store you'll typically see some fine print saying "in-app purchases from $0.50 to $20.00", which tells me very little.)

The intention seems to be to get me hooked before I can invoke any judgment calls. I've had similar experiences with car salesman.

The bottom line is that I'm not willing to begin the experience/transaction without a clear idea of what the final outcome might be.

The reason I dislike this is because it will always be a free app. I say that in the sense that they will include tracking and advertising and even if you "pay to remove" you have no real guarantee.

It's better to have a paid app that does not have the code/permissions required to even engage in advertising and tracking in this way. Preferably the paid app doesn't even have IAP at all.

Looking through the Google Play store, nearly every "Top Free" app clearly states that data is collected and data is shared with third parties. Nearly every "Top Paid" app clearly states that no data is collected and no data is shared with third parties.

Yes exactly. I rarely even look at free apps anymore, unless I don't see anything paid that looks good. I've also had trouble getting "purchase restored" on apps that I paid through IAP so I don't trust it anymore. I would much, much rather just pay up front.

Just because it doesn't have tracking now (or at least claims so) doesn't mean they won't add it a few months later. Paying for something is no guarantee for privacy, unfortunately.

App stores could offer free trials for paid-up-front apps, or generous refund windows.

As far as I know the major ones don't offer this, Apple for sure doesn't. I think the store runners would much rather see developers use subscription pricing that gives them a recurring cut as well.

Apple has refunded me every single app that I purchased accidentally. Every single one. No questions asked.

Play Store has a no questions asked refund window, but it is very small.

I think free-to-play games have ruined this model for everyone. Now people see "in-app purchase" and immediately associate it with "paying for every interaction" instead of "one-time payment to purchase full functionality "

I agree, one of Spotify's big early successes was embracing a Freemium model before other apps did. Really helped establish a userbase.

> but there are good reasons why users prefer it

I think it is vastly disingenuous to suggest that the ads and spyware in most free apps are somehow “good for the user”.

These are simply economic realities that are forced on app developers, because the market place for paid sustainable apps has been mostly destroyed by free alternatives.

These days good apps are almost without exception either a) subsidised by a major corporate (eg. Insta) or b) paid (eg. Procreate). Free apps are mostly exploitative spam, hunting for whales to sustain the developers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com